Economics Professor: Negative Interest Rates Aimed at Driving Small Banks Out of Business and Eliminating Cash

George Washington's picture

More than one-fifth of the world’s total GDP is in countries which have imposed negative interest rates, including Japan, the EU, Denmark, Switzerland and Sweden.

Negative interest rates are spreading worldwide.

And yet negative interest rates – supposed to help economies recover – haven’t prevented Japan and Europe’s economies from absolutely going down the drain.

Nor have they even stimulated spending. As ValueWalk points out:

Japan has had ultra-low rates for years and its economy has been terrible. Trillions of debt in Europe now trades at negative interest rates and its economy isn’t exactly booming.  Denmark, Sweden and Switzerland all have negative interest rates, but consumer spending isn’t going up there. In fact, savings rates have been going up in lockstep with the decrease in interest rates, exactly the opposite of what the geniuses at the various central banks expected.

 

Why is this happening? Simply, savers are scared. Lower interest rates have wrecked their retirement plans. Say you were doing some financial planning 10 years ago and plugged in 3% from your savings account.  Now its 0%.  You still have to plan for your retirement. Plug in 0%. What happens to your planning now?  0% compounded for X years is 0%.  The math is simple. So in order to have your target savings at retirement, you need to save more, not spend more. But for some reason, the economists that run central banks around the world can’t see this. They are all stuck in their offices talking to one another and self-reinforcing this myth that they can drive spending up by reducing the rate of return on investments.  Want to see consumer spending go up?  Don’t wreck their savings plans so that they are too scared to spend.  But that’s too simple. Instead, central banks use a chain of causation that doesn’t exist to try to create change 3 or 4 steps down the line. It hasn’t worked, and it won’t work. It isn’t in an individual’s self-interest to go out and spend their money on more “stuff” in order to spur economic growth.

So what’s really going on? Why are central banks worldwide pushing negative interest rates?

Economics professor Richard Werner – the creator of quantitative easing – notes:

The experience of Switzerland [shows that] negative rates raise banks’ costs of doing business. The banks respond by passing on this cost to their customers. Due to the already zero deposit rates, this means banks will raise their lending rates. As they did in Switzerland. In other words, reducing interest rates into negative territory will raise borrowing costs!

 

If this is the result, why do central banks not simply raise interest rates? This would achieve the same result, one might think. However, there is a crucial difference: raised rates will allow banks to widen their interest margin and make their business more profitable. With negative rates, banks’ margins will stay low and the financial situation of the banks will stay precarious and indeed become ever more precarious.

 

As readers know, we have been arguing that the ECB has been waging war on the ‘good’ banks in the eurozone, the several thousand small community banks, mainly in Germany, which are operated not for profit, but for co-operative members or the public good (such as the Sparkassen public savings banks or the Volksbank people’s banks). The ECB and the EU have significantly increased regulatory reporting burdens, thus personnel costs, so that many community banks are forced to merge, while having to close down many branches. This has been coupled with the ECB’s policy of flattening the yield curve (lowering short rates and also pushing down long rates via so-called ‘quantitative easing’). As a result banks that mainly engage in traditional banking, i.e. lending to firms for investment, have come under major pressure, while this type of ‘QE’ has produced profits for those large financial institutions engaged mainly in financial speculation and its funding.

 

The policy of negative interest rates is thus consistent with the agenda to drive small banks out of business and consolidate banking sectors in industrialised countries, increasing concentration and control in the banking sector.

 

It also serves to provide a (false) further justification for abolishing cash. And this fits into the Bank of England’s surprising recent discovery that the money supply is created by banks through their action of granting loans: by supporting monetary reformers, the Bank of England may further increase its own power and accelerate the drive to concentrate the banking system if bank credit creation was abolished and there was only one true bank left – the Bank of England. This would not only get us back to the old monopoly situation imposed in 1694 when the Bank of England was founded as a for-profit enterprise by private profiteers. It would also further the project to increase control over and monitoring of the population: with both cash and bank credit alternatives abolished, all transactions, money creation and allocation would be implemented by the Bank of England.

If this sounds like a “conspiracy theory”, the Financial Times argued in 2014 that central banks would be the real winners from a cashless society:

Central bankers, after all, have had an explicit interest in introducing e-money from the moment the global financial crisis began…

 

***

 

The introduction of a cashless society empowers central banks greatly. A cashless society, after all, not only makes things like negative interest rates possible, it transfers absolute control of the money supply to the central bank, mostly by turning it into a universal banker that competes directly with private banks for public deposits. All digital deposits become base money.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
jonesselas's picture

Are you in need of commercial,personal and business loan? If yes here is an offer from a Registered, Government approved and Licensed private lender,we offer loan at 2% rate and we give out loans in the range of 5,000usd to 100,000,000.00usd. Contact us today at michaelselitoloanfirm@hotmail.com and get your loan to start up business and other needs. michaelselitoloanfirm@hotmail.com

RabbitOne's picture

The Business/Government model I grew up with the 1960 to 1980 era was business led and government reacted to clean up the mess. Then in the 1990s central banking decided under Alan Greenspan the Business/Government model needed change and that “accommodation” was necessary to prolong prosperity. And finally we have evolved to a Yellen model of Business/Government after several “crashes” where government will decide what makes business and the consumer “tick”.

 This evolution has let weak business “hang on” with cheap credit that should have gone to the grave yard as they did in the past. It has pushed consumers to take on far more credit than any individual should be able to. It has created a super state that depends on excessive lines of credit to accommodate any perceived weakness.

Thus we have passed from capitalistic to socialistic as a society. As with Russia and China our “socialist experiment” will come crashing down with no safety nets available. One must be prepared for the nasty outcomes  on the horizon…

Seer's picture

Huh?

The New Deal

WWII

The Great Society

Viet Nam war

USD off the gold standard

Massively high interest rates

Increase in govt debt (despite the rhetoric given by govt officials in the early 80s)

From The New Deal through the early 50s the US was fascist, fascist if you consider that MUCH of the US's manufacturing had been appropriated for State use (war), fascist when you consider the behaviors of the likes of J Edgar Hoover, the rise of the CIA etc...

Population increases.  And the decrease in mineral (think oil) and other resources.

And if you really believe that "socialism" is the CAUSE of the  downturn then think again (HINT: it's got NOTHING to do with "isms" or leadership or style of rule):

http://people.uncw.edu/kozloffm/glubb.pdf

buzzsaw99's picture

no, yeah, no. nirp allows the smaller banks to borrow more cheaply and lower interest rates paid on deposits. the problem isn't nirp but zirp that preceded it caused loose lending, overinvestment, and deflation. THAT is why lending is hopefully more conservative. spurious causation on the part of the author.

Seer's picture

I think that people are missing the BIG PICTURE.  The current System is predicated on perpetual growth.  Clearly we're now at that point where reality is trumping such a flawed notion.  The entire banking business model is threatened, and it's more to do with reality/physics/mother-nature than the conspiracy of a few powers.

Smaller, less-efficient entities are being squeezed out.  This is a recession/depression- it's CONTRACTION.  That some of the big entities are doing everything they can to acquire more market share is just business.  Again, keep in mind that the markets are shrinking (after being artificially inflated).

Looking at the problem through the lens of yesterday only leads to frustration as it fails to account of the realities of today (and tomorrow).

I see the move to a cashless banking environment as a response to the notion that our current system is totally incapable of dealing with the massive unwinds that are heading our way.  Don't get me wrong here, I'm NOT advocating for such, just stating the realities.  Doesn't matter what's pulling this cart, eventually the wheels are gonna come off.

Growth is ALWAYS about a Ponzi.

blindman's picture

The Chart of Doom: When Private Credit Stops Expanding… Read more at http://www.maxkeiser.com/2016/02/the-chart-of-doom-when-private-credit-s... .

blindman's picture

Courtesy of Market Daily Briefing, here is The Chart of Doom, a chart of private credit in the five primary economies:
Read more at http://www.maxkeiser.com/2016/02/the-chart-of-doom-when-private-credit-s...

Ghordius's picture

Seer, I am curious about your "Smaller, less-efficient entities are being squeezed out "

in the light of this...

...huge war of Big Biz...,

with legions of lobbyists and the support of a whole chunk of the financial world that would wish for Unicorns Only (i.e. for businesses worth over one billion, for the greater glory of the stock and commercial bond markets), tax laws in support of multinationals, IP laws, and so on

... against Small Biz...

...are you sure you are putting the emphasis on the correct... "efficiency"? In other words, are you talking about economic efficiency... or efficiency on getting laws and regulations in favour of Biz, The Bigger The Better?

/bob

Seer's picture

Don't get hung up on semantics.

Those with the might tend to be the victors.  Got nothing to do with who is "morally superior" or "not corrupt."  The BIGGIES got there by offering things that built up enough of a customer base for them to leverage from; this would include creating reams of money for lobbying (which is legal).  Given sufficient size the entity becomes nearly impossible to stop as it's significantly hooked into society' foundations: think MIC- stuffing military installations an weapons manufacturers in every congressional district.

So, if it helps, do as you did and  put quotes around "efficiency."  Or, just call it "advantage" (one example would be  economies of scale- kind of hard to beat out the likes of Wal-Mart when they pretty much own/control the suppliers.

Again, it has ALWAYS been the case that during downturns there's consolidation.  While it might be the case that some "better" companies get wiped out the fact is that the majority of them are lower-performing.  Even when NOT in a downturn you get hostile take-overs happening.

Economies of scale IS a benefit (for an advantage over a competitor).

EVERYTHING, however, will ultimately fail to scale (given the basis of our entire economic system is centered around growth).  And THIS is my primary point here (as it has been for YEARS).  We're now seeing the other side of the growth parabola: though many will refuse to believe this and look to blame the slide on conspiracies and "others."  An over the course of many years I've asked for ANYONE to put up any theory on how "capitalism" (or fucking anything else) could exist without growth.  People can view me a heretic all they want but that doesn't answer/address this fundamental question.

Ghordius's picture

+1 Seer. You give me a mental picture of dinosaurs roaming the Earth, with Tyrex critters getting bigger and bigger /bob

Global Observer's picture

It is a very interesting and original take on negative rates on excess reserves, bank lending rates going up instead of the oft-repeated and silly claims that it will lead to banks charging negative rates on customer deposits.

Charging new loans higher spreads over prime lending rates is certainly a realstic way for banks to make up for the losses incurred on negative rates on excess reserves. But that will lead to fewer new loans and not more new loans, the supposed intention behind charging negative rates on excess reserves, forcing banks to lend more turning their excess reserves into required reserves and escaping the penalty.

Goes to show how silly the concept of negative rates on excess reserves is to begin with.

Ghordius's picture

Global Observer, the silliness of negative rates on excess reserves pales in comparison to the silliness of Currency Wars, doesn't it?

and all this silliness pales even further if you look at megabanks trying to reduce their costs... but not on the bonuses of their "Masters of the Universe", no, on all those retail banking branches they gobbled up, including the costs of handling physical cash, maintaining local branches, etc.

starting with Douche Bank, and their talk of shedding the German PostBank

/stuart

Ghordius's picture

GW, excellent article, but you have to take what this Professor Werner is saying with a grain of salt

"As readers know, we have been arguing that the ECB has been waging war on the ‘good’ banks in the eurozone, the several thousand small community banks, mainly in Germany, which are operated not for profit, but for co-operative members or the public good (such as the Sparkassen public savings banks or the Volksbank people’s banks). The ECB and the EU have significantly increased regulatory reporting burdens, thus personnel costs, so that many community banks are forced to merge, while having to close down many branches. This has been coupled with the ECB’s policy of flattening the yield curve (lowering short rates and also pushing down long rates via so-called ‘quantitative easing’). As a result banks that mainly engage in traditional banking, i.e. lending to firms for investment, have come under major pressure, while this type of ‘QE’ has produced profits for those large financial institutions engaged mainly in financial speculation and its funding."

Here, you have to be careful of which european institution is responsible for what

The EU Parliament is indeed bashing on bankers. For example with the EU "Banker Bonus Cap" regulation. Hear bankers scream... particularly in the UK, when not busy finding new ways to get around that thing

On the other side, the EU Parliament is also constantly pushing regulators to "do something"... with mixed policies and results, yes, but in particular with the stated intent of being in favour of small (community and coop) banks and in favour of lending to the Small and Medium Enterprises. At least in the matters of intent, the EU Parliament and Commission pay constantly at least lip service for Small Biz and Small Banking

But here it comes: Bank Regulators. The EU28 used to have 28 national regulators, which are the main "whippers" of banks in Europe. In Germany, for example, it's the BaFin

It's Bank Regulator Authorities that do the bulk of regulation, and tend to burden banks with regulatory reporting. And there, there is a kind of global regulator "concert" going on which is quite relevant, similar to the one about acccounting standards (particularly for banks)

But now we have a 29th regulator: the ECB. Which regulates... and there it's the biggest whopper of Prof. Werner... the biggest 120 eurozone banks... only

That's additional whipping of banks by the ECB... but only Big Banks, only the 120 biggest of the eurozone

Meanwhile, yes, NIRP puts pressure on banks. But NIRP, where it's actually in place - instead of forecasted to be soon introduced - is primarily a policy that puts a punitive rate on "excess reserves" of banks at the central bank. Yes, it whips banks. But the ECB line there is: don't keep it there, lend it to the Small and Medium Businesses: the whole rationale of NIRP as presented by the ECB

Seen in the light of those pesky details, the dear Professor is engaged in a bit of obfuscation, when stating this:

"The policy of negative interest rates is thus consistent with the agenda to drive small banks out of business and consolidate banking sectors in industrialised countries, increasing concentration and control in the banking sector."

 

Here, a small bit of evidence: in the US, small banks closed in the ballpark of thousands. In the UK, there was a less pronounced death of the small banks. In the Eurozone... way, way less

 

Of course dead, closed small banks do not generate news, while living, working, embattled and overburdened small banks do generate news

---------------

This one from Professor Werner is even worse to disentangle:

"It also serves to provide a (false) further justification for abolishing cash. And this fits into the Bank of England’s surprising recent discovery that the money supply is created by banks through their action of granting loans: by supporting monetary reformers, the Bank of England may further increase its own power and accelerate the drive to concentrate the banking system if bank credit creation was abolished and there was only one true bank left – the Bank of England. This would not only get us back to the old monopoly situation imposed in 1694 when the Bank of England was founded as a for-profit enterprise by private profiteers. It would also further the project to increase control over and monitoring of the population: with both cash and bank credit alternatives abolished, all transactions, money creation and allocation would be implemented by the Bank of England. "

Here, another small bit of evidence: only the UK uses EBT cards, and British diplomacy and politics is often engaged in preserving the so called "City of London"... i.e. the Big Banks in London from regulation from and about the eurozone, including the EU Parliament, the ECB and the other 27 national regulators in the EU

Generally speaking, the UK is way more involved in the push for "reducing the burden of retail banking" and going cashless then the rest of the EU, particularly in the eurozone. Denmark too, and it's not in the eurozone. Both countries's banking sectors are dominated by what in earlier times were called "merchant" banks, and later "investment" banks, which are not retail banks, and not small banks

Here, another bit of evidence: recently, the EU Parliament is for a "bank account for all", which will whip banks more, yes. But it is not the direction of a EBT card for the poor and credit cards for all the others, it's about a guarantee that the poor can have a retail bank account, too... instead of electronic cashless banking and instead of credit cards

Last bit of evidence: recently, the EU Parliament urged the ECB to consider banning the 500 euro banknotes. For it's attributed criminal activity, but let's be frank here, the thrust is against tax evasion.

The ECB replied laconically that it will take that in consideration sometimes, possibly June. The German CB's (BundesBank) President, Weidmann, went purple just replying what he tought about all this. That's already one vote in the ECB Council for a clear "forget it, the 500 euro note is here to stay". And considering the other national bank presidents there, I would say it's reasonable to expect that the ECB will not ban that banknote, whatever the EU Parliament or Commission might think about it

/stuart

Silver Sparrow's picture
   

"The policy of negative interest rates is thus consistent with the agenda to drive small banks out of business and consolidate banking sectors in industrialised countries, increasing concentration and control in the banking sector."

The small bank failures are down to a trickle. Since 2009.

There were  8 bank failures in 2015.
               18 bank failures in 2014.
               24 bank failures in 2013.
               51 bank failures in 2012.
               92 bank failures in 2011.
             157 bank failures in 2010.
             140 bank failures in 2009.
https://www.fdic.gov/bank/historical/bank/index.html

The Giant Squids.... needs more fishies!

VW Nerd's picture

In the Bible, Jesus railed on the moneychangers, calling them a den of vipers.  Wonder why....

Lumberjack's picture

Boston news media is reporting that Elizabeth Warren might be under consideration for VP spot in Sanders campaign.

Flying Wombat's picture

While speaking with management at a number of local credit unions, all I ever hear are their complaints about how friggin hard it is to meet compliance hurdles and with the challenges of surviving in a mega-bank world.  Back when I was in undergrad econoimcs and taking the standard "banking and credit" course work, the general idea that it was a good thing to see what was then about 10,000 banks, on their constant consolidation march to fewer and fewer banks (and that 10,000+ figure was actual bank instuttions, not branches).

Might as well remove the word "antitrust" from the American lexicon.  The word dosen't get much uses these days............

Flying Wombat's picture

Crap.  Sorry for accidentally hitting "submit" twice and creating two posts.  

Flying Wombat's picture

While speaking with management at a number of local credit unions, all I ever hear are their complaints about how friggin hard it is to meet compliance hurdles and with the challenges of surviving in a mega-bank world.  Back when I was in undergrad econoimcs and taking the standard "banking and credit" course work, the general idea that it was a good thing to see what was then about 10,000 banks, on their constant consolidation march to fewer and fewer banks (and that 10,000+ figure was actual bank instuttions, not branches).

Might as well remove the word "antitrust" from the American lexicon.  The word dosen't get much uses these days............

NorthernPike's picture

Thank you George for your ever trusty insightful analysis and reporting.

numapepi's picture

Doesn't it seem like a negative interest rate would drive people to horde cash? Which would destroy banks...

Baa baa's picture

The elimination of cash will be the single greatest element for a citizen uprising which may be as simple as refusing to participate and/or the advent of multiple currencies to outright revolt.

Hungry, desperate people can be amazingly creative. The PTB are beginning to make this about survival and many of us are just not ready to roll over for their greed. Put another way, most of us are not prepared to die but are prepared to engage in any effort to protect our lives and liberty and those of our loved ones.

Not sayin' Americans are "Exceptional", just that we are woefully underestimated. Mistaking slow, deliberate action for disinterest or capitulation.

the grateful unemployed's picture

http://qz.com/120960/americas-huge-mistake-on-monetary-policy-how-negati...

 

The key technical issue is to make it so there is no place to hide from the negative interest rates, not even by putting cash under the mattress; paper currency would earn more or less the same negative interest rate as money in bank accounts. See my first column on electronic money here and the presentation I have been giving at central banks around the world here. So it all comes down to interest rate politics. If, politically, the government doesn’t dare let interest rates go negative, they won’t be able to. But if the government quit gumming up the works of the price system by guaranteeing a minimum interest rate of zero, then negative rates would be quite possible, and even half-decent monetary policy using negative rates would be enough to prevent another Great Recession.

 

the problem with electronic money IMHO is that it would be essentially a transaction only currency. it only gets you from one investment to another. when a central bank can no longer print money with a store of value they are finished. people will use electronic money to move their assets into gold, then we are back on the gold standard, defacto, and the central banks are screwed (well good for them, but why would they want to do it?) their entire existence is predicated on inflating monetary supply and fooling people into believing the new money is worth exactly what the old money was worth...

razorthin's picture

people will use electronic money to move their assets into gold

BitGold makes that easy, and it is easily spendable too.

George Washington's picture

Yeah, but they're trying to outlaw cash. It'll be a package deal, a 1-2 punch.

Dre4dwolf's picture

Confiscation of wealth through inflation then deflation.

You put out the fishing nets (inflate and lend) then rake the nets in to steal assets for free (deflate and foreclose).

Courts, Lawyers make a cut in the theft, banks make profit on the flip side when they counterfeit more money on the loans to sell the property they confiscated.

That's how the monetary system breathes money/assets in and out.

 

Its all part of the show and if anything goes wrong " bailouts/bailins ".

Something going catastrophicly wrong is the best outcome in some sense for the banks, because they get to foreclose and get bailouts/take peoples deposits like a cherry ontop.

cwsuisse's picture

It is difficult to say what is more stupid, the NIRP policy itself or the explanation for NIRP provided by that "professor".

the grateful unemployed's picture

yeah bernanke says its a positive for corporations who can right off debt, i thought most of the really big corporations had no debt.

http://fortune.com/2015/10/21/bernanke-negative-rates/
roadhazard's picture

Sounds like someone always wants me to buy gold.

silverer's picture

Small banks out of business? Yes and no. They just use the good old "merge" gag. One bank name, one world government, one leader for all. My thoughts: Stop having kids. You're wasting their time.

Baa baa's picture

The bulk of the "small banks" are just as dirty as the big ones. I know, I was witness to it.

There is no "Innocence" with regard to any banker. They laid with the dogs and have now contracted chronic and eventually lethal sarcoptic mange. Also, it makes them easy to spot.

durablefaith's picture

Once cash is banned, it will be a simple transition from "no fly list" to "no buy list"

AGuy's picture

No Cash business is likely to also drive many small business out of business, Car Washes, Convience stores, and small resturants. Not everyone has a credit card, and using credit cards for small purchase can be expensive.

I think a Cash ban will likely have the opposite effect, by driving people to the underground economy and driving most of the population into criminal activity just to get by.

This sounds like a desperate act, and probably means the system doesn't have too much time left before something breaks, as the gov't tried ever more desperate financial tricks to prop the system up.

NorthernPike's picture

My perspective aligns much with yours AGuy.

The faster Cash goes away, the faster alternatives will emerge to fill the role it plays in trade now.

I spent a few months last year cataloging alternative monetary and trade token systems and believe once USA cash is curtailed there will be great opportunies to cash in on the change (Pun Intended but I'm serious).   

Those wishing to sign up now to a 20,000 month contract @ $9.99/mo please let me know, I will share the secrets of How to Make huge money through the cash demise without even trying. Off/Sarc

bbq on whitehouse lawn's picture

Its near cashless now. In 1960 you could go to a bank and cash a check for over 5k in then money. Now you cant, even in todays money. What does that tell you.

blindman's picture

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n3xgjxJwedA
9/11 Trillions: Follow The Money
.
digital transactions subject herein.

blindman's picture

in·ter·est
?int(?)r?st/
noun
" 2.
money paid regularly at a particular rate for the use of money lent, or for delaying the repayment of a debt.
"the monthly rate of interest"
synonyms: dividends, profits, returns; a percentage
"her savings earned interest" ".
.
there can be no negative interest or rate, that is just another
form of stealing mislabeled.

Baa baa's picture

You win the perspicacity of the day award!!!

blindman's picture

zero hedge posted a steve keen piece http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-02-07/steve-keen-exposes-our-dysfunct...
Steve Keen Exposes Our Dysfunctional Monetary System
Tyler Durden on 02/07/2016 20:40 -0500
.
therein he said, among other things “We are hostage to a dysfunctional monetary system, run by people who don’t understand how it works in the first place.” … s.k. can’t argue with that.
then, in the comment section, he is attacked for his general opinion and perspective, that being the forbes piece concerning stocks and flows analysis regarding principal and interest.
MAR 30, 2015 @ 04:23 PM 22,425 VIEWS
The Principal And Interest On Debt Myth
http://www.forbes.com/sites/stevekeen/2015/03/30/the-principal-and-inter...
.
stocks and flows.
so, reading the lines and in between, the question appears to be how do stocks impact flows, that is the true question. the doom question no one of repute understands or can publicly articulate without being rejected as subversive. obviously, that line of questioning would threaten a “stock” which is sacrosanct in a system so debased by near or complete monopolistic “property” ownership.
the bankers are draining the swamp they refer to as the economy or mankind , as owners, and testing the level of servitude the system will tolerate. they control the stocks and flows, it is their business, no one else’s. the stock, that is slavery and units of slavery. the flow, that is acquiescence and acceptance of slave trade. no? it is and has been all bout the money system. mass killing and running people from their homes and lands for centuries, it is a system.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YpZXc1uwz98

Kokolo – Soul Power

then, money becomes the most ubiquitous art, even more than dance or music somehow. it is a mystery for the ages i guess. ....to control a flow you merely control the stock. the most efficient way to do this is to establish a monopoly on the stock. the rest is history.

Read more at http://www.maxkeiser.com/2016/02/why-we-wont-have-a-lehman-moment-in-the...
i don't know about that.

blindman's picture

let me put this here.
http://www.funnyordie.com/videos/ad38087bac/donald-trump-art-of-the-deal...
Funny Or Die Presents Donald Trump's The Art Of The Deal: The Movie
.
the original to follow.

blindman's picture

Traces of the Trade: a Story from the Deep North
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mMJGGtnlTtw
.
Sojourner Truth
Wednesday, February 10, 2016 3:00 pm
http://wbai.org/server-archive.html
.
this, above, is a rebroadcast of a hugh hamilton, the great
radio voice, what happened to him?, piece ...here mislabeled.
.
there be original keys to the truth in the above.
.
here the context....
http://newsreel.org/video/TRACES-OF-THE-TRADE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qVX-Hrp41AA
.
need i say it all evolved into a more broad based, color blind
system. the system of "money" where words mean nothing. they have all
been raped and buried.

blindman's picture

from above,
"This film explains how the New England slave trade supported not just its merchants but banks, insurers, shipbuilders, outfitters and provisioners, rich and poor. Ordinary citizens bought shares in slave ships. Northern textile mills spun cotton picked by slaves, fueling the Industrial Revolution, and creating the economy that attracted generations of immigrants. It was no secret; John Quincy Adams, sixth president, noted dryly that independence had been built on the sugar and molasses produced with slave labor. Traces of the Trade decisively refutes the widely-accepted myth that only the South profited from America's "peculiar institution."

blindman's picture

buyer beware and ask not for who the bell tolls, the bell tolls for you.

blindman's picture

perhaps why no one reads anymore, reads nothing of meaning.

bg6666's picture

More theft and pillage from the global elite Pirates.  One world digital currency where our earnins will be hostage, to be confiscated at their whim.

Wow72's picture

Its too bad we didnt have an "Economics Professor" in charge of our economy... No instead we have immature children that print themselves out of every situation instead of looking for REAL solutions to REAL problems. Take the peoples cash, take their money, everything will be FINE.  TRUST US!

g speed's picture

ban something and make it valuable---works every time--