Saltspring Island has it's own currency. The great thing about it is that it has an expiry date. If not used within a period of one year it is no longer legal tender. The tourists think it is great and accept it. A year later if they do not use it on Saltpring it expires and the value of the currency is returned to the island.

The money on Salt Spring is just another Salt Spring beautiful people, beautiful thoughts, lots of money -let's make play money deal. The money does not circulate it just gave Robert Bateman a chance to show how damm dedicated he is to the cause of the beautiful people (he did the art work for one of the bills).

I'm pretty sure the Courtenay LETS only lasted a few years - I believe the problem was that of the services offered for barter, some were always in demand & some rarely in demand, leading to an unworkable imbalance of credit & debit.e.g. imagine the group has 25 massage therapists and one carpenter - which person is going to build up huge credits that they will never use??

Governments have ceased to issue money ages ago. They gave the right, at first strictly controlled, now completely deregulated, over to private banks, but we, the public, through our governments, are still responsible for the convertibility of that imaginary money into resources. Which is the biggest con-job in history.

With bank deregulation money ceased to exist and became a licence for the control of resources and energy, issued by a special interest sector for its own benefit.

If governments were really interested in solving the problems, they should take back the right of money creation and reorganize the system for the benefit of everybody.

This should also solve many environmental problems caused by irresponsible, private money creation that ends up in overcapitalized resource waste. Many, if not most, of our environemntal destruction is caused by overcapitalization, with the use of inaginary capital, to skim off and steal the benefits of resource conversion.

Ed Deak, Big Lake.

The huge majority of people have no idea what money is, who creates it, and how it is used.
Almost everyone thinks the gov't creates it, when in fact over 95% is created out of thin air by the banks. Ed is right: it is a huge scam that almost nobody relaizes is happening.

among others, check out Galbraith's "Money: Whence It Came, Where It Went" for a good book on the subject. Paul Hellyer has opined extensively on this subject as well. see e.g. his book "Funny Money"

The concept of the system seems sound at first blush. Then upon reflection there is still the very real value of raw materials.

Service items can easily be bartered in such an exchange, but grocery items? The grocer still needs to PAY for those. Furniture? The carpenter must still PAY for the wood. Unless and until all are using such a barter system (not likely with the crazy non-value systems that are described in the article and time-limits commented above).

Until private money, true private money that governments cannot artificially inflate, comes into being these barter systems can only work on a local scale (2-3 km and a small tight knit community).

It is not governments that inflate money, but the banks, because they're the ones that create it.

Governments only take the responsibility for the conversion of worthless money into resources.

E.g. The US Federal Reserve is a private enterprise.

It is all very nice to preach government hate, but let's use a bit of knowledge sometimes and also realize that if there were no governments, we'd be completely ruled by the corporate mafia who even now claim that the only purpose of government is to ensure the free movement and protection of capital. And to hell with people.

Ask the Fraser Inst. and the neoclassical economist by the name of Stephen Harper.

Ed Deak.

What would work in a city such as, well, Vancouver, since it is very oriented to goods rather than services, is an online LETS service to distribute a trade in goods. Craigs list is great but it is still based on regular currency other than the odd trade. I could see myself participating easily at this level. It would give the concept a first step, trade for services a second, once there is a strong exchange going. Is this being tried anywhere in a large urban setting?

You got the first part right, money isn't real. But you're completely missing the point on the second part. It's not a scam. It's an agreement.

If you start saying it's a scam, people will stop agreeing, then you might as well paper your rumpus room with it.

Fiat Lux comments:

Therefore they, the governments, are part of the exchange and they can artificially inflate the value (thereby devaluing the service that created the $$$ in the first place).

As I said before until governments are completely cut out of the loop such things as 'private money' cannot come into existence.

This is a stupid article.

OK, so somebody creates a barter system that works for some trades people (important individuals to local economy but dime a dozen) and it doesn't work for the research scientist (more important individual to everyone's economy and rare).

What is money? It is a store of value and a medium of exchage. Our monetary system works and works well. We enjoy one of the highest standards of living in the world, in part because we have tremndous confidence in our banking and monetary system. LETS is a potential solution, I guess I agree, looking for a problem that doesn't exist. These variations of barter are a step backwards. Money,in the LETS case, isn't "created" - it is simply substituted. Would I as a business person accept LETS payment - maybe - what's the incentive? Help out local economy?...can't I do that with good 'ol money? OK, if someone convinced me of other benefits I might accept LETS, but most likely for small incidental transactions - as would everyone else so LETS would never amount to much. What would be the other incentive?...to cheat the taxman? Sorry - count me out.

Hey Big Ed: man,you sure can spout off a lot of neoclassical nonsense. What the heck do you read to come up with this misguidedness or are you just making it up? Why don't you argue facts rather than conspiracy theories? I mean, you sound like a smart guy but your prejudices are so dumb. A strong economy even benefits you. Why would you suggest otherwise?

I think the biggest problem is that income tax is triggered at every exchange, regardless of whether it is barter or cash.

That being said, neocon's comments sure illustrate his/her complete lack of understanding of the current economy. Tradespeople: less important and a dime a dozen??!! Buddy, if you can provide the economy with a cheep source of tradespeople you will be a rich man indeed.

Believe you me, cosmo, I understand the current economy better than you do. I never said trades people we're not important - in fact I said just the opposite. My calling trades people "dime a dozen" only meant that trades people are numerous compared to research people. And I said a more important (meaning valuable) person in today's economy, such as a research scientist, probably couldn't operate or survive/exist with a LETS/barter system. Imagine, if you can, that you're involved in a 10 year cancer project - how do you get paid? From LETS communities around the world? Why not use currency? It already works.

BTW, where is income tax triggered in a barter economy?

Here is a good article to help understand what Ed is saying
http://canadianactionparty.ca/temp/articles/Debt_Based_Monetary_System_Functions_in_Canada.asp

Neocon wrote, "Why don't you argue facts rather than conspiracy theories?"

"Conspiracy theories" - a cheap shot used to deflect the argument away from discussing a genuine problem.

Ed is dealing with facts - there are , if you take the trouble to look, that is, numerous books and articles written on the banking and financial system and how it exploits the public. It is no secret, and was done rather above board actually - no "conspiracy" there, sorry

"Believe you me, cosmo, I understand the current economy better than you do."

Ah, don't you just love such modesty.

Ok Mr. Smarty Pants, define a strong economy. As you have responded to Ed's posting above. I'll even help you. A stong economy can only occur with a strong and diverse environment. You can't have economy without environment period. Once you understand this resource conversion equation you will see that we are only fooling ourselves about our long term future and what is a sustainable standard of living.... Sorry, answered my own question...

As I understand it, individuals and businesses are required to pay taxes on barter transactions.
"4. The Department takes the view that barter transactions are within the purview of the Income Tax Act. Such transactions can therefore result in income or expense as contemplated by sections 3 and 9 thereof or can result in the acquisition or disposition of capital property, eligible capital property, personal-use property or inventory, depending upon the circumstances of the persons who are bartering and the nature of that which is bartered, on the same basis as if cash was the consideration."

For a complete explanation see:

http://www.cra-arc.gc.ca/E/pub/tp/it490/it490-e.html

Just came home from a day in town..

Money is a debt to government and society, because every penny creates a liability to government that no ideological claptrap can cover up.

Anybody who calls him or herself a neocon in this day and age, reminds me of the people I knew, who used to call themselves proud nazis and proud communists. Anybody who still accepts the theories of people like Friedman is just as ignorant as those who still spout the theories of Marx.

No time for more..

Cheers, Ed Deak.

neocon,
if you think trades people are "a dime a dozen" or "are numerous", try to hire one. dime a dozen infers a surplus.
as for the research scientist being "more important individual to everyones economy", i don't think so.

ok demotto, I read the Canadidan Action Party link - this is BS - sorry. Money (monetary system + capital markets) doesn't work that way. This is a BS argument put forth soley for political gain

Do all you posters here believe this crap? ...that banks simply create money out of thin air?

Seriously, this kind of statement:

Money is a debt to government and society, because every penny creates a liability to government that no ideological claptrap can cover up.

who believes this?

How is my mortgage a debt to government, for cryin out loud?!

How is Inco supposed to pay $5 B or so for Falconbridge? with suitcases full of cash?

Man, even the NDP doesn't espouse such BS!

Zen and Bob Rogers above made a couple of points: Bob suggesting that Saltspring has such a system that seems to work (in a small closed economy) and zen suggests why these systems fail.

and barryjo: if your wife is suffering from breast cancer and needs the drug Herceptin to survive, it won't be no drywaller that saves her butt.

Obviously a good enough article to stir quite a good debate here.

Ed, I think you have touched a sour spot with a few of our traditionalist economy theorists here.

You scare them. Good.

Bailey, it's an agreement only in theory. Look how many people find it novel that the government isn't the one creating dollars, it's the banks.

Last time I looked it's about $10 for every $1 some schmuck foolishly deposits into a low interest (if any) bearing account.

Now that would sure stretch the old pay cheque a ways, wouldn't it?

That it will fall into a heap of useless toilet paper when public confidence is eroded certainly puts the old "worth it's value in gold" to the test, doesn't it?

OK Mr Know It All, You tell us where money and credit come from. No doubt you have studied the subject to great length, far more than Ed, who has only spent the last 50 years doing so...

Oops, That last message was for Neocon (Ghad what a monniker!) but Allen snuck in ahead of me the rascal..

bring back the gold standard!

Neocon..........If you really believe that money is not created by the banks from thin air, I'm not surprised you call yourself "neocon".

Why do you think Reagan, and after him Mulroney, deregulated the banks? Brian did it in secret at the time, but if you know so much, do you know the year and how much money the banks were permitted to loan out for every $1. on deposit and where the figure stands now? ?

Please try to grow up and do some objective reading on the subject before making more foolish statements.

Ed Deak.

Wow, a few narrow minds here!
I read the book a couple of times
Galbraith's "Money: Whence It Came, Where It Went" is superb. Especially in times of war, govenments really did create money out of nothing. Well paper and printing presses were all that was needed.
And they still create money from next to nothing. As long as they do it at a controlled pace, nobody gets badly hurt.
If you put lets victoria into the computer, you get 3 groups in victoria australia and one here in vic bc. and one of the leaders lives about 10 minutes walk from me. So it is hardly failing! Aand with things like the hundred mile diet gaining traction, what better way for people to meet locals with stuff to sell?
And the saltspring money thing. thats exactly how the first banks worked. And calling themselves branches of national bank really helped.The money was exchanged for goods again and again and as long as it never came into that branch again, the banker was happy. So the saltspring money becomes nothing after a year. a dollar is worth less goods after a year so there is just a subtle difference. It is like a bus pass.
Expired monthly Bus passes could be used as letts money? Or no?
something that is worthless but hard to make is the classic form for money.

thanx for the link demotto. For the innumerate like me that was a fairly easy read.

Love the idea of recycling bus passes as currency. They would simply equal the amount of the fare right? A one zone would equal $2.25 and you'd make up the one dollar and uneven numbers with regular cash?

Would you be allowed to simply save up some transfers to get in the game?

Intriguing.

allan writes:

The 'value in gold' or 'gold standard' is what the true private money of the late 1700's was all about.

In Scotland, there were many private banks that continued to survive well into the late 1800's. It was only the forced 'mergers' into the bank of England that stopped the successful Scottish banks from continuing.

With the US currency becoming truly a 'fiat' currency in the 1970's when it was taken off the 'gold standard' is when the real devaluation of all national 'fiat' currencies really got rolling.

Now until more private currency can come into general acceptance, such things as this 'local barter system' or LETS could fill the gap.

BrianWhite says:

Well the US is now printing money at a pace only equalled in the post-war Germany of the 1920's and Argentina of the 1970's. The hurt is going to come, sooner or later it is going to come.

Paper and printing presses are the technology of 500 years ago, these LETS cells are at least starting on the path along with a new technology. What is needed is to encrypt their transactions in a usable form....

The problem with Lets, in practice, is likely to be the same as the problem with all other paper and electronic currency: no discernable base, therefore the capacity for infinite debasing through inflation. Dollars buy less and less as the money supply expands (Neocon: the expansion happens through private enterprize today, not through gov't. Do your research).
There's an outfit down in the states who makes a "libery dollar" entirely out of silver and backed by silver. There are also gold based currencies, one of which is tradeable on the internet IIRC.
Currencies backed by metal have no danger of being inflated in to nothing. In fact, as other currencies print their way marrily allong(US$, I'm looking in your direction...), commodities backed by REAL THINGS are going to be able to buy more and more of these junk paper and digidollars.
As I understand it, LETS is backed by the labour of the people in the co-operative. This is a nice idea, but the tendency will be to print more of it than there is available labour in the pool, and therefore debase it.

This discussion has a history that goes back 160 years to Pierre Proudhon and William Greene. At that time money was based on gold and as such the gold-owners had a strangle-hold on credit and the money supply. The result was usury and workers – who had no physical collateral – could not get loans. Farmers frequently lost their land to the usurers. Proudhon realized two things - that the real wealth of society was its production and not just gold, and that each person, by the very fact of having a work-life had collateral in their potential labor power. He suggested that a Peoples Bank be set up on this basis and issue currency and credit, the latter at cost, which he calculated to be less than one percent. Greene developed this idea further in his book, Mutual Banking. Both men felt that such a system would eventually allow both the farmer and the worker to receive the full product of their labor and eliminate capitalism, creating a system of free producers. For further reading see:
http://www.the-portal.org/mutual_banking.htm

The easiest way for the ignorant faithful, who still keep talking about "booming economy" etc. nonsense, is to go to google and type in "How money is created." There are millions of hits that should explain how the racket works.

Today, most money is created for colonization and collectivization purposes by overcapitalization, to disempower the majority and use the imaginary money to entrench the power and rights of a self appointed ruling class.

Ed Deak.

I would like the author or Mr Linton to explain why LETS works in Victoria but not in Vancouver.

"Today, most money is created for colonization and collectivization purposes by overcapitalization, to disempower the majority and use the imaginary money to entrench the power and rights of a self appointed ruling class."

Ed: enlighten me, please

What do you mean by colonization and collectivization? Where do you see that happening? Can you give me a recent example? Honestly...I'd like to know.

What do you mean by overcapitalization? What does that word mean in the first place?

How is the majority disempowered? What majority are you talking about?..the majority of people, fish, trees?

If money is imaginary, why is it accepted? Why has it been accepted for hundreds of years?

Who is self-appointed? Allan Greenspan? Ben Bernanke? Stephen Harper? The Queen of England?

Sportsdesk: Isn't a currency's relation to other currencies a discernable base? What's wrong with "confidence" often described as "full faith and credit"?

Gold and silver are no more real money than paper. They're representatives of value at a fixed rate. Paper's the same, only once removed. It's a symbol of a representation of value. The only advantages of gold and silver are they don't rust, and they can be concentrated, which makes it possible to accumulate more wealth than the actual value of your work. Good news for obsessive-compulsives.

The true value of a dollar, or Euro, or a zlotnik or any unit is the value of all goods and services they represent divided by the number of zlotniks there are.

After making allowance for the machinations of idiots. Tried to spend an old-style hundred since the new generation of Xerox machines came out?

Ever since Canada went all loonie-toons I've thought that the most solid currency we've got is Canadian Tire money.

Neocon enlighten us, please.

While waiting for Neocon to enlighten us I found more stuff on mutual banking. See
http://mutualist.blogspot.com/2006/02/more-mutual-banking-material.html
Don’t be afraid to read it Mr. Neocon, It won’t hurt.

If Santa Claus, The Easter Bunny, The Tooth Fairy, are imaginary, why is are they accepted? Why has it been accepted for hundreds of years?

Fixed it for you Neocon. You're welcome.

ok anarcho,

I went to your link on mutual banking - notice that this piece of insight was written in 1849. Then I stopped reading.

If I want to read something insightful that is centuries old, I'll read Adam Smith's Wealth of Nations instead.

Do you actually believe (I mean, seriously) that our advanced economy could take that kind of a step backwards?

With regard to your turnspeak request for enlightenment, I'm still waiting for Mr. Ed to substantiate his claims. Why not go to the Bank of Canada website? - lots of enlightenment there.

There seems to be a lot of like-minded posters here espousing anti-capitalist (anti-everything for that matter except anti-union) points of view. That's all well and good - I'm all for a better way. Reminds me of a quote from Winston Chuchill "capitalism is the unequal sharing of prosperity; socialism is the equal sharing of misery".

You probably dismiss such statements 'cuz Churchill was a neocon too.

Hey Stump!

Sell me your house and I'll pay you double your asking price, if you agree to accept payment from either The Tooth Fairy, Easter Bunny or Santa Claus - your call.

Overcapitalization used to be defined in the old textbooks as higher than one wage year of investment in a job. Which means that in today's economy, investment should be restricted to say $50,000 per job. OK, let's multiply this by 10. It still is only $500,000. But what we have now are investments in simple mill jobs ranging from $2 to 3 million and in some jobs many times more, 60-70 wage years per jobs.

The purpose is to increase the service costs of the capital through automation, and so outsource and divert the benefits of resource conversion into the pockets of the artificial entities of shareholders and banks.

In old fashioned language this would be called theft, or robbery, but today it is called "efficient neoclassical market economics".

Forced collectivization, now called "the competitive equilibrium of the global marketplace", which Stalin and disciples used to do with bayonets, is now achieved with the creation of imaginary capital to automate,
merge and globalize certain power elite into a global corporate dictatorship that expropriates
the properties of millions and the rights of the decision making powers of elected governments. See NAFTA Chapter 11, just for starters, but all, so called "free trade agreements" are basic expropriation rights for the elevation of a global aristocracy.

Colonization with capital is achieved by the power given to certain banks, in certain countries, including Canada, to create imaginary capital to take ower the resources of other countries in the name of "wealth creating foreign investment", while expropriating the rights and benefits of resource conversion from the locals. See: Virtually all oil producing countries, with small, quisling ruling classes in the pay and control of multinationals and huge impoverished, starving, local citizenry, while the oil companies rake in obscene profits.

And please don't start on this "union" nonsense. I'm and have been a private enterpriser, non union, business owner in BC since 1957. The difference is that I'm not hooked to any ideology and try to maintain a certain degree of objectivity.

I also feel for the unnecessarily starving millions in the world, the little kids who die of starvation every 5 seconds, because I've been there and know what it feels like being a helpless POW at 18 and weighing 47 kg.

Try it my dear neocon and then let's see how long you're willing to hang on to that criminal ideology ?

Now I'll give you a few more shocks: I could create an endless number of jobs here in BC with investments under $15,000/job, but first we'd have to kill NAFTA and the WTO. Both criminal organizations, using ideology to justify theft.

Also, human labour doesn't cost anything to an economy. Now this will blow a few ideologically warped minds.

Also, neither Canada, or any country where so called "foreign investment" flows in, needs a single penny of it, because anybody who's ever been in business knows that when you have resources, you have capital. Period.

In other words, foreign investment, especially with imaginary capital, created for the purpose, is a fraud.

Neoclassical market economics are the biggest crime wave in human history that now kills more people on a long term, daily basis that both World Wars and the death camps of Stalin, Hitler and Mao put together.

Now please start reading, because I'm too busy to waste more time on this kids' stuff.

Ed Deak

Neocon,

You should read Wealth of Nations, and you should pay special attention to the part about merchantilization, and put it in the context of today's banks. But now we're off base, back to money.

Paper dollars valued against other paper dollars. Brilliant. Ever notice how things cost (on average) twice as much as they did ten years ago? That's called inflation. The paper dollars (ALL paper dollars) are losing purchasing power as quickly as they're created.
Econ 101: Money is a)a medium of exchange b)a unit of account c)a keeper of value

Paper dollars are the first two of those things, but invariably they fail to keep value. Technically, they're not even money.

Baily, pay attention: You can always print more money. Today, you can print it easier than ever because it's done digitally. As it's printed, debt is being created. The world's reserve currency is backed by an ever increasing ammount of debt. This is clearly not sustainable. A nation can't borrow its way out of debt any more than a fat man can eat himself thin. This puts the global economy on questionable footing at best.

Reflect on several comments above about wealth being created only by labour - Gold can not be created by decree: it must be mined by the sweat of men. Metals are real money. They store value. They represent the ACTUAL EFFORT that it took to remove them from the ground.

Well neocon. The bank of canada has no assets, Mulroney made it so banks don`t even have to have any money on deposit with the bank to cover the loans they give out. They are charging us interest on non existent money. If everyone tried to pay off their debt today there is not enough currency in circulation to do it. What a scam, better than loansharking.

"Sell me your house and I'll pay you double your asking price, if you agree to accept payment from either The Tooth Fairy, Easter Bunny or Santa Claus - your call."

I can't eat enuff chocolate to take the Easter Bunny's offer, but I'll be happy to deal in either the Tooth Fairy's medium of exchange, or Santa's. Unfortunately, I don't own a house, but double of nothing is about all you neo-cons have ever offered the average working stiff anyway right?

You've been schooled Neocon: by Fiat Lux, and a few others. If you can't refute their arguments maybe you shouldn't waste your time posting and hit the books so you can contribute something worth reading?

Sportsdesk: I know how inflation works - what's wrong with inflation?

Stump: I can't reason with an idiot.

Sounds like Sportsdesk will face a similar challenge. Haven't you been paying attention?

Dear Sportsdesk; Actually you can't always print more money. In fact you never can.

Money represents a more or less static fund of value. That is all the goods and services contained in the currency region it covers.

The actual quantity of zlotniks is irrelevant. It's just a decision. You set the value of a zlotnik by deciding how many shall be in circulation. Printing more than that amount is called counterfeiting.

Doesn't matter if you're a state or a stoner with a xerox. The effect is to devalue every zlotnik there is. And to make it hard to assign the true value to real property, since you know longer know that quantity.

Let me relate a story. In Germany between the wars the crippling war reparations were paid off in Deutchmarks that were printed for the purpose.

The resulting inflation created a market in which workers had to be paid at the beginning of each shift, then given an hour off to shop for food before the rising prices wiped out all the value of their wages. By the end of the day, the morning's wages would be worthless.

When the currency was reissued to stabilize the situation, (after the debt was paid), the rate of exchange was 1,000,000,000,000 Deutchmarks for one Newmark. A trillion to one.

Metals are no more valuable than paper. The stability of a currency rests entirely on the honor and trustworthiness of whoever is running it.

gee - thanks Bailey

it's a racket, neocon. If you can't see it then you're hopeless. "economics" as practiced and preached by our aristocracy is a shell game, a con job. You call it "working" because your nearer the top of the shite pile. Hooray. As fiat lux ably pointed out

In old fashioned language this would be called theft, or robbery, but today it is called "efficient neoclassical market economics".

and I particularly appreciated,

It blows my pea to think that there are people out there like you, neocon, who view our monetary system of exchange as natural and right. It's a RACKET, not unlike the mob runs. In fact, Banks are sanctioned mobsters with officiall clean hands. GEt a clue.

And what, neocon, does "unionism" have to do with this "big picture" discussion? It seems as if this a little security blanket you cuddle up to, just start union bashing out of the blue. Unions were, I submit, an entirely rational response (which was a long time in coming) to this imaginary yet thoroughly pervasive con job of an economic system, variously and contemporaneously labelled. Unions were a reaction, a stop-gap and entirely dependent on this current system. Though prescribed as a solution, they are at best a partial solution and an inadequate response from labourers who knew they were consistently getting screwed. This is not to union bash, only to point out that in someways the "unionist" idea is just the other shoe. Part of the self-same system. Never outright denying the legitimacy of the system itself.

And with regard to your confusion over calling something "imaginary" when it is widely accepted I have two points:
the first being that it is not widely accepted, or at least not as widely as your paradigm must assume.
The second being that all kinds of ideas are accepted and imaginary. This does not presuppose that imagined "realities" do not have very real fallouts or effects. Only that the premise is untenable. An untenable premise does not exclude completely monstrous outcomes.

jtothemfk, you make a lot of sense about unions, which I continue to support as the only viable answer yet to capitalism.

Viable as it may be, it is, in fact, a reaction and thus a product of the capitalist system.

It doesn't really try to counter the thrust of capitalism, but rather attempts to ensure that those who toil on behalf of the capitalists also benefit.

But isn't it amazing how some people simply lose bodily control (like neocon), when collective decision-making rears its logical head.

Truly a better approach would, (in my mind), be to work to defeat the system and to ensure everyone benefits, not just those in charge or those who have the ability or fortune to be able to unite and fight as a group.

Unfortunately, far too many who toil on behalf of others think the others actually care a damn if the workers have a good income.

Neocon wrote "ok anarcho,

I went to your link on mutual banking - notice that this piece of insight was written in 1849. Then I stopped reading.'

Nothing like an open mind.
Guess wew better give up on Plato, Shakespeare and Newton, THEY ARE OLD!

mutual banking is a misnomer is it not?

mutual denotes an agreement between two parties and i have never seen an intelligent man/woman totaly agree with their banks method of SCREWING THE PUBLIC OVER...there is always a caveat the screwee will want from the screwer.

then there is a contract of COMPROMISE...
so lets use words correctly and agree that banks put us in a compromising position,ala the third world...and if we default on our debt...WE CAN WATCH OUR CHILDREN DIE.

the key words in banking...PROFIT,GREED,SPECULATION.

any half wit can come up weith a monetary system to accomodate those principles.

a humane society has to look at benefitting all and when we are all taught that...then we can have ECONOMIC UTOPIAS.

so who is devising a system for all 6 billion on this globe to survive?

rather than some artsy fartsy bunch on a wealth playground island like saltspring...

small wonder the rest of the world laughs at the vacuous morons you put on a pedastal.

now let's turn on the BIGSCREEN and watch kids in africa die...IN HIGH DEFINITION...OUGHTA BE A BLAST!

You men are all long on theory, but no one has addressed any of the practical aspects, if there are any, and I still haven't got an answer to my question. Maybe this information doesn't exist, if it does maybe someone could point me to where I can find it. Meanwhile I thought I would entertain you with this little ditty.

There was a fat bast**d named Jack Munroe
Fiddle de diddle de fo fo fo
He worked for the Socreds in charge you know
Fiddle de diddle de fee fi fo
The woodworkers had voted the Socreds in
Then marched with us through the angry town
Hideoh hideeoh oh no no
The Socreds were scared, they were on their knees
THE PEOPLE UNITED, no compromise these
Victory dickery go go go
The secret committee, the unions band
Sent Jack Munroe with hat in hand
Thickery thugery rah rah rah
The people were sold in to slavery again
And the unions became the Socreds b*tch
With a higgily piggily ho ho ho

The question again:

I would like the author or Mr Linton to explain why LETS works in Victoria but not in Vancouver.

UNDERSTANDME wrote:"mutual banking is a misnomer is it not?

mutual denotes an agreement between two parties and i have never seen an intelligent man/woman totaly agree with their banks method of SCREWING THE PUBLIC OVER...there is always a caveat the screwee will want from the screwer."

If you would take the trouble to actually read the material in the links provided you would find that that "mutual" refers to a system of cooperatives called "mutualism" that provided both insurance and savings and credit. The contemporary form of this - shorn of its revolutionary aspects - is the credit union. Mutualism, far from an extercise in screwing the public is a way of ending that screwing and was devised precisely to do that.

SometimesI feel like I am talking (more correctly writing) to a wall...

OY VEY ! I can see some people have reading COMPREHENSION problems...as well as overblown egos...

take a word and run with it threading your/mine our ideas is what this forum is about SUNSHINE...

you can't teach me SQUAT

cause my PROFESSORS said THEY were going to teach me everything i need to know...and that was a LONG time ago.

I AM JUST EXTRAPOLATING VARIOUS IDEAS,THEORIES AND GENERALY SEEING WHAT MY COUNTRY KIN ARE BATTING AROUND...

I CONSIDER THIS NOTHING MORE THAN WORSHIPPING AT THE TOWER OF BABEL...or as a friend likes to call pages such as these...THE BULLSHIT CHRONICLES

Bailey says:

Incorrect.

Gold, and to a lesser extent, Silver are a 'hard currency', which until 1973 nearly all world paper currencies were linked. US dollars could have been exchanged for X amount of gold and British pounds for Y amount of silver.

In 1973, then President Nixon, ended the US gold backing of Dollars, thus making the Federal Reserve currency what is called a 'fiat currency'.

for more definitions see:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiat_money

and for lots of terms see:

http://www.numismedia.com/glossary.htm

In opposition to your statement, GOLD and SILVER are very real currencies and as the failing US economy continues watch for the price of gold to soar and to a lesser extent silver (the common man's currency).

Possibly within the lifetime of those whom are adults today there may come a time when the paper 'fiat' currencies are of no value at all.

If you had changed the entire NYSE into Argentine dollars in 1973 and buried it, it would not have been worth the effort to spade it up in 2000.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/2148885.stm
http://www.eldis.org/static/DOC4714.htm

That is what can happen to 'fiat' currencies, and will happen to all of them over time.

janet666, please don't whine all these years later about the unfortunate ending of Operation Solidarity.

Let me guess, you road on the shirttails of labour in those historic days astride some cause or want that clung to the efforts by workers to confront an ugly and hostile government.

I was on the picket lines in those days sister and I was accompanied by many a good IWA member who, incidently put in lots of effort for the NDP.

Your dislike (or is it hate?), of Munroe is hardly novel, but to smear crap over all the trade unionists in the IWA and accuse them of being Socreds is juvenile, especially for someone who's been around as long as you.

If you had paid attention in those heated times you might have noticed it was the rank and file labour movement that objected loudest to the deal cut in the dark in Kelowna.

But then, a lot of the free riders probably realized suddenly they'd have to start paying for some of the protest and actually participating in the revolution themselves if they carried on, so they too bailed.

Because the workers won't carry your cause any further as a mass shutdown they are described as enslaved.

I'd suggest had they stayed, in many cases they would have simply ended up paying all the freight in a long, costly and, inevitably losing battle. That's also slavery, isn't it?

Frankly, I find your tone insulting, your arguments petty and your grasp of real history almost humourous.

I also find it quite interesting that you can bleat loudly and accuse me of some form of predatorship or stalking, yet you have absolutely no qualms about using words that are sexist and degrading in general to women, such as "Socred's bitch."

I was certainly right about that ugly disposition.

Murdock; You're right. Those metals are money, I was careless in the way I expressed myself. But so is paper really money. Both are equally real, or unreal.

They work as media of exchange because we agree to that. If it became as easy to make gold as it has to manufacture say, diamonds and rubies, that agreement would quickly disappear.

I maintain my premise, trust in any currency is really based on the trustworthiness of whoever is running it.

We have runaway inflation because idiots are allowed to print money in unreasonable amounts, and so it no longer bears any relationship to the real values money is supposed to represent.

Looks to me like LETS is just Major Douglas's Social Credit theory using computers.

I don't even pretend to know the theory. I would just like to know what works and why it works and why it doesn't work somewhere else. Where are the conflicts?

When we are given a proposal for a possible solution we get lost in a discussion of the pros and cons of mutual banking instead of dealing with more practical issues.

Whats the point of bringing proposals for solutions to the Tyee if no one is going to take it seriously. There is nothing wrong with theory or the discussion, that is essential to cooperation. But how about mechanics, how will this theoretical machine work? Its been 3 days and there is still no answer to my question.

I have a right to jest,
it was just a little jig
Jiggery, Pokery
and la

the stinging barb drew swift response
with phrase too late to now recall
exposed now still unresolved
the kernel of the problem
obvious to any discerning eye
it was all laid out before you
Ladies and Gentlemen

Dear janet666,

The answer to your question - why there is a LETSystem in Victoria and not in Vancouver? - has nothing to do with either the idea, or the location or the weather. You could ask some of the Victoria users why they do, but you'll get more information by asking some of the Vancouver non-users why they don't.

It's an interesting reflection on how people relate to ideas such as this that the invitation for Tyee readers to try the game at openmoney.org/letsplay has as yet had no takers.

I won't comment on the comments posted so far, but I will suggest anyone really interested in the substance of this should look at http://lets.net and http://openmoney.org. And even http://demo.openmoney.org.

cheers, Michael (Linton)

ok, LETS hear it from the users and the non-users?!

Certainly you can refer to it as a "stinging barb", if it makes you feel better janet666, but the odour of a cheap shot still lingers above your post.

Jack Munroe was never my type of trade unionist and, as you noted, he is a big boy and can take care of himself so insult him 'til the cows come home if that's what you feel you need to do.

But I think you might try apologizing to the hundreds or perhaps thousands of IWA member who over the decades have worked with the NDP and with other working people to resist the efforts of right-wing governments.

Those would be the ones you implied all voted Socred back when you were a younger woman. Who knows, perhaps you were phoning for the Socreds and talked to IWA members who told you that.

Anyway, please don't take so much licence with history even if you think it's just jestery.

And what about that conflict you seem to be wearing all over the place? That little inconsistancy with your efforts to paint yourself as a helpless victim of a "stalker" mixed with your apparent reliance upon lockerroom comments like "Socred's bitch."

Just more hokery pokery?

Lady you're act is getting a bit thin.

janet - the question remains rhetorical, and you can probably answer it yourself.

The users have little to say beyond "why not? - what's to lose?"

The non-users can go on for ever, and many will. It's mainly logic of the "if god had wanted us to fly, she would never have created gravity" quality.

cheers, m

For the record:
Germany was forced to pay WW1 reparations in gold, not (Deutch)marks. It was because the mark was no longer backed by gold that inflation took off. U.S. currency is no longer backed by either gold or manufacturing capacity.

F.D.R. confiscated citizens gold for which the government paid $20 per oz. The price was then fixed at $35 and Americans were forbidden to hold the metal. Foreigners could redeem $US for gold until Nixon closed the "gold window".

At the same time, Canada stopped using the Bank of Canada to create up to 20% of the country''s money supply for public works etc. That was the beginning of our debt. The Finance Minister under Trudeau, John Turner was blamed for creating the debt, but it was never explained that Canada had started using essentially the same system as the U.S., but without an entity called the "Federal Reserve".

The N.D.P. under David Lewis, Steven's father, held the balance of power. He coined the phrase "corporate welfare bums", implying the debt was because of tax-breaks, but never said boo about what had really happened. Trudeau said that economics bored him and proceeded to fund numerous projects to keep the artists and intellectuals happy and quiet.

The wonderscam is that in both countries, the government is the ultimate guarantor for the banks i.e., the government insures deposits and picks up the tab when a bank goes belly-up.....but each government must borrow from those same banks and pay interest on the money. Voila...the DEBT.

The Bank of Canada created enough funds in order that 15 million Canadians could send wartime Britain $10 billion worth of goods and mount its own war effort at the same time.(bread and milk were 10 cents each) This after years of grinding poverty and Bennet Buggies. Britain is paying us back at the rate of $750,000 (I kid you not) per year.

Ed Deak is absolutly right. Our present monetary system is a brutal and colossal fraud.
Changes need to be made and we need to educate ourselves....and we must understand that all of our principal political parties are run out of Washington.

Dear mwl

I understand the rhetoric, I'm more interested in hearing from the users or past users what sort of difference it has made in their lives, do they find it convenient or easy to use? Someone brought up the issue of taxes, how did they reconcile that? How far did the Vancouver attempts at running LETS go before they gave up, what stopped it? Does the presence of the CCEC make a difference in Vancouver? If it is a viable system outside of theory, how many are successfully using it? Understand I'm not being critical.

janet666

This is an interesting topic. But nothing to do with this discussion string. So I will say the following and leave it at that.

The forestry workers and the forestry industry have been married for many years. They hate each other but they won't let each other go. They have played the Liberal Socreds against the NDP since the beginning to the forest industry benefit.

You could ask the people who stood on the line and went to jail to protect old growth forest. Who do you think they thought the loggers voted for?

janet666, you do make a point. Unfortunately, though, you have had to switch issues to do that.

You brought up how the Jack Munroe and the IWA membership screwed everyone involved in Operation Solidarity when Munroe went to Kelowna seeking to end the confrontation.

He certainly did, but to now turn around and leap into yet another issue like a confrontation between environmentalists and the forest industry, which also involved loggers, just won't cut it.

Janet666, you can't throw out provocative comments designed to enflame and then when challenged try to move the argument onto a whole new plain.

Hey, if you want positive feedback or even a hotly contested debate, you can't simply leap from one thing to another, trying to avoid dealing with your statements.

Well, obviously you can, but it certainly leaves you looking a bit shy of anything substantial.

What I would like you to do is to tell me what is a better means of fighting the mountain pine beetle infestation other than to burn on small woodlots.

You stated there are better ways to do that. Here's your chance to offer something positive and even (hold on for this), get a thank you out of me.

We can kick ol' Jack around all you want, but it really isn't very productive, is it?

..as a regular volunteer, I wonder if LETS could work in the volunteer sector. though the aim of volunteering is to support the underfunded by donating labour & services, volunteering still has its own currency - ie: getting something for 'free' for doing work, like volunteering at a theatre to see a show. Honorarium payments (a gift of actual money for services performed) also show up from time to time. hmm.. if I had LETS currency for all the volunteer work I did last year, and a network of services to buy, perhaps I could 'afford' to have my old kitchen chairs refinished, take a dance class, or go for some massage therapy.. things I currently cant afford to do with my paying jobs. its an interesting thought.

well there you go, michael, with the exception of those who have grown very small footprints, many can talk the talk, few walk the walk, not everyone has time to play the game. Unless there is a secret society somewhere....

Ed Deak, Michael Linton, and other "real people",
Thank you for being the rare ones who join into discussion of important issues without wearing the mask of an alias. We have more to gain in our present society by speaking openly about who we are and what we believe. The ones with the most to fear are the minority who, with essentially criminal intent, have managed to perpetrate the apparently perfect crime of centuries - control of the monetary systems around the world, and thereby control of all people. If the truth about the monetary system were known by the general population, especially how the minority of wealthy have manipulated it to cause harm to millions (the great depression) IN COLD BLOOD, there would be mass uprisings around the globe.

I will gladly join in discussion with anyone who uses a real name. As for "neocon", for all I know, you're Mr. Lunn's office assistant who claims to be the spokesperson for the Alliance/Conservatives, stating to me the other day that your party "wouldn't even consider looking at fixing a perfectly good monetary system..." By the way, I still haven't got an answer from my riding's elected official on whether or not he will, with or without the support of his "party", go to bat on his constituents' behalf to take back the creation of money by the private banks and put that task in the hands of OUR Bank of Canada where it belongs for the people. Economists know that we could have no federal debt within less than two years if this were done.

Donn Tarris
Salt Spring Island, BC

Cleverkitty,
The only kind of "underfunding" that truly counts is when you have no-one willing to do what needs to be done. Volunteers prove the point hour by hour, day by day, with their time and effort, that the monetary system isn't working. It takes more than money to make things happen, in fact, money can't make it happen. It is a belief in the value of money that convinces someone to do what needs to be done - sometimes. Lincoln's greenbacks proved that you only need to back your monetary system with the faith of the people, the promise of the people to trade, create, consume, share...

For those currently in power, it is a scary thought that no-one requires money to actually do something, make something happen.
Money is NOT required to make the world go around - the energy of people to do things is what is required. Mother nature provides the tools for us to do EVERYTHING that has ever been done on this planet, and only charges us the thought and effort required to use these tools. In the beginning, some people began to claim mother nature's gifts as their own - property, oil, gold, water, air... - and their descendents and hangers-on continue to do so.

Instead of using guns to control this, they use money. Money is the current barbaric tool that kills people to take what they have, just look at the results of the manufactured great depression of the 30's.

Thank you for any volunteering you do. If everyone volunteered to do only things that sustained life on the planet, and ceased to "work" at "real" jobs that perpetuate the incredibly lop-sided system we have now, we would be that much closer to having the heaven on earth that mother nature gave us. True education is the only way out of our mess. Within our present system, the truth is rarely taught. We are doomed to failure without knowing the truth, and then acting on it.

Cheers,
Donn Tarris
Salt Spring Island. BC

Don't believe me. You don't know who I am, or what I truly know. Instead, do the following:

If you're in the banking industry, a teller, a manager, a territory supervisor, please answer the following questions. Take an oath, and then answer them under the possibility of a charge of perjury if you tell a lie. Sign your name, as well as your bank branch - in other words, take responsibility for your answer.

1. Who creates money in Canada, and at what benefit?
2. While the country's municipal, provincial, and federal leaders complain constantly of having no money to do anything with, how is it that the private banks keep reporting profits?
3. What were the profits of your bank in 2005, and where did they come from, i.e. what are the profitable activities of banking?
4. Does it make sense to have private banks such as yours create the money, and if so, why?
5. What would happen if the Bank of Canada began to create all of the money in our Canadian monetary system, and your bank were forced to stop?
6. As there are no securities taken for credit card accounts, i.e. credit is given based purely on a person's perceived ability to repay what is used, along with their promise to do so, how do you justify the right to be the one to create that credit and charge interest for doing so? Why shouldn't people just promise the seller of the service or product that they will pay over time, and give the interest to the seller rather than the bank?
7. Who gave you the right to create money/credit and do they maintain the ability to take that right away?

I doubt that any bank managers will answer these question and sign their names. Naive bank tellers may state what they believe to be true, but so many of them don't know. As the banks won't enter into this discussion in the names of the people representing them, I urge every citizen to go into their bank(s) and attempt to get the answers to at least the questions above. Please post them to this forum.

Think of it this way. When you were in elementary school and the bully (every school had one) told you that you had to give him/her your sandwich/cookie/money, you may have felt like asking him/her why you should do so. The ultimate reason was fear of physical or other reprisal. We have our present monetary system because of the real threats of the banking community, who would use their present power to see it sustained for their benefit, as they have always done.

Why was Lincoln assassinated? Look at his greenbacks and his intent on shutting down the US Central bankers following the civil war.

I look forward to answers to the questions above. "Neocon", will you answer, and sign your real name to it?

Thanks folks,
Donn Tarris
Salt Spring Island, BC

People, at what point in time did you decide to only purchase prepackaged, "no subsitutes", products and services? At what point did you accept the answer "sorry, you can't have more, or less, salt on your dinner"? At what point did you start believing that anyone could create a political party that would represent the complex set of beliefs that you have?

Begin to elect individuals to government who have a belief in working with their fellow citizens to educate all on the issues, who demand participation in the political process, who represent the wishes of their fellow citizens EVEN WHEN THEY THEMSELVES MAY NOT AGREE. They always have the option of stating their own belief, but should ALWAYS vote for what their fellow citizens want. If they feel their fellow citizens aren't voting the right way, then perhaps they haven't done a good enough job to ensure an informed electorate... or perhaps their fellow citizens are a bunch of heathens with criminal intent. Regardless, in democracy the majority is supposed to rule, not necessarily the "right". It is our faith in the goodness of humanity as a whole that makes democracy our dream.

Stop going to sleep between elections, make sure that your elected official is hearing from you constantly. Maker sure that they're keeping you informed of important issues AND HOW THEY PLAN TO VOTE, as well as how they ended up voting and why.

Thanks for listening, sorry for the extended use of bandwidth.
Donn Tarris
Salt Spring Island, BC

Janet666, have you found that better MPB removal method yet? I'm still burning for a better idea from you.

dear dontarris

I know the criticisms directed to non de plumes are not directed towards me per se. As you can see in the above posts, however, there are some aspects of very serious issues that have never been resolved. You said march, we marched and you sold us out (except you dontarris). My experience was confirmed by the obsessed logger above, however, along with everything else he has said who could believe anything he says. I have only words, only one opinion, no organization or money, no power or influence, no career to ruin, I'm free to say what I like, even at the cost of occasionally sounding like a fool. Without a soubriquet, I would be concerned for the safety of myself and my children.

Trust is vital to being able to work together. Now you say march again or believe in us, politics will save the world. Well frankly I don't believe you. And now we have all come to some sort of agreement that the world needs our help and there are parts of Canada where people live like a Third World country.

There was a time when we used to get things done on a community level. We have lost the ability to work together, instead we must be possessed by some sort of dogma.

Politics means committees. Even at grass roots level, there will always be someone undermining the process, or building a hierarchy because of what they perceive to be an absence of a leader. Green promises from successful political parties mean more committees. I refuse to work on a government committee ever again. I'm tired of committees, I've done my time, they wear you down with committees because they have the time and the job to wait you out. Then, while your life is draining away in those huge rooms with the white tablecloths they start the dumping, digging or cutting behind your back.

How do we make the shift to pragmatic action when the world, run by big guns and money, is rushing toward the apocalypse. I don't think there are enough of us to make that change.

Following is the Neuroeconomics of Trust by Paul J. Zak of Claremont Graduate University - Centre for Neuroeconomics Studies Aug 2005
Abstract:
The traditional view in economics is that individuals respond to incentives, but absent strong incentives to the contrary selfishness prevails. Moreover, this "greed is good" approach is deemed "rational" behavior. Nevertheless, in daily interactions and in numerous laboratory studies, a high degree of cooperative behavior prevails - even among strangers. A possible explanation for the substantial amount of "irrational" behavior observed in markets (and elsewhere) is that humans are a highly social species and to an extent value what other humans think of them. This behavior can be termed trustworthiness - cooperating when someone places trust in us. I also present the cross-country evidence for environments that produce high or low trust. A number of recent experiments from my lab have demonstrated that the neuroactive hormone oxytocin facilitates trust between strangers, and appears to induce trustworthiness. In rodents, oxytocin has been associated with maternal bonding, pro-social behaviors, and in some species long-term pair bonds, but prior to the work reviewed here, the behavioral effects of oxytocin in humans had not been studied. This chapter discusses the neurobiology of positive social behaviors and how these are facilitated by oxytocin. My experiments show that positive social signals cause oxytocin to be released by the brain, producing an unconscious attachment to a stranger. I also discuss recent research that manipulates oxytocin levels, and functional brain imaging research on trust.

janet666, you sold yourself out years ago.

Perhaps you might try defending some of the outlandish suggestions you toss out here rather than verbally pulling your pants down, dropping your wisdom and then flitting off on some more airhead suggestions.

In fact, I'd call you an absolute coward. The type that throws a rock from amidst a crowd and then tries to blame the person hit for suggesting the rock come from the crowd in which you stand out with dirty hands.

Janet666, the only thing you ought to fear is your own personality, which has a real problem with a little thing called honesty.

Janet666 and Alan. Cut it out you two! In the "Big Picture" aspects you are both on the same side. Save your fire for the real enemy, the one that wants war, environmental destruction, an impoverished work force and the abolition of what few liberties we have left.

Donn Tarris, I really like your banking questionnaire and am passing it around. Thank you for posting it!

anarcho that is not fair, there is post after post attacking my character, and repetitive personal insults that I wouldn't lower myself to respond to, from an obsessive cretin whose comments are not directed to any subject but the assassination of my character, and he follows me around the discussion boards to do that. Perhaps he is jealous that I have something more original to say other than "this is a great discussion you guys". What I find strange is that you let him bray on, except that he has so openly exposed himself, he has no credibility left as a caring individual, that nothing more needs to be said. I must really disturb or frighten him to have enraged him so, that he needs to make such aggressively venomous postings. He is like a mad pitt bull that attacks and won't let go. I would say that it is this kind of aggression against women that will never stop, that will push us to the brink of extinction. So I will continue to ignore him and keep posting my opinion in spite of the same kind of crazy making abuse and insults environmentalists have always had directed at them from loggers.

Baily,

We're coming from the same angle here: indeed, one can never create more wealth, only more units to denominate said wealth.

What I'm trying to get across here, is that Gold, Copper, Silver, Nickel, Zinc, Uranium, Oil.... Begonias, etc.- REAL THINGS - aren't as 'debaseable' as zoltiniks or paper dollars. They represent actual wealth earned by actual labour in the actual real world. That is why they are real money.

anarcho, I agree, but alas, I am but one half of a dispute here.

I have been excused by janet666 of stalking her repeatedly on Tyee. In her latest post janet666

once again goes over the top.

I've been posting on this site for about two years now and, while I frankly acknowledge I won't shy from an argument (and my skin's real thin), I don't think I have ever chased anyone around this board.

This snit, and that is the only way I can describe it, started when I criticized janet666 for her somewhat overuse of the word hate in one post.

Janet666, although you will not even acknowledge my postings now other than through some weird sort of third-party, past-tense diatribe, I am not chasing anyone around this board. In fact, you are the newcomer here who has choosen to attack, attack and attack.

I am not a logger, but I do not hate loggers, nor do I hate environmentalists. I do recognize that we all have to live together somehow and find solutions rather than simply choose sides and call yourself black or white.

Once again, janet666, I am not stalking you, nor am I being aggressive with you because you are a woman, which you not so gently suggest.

Hey, don't believe me, well then at least listen to anarcho.

Why the facination with gold?
it is just a comodity, like tin or lead or zinc. Produce more and the price goes down. and some countrys have goldmines and others dont.
Lotsa reasons to kill the gold standard.
Its done, forget it.
And the talk of adam smith?
"The rising tide lifts all boats" and other meaningless stuff
Great if you have a boat, but you are dead in the water if you dont have one.
Economic theory moved on since then.
The entire world is based on keynes now. How about updating your stuff?
So, there isnt enough gold to back up all the looneys. So Freeking what?
The looney is the standard now and (just like gold) it has variable value. It goes up and it goes down.
Big deal.

commentor: donntarris
posted: 2 Days Ago
Don't believe me. You don't know who I am, or what I truly know. Instead, do the following:

I think many of the banks are public traded companys. In that case, you can join. buy shares and get some dividends. And credit unions can turn into banks. Join and get a windfall when they become banks.
The world is the world. you can live by the rules or you can complain about them. The only chance for your complaint to be heard is from the inside.

1. Who creates money in Canada, and at what benefit?
2. While the country's municipal, provincial, and federal leaders complain constantly of having no money to do anything with, how is it that the private banks keep reporting profits?
3. What were the profits of your bank in 2005, and where did they come from, i.e. what are the profitable activities of banking?