Skip to content

Justaluckyfool comment on “The Way to Occupy a Bank..by Ellen Brown

December 16, 2011
The Way to Occupy a Bank is to Own One
by Ellen Brown

“The public bank concept is not new.  It has been proposed before in San Francisco and has a successful 90-year track record in North Dakota.  Weidner notes that the state-owned Bank of North Dakota earned taxpayers more than $61 million last year and reported a profit of $57 million in 2008, when Bank of America had a $1.2 billion net loss.  The San Francisco bank proposal is sponsored by city supervisor John Avalos, who has been thinking about a municipal bank for several years. 

 
Weidner calls the proposal “the boldest institutional stroke yet against banks targeted by the Occupy movement.” 
 
Responding to the Critics
 
He acknowledges that it will be an uphill climb.  In a follow-up articleon December 6th, Weidner wrote:
 
Of course, there are critics. . . . They argue that public banks would put public money at risk.  Would you be surprised to know that most of the critics are bankers?
 
That’s why you don’t hear them talking about the $100 billion they lost for the California pension funds in 2008.  They don’t talk about the foreclosures that have wrought havoc on communities and tax revenues.  They don’t talk about liar loans and what kind of impact that’s had on the economy, employment and the real estate market — not to mention local and state budgets.
 
Risk to the taxpayers remains the chief objection of banker opponents.  “There is no need for such lending,” they say.  “We already provide loans to any creditworthy applicant who comes to us.  Why put taxpayer money at risk, lending for every crackpot scheme that some politician wants to waste taxpayer money on?””
 
JUSTALUCKFOOL asks a simple question,”Why put taxpayer money at risk ??”
We the people already have done that by GUARANTEEING THE BANK LOANS THEY MADE FROM THE MONEY THEY PRINTED!!
TERMINATE THE STUPID PRACTICE OF PAYING INTEREST ON OUR OWN MONEY TO PRIVATE BANKS .A PRACTICE THAT CAN ONLY END WITH A FINANCIAL BUST,OR SERVITUDE !
The Federal Reserve Charter  as it stands now is a bank that is owned (shareholders) by other banks. This is the greatest banker fraud of all,and we know how Freddie and Fannie turned out.No more GSE’s. And because the present  Federal Reserve Charter is the bankers bank,they are using taxpayers dollars to HELP THEIR BANKS more than to help people. When the banks made federal guaranteed loans,the FEDS guaranteed the loans with taxpayer dollars. Now they are supplying the banks with almost free money. This is exactly what we the people should do-become the owners of our money,the owners of the fruits of our labors.
END OF justaluckyfool’s comment
 
“The Constitutional Challenge
 
In Weidner’s Wall Street Journal article, he raises another argument of opponents—that California law forbids using taxpayer money to make private loans.  That, he said, would have to be changed.
 
The U.S. Supreme Court, however, has held otherwise.  In 1920, the constitutional objection was raised in conjunction with the Bank of North Dakota and was rejected both by the Supreme Court of North Dakota and the U.S. Supreme Court.  SeeGreen v. Frazier, 253 U. S. 233 (1920), and fuller discussionhere. 
    
 JUSTALUCKYFOOL ASKS A SIMPLE QUESTION,”THE FEDERAL RESERVE BANK OF AMERICA”
should hold the same opinion for FRBA ?
A municipal bank would be doing with the public’s funds only what Bank of America does now: it would be lending “bank credit” backed by the bank’s capital and deposits.  The difference would be that the local community, not Florida or Europe, would get the loans; and the city of San Francisco, not Bank of America, would get the profits. 
 
California and many other states already own infrastructure banks that use the states’ funds to back loans.  If that use of public monies is legal, and if public funds can be deposited in Bank of America and used as the basis for loans to multi-national corporations, they can be deposited in the Bank of San Francisco and used as the basis for loans to the local community. 
 
Better yet, they can be used to buy municipal bonds.  Investing in municipal bonds would avoid the constitutional issue with “private loans” altogether, since the loans would be to local government.
 
Sending a Message to Wall Street
 
The campaign to “move your money” has gotten a groundswell of support, but move your money into what?  Weidner repeats the complaint of critics that private credit unions have gotten too big and threaten commercial banking.  Having greater impact would be to “move our money”—move our local government revenues out of Wall Street banks into our own publicly-owned banks, which could then generate credit for the local economy and public works.  ” 
 
Ellen Brown is an attorney and president of the Public Banking Institute, http://PublicBankingInstitute.org.  In Web of Debt, her latest of eleven books, she shows how a private cartel has usurped the power to create money from the people themselves, and how we the people can get it back.  Her websites are http://WebofDebt.com and http://EllenBrown.com.
Advertisements

From → Uncategorized

Leave a Comment

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: