Electronic Money Blackhole at ECB

Electronic Money Blackhole at ECB

S&P nears settlement on real-estate bond ratings fraud

S&P nears settlement on real-estate bond ratings: WSJ

Thu Dec 25, 2014 10:38pm EST

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/12/26/us-usa-s-p-settlement-idUSKBN0K403V20141226

A view shows the Standard & Poor's building in New York's financial district February 5, 2013.

Credit: Reuters/Brendan McDermid

(Reuters) - Standard & Poor's Ratings Services is nearing a settlement with regulators over their investigation of how the company graded real-estate bonds, the Wall Street Journal reported, citing people familiar with the matter.
The proposed deal, which could be reached as early as next month, is a joint settlement with the Securities and Exchange Commission, New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman and Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Coakley, the newspaper reported. (on.wsj.com/1tiyOP6)
The settlement could involve a suspension of S&P for several months or even a year from rating some deals and a fine of at least $60 million, the Journal said.

S&P spokeswoman Catherine Mathis, representatives at the SEC, the NY AG's office and Coakley's office could not be reached for comment outside regular U.S. business hours.
In October, S&P's parent McGraw Hill Financial Inc said it was in "active" settlement talks with federal and state regulators over its ratings on six commercial mortgage-backed securities and took a $60 million charge in the third quarter for a possible accord.
S&P suffered a huge blow to its commercial mortgage-backed securities business in 2011, after a major error on a $1.5 billion deal caused its market share to shrink.
It isn't clear whether S&P will be asked to admit wrongdoing, the Journal said.
The U.S. Department of Justice sued S&P for $5 billion in February 2013, accusing it of issuing inflated ratings before the 2008 financial crisis to win more fees from issuers, and failing to downgrade debt backed by mortgage-backed securities fast enough. That lawsuit remains pending.
The rating agency also faces related lawsuits by many U.S. states. Its main U.S. rivals, Moody's Investors Service and Fitch Ratings, do not face similar lawsuits.
(Reporting by Supriya Kurane in Bengaluru; Editing by Sunil Nair)

Credit Suisse Faces $10 Billion Mortgage Fraud Suit

New York's Top Cop Scores as Credit Suisse Faces $10 Billion Mortgage Fraud Suit

By Linda Sandler and Christie Smythe Dec 26, 2014 5:37 PM GMT+0100

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-12-25/credit-suisse-ordered-to-face-new-york-s-mortgage-fraud-claims.html 

Credit Suisse Group AG (CSGN) was ordered to face a $10 billion lawsuit by New York’s attorney general accusing the Swiss bank of fraud in the sales of mortgage-backed securities before the 2008 financial crisis.
A New York State Supreme Court justice rejected the bank’s request to dismiss the case, a move that gives leverage to Attorney General Eric Schneiderman to demand internal bank documents and force a settlement. New York demonstrated the bank may have engaged in misconduct, Justice Marcy Friedman said in a Dec. 24 decision, allowing the suit to head toward trial.
In addition to forcing Zurich-based Credit Suisse to defend itself or settle, the ruling may strengthen Schneiderman’s hand in punishing other banks for bad behavior tied to the recession.
Elizabeth DeBold, a spokeswoman for Schneiderman, said the lawsuit is part of an effort to pursue “accountability for those who contributed to the near collapse of our economy.” Drew Benson, a spokesman for Credit Suisse, said yesterday in an e-mail that the bank will appeal the ruling.
New York sued Credit Suisse in November 2012, claiming Switzerland’s second-largest bank misrepresented the risks of investing in mortgage-backed securities. Last year, the bank argued that New York missed a three-year deadline for suing. The state countered that it had six years to file its complaint.

Photographer: Louis Lanzano/Bloomberg

Eric Schneiderman, attorney general of New York.

If the bank had won, Schneiderman would have faced a new roadblock as he considers similar multibillion-dollar claims against Wall Street firms.
Armed with the Martin Act, New York’s powerful anti-fraud statute, Schneiderman has pursued banks while introducing programs to relieve struggling homeowners and stem a rise in foreclosures. He claimed Credit Suisse knew about “pervasive flaws” in the screening of residential loans underlying mortgage securities it sold, but assured investors they were safe because it wanted to expand its business.
Under the Martin Act, “false promises” by sellers of securities are against the law.

Earlier Settlements

JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM), also sued by Schneiderman’s office, agreed to settle that case along with federal claims over mortgage-backed securities in a landmark $13 billion accord last year. The state got $613 million in the settlement, the first in a string of payouts it has received in legal agreements over the financial instruments.
In July, Citigroup Inc. (C) agreed to pay $7 billion in fines and consumer relief to resolve claims by the federal government and states including New York. The following month, Bank of America Corp. agreed to pay about $17 billion, including almost $10 billion in cash, to resolve civil investigations by federal and state prosecutors, including Schneiderman.

Photographer: Gianluca Colla/Bloomberg

Credit Suisse Group AG's headquarters in Zurich, Switzerland, on Oct. 23, 2014.

Warning Signs

In New York’s suit against Credit Suisse, Schneiderman claimed the bank ignored warning signs about the quality of loans it was packaging and selling. One example cited was its use of New Century Financial Corp. mortgages after that firm’s 2007 bankruptcy.
The case is People of the State of New York v. Credit Suisse Securities (USA) LLC, 451802-2012, New York State Supreme Court, New York County (Manhattan).

To contact the reporters on this story: Linda Sandler in New York at lsandler@bloomberg.net; Christie Smythe in federal court in Brooklyn, New York at
csmythe1@bloomberg.net
To contact the editors responsible for this story: Michael Hytha at mhytha@bloomberg.net; Andrew Dunn at adunn8@bloomberg.net David E. Rovella, Joe Schneider

The Morality and Legality of Debt Jubilee

Part I to III – Bullion Bulls Canada – Sprott Money News

inShar

November-December 2014
http://www.sprottmoney.com/news/the-morality-and-legality-of-debt-jubilee-part-i-bullion-bulls-canada-sprott-money-news

Our nations (Western nations) are rapidly going bankrupt. This is not a suggestion or an assertion. It is a simple fact of arithmetic, for anyone capable of operating a calculator, and who can understand the concept of “compound interest”. Indeed, the bankruptcy of these already-insolvent regimes has only been delayed via permanently (fraudulently) keeping interest rates frozen at near-zero – to minimize their already gigantic interest payments.
The economic outcome here is as obvious as it is inevitable. After the mass-bankruptcy which will occur either tomorrow, next month, next year, or (improbably) next decade; there will be a gigantic “economic reset” of Western economies, and very possibly the entire global economy.

This simple, inevitable conclusion should not surprise any reader. It has happened many times in our civilized history. Indeed, it has happened with such regularity/frequency that we even have a name for this economic phenomenon: Debt Jubilee. The origins of Debt Jubilee go back to (literally) Biblical times, as our societies have been bankrupting themselves, and then “resetting” for well over 2,000 years.
Having established that there must be an economic reset ahead of us, and having observed that this is a regular occurrence in our societies/civilizations; all that remains to be dealt with is how the next Debt Jubilee should be administered. As Debt Jubilee translates literally to erasing our debts; the question boils down to this: should all debt (government/corporate/individual) be wiped away, or only partially erased?
Since this is ultimately a question of law, and we are still (supposedly) societies governed by the Rule of Law; the appropriate analysis here is a legal one. The legal principle upon which any Debt Jubilee must be based is known as “the doctrine of unjust enrichment”. It is an elementary doctrine, and thus requires no legal training or expertise to understand it.
The precise legal question to be decided here is a simple one: would the Debtors here (our governments, and us) be “unjustly enriched” if all our debts were totally/permanently erased? If we answer the first question affirmatively; then the doctrine of unjust enrichment requires that we consider a second question: are the Debt-Holders entitled to any legal remedy themselves, under a separate branch of our law known (appropriately) as Equity?
Here, again, the answer to the question is governed by a simple principle. In order for any person/entity to be entitled to any equitable remedy in our legal system, they must satisfy a stringent legal test: they must demonstrate themselves to have “clean hands”. Simply, in order for anyone to be entitled to a legal remedy in Equity (in this case, the Debt-Holders) they must prove that their own conduct has been above reproach.
With the facts set out, the issues identified, and the legal principles which must decide this matter explained; we are now ready to adjudicate our coming Debt Jubilee. Considering the issues in their proper order; we begin with the question: would it be “unjust” (would we be unjustly enriched?) if our debts/our governments debts were simply erased?
Regular readers should be familiar with the recent history concerning our governments’ massive debts. The $10’s of trillions of new debt piled atop these corrupt Western regimes over the past decade are (without exception) all the direct result of serial acts of fraud/extortion by the primary debt-holder here: the One Bank (i.e. the oligarchs of the Old World Order).

With respect to the fraud; where do we begin? This banking crime syndicate began by engaging in fraudulent misrepresentation. They assured our governments back in the 1990’s (as their/our “financial experts” and the financiers of this debt) that our governments could safely increase our debt levels dramatically, meaning the bankers had (supposedly) developed the “financial engineering” to permanently suppress the amount of interest paid on those debts.
It was (as we have seen) all lies. Our debts haven’t grown in an orderly, manageable manner, as the bankers promised they would. They have exploded exponentially, to the point where all these governments are completely/obviously insolvent, and mass-bankruptcy is only delayed by (as previously mentioned) even more fraud – the illegal suppression of interest rates.
Additional fraud comes in the form of one of the banksters’ favorite tools of crime from the derivatives market — the entirely unregulated, entirely illegal $1.5 quadrillion rigged casino, operated exclusively by this financial crime syndicate – “interest rate swaps”. This form of fraud involved the banksters tricking the leaders of our governments, and the administrators of most public institutions throughout the Western world to bet against the banksters themselves.
The bets they were making (involving $trillions more in fraud) were with respect to the direction of interest rates. Let me be more specific, so that readers fully understand the magnitude of the fraud, and the monumental stupidity of all these politicians and public officials. They were betting on the direction of interest rates against the same financial cabal which is capable of completely manipulating interest rates.
It would be just as foolish as betting on tomorrow’s weather – against someone with a “weather-control machine”. How could thousands of governments and public institutions all have been swindled by this same, grossly obvious fraud? Herd mentality. “Everyone” was doing it, so it had to be not only safe, butsmart.
Then there was/is the extortion. As part of its gigantic interest-rate swindle; it was necessary for the One Bank to “crash” all of our economies (and markets): the Crash of ’08. The crash was triggered in precisely the same way that this banking cabal has been manufacturing “panics” in our economies for 150 years. In economies which (thanks to the bankers themselves) now totally run on “credit” (i.e. debt); the One Bank simply cuts off all credit – suddenly and collectively, via its Big Bank tentacles.
The result is as devastating (and predictable) as cutting off the supply of sunlight to plants, or cutting off the supply of oxygen to humans. Our economies now (literally) ‘live on’ credit. Withhold that credit, and they crash every time.
After the One Bank triggered the Crash of ’08, came the extortion against our corrupt, cowardly governments: pay this cabal $10’s of trillions in blackmail money (spread over decades), or they would finish the economic destruction of Western regimes – i.e. “call-in our debts” (which are held by the One Bank), and drive all these insolvent governments into bankruptcy.
The tip-of-the-iceberg in this extortion were the direct, cash payments to these financial extortionists: what we now know (via the propaganda of our governments and the media) as the “bail-outs” of 2008/09. However, the vast majority of these $10’s of trillions in extortion (i.e. “bail-outs”) were hidden – and are rarely mentioned by the politicians, or the equally corrupt Corporate media.
They come in primarily two forms: massive, long-term “tax breaks”, so that this crime syndicate is not even required to pay taxes on the endless $billions which are the proceeds of its various criminal enterprises. Along with that are endless $trillions of “loss guarantees”. In other words; after the various frauds of this crime syndicate have reaped their illegal harvest, and imploded (as all frauds eventually do); we are committed to indemnifying the One Bank for any/all “losses” it suffers as it perpetrates its mega-billion and mega-trillion dollar crimes against our societies.

Why were the bail-outs ever supposedly necessary, in the first place? Because some of the Big Banks were (supposedly) on the verge of bankruptcy because of debts/obligations owing to other Big Banks.
But all of these Big Banks are tentacles of the One Bank: JPMorgan, Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, Barclays Bank, Deutsche Bank, Citigroup, Bank of America, et al. The “crisis” was imaginary. It was merely a gigantic paper-fraud orchestrated by the bankers. The blackmail, however, was/is only too real. And that was only the beginning of the extortion.
This financial crime syndicate then strong-armed the pathetic cowards who call themselves our “leaders” to declare the Big Bank tentacles of this crime syndicate (permanently) “too big to fail”. In other words; these traitorous cowards were permanently committing our governments (and thus ourselves) to pay any/allfuture extortion demanded by the One Bank.
Here it must be understood that no amount of financial carnage perpetrated by this crime syndicate over the short term could possibly be as injurious as agreeing to permanently pay massive extortion payments to the most-rapacious crime syndicate in the history of our species. Rather, our cowardly leaders agreed to the extortion simply to save their own jobs (and positions of privilege).
Had the banking crime syndicate driven all our governments collectively into bankruptcy; our Traitor Leaders would (at the very least) be thrown out of office. And if their treasonous crimes were uncovered by whatever regime succeeded them; they could easily rot in prison cells for the rest of their miserable lives.
Our futures (and our children’s futures) have all been permanently mortgaged to this financial crime syndicate solely so that our selfish, cowardly, treasonous leaders can protect their own interests. There can be absolutely no doubt that any/all of the additional debt and obligations which have been piled atop our governments over this period of time (and thus piled atop all of us) are doubly fraudulent.
They are fraudulent (in one, obvious sense) because they are the simple/obvious result of acts of fraud and financial extortion – and thus legally unenforceable. They are also fraudulent in the sense that our governments (our legal representatives) have been fraudulently misrepresenting these debts to us, and all the crime upon which they are based.
However, while most of our national debts are the direct product of fraud; we also had/have large historical debts. What about the original debt-loads accumulated by our governments, over roughly the last century? If we are going to erase all government debt; that debt must be considered as well.
Part II of this series will deal with that subject. Readers will be provided with a little ‘teaser’ of what is to come, via the words/thoughts of a political leader who lived at the time that our yokes of debt were first being fastened to our throats – Republican Congressman (and former prosecutor) Charles Lindbergh Sr. (from his superb book, The Economic Pinch). This is what Lindbergh had to say back in 1923 (p.110):

Our future and the future of our children have been doubly mortgaged by the wonderful profiteering schemes of the last eight years [1915-22], mortgaged on a larger scale than ever before. It is simply a larger installment of the great profiteering game, growing in its burden all the time and forcing us into greater and greater debt, debt that can never be paid under the present system of finance; but, on the contrary, will increase until by its own excesses it breaks down by forcing its own repudiation [i.e. Debt Jubilee]. It cannot much longer stand the strain imposed by its own plan. [emphasis mine]


Part I of this series demonstrated how/why all of our government debts incurred in recent decades are the result of obvious and egregious fraud. These debts currently cripple our economies (and societies) with roughly 25% of every revenue dollar taken in by our corrupt governments being utterly wasted, making interest payments to financial parasites – criminal parasites.
This means that not only is it morally defensible (and imperative) that we wipe away these recent, fraudulent debts, it can be justified legally, in clear and unequivocal terms. But the question which remained from the opening installment of this series was with respect to the morality/legality of our historical debts. Could we, should we also erase the debts incurred by past generations, after we wipe away all of the recent years of debt-via-fraud?
Part I provided a clue/argument on how we should adjudicate the debts from our past, in the form of a quote from the late Charles Lindbergh Sr., former Republican Congressman, and a champion of the people in his own era, nearly a century ago:

Our future and the future of our children have been doubly mortgaged by the wonderful profiteering schemes of the last eight years [1915 – 22], mortgaged on a larger scale than ever before. It is simply a larger installment of the great profiteering game, growing in its burden all the time andforcing us into greater and greater debt, debt that can never be paid under the present system of finance; but, on the contrary, will increase until by its own excesses it breaks down by forcing its own repudiation [i.e. Debt Jubilee]. It cannot much longer stand the strain imposed by its own plan.  [emphasis mine]
There are two themes which dominate this quote. First of all; the debts incurred in Lindbergh’s era – the original debts of our nations – were the product of a “game” (or a scam, or a fraud?). The banking cabal of Lindbergh’s era, the (direct) ancestors of today’s banking oligarchs employed coercion: “forcing” us into debt, and (via the arithmetic of compound interest) ultimately “forcing” us to repudiate that debt.
Clearly the original debts piled atop our nations were also the result of malice, coercion, and fraud. The malice and coercion are explicitly implied by the quote; the fraud is implicitly implied. Were the banksters of Lindbergh’s era – who also professed to be “the financial advisors” of our governments – telling our governments that the economic path they were leading us down could only end in disaster and bankruptcy? Of course not.
They professed to have a superior understanding of “finance”, and (like all Con Artists) they claimed the subtleties of this “finance” were too complex to grasp – for anyone lacking their “expertise”. Lindbergh understood in his own era, as it is understood here, that the majority of “finance” is nothing more than the application of arithmetic.
Any entity which steadily and relentlessly incurs debt will go bankrupt. There is no ‘magical’ means of manipulating one’s financial management in a manner which contradicts the most-basic principles of arithmetic. Were the political leaders of Lindbergh’s era simply too stupid to grasp the arithmetic of compound interest: that piling debt on top of debt must lead to bankruptcy (and Debt Jubilee)?
No. Just as with the political traitors of our own era; the means of “force” employed by the One Bank of Lindbergh’s era was the brute-force of corruption. The bankers bought our political leaders, and once in their service, those “leaders” (i.e. employees) feigned an incapacity to understand the simple mechanics of compound interest, and the inevitable result of serial debt. Quoting Lindbergh, again:

…it has become a farce. Voters must realize that the old party leaders shout the ideals the people had in the original formation of the parties. Party leaders do that for propaganda purposes only.They proclaim good, and do evil.
The (U.S.) Two-Party Dictatorship described in these (modern) commentaries was already a fact of life one hundred years ago. Lest any reader make the mistake of interpreting any ambiguity in the preceding quote; Lindbergh is unequivocal in words which preceded that:
There is no material difference now in the old political parties [Republican and Democrat], except which shall control patronage [and thus collect the biggest bribes].
Clearly the debts incurred by the U.S. government of Lindbergh’s era, the U.S. debts incurred in our own era, and all the decades in between were a deliberate fraud perpetrated by the (supposed) government of the people, against the people. The combination of both fraud and malicious intent makes all of this debt blatantly illegal, and absolutely unenforceable.
However, what must be understood is that there is a totally separate basis for concluding that these debts were incurred as the product of fraud (in the strict, legal sense), and therefore legally unenforceable on this basis, as well. Thus for any who insist on blinding themselves to the rampant corruption of our traitor-leaders, there is still a binding, legal basis for repudiating these debts – all of them.
This other, fatal illegality in the origins of our debts, past, present, and future is founded in the legal doctrine of “fraudulent misrepresentation”. Under ordinary circumstances; if someone tricks us, and we suffer financial harm from that treachery, we have no legal recourse. We are (legally) victims of our own stupidity.
There is, however, a very large, distinct, and legally conclusive exception to this general rule. This relates to the legal concept known as “fiduciary duty”. Readers need not be intimidated by this jargon, as it represents a very simple principle. If someone proclaims themselves to be an expert, and also proclaims to be giving someone/some entity advice which is in their own best interests; this self-proclaimed “expert” creates a fiduciary duty for himself.
The expert (or “fiduciary”) has a legal duty of honesty. It is never allowable (or legal) for someone to gain the confidence of any person/entity by portraying one’s self as an expert, and then exploit that trust (and dependence) for their own financial advantage. Have the bankers of these Big Banks (the tentacles of the One Bank) portrayed themselves as “experts” when they advised our governments, and thus became fiduciaries? Obviously, yes.
The banksters have irrevocably portrayed themselves as fiduciaries (binding themselves by this legal duty of honesty) in both explicit and implicit terms. For proof of this; we need merely look around at the current generation of these financial experts.
According to Lloyd Blankfein, CEO of one of “the Evil Twins” of banking (Goldman Sachs); he considers himself and his banking brethren to not merely be “experts”, but High Priests of the world of finance:
I’m doing ‘God’s Work.’ Meet Mr. Goldman Sachs.
Note the deliberate capitalization of the word “work”. This devious snake not only wraps himself in divinity (as he lies, cheats, and steals every day of his life); he claims that the “Work” he does is, itself, Divine – and thus beyond the comprehension of lesser mortals (like our governments).

For any banker apologists reading this, who don’t consider Blankfein’s explicit boast of being a High Priest as proof of the fiduciary status of these banksters; the implicit evidence is even more overwhelming. These High Priests award themselves astronomical salaries, orders of magnitude greater than the Average Person, and an order of magnitude greater than the politicians they advise – even if we include all their political bribes.
There are only three possible conclusions which can be deduced from the obscene levels of compensation which these banksters award themselves each year, concerning their own state of mind:
a)  They consider themselves experts.
b)  They consider themselves thieves.
c)   (A) and (B).
Even if these career criminals seek to profess that there was nothing strictly illegal concerning how they induced our governments into burying themselves (and us) in debt, even mere dishonesty is enough, by itself, to taint these debts (past, present, and future) and render them legally null-and-void.
here is one, final element necessary to conclusively prove “fraudulent misrepresentation”, and thus conclusively prove that all our governments’ debts are illegal and unenforceable. We must show that our governments relied upon these swindlers – as experts/fiduciaries.
Here, once again, the evidence is overwhelming. Going back to Lindbergh’s own era (and the “J.P. Morgans”, and other Snakes of that time); these High Priests have always enjoyed privileged status as “financial insiders”. They have always been privy to confidential information from our governments, concerning our markets, our economies, and the present and future policies they intended.
The banksters have used this confidential information to their (enormous) financial advantage, year after year, decade after decade, for more than a century. It’s known as “insider trading”, and it’s yet another crime which has been serially perpetrated by the High Priests. Putting aside all that additional crime; with the privilege of being (permanent) financial/economic “insiders” comes (legal) responsibility.

The fact that our governments have shared (financial/economic) secrets with the High Priests – for generations – is conclusive legal proof of the “reliance” we seek to demonstrate. One only shares their most important Secrets with their most trusted Advisors.
For one hundred years; these financial High Priests have had a binding, legal duty to advise our governments honestly – and to act in their/our best interests. For one hundred years; the High Priests have shamelessly betrayed us, to bring us to where we are today: buried in debt, and on the brink of bankruptcy.
These High Priests (of the same Big Banks) have not only been the “trusted advisors” of the U.S. government over the past century. They have been the trusted advisors of (nearly) every nation in the Western world over those hundred years. Our national debts, debts incurred at the explicit urgings of the High Priests are not merely illegal and unenforceable. They are a joke – a very, very bad joke.
This still leaves one, very large question unanswered as we head (rapidly and inevitably) toward Debt Jubilee. What about our own, individual debts? The majority of our populations are also seriously (if not terminally) indebted, and indebted to the same financial parasite: the One Bank.
Should all of our personal debts stand, when the fraudulent/illegal debts of our governments are inevitably (and legally) wiped clean? That final issue will be the subject of the third, and concluding installment of this series.

In Parts I and II; readers saw how all of the public debts of our nations (past and present) were the direct result of fraud, and thus legally unenforceable – on two bases. Firstly; the bankers of these Big Banks proclaimed themselves the world’s foremost financial experts. On that basis; they not only received privileged treatment for these Big Banks, they were recipients of confidential financial and economic information from our governments, as fiduciaries who were claiming to be acting in our best interests.

In reality; these Con Men never had anything on their minds other than burying our nations in debt, in their own best interests. However, based upon the well-established legal doctrine of “fraudulent misrepresentation”; these fiduciary financial “experts” owed us a duty of honesty. Having violated that duty (incessantly); the multi-trillion dollar IOU’s that the One Bank is holding (in the form of our national debts) are illegal and unenforceable.
But there is also a second basis for legally repudiating these debts, in full. As detailed by Republican Congressman, Charles Lindbergh (roughly a century ago); our governments were already completely in the service of this financial crime syndicate a hundred years earlier. Our political “leaders”, who also had (and have) a legal duty to represent us to the best of their abilities have been little more than the bankers’ bought-and-paid-for stooges for the past 100+ years.
Having our own representatives behave in a fraudulent (and arguably criminal manner) is an equally valid legal basis for erasing every cent of these monstrous, mountainous debts. There can be no argument that our public debts are anything other than illegal/unenforceable, merely a choice as to which legal ground to use as justification for their repudiation.
However, it isn’t only our governments who have been enslaved in debt. Much of our populations have done the same to themselves, as well. Indeed, countless millions of inhabitants across the corrupt West have already seen their own finances implode, on the basis of being no longer able to even service their debts – let alone repay them.
Unlike our public debts; we have no (corrupt) “representatives” whom we can blame directly for our own indebtedness, thus that particular argument for repudiating our personal debts is denied to us. But in law; one doesn’t need two valid arguments to succeed in any adjudication, one substantial basis is all that is required.
This then leaves us with the second basis for (potentially) repudiating our personal debts: the fraudulent conduct of these financial predators. Here, once again, the circumstances of our personal debts are not the same as with our public debts. Unlike the representations which these banksters made to our (corrupt) governments; the bankers (and the Big Banks they serve) do not portray themselves as our fiduciaries when we approach them for financial advice and/or services.

They articulate to us (or, at least, they are supposed to) that we are “responsible” for our own financial decisions, and thus they advise us to “read carefully” any/all financial documents or agreements they put before us. Does this thus absolve the Big Banks of responsibility (and guilt), as they malevolently buried 100’s of millions of generally well-meaning individuals under mountains of debt they could never hope to manage?
Hardly. Holding us (fairly and legally) responsible for our own debts is based upon an assumption: the legal assumption that “the system” itself is structured in a manner where it is fair-and-reasonable to assume that debtors properly understand – and are capable of understanding – financial documents put in front of them.
Clearly such an assumption has no basis in reality in the 21^st century. Indeed, we see the exact opposite. While our (so-called) “educational systems” have been dumbed-down to the point that they do little more than churn out mindless drones; the financial documents (and transactions) concocted by these Big Banks have gotten steadily more-complicated/less-comprehensible.

Who is responsible for creating a “system” which allows these Big Banks to entrap us with ultra-complex financial agreements, documents which few members of society have the education and/or expertise necessary to decipher? Our “leaders”: the same corrupt stooges who (we have already established) have simply been the bankers’ accomplices for the past 100 years, or so.
While these banksters may have no “fiduciary duty” to properly/honestly explain their documents, or simply draft documents which can be reasonably deciphered; our “leaders” certainly do have such a duty. Allowing the Big Banks to enslave us (individually) in debt, through the use of complex, predatory documents (transactions), into which we would never enter if we properly understood the terms is also obvious fraud.
To illustrate this; we need merely point to the most-egregiously exploited victims. In the United States; it is long-established that the large African American minority is systemically denied not only equal opportunity in employment, but equal opportunity in education. With many denied even the possibility of a proper education; it is public knowledge that this demographic is especially vulnerable to predatory financial practices.
What do we see in the U.S.? Overwhelming financial evidence that black Americans have been both systemically and systematically victimized by the predatory Big Banks. African Americans are not only regularly assigned higher mortgage rates (and less-favorable terms) than non-black borrowers with similar/identical financial parameters, they are regularly assigned higher mortgage rates than they are entitled to, based upon their financial data.
Obviously this also applies to poorer, and more poorly-educated members of other racial/ethnic groups as well, it’s simply a matter of the evidence being more vivid and unequivocal when viewing the U.S.’s African American population. Thus clearly when it comes to borrowers on the bottom; there is more than enough evidence of fraud (and malice) on the part of both the Big Banks and our Traitor Governments to wipe away their debts along with those of our governments.

The question then becomes: what is the appropriate means of dealing with debtors further up the economic totem-pole?  Are we going to allow our Traitor Governments and the banking crime syndicate to get away with their economic rape of those of us slightly better off, simply because (in the case of those crimes) the level of victimization was slightly lower, and the level of personal stupidity a little higher?
It is a well-established principle of law that when it comes to the enforceability of contracts (including any/all contracts incurring debt) that there is no such thing as “a little bit” of fraud.Any evidence of fraud makes contracts unenforceable. Individual acts of fraud by the Big Banks. Systemic fraud by our Traitor Governments in creating a financial system which is as predatory as it is insolvent.
We can’t sue our political leaders, and then compel them to indemnify us for our own predatory/fraudulent debts. That remedy may be “just”, but it is neither financially practical, nor is it legally achievable. However, we can simply erase all of these corrupt, predatory debts.
Along with the legal justification for doing so; there are numerous “public policy” justifications which also argue in favor of wiping away our individual debts, and virtually no arguments which can be made in favor of enforcing these debts.
Who benefits if all these individual debts are wiped away? Everyone, including those who don’t carry any debt at all – everyone except the One Bank. With their debts wiped clean; individuals formerly buried in debt would/will have much more money (obviously): money that can be used buying goods and services, money that can be used paying taxes, money that can be used to start new businesses.

In short; the ultimate “stimulus program” for our (currently) hopelessly crippled economieswould be a full Debt Jubilee. It would (in most respects) restore full health to our economies, something which practically none of us have ever seen in our entire lives.
What about “personal responsibility”, shout out some readers, apparently without the need of any bribes from the Big Banks? Why not force these debtors to pay-off their $trillions of debts, no matter how badly it devastates their lives, and our economies?
Yes, what about “personal responsibility”? Why not demand that debtors shovel $trillions of dollars into the vault of the worst crime syndicate in the history of our species. Now there is “responsible” thinking!
Who cares if the One Bank is financially engorged with $trillions which it never earned, and never deserved? Leave it with mountains of wealth large enough to continue to buy-off our governments, to continue to rape-and-pillage our economies (and all of us), and to complete the entire destruction of our societies. Surely that is a small price to pay as long as we can make sure that our indebted neighbours “get what’s coming to them”?

United we stand. Divided we fall. Those who think that their path to “a better life” lies over the backs of their own neighbours serve the One Bank

Sprott Money Ltd. General Use Disclaimer
Sprott Money Ltd., its owners and operators, content creators, presenters, and interviewees, offers no financial or investment advice. The content in this material is for information purposes only and is not an offer or solicitation for the sale of any financial product or service. Investors should seek financial advice regarding the suitability of any investment strategy based on their objectives, financial situation, investment horizon, and their particular needs from a registered financial advisor. Sprott Money Ltd. is not a registered securities or investment dealer. Sprott Money Ltd. products are not insured by the Canada Deposit Insurance Corporation (CDIC) or any other government insurer.