Submitted by Sprott Money on 12/22/2014 09:19 -0500
The Morality and Legality of Debt Jubilee, Part III
Jeff Nielson for Sprott Money
In Parts I and II (click Sprott News), 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.
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 21st 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.
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.
Jeff Nielson for Sprott Money