Quote:Nonsense ! :-[
ok. how efficient is it for a central bank to run a system of commcercical banks ::confused::
it is not efficient.. or it would happen.
but if the people who captured your central bank, privatises your currency into own their hands, allow some of their own to set up a system of commercial banks necessary for more efficient exploitation of the economy where is the difference?
in efficiency that's where!
the same people control but they have divided the activity as per their need for efficiency.
a commercial bank is a huge divergent enterprise in routine function. but the central bank behind them allows them safety from failure because they have the purse.. allows them fractional reserve, allows them monopoly.
in fact because they have the central bank..they can start up the commercial banks with no investment at all...which is what has happened.
look at al the commercial banks and their history and you will see. originally in europe they had investments of course..start up. but by the time of expansion into the new world they needed no investment at all.. commercial banks. they were and are simply derivatives from central banking control
and the monopoly they have...now one is allowed to start up competitve banks. and even if they do like in Titty and elsehwre they are bever allowed to to be competitive. and if they are they are focred to sell out to the forriner with the commerical banks to himself.
check royal bank which was owned locally in Trinidad..grew successfully and first thing you know local owners sold it to barclays or one of them.
all economic activity is forced through the commercial banks in a location. no activity is possible without them not because they are essential but because they have set up a system that forces the people through their doors.
and it is the same with investment banks..the very same people again set up a segment to deal efficiently with the exploitation of sectors like construction and mega projects..another systematic facet for bleeding the location.
and because it is the people who own the central bank what they are doing is financing themselves with the peoples money for they can print whatever they need free of charge. that is how they pollute economies with inflation by printing the money they need to rip off the situation out of thin air. they don't care if inflation skews the prices but they own it.
if a house is 50 grand real market value locally, and they print 50 grand for themselves, they slice the value in 2. it is now 100 grand chasing the house divided by 4 so the house is now worth 25 grand. so by printing 50 grand for themselves they have stolen your house and reduced you value to 25 grand. even worse that 50 grand printed out of thin air is added to the national debt which must be repaid at interest by your very own taxation.
so your house and value is not only stolen up front.. you keep paying for it in interest charges met by your income taxes.
its the same with your commercial bank loans....which if dead/failed are given to the central bank by the commercial banks for payment..which bad debt is now added to the national debt to be paid by income taxes
so their is major inflation in every jurisdiction all caused by the central banks/commercial and investment banks..all owned by the very same people in all and every instance.
so your money becomes worthless relative to other currencies...like west indian currencies..all hollowed out by banking activity...central commercial and investment..all organically connected..no one able to function without the other
what they also do with control of the local currency is to keep local ownership lily white.
they will not lend money for any but the most trivial of activities to locals...only to forrin whites for business purposes..or designated flunkies like Syrian Lebanese, or Greeks in some cases... who pass by even if they are flotsam and jetsam. that's ok. the local people will have to pay if they fail or abscond with the money.
THEY CANNOT BE SEPARATED THOSE BANKS, YOU TRY AND LET ME SEE THEN