RICHPLANET.NET FORUM : WE ARE NOT ADMITTING NEW MEMBERS AT THIS POINT IN TIME.  THIS IS DUE TO PREVIOUS TROLLS ATTACKING THE FORUM.<br>
There is still no decision on whether new members will be added.  This can only happen when suitable moderators are in place, who are not easy to find for obvious reasons. www.richplanet.net community built on miniBB / RICHPLANET.NET FORUM : WE ARE NOT ADMITTING NEW MEMBERS AT THIS POINT IN TIME. THIS IS DUE TO PREVIOUS TROLLS ATTACKING THE FORUM.
There is still no decision on whether new members will be added. This can only happen when suitable moderators are in place, who are not easy to find for obvious reasons.
/

BANKING & ECONOMY

 Page:  ««  1  2  ...  7  8  9  10  11  ...  134  135  »» 
Starseed
Guest
#121 | Posted: 28 Nov 2010 15:43
Reply 
dreamkatcher:
http://www.realecontv.com/videos/europe/whats-that-sinking-sound-.html

I recommend that one too DK
Starseed
Guest
#122 | Posted: 28 Nov 2010 22:13
Reply 
http://www.positivemoney.org.uk/

Don`t forget this one...
dreamkatcher
Member
#123 | Posted: 28 Nov 2010 23:29
Reply 
Why contribute to the bankers? Am I misunderstanding this one? They have millions of our money - I have a basic pension.

I dont trust ANY BANK.
Starseed
Guest
#124 | Posted: 29 Nov 2010 07:44
Reply 
Starseed:
http://www.positivemoney.org.uk/

Don`t forget this one...

Hey, I posted the positive money one ages ago! Tis a great site and a good idea.
dreamkatcher
Member
#125 | Posted: 29 Nov 2010 09:07
Reply 
This was sent to me on 24th, just received.

http://blacklistednews.com/Bank-of-England-Chief-Mervyn-King-Proposes-E=
liminating-Fractional-Reserve-Banking-/11291/0/13/13/Y/M.html


Source: Washington=E2=80=99s Blog

Mervyn King =E2=80=93 the governor of the Bank of England =E2=80=93 has=
proposed abolishing fractional reserve banking.

As the BBC noted last week:

Mervyn King, the governor of the Bank of England, has tonight made a bi=
g intervention into the debate on
banking reform. In a speech at Buttonwood, New York, he [listed] much =
more radical proposals.

1. Forcing the riskiest banks to hold capital =E2=80=9Cseveral times th=
e magnitude=E2=80=9D of requirements at present.
2. The Volcker rule-style enforced breakup of banks into speculative an=
d non-speculative arms.
3. The =E2=80=9CKotlikoff proposal=E2=80=9D, which forces banks to matc=
h each pool of risks with a requisite amount of capital, preventing los=
ses in one spilling over into another.
4. Stunningly, Mervyn King imagines the =E2=80=9Cabolition of fractiona=
l reserve banking=E2=80=9D:

=E2=80=9CEliminating fractional reserve banking explicitly recognises t=
hat the pretence that risk-free deposits can be supported by risky asse=
ts is alchemy. If there is a need for genuinely
safe deposits the only way they can be provided, while ensuring costs =
and benefits are fully aligned, is to insist such deposits do not co-ex=
ist with risky assets.=E2=80=9D

King does not advocate any of these radical plans =E2=80=93 but the fac=
t that he goes out of his way to list them, and to place them on the ag=
enda of the UK=E2=80=99s Independent Commission on Banking, means that =
we are not yet at the end of the debate about long-term reform of the b=
anks.

***

Beyond the technicalities, the fact that a central banker in a G7 count=
ry is prepared to imagine such outcomes is itself significant.


=20
Moreover, King wrote to Ben Dyson and
stated:


You suggest that banks should be forced to conform to the underlying pu=
rpose of the 1844 Bank Reform Act. You might be aware that I have said =
publicly that I think ideas in this spirit =E2=80=93 such as those advo=
cated by John Kay =E2=80=93 certainly merit serious consideration in th=
e debate as to how we reform our financial system. I remain sympathetic=
to these views. But as I said in my previous letter, I do not want to =
prejudice the outcome of the Banking commission=E2=80=99s deliberations=
. Now the Commission has been set up, I think we all should wait to see=
its conclusions.=E2=80=9D

=20

As Dyson explains:

The 1844 Bank Charter Act (=E2=80=98Reform=E2=80=99 is a typo) was a pi=
ece of legislation that prohibited commercial banks
from printing paper notes (=C2=A31, =C2=A35, =C2=A310 and so on). Befo=
re this law was passed, banks were permitted to print as many paper not=
es as they wanted, up to the point where they printed too many and went=
bankrupt (as everyone cashed in their paper notes at once).

That situation should sound very similar to the situation that we have =
today =E2=80=93 we currently allow commercial banks to =E2=80=98print=E2=
=80=99 money in the form of digital bank deposits (the numbers in your =
bank account). In the years up to 2007, the banks =E2=80=98printed=E2=80=
=99 far too much of this digital money, to the extent that they =E2=80=93=
and the economy =E2=80=93 started to collapse.

The =E2=80=98underlying purpose=E2=80=99 of the 1844 Bank Charter Act w=
as to prevent the commercial banks creating money and to restore that p=
rivilege to the state. It had become obvious to the government of the d=
ay that if banks were
allowed to create money, they would keep creating money up until the p=
oint where it destabilized the economy, so they could not be trusted wi=
th this responsibility.

So, in plain English, Mervyn King appears to be saying:

=E2=80=9CI agree that banks should probably be stopped from creating mo=
ney, and recommend John Kay (or Laurence Kotlikoff=E2=80=99s) proposals=
. But it=E2=80=99s not for me to say =E2=80=93 let=E2=80=99s leave it t=
o the Banking Commission.=E2=80=9D

It=E2=80=99s very reassuring to know that the top guy at the Bank of En=
gland understands the root of the issue and is promoting solutions that=
would go a long way to addressing it. Both John Kay and Laurence Kotli=
koff=E2=80=99s proposals would prevent commercial banks from creating m=
oney (or =E2=80=98issuing credit=E2=80=99) for their own benefit at the=
expense of the wider economy
and the public.

Ironically, while King is proposing the potential elimination of fracti=
onal reserve banking (i.e. a return to 100% reserves), Ben Bernanke has=
proposed the elimination of all reserve requirements (i.e. requiring n=
o reserves):

The Federal Reserve believes it is possible that, ultimately, its opera=
ting framework will allow the elimination of minimum reserve requiremen=
ts, which impose costs and distortions on the banking system.
Starseed
Guest
#126 | Posted: 29 Nov 2010 16:59
Reply 
72 billion Irish rescue package agreed

An 85 billion euro (72.1bn) bail-out for the Irish Government from the International Monetary Fund and Europe has been agreed, head of eurozone ministers Jean-Claude Juncker has said.

'Eamon Gilmore, leader of the opposition Irish Labour Party, said the potential 5.8 per cent rate of interest to be paid on the IMF/EU loans did not represent a fair bargain.'

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/4/20101128/twl-72-billion-irish-rescue-package-agre-41f21e0. html
dreamkatcher
Member
#127 | Posted: 29 Nov 2010 17:58
Reply 
I thought everybody had gone. Been nobody on anywhere today.
dreamkatcher
Member
#128 | Posted: 29 Nov 2010 17:59
Reply 
Have you seen Wikileaks news? Trouble brewing, eh?
Starseed
Guest
#129 | Posted: 29 Nov 2010 19:49
Reply 
dreamkatcher:
I thought everybody had gone. Been nobody on anywhere today.

LOL - when we go who will turn out the lights DK?

dreamkatcher:
Have you seen Wikileaks news? Trouble brewing, eh?

I have heard much but had no time to read any of it. Apparently it is all online and a friend of mine has looked through a bit of it and it seems to be dynamite ? Will have to make time.
dreamkatcher
Member
#130 | Posted: 29 Nov 2010 21:37
Reply 
I saw quite a bit through the night on tv, & today Hillary C is making their apologies. Who believes her anyway?

Cameron gets hammered, so does "one of our Royalty". Maybe it'll all be made public eventually?
RICHPLANET.NET
Admin
#131 | Posted: 29 Nov 2010 22:09 | Edited by: RICHPLANET.NET
Reply 
I have to say I don't trust the whole Wikileaks thing now. They are working very closely with The Guardian and New York Times. What makes me suspicious of Assange is his take on 9/11. Ever since he got into bed with "The Guardian" he made statments about 9/11 conspiracy being not a real conspiracy. I reckon they have bought him off somehow. It could be a compromise thing, where they agree to publish x,y and z as long as he does not go near false flag terror. I think he could have sold out quite frankly. I could be wrong but that's my feeling. If that's the case you can't trust it. THEY could be using Wikileaks to create more hatred against China/Iran etc.

The Cameron / Clinton / Prince Andrew bashing is bollocks - it isn't important. It could be a smoke screen. Why does he need the Guradian? Why not publish it all on their own website? Without doubt the Nationals are calling the shots with him. They would not entertain him unless it was on THEIR terms.
Starseed
Guest
#132 | Posted: 29 Nov 2010 22:23
Reply 
RICHPLANET.NET:
I have to say I don't trust the whole Wikileaks thing now. They are working very closely with The Guardian and New York Times. What makes me suspicious of Assange is his take on 9/11. Ever since he got into bed with "The Guardian" he made statments about 9/11 conspiracy being not a real conspiracy. I reckon they have bought him off somehow. It could be a compromise thing, where they agree to publish x,y and z as long as he does not go near false flag terror. I think he could have sold out quite frankly. I could be wrong but that's my feeling. If that's the case you can't trust it. THEY could be using Wikileaks to create more hatred against China/Iran etc.

The Cameron / Clinton / Prince Andrew bashing is bollocks - it isn't important. It could be a smoke screen. Why does he need the Guradian? Why not publish it all on their own website? Without doubt the Nationals are calling the shots with him. They would not entertain him unless it was on THEIR terms.

I tried to explain this very same thing today. This was put about before the last lot of 'revelations' and there are many doubters.

They own both sides of the 'evidence' . Nothing comes out on the BBC / SKY / FOX unless it is meant to. It all serves a purpose.

A bit deeper down - and you begin to question RTV and PRESS TV. ? That`s when it gets a bit 'blurred' also (IMO)
dreamkatcher
Member
#133 | Posted: 30 Nov 2010 01:58
Reply 
NOTHING gets out unless OK'd by Editor who gets OK from "higher up."

Maybe its just to cover something else up, wink, wink.
dreamkatcher
Member
#134 | Posted: 30 Nov 2010 06:32
Reply 
The latest trend in fraud could sting you

Sarah Coles
Nov 19th 2010 at 5:00AM

Filed under: Fraud
New figures reveal that criminals are taking a new approach when it comes to delving into our bank accounts and ripping us off. Theft through direct debits has surged 228% in the last four years, and now accounts for 10.6% of all ID theft.

So just what is going on, and how can it affect you?

How it works
Most of this fraud is relatively unsophisticated: fraudsters use stolen details to set up direct debits for services like gyms and TV packages that they use. However, some pay money into accounts which they then withdraw money from.

They are exploiting the fact that so few people check their bank statements properly, so middling amounts being siphoned from the account can go undetected. These may be reasonably modest amounts every month, but they really add up - the average taken before it is spotted is 540.

In this year alone 26,000 people have been attacked in this way. It is thought to have taken off after chip and PIN made card fraud more tricky and criminals sought a softer target.

The fraud boffins reckon there's little to stop this trend from accelerating ,as we're showing increasingly less inclination to check statements - especially when we get them online.

LV= asked the Centre for Economics and Business Research what would happen to this sort of fraud, and it calculated that it will stand at 41,000 cases a year by 2013.

The good news is that the direct debit scheme promises costumers will get their money back if they haven't been careless with their bank details.

John O'Roarke, managing director of LV= home insurance, said: 'The rise in fraudsters setting up direct debits in victims' names proves the need for everyone to regularly check bank statements and ensure they're not paying out for someone else's mobile phone or any other direct debit they don't recognise. "

Related stories

Related Articles From Walletpop UK

* Card fraud criminals jailed for 20 years - are you at risk?

13 days ago
* MPs want our bank details. Is it safe?

21 days ago
* UK fraud rife as scammers change tack

24 days ago

Related Articles From Our Network

* Jury Verdict Puts Banks on Notice: 'Meltdown Defense' Won't...

10 days ago
* Ex-Banker Tells How Not to get Ripped Off at a Bank

12 days ago
* Credit vs. Debit Cards for Travel
Starseed
Guest
#135 | Posted: 30 Nov 2010 07:17
Reply 
dreamkatcher:
They are exploiting the fact that so few people check their bank statements properly, so middling amounts being siphoned from the account can go undetected. These may be reasonably modest amounts every month, but they really add up - the average taken before it is spotted is 540.

Happened a few times to me. It`s worth looking for transactions around the 30 mark. They use the money (unbelievably) to buy mobile phone credit. It is definitely when you order goods (or whatever) on-line.
 Page:  ««  1  2  ...  7  8  9  10  11  ...  134  135  »» 
Your reply
Bold Style  Italic Style  Image Link  URL Link 

   
» Username  » Password 
Only registered users are allowed to post here. Please enter your login/password details upon posting a message, or sign up first
TO JOIN THIS FORUM: WE ARE NOT ADMITTING NEW MEMBERS AT THIS POINT IN TIME. THIS IS DUE TO PREVIOUS TROLLS ATTACKING THE FORUM.
We may be considering adding new members on a "block basis". We will collect new member requests and then introduce a new batch. The new memebrs will be identifiable by a prefix in their username as a "new member". Anyone considered to be trolling or causing trouble will be immedialtey removed. To be put on the list please email richard@richplanet.net AND GIVE YOUR US NAME, A USERNAME, PASSWORD. I would imagine a new batch of new members will be added in January 2012.
 

Forums are powered by miniBB®