Go Back   David Icke's Official Forums > Main Forums > Lawful Rebellion / Non Compliance / Sovereignty

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 20-10-2011, 09:41 AM   #481
wake_up_bomb
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 6,994
Likes: 3 (3 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by undeadcreature View Post
I apologise if I implied money had intrinsic value, which it doesn't.
The whole idea of the banknote was so that you could leave your gold or other valuable commodity in a safe place instead of having to haul it around with you all the time.
Exchange the banknote for whatever you want and it is then up to the seller if they want to go and cash it in for the gold or use it to get something else they want and therefore passing the note onto the next person, and so on.
Yep, it's not exactly a secret, just not commonly known about:

http://www.bankofengland.co.uk/bankn...out/faqs.htm#2

Quote:
The words "I promise to pay the bearer on demand the sum of five [ten/twenty/fifty] pounds" date from long ago when our notes represented deposits of gold. At that time, a member of the public could exchange one of our banknotes for gold to the same value. For example, a £5 note could be exchanged for five gold coins, called sovereigns. But the value of the pound has not been linked to gold for many years, so the meaning of the promise to pay has changed. Exchange into gold is no longer possible and Bank of England notes can only be exchanged for other Bank of England notes of the same face value.
Here's the killer statement:

Quote:
Public trust in the pound is now maintained by the operation of monetary policy, the objective of which is price stability.
Phew. I feel so reassured...
wake_up_bomb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23-10-2011, 10:40 PM   #482
ghanzmeister
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 11
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by relentless View Post
[I]
In a giving and recieving exchange one can ALWAYS give more than they can recieve because recieving is finite and giving is infinite.
Very well said! I really like the idea of a moneyless society. I think it can be done.
But who decides on what to recieve? and who will recieve it?
5 apples, 6 persons wanting an apple.

(come to think of it, will i WANT anything in that system or is the key that everything you get is equally valuable and so getting something or not doesn't make a difference. I'm happy with what i got and i have enough for myself to get by on daily basis, while i'm having no worries if there will be enough for my family, and my work is out of love not out of necessity??)

It does remind me of the first 20 minutes of "The Gods must be Crazy".
Where an unnatural object which is limited as there is only one disrupts a society who before had everything they ever wanted given to them by nature as it always provided in abundance. Can we not be jealeous of on another where there is something that can not be used by everyone?

the argument that we have used it for 5000 years and thus we cannot live without it i do not believe. When i look back.. 5000 years is roughly when our known history started and it has not known real prosperity as in no wars or poor and underfed people. Maybe it is even due to the fact we use money.

I'd definetly support this!

Paradigms are not solid objects
ghanzmeister is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 08:09 AM.


Shoutbox provided by vBShout (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.