If you went to the store and bought a pound of bananas (Remember when they were sold by the dozen?), you were almost certain to get a pound of bananas. In the event that you did not get a pound of bananas for the price indicated, you could report the seller to the Department of Weights and Measures. This governmental agency would then rush down and check the scales of the seller. And if the scales were found wanting, or if the seller was pushing a little on the corner of the scale with his thumb (a common practice among some cheats) there would be trouble.

Fines and even imprisonment await those who violate the laws of weights and measure established by the respective government authority.

Now, we in the United States have adopted the English system of weights and measures for obvious reasons. Those "obvious reasons" for those who do not know are the simple fact that the English colonized this part of the world and brought their language and culture to this part of the globe.

Now, if it is essential for good order to have a fixed and uniform determination for weighing things and measuring things, does it not make sense to have the same thing for an equally essential and important element in commerce such as money?

How important is this question of money? It is just as important as the question of weights and measures. It is so because the value of things weighed and measured depends on the stability of the means of exchange, namely, money.

For example: an ounce of silver is closely regulated as to its weight. But, how can you explain that the same one ounce of silver may be valued at 1.00 per ounce one day, and 10.00 an ounce another day? The weight and quality of the silver has not changed.

Why, then, must we speak of the "price of silver going up or down"? The amount of labor in taking the silver out of the ground and processing it is the same. Everything is the same except one thing: the price.

Why should the price of items of the same weight and quality be different? Why should a gallon of gasoline, for example, cost more when people are buying more than when they are buying less? Did it take more effort to make that gallon of gas in the summer than it did in the winter?

Why should a cup of coffee that cost a beggar a dime fifty years ago now cost that beggar to ask for a dollar for a cup of coffee? Did the coffee bean get ten times bigger? If so, we should be able to buy ten cups of coffee for our dollar. But, of course, we would not expect to do so. And, why not?

This is a good time to bring up the question of MONEY which is the stuff we get for working (And some without working!)

If you were working five hours a day and in return for your labor you had agreed upon five ounces of silver in return for your labor, would you not become highly incensed if the man who employed you only gave you four ounces of silver? Of course you would. And rightly so.

Your physical labor and intellectual labor, as the case may be, was a direct contribution to the production of the goods made. If the one who has contracted with you for your energy and time defrauds you by withholding a portion of your wages, he is acting in violation of your mutual agreement. He has broken a verbal contract.

But, what is so obvious to anyone with a third-grade education suddenly becomes mystifyingly complex when the question of money arises.

We don't have to know that a `meter' is the fundamental unit of length in the metric system, equivalent to 39.37 U.S. inches, originally intended to be, and being very nearly, equal to one ten-millionth of the distance from the equator to the pole measured on a meridian: defined from 1889 to 1960 as the distance between two lines on a platinum-iridium bar (the "International Prototype Meter") preserved at the International Bureau of Weights and Measures near Paris, and from 1960 to 1983 defined as 1,650,763.73 wave-lengths of the orange-red radiation of krypton 86 under specified conditions; and now defined as 1/299,792, 458s of the distance light travels in a vacuum in one second.

We don't have to know all that because we have a little stick with lines etched on it that we call a "ruler". This "ruler" represents all that was said above and we can order our lives quite well by just using (and trusting!) that "ruler".

Can we do that with money? No, we cannot. And why not? Because our money is no longer an honest, objective, measure of value. It has been made subject to the whims and schemes of a very small clique whose purpose is far from beneficial to mankind, especially to the laboring class of people all over the world.

Note how your "dollar" has "shrunk" in value. Of course, the piece of paper you may have in your pocket that says "One dollar" has not changed. The size is probably the same; the color may be more or less the same, etc. But, you no longer can buy a can of beans with that same "dollar" that you could, say, a month ago. What happened to it? Did that can of beans increase in weight? Did the manufacturer build or buy a new machine to process the raw materials? Did anything in the entire chain of production change to warrant that very same can of beans costing you more today than it did before? Absolutely nothing changed in the object.

The change took place in the "buying power" of your money. So, follow this important conclusion: If you earned 100 dollars and saved that money for "a rainy day," you would be shocked to find out that your 100 dollars no longer buys what it did when you first got it. Why did its "buying power" shrink?

You may have a piece of paper, or several pieces of paper that arithmetically total "100 dollars," but you no longer have the same value.

You might say: "What does all this have to do with me?" And the answer would be this: "Everything!"

Your labor is part of you; it is an expenditure of your energy which you had to conserve and build up by spending money on food, clothing, shelter, etc. Everything you have has been paid for either by you or someone else. Now, when all your energies come to nothing because your saved money has been reduced to less than its former value, you have been abused and exploited.

This is what is called "Money Manipulation". The object weight and measure of a thing cannot be manipulated openly. To do so constitutes a crime punishable by fine and/or imprisonment. BUT: Those who manipulate your livelihood not only get away stealing your valuable physical goods, but keep you enslaved while they reap huge profits.

Back in 1931, Pope Pius XI wrote an Encyclical Letter "Quadragesimo anno" in which he stated:

"It is patent that in our days….immense power and despotic economic domination are concentrated in the hands of a few…..This power becomes particularly irresistible when exercised by those who, because they hold and control money, are able to govern credit and determine its allotment, for that reason supplying, as it were, the life-blood to the entire economic body, and grasping, as it were, in their hands the very soul of production, so that no one dare breathe against their will."

It is timely to look back to the past. For, as George Orwell knowingly stated: "He who rules the past, rules the present; and he who rules the present, rules the future." Our future depends upon our learning from the past. Unfortunately, few have learned and the majority have been cajoled or dumbed from learning. The few who have learned, though eager to help their fellowman, are almost helpless because the perpetrators of these social evils are so entrenched that they control "the very soul of production, so that no one dare breathe against their will."

In order to show that this problem of money is not new, permit me to quote extensively from a letter written by intelligent English patriots regarding the erosion of England's physical wealth. The letter is addressed to His Excellency, Most Reverend William Godfrey, the Apostolic Delegate to Great Britain and other influential members of the Anglican Church.

It reads:

"Your Grace,

We, all of British blood and descent, having studied the fundamental causes of the present world unrest, have long been forced to the conclusion that an essential first step towards the return of human happiness and brotherhood with economic security and liberty of life and conscience, such as will permit the Christian ethic to flourish again is the immediate resumption by the community in each nation of its prerogative over the issue of money including its modern credit substitutes.

This prerogative has been usurped by those still termed in general `banker,' both national and international, who have perfected a technique to enable themselves to create the money they lend by granting of bookkeeping credits, and to destroy it by the withdrawal of the latter at their discretion, in accordance with entirely mistaken and obsolete ideas which they do not defend against impartial and informed scientific criticism and examination. In this way, a form of national money debt has been invented, in which the lender surrenders nothing at all; and which is physically an impossibility for the community ever to pay. Any attempt to do so produces the artificial `economic blizzard,' as it did after the 1914-18 war.

This has led to the gradual rise of a form of national, international and supra-national power, dominating through its monopolisaton of the National social credit all the basic creative activities of mankind. Thus, in this as in other countries, it has become impossible to obtain publication in the press, or to broadcast on the radio, the truth concerning this economic enslavement which holds the peoples of the world in thrall.

Under the world's present financial system the money, except for a now trifling portion, is originally created by the issue of a loan at interest by the `bankers,' who lend nothing of themselves but in effect make a forced levy in kind on the Nation by conferring on the borrower the power to purchase a corresponding amount of wealth on the market, which wealth does not belong to them, or those who borrow from them, but to the community. The proceeds of the issue of new money _ whether of paper or any other form of credit money _ belong to the Nation in which it is, or is accepted as, legal tender, and not to the issuer. Herein lies the basic flaw of the existing monetary system.

By this method, which has come to be regarded as legal by virtue of established practice, the banks in our country are responsible for the issue of new money of their own creation amounting today to between two and three thousand million pounds _ this being the difference between loans extended, including those to themselves, and those repaid since they instituted the system a number of years ago _ and are thereby extracting by means of interest an annual tribute from the Nation of over £100,000,000 for what has now become to them a relatively costless and riskless service. But the real danger, well understood in every preceding era of history, is the undermining of all lawfully constituted authority by the creation and destruction of money carried on in secret for private gain and the acquisition of power.

All forms of government, whether conservative, liberal or labour, fascist, socialist or communist, fall alike under the control of a political Power Group, which is ultimately, and in large measure unwittingly, dominated by the Money Creators and Manipulators. In this way the national political power, which, if the individual is to enjoy the maximum of personal freedom consistent with his duty to his conscience and his fellows, should be distributed throughout the people, has been usurped without their knowledge and consent.

It will be seen that the present monetary system, which by its disregard of primary physical and ethical laws is inevitably destroying the civilisation into which it has been introduced, requires rectification both in the material technique and in the ethics which at present inspire and control this technique. It is particularly in view of its devastating effects in the moral sphere that we have ventured to refer to Ecclesiastical Authority, and to invoke the Churches to action.

We therefore appeal to you in your position of great authority and influence to proclaim the truth to the Nation on this subject and in the hope that you may see fit to disseminate as widely as possible the text of this statement, whereby this vitally important question may be brought to the light of day and earnestly enquired into by the peoples of the British Commonwealth.

We do so in all Christian fellow-feeling, knowing and honouring the efforts you are making against the abuses of our present economic system and the evils of usury, and believing that the world is now in the gravest crisis of its history. The issue of new money by the money-lender is an unforeseen result of the modern cheque as a substitute for national money _ a valuable invention which in itself was undoubtedly social and benevolent in intention and effect. If the cheque system were corrected, as it can be simply corrected, to restore to the nations their rightful prerogative over the issue of money, there is every reason to retain it. We fully appreciate the services which banking organisations have rendered and can continue to render to the community. But the issue and destruction of money by the money-lender is not a service, but a weapon which can be and has been unsed to perpetuate poverty amidst abundance, which renders individuals and nations powerless to protect themselves, and which may even be perverted to serve vast designs for the complete subjugation of the human race to tyranny, exploitation and the powers of darkness and evil."

The signers of this letter were all without exception exemplary patriots and extraordinary members of their society. Clergy and laymen, they all understood the artificially controlled economy of their country that had reduced it to abject servitude. Above all, they were all concerned with high moral standards.

Recently, Mr. Greenspan _ the man who controls the U.S. economy _ made the public statement that the U.S. economy was too hot. What that meant was that the economy was booming. Business was booming; people were making money and investing their surplus in order to make more money. Mr. Greenspan decided that this was not good for the economy! A booming economy is not good for the economy? People buying and selling is what makes the economy go. If nobody buys, the sellers have no market; if the sellers can't sell, they end up with an inventory that stagnates. And, if they cannot sell what they have, they cannot make the bank payments for loans received. Conclusion: the banks move in, take everything away and the seller is standing outside with a tin cup full of pencils.

What does the bank then do? Simple: the bank turns around and re-sells all that is has confiscated from the seller who could not sell because the people had no money to buy. The bankers make money on the loans they made; they make money on the same things purchased with the loaned money and then turn around and sell the same thing to others. This is what they call a "Trade Cycle".

Inflation and depression are the bankers' tool to made huge profits while keeping the ordinary people enslaved with no hope of future economic freedom. Let us observe how all this works.

This is the alternate `boom and bust' cycle. In the beginning, money is increased by the simple fact that the banks give out more loans than are repaid. This causes a rise in prices because there is more money out there than goods. This happens because private individuals decide how much money is going to be issued. There is more paper and goods.

The aim of these people is not to keep the price-level stable while the natural productivity of the country could be developed. Their goal is to make a profit for themselves.

During this first stage, employment increases, producers and traders take out loans. There is an increased demand for goods. Prices continue to rise because there is still more paper than goods. But, although prices rise, the people at home do not have an increase in salary. This leads them to buy abroad where they can get more for their meagre money.

The speculators sell when prices are still high (if they are in the know) and buy when the prices fall to the lowest level. Only a novice would be naïve to think that the economic market is subject to some mystical "natural law".Most people believe this mystifying nonsense. What they do not realize is that in this "Credit Cycle" the bankers are making profits both ways: They force buyers to pay them tribute during the booms and by compelling sellers to pay them tribute during the slumps. And, this is all done by means of loans of promises-to-pay what none of them really possesses: money.

The people swallow the lie that all this is due to some inscrutable "natural law,' whereaas it is nothing more than the scrutable chicanery of the bankers.

It is a fact that when the Federal Reserve raises interest rates, investors take their money out of stocks and place them in those funds where the interest rate is now profitable; meanwhile, the stock market is depressed. People panic and sell their stock, thus creating a landslide profit for those who have deliberately created the situation. Stocks hit bottom and the "insiders" buy up the enfeebled stock. After cleaning up the market of undervalued stock, these same people start the cycle all over: the stocks begin to rise because these people, like Greenspan and his gang, are now pushing the stock. They will do this until the peak of the cycle is reached and then they will start the same scenario over again. Meanwhile, many people who have invested with the hope of future economic security will have lost all their savings. And for one reason only: To fill the coffers of these unscrupulous individuals who manipulate the economy and its visible expression: MONEY.

The current economic crisis should awaken many people to the evils attached to the privately-owned enterprise known as the "Federal Reserve." It is neither "Federal" nor does it "reserve" anything. It is nothing more than the invention of international white-color thieves.

Return to Contents

Return to Homepage.