By: Shawn Alli
Posted: October 10, 2017 (on http://www.shawnalli.com/)
*Note: I use the term liberal trifecta to refer to liberals in general, liberal/progressive/neo-liberal media outlets, and Democrats.
Private Banks & Debt & Fiat Currency
The Welfare State & Unions & The Middle Class & Universal Income
Private Banks & Debt & Fiat Currency
The magic trick from private banks is one to behold. GSIGs (via Big Gov't) allows multinational private banks to create money out of thin air, all without printing a single dollar, and then gets repaid with real money.
In a rational world, such a thing could never exist. But in our world, it not only exists, it's thriving. Can you imagine privatizing money, water, and electricity in a rational world? Yet this is what human society as a whole is doing. While conspiracy theorists see this as a problem, liberals and conservatives see this as acceptable and normal behavior. Are you cracked in the head or what?
Contrary to what you may believe, multinational private banks don't give a f*ck about you. They have tens to hundreds of billions of dollars. Take a look at the mortgage settlements:
Financial companies have paid at least $164 billion in more than 100 mortgage-related settlements since 2009.
Bank of America: $71.23 billion in 24 settlements
JPMorgan Chase: $31.07 billion in 13 settlements
Citigroup: $12.26 billion in nine settlements
Wells Fargo: $10.56 billion in eight settlements
Deutsche Bank: $9.13 billion in two settlements
Morgan Stanley: $7.92 billion in nine settlements
Goldman Sachs: $7.26 billion in seven settlements
Credit Suisse: $6.28 billion in three settlements. [1]
$164 billion in settlements and no one except Lehman Brothers goes bankrupt? Really? But then again, that's the point of the US bailout. In a rational world, the free market rules with minimal regulations to protect the public. Big corporations go bankrupt if they fail. And directors of bankrupt corporations are barred from being a director or CEO for at least 10 years. It's a shame that this picture has no basis in reality whatsoever.
But again, you're just cattle to multinational banks. They don't give a f*ck about you. Don't believe me? See for yourself:
Citigroup, which is now one-third owned by the government as a result of the bailout, gave 738 of its employees bonuses of at least $1 million, even after it lost $18.7 billion during the year, Cuomo's office said.
...Bank of America, which also received $45 billion in TARP money, paid $3.3 billion in bonuses, with 172 employees receiving at least $1 million. Merrill Lynch, which Bank of America acquired during the credit crisis, paid out $3.6 billion.
Bank of America earned $2.56 billion in 2008, while Merrill lost $30.48 billion. Cuomo's office said Merrill Lynch doled out 696 bonuses of at least $1 million for 2008. [2]
Pay for big banks' chief executives shot up 7.6 per cent in 2015 — more than 10 times faster than a year earlier — to an average of $13.1m each. [3]
I'm not against high executive pay. But not at the cost of regular people:
Most major U.S. banks continue to charge high fees when customers overdraft their accounts, according to a new report issued Tuesday.
More than two out of five banks also rearrange their processing of account holders' transactions with a procedure that maximizes overdraft fees... [4]
Banks have been lobbying relentlessly, but in the meantime they have found a more effective method: taking the difference out of consumers' bank accounts.
Is it a coincidence that since the passage of the Durbin amendment, banks have boosted the size of the balance required to qualify for free checking? Monthly account maintenance fees – and all other kinds of bank fees – have also soared.
Citibank, which once offered free banking, last fall announced another round of checking account fee hikes for those customers who can't manage to make one direct deposit and one bill payment (one that qualifies, anyway) on its system each month, and maintain a balance of $1,500 in their accounts. [5]
The Royal Bank of Canada will make a public apology to the workers affected by the bank's outsourcing arrangement with a foreign company.
The apology comes at the end of a week of drubbing from RBC customers and labour critics after the bank's outsourcing plans were disclosed in media reports. [6]
Three TD Bank Group employees are speaking out about what they say is "incredible pressure" to squeeze profits from customers by signing them up for products and services they don't need.
The longtime employees say their jobs have become similar to that of the stereotypical used car salesman, as they're pushed to upsell customers to reach rising sales revenue targets.
..."I'm in survival mode now," says a teller who has worked at TD for more than 15 years, "because it's a choice between keeping my job and feeding my family...or doing what's right for the customer." [7]
Hundreds of current and former TD Bank Group employees wrote to Go Public describing a pressure cooker environment they say is "poisoned," "stress inducing," "insane" and has "zero focus on ethics."
Some employees admitted they broke the law, claiming they were desperate to earn points towards sales goals they have to reach every three months or risk being fired. [8]
The court ruling reveals that TD Bank, which reported profits of $2.5 billion in the first quarter of this year, claimed a provincial tax refund under the IBA [International Business Activity] of more than $2.8 million in the 2012 tax year. That year, TD reported an annual profit of $6.47 billion.
..."I don't think that British Columbia taxpayers know that they're subsidizing some of the most profitable companies in Canada and we don't know why." [9]
CIBC is eliminating up to 130 jobs in its Toronto finance department and outsourcing the work to India.
As part of the transition, staff losing their positions must train other local CIBC employees. Those employees then train the workers in India who will be taking over the jobs.
..."They want to get rid of us no matter what, because we are old or something," said one worker who claims many of the employees facing layoffs are middle-aged or older.
She said CIBC pulled in a $1.4 billion profit in the last quarter and is still outsourcing jobs to save money. [10]
Personally, I don't know what it's like to make $1.4 billion in profit. But if I ever find out, I won't be outsourcing jobs. I'll be rewarding employees for their great work.
Maurice R. Green (the former Chairman of AIG) even sues the US government for their bailout:
The appeals court also ruled that the lower court had not erred in denying A.I.G.'s shareholders up to $40 billion in damages they had sought as a result of the government's takeover. [11]
Again, contrary to what you may believe, these multinational banks don't give a f*ck about you. Even mainstream media outlets and politicians know that the financial system rules everything:
Canada's big banks and the association that represents them have lobbied government officials hundreds of times since the last election – including the watchdogs charged with policing them and members of the parliamentary committee now examining their practices.
...Among cabinet minister, Finance Minister Bill Morneau met 10 times with lobbyists, making him the minister most lobbied by the banking industry. Agriculture Minister Lawrence MacAulay was lobbied seven times. The third most lobbied was Chrystia Freeland when she served as international trade minister and met four times with bank industry officials.
Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is listed in two lobbying reports – once by the Royal Bank and once by Scotiabank. [12]
...The real truth of the matter is, as you and I know, that a financial element in the larger centers has owned the Government ever since the days of Andrew Jackson...The country is going through a repetition of Jackson’s fight with the Bank of the United States — only on a far bigger and broader basis." — Franklin D. Roosevelt in a 1933 letter to Edward M. House... [13]
...the powers of financial capitalism had another far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole...The apex of the system was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basle, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world's central banks which were themselves private corporations. Each central bank...sought to dominate its government by its ability to control Treasury loans, to manipulate foreign exchanges, to influence the level of economic activity in the country, and to influence cooperative politicians by subsequent economic rewards in the business world.
...In each country the power of the central bank rested largely on its control of credit and money supply. In the world as a whole the power of the central bankers rested very largely on their control of loans and of gold flows…payments between central banks could be made by bookkeeping adjustments between the accounts which the central banks of the world kept there…They made agreements on all the major financial problems of the world, as well as on many of the economic and political problems, especially in reference to loans, payments, and the economic future of the chief areas of the globe.
The B.I.S. is generally regarded as the apex of the structure of financial capitalism whose remote origins go back to the creation of the Bank of England in 1694 and the Bank of France in 1803. [14]
Generally speaking, Luxembourg and Switzerland are GSIG headquarters. And then there's the lack of major criminal prosecutions for the 2008 financial crisis:
The credit crisis of 2008 dwarfed those busts, and it was only to be expected that a similar round of crackdowns would ensue.
...But the crackdown never happened. Over the past year, I've interviewed Wall Street traders, bank executives, defense lawyers and dozens of current and former prosecutors to understand why the largest man-made economic catastrophe since the Depression resulted in the jailing of a single investment banker — one who happened to be several rungs from the corporate suite at a second-tier financial institution.
...The department began to focus on reaching settlements rather than seeking prison sentences, which over time unintentionally deprived its ranks of the experience needed to win trials against the most formidable law firms. By the time Serageldin committed his crime, Justice Department leadership, as well as prosecutors in integral United States attorney's offices, were de-emphasizing complicated financial cases — even neglecting clues that suggested that Lehman executives knew more than they were letting on about their bank's liquidity problem. [15]
Eric Holder has long insisted that he tried really hard when he was attorney general to make criminal cases against big banks in the wake of the 2007 financial crisis. His excuse, which he made again just last month, was that Justice Department prosecutors didn't have enough evidence to bring charges.
Many critics have long suspected that was bullshit...
A new, thoroughly-documented report from the House Financial Services Committee supports that theory. It recounts how career prosecutors in 2012 wanted to criminally charge the global bank HSBC for facilitating money laundering for Mexican drug lords and terrorist groups. But Holder said no.
When asked on June 8 why his Justice Department did not equally apply the criminal laws to financial institutions in the wake of the 2008 economic crisis, Holder told the platform drafting panel of the Democratic National Committee that it was laboring under a "misperception." [16]
...the report concluded that the Justice Department's leadership overruled an internal recommendation to prosecute HSBC, citing concerns "that prosecuting the bank 'could result in a global financial disaster.'" [17]
When bank executives and regulators get a free pass while paying a fine (not an option for Bitcoin executives), that's how you know that the system is rigged and that you don't live in a democracy. In our irrational private financial system, you can even bet against investments:
In 2010, the S.E.C. secured $550 million from Goldman Sachs. In that case, the agency focused on a single mortgage security created in 2007, just as fissures spread through the housing market. Goldman allowed a hedge fund manager, the S.E.C. claimed, to help construct the security, then bet against it, but never alerted investors. [18]
Fairfax Financial Holdings chief executive Prem Watsa, who profited handsomely by betting against the U.S. housing market before it crashed 10 years ago, had a more ominous take on the state of the market. [19]
Just as statistics will never make an unfalsifiable science falsifiable, no amount of regulators can make the financial system legitimate/genuine. Stop listening to bullsh*t liberal media outlets claiming that you live in a democracy. Most of them are useful idiots to GSIGs. They're not intelligent enough to make the realization that they don't live in a democracy (see Philosophy of Governance & Economics in Philosophy Reborn Part I: Purpose).
So why do we continue to bank with these unethical multinational behemoths? Safety. The safest place for your money isn't in your personal safe at home. It's in a large multinational bank. Why? The odds of them folding or being robbed are inconsequential (aside from the 2008 financial crisis). If you want to move money in different countries relatively fast, you need to bank at a large multinational bank. Sadly, in a false democracy, this is still your best bet.
While I have good news for most of my articles, in regards to the banking state, there's none. The only potential good news is if a WE president or prime minister threatens to take their money supply off of the private bank system and issue it themselves.
And our best shot for that is US President Trump. And he has the executive power to do so. If he does, he'll most likely be assassinated...BUT...his legacy as one of the best US presidents in history (along with JFK) will be cemented for all of time.
If Trump decided to do it, how would it go down? First, he would use executive power to stop borrowing from the Federal Reserve and replace Federal Reserve notes with US Treasury ones backed by gold. This can all be done via executive power.
And then, Trump would put a bill on the floor for Congress to repeal the Federal Reserve Act of 1913. Of course, it won't pass. While the vote is symbolic, it's also necessary. The power of GSIGs is concentrated in their financial means. Screwing with that is a major attack against GSIGs. The vote will show the global public which American politicians (Democrats and Republicans) are beholden to GSIGs when they vote against it.
And aside from outing the politicians, the lead up to the bill will out all of the journalists in mainstream and alternative media outlets that oppose it. It's a win-win for both Trump and the people, despite having no chance of succeeding. This may be the best thing for Trump as a genuine president instead of being another GSIG puppet.
But I think we're moving too quickly. Let's back up and look at the institution of banking in order to fully understand it. First off, what is money? While you may see it as legal tender pieces of paper, in the past, it's just receipts confirming an amount of gold. It's a shame that gold backing disappears in 1933.
But let's start in 1913. In 1913 rich banking families like the Morgans create a private central bank called the Federal Reserve. You can say that this is the beginning of the meta-fiat currency. In the same year, personal income tax is created in the US. All of this happens under US President Woodrow Wilson's watch. If you want to blame someone for America's financial mess, Wilson would fit the bill.
For those that believe that income tax is forever and inescapable, they only have to realize that income tax in the US begins in 1913. From 1776 to 1912 there's no personal income tax in the US.
You need to remember that the global financial system is just a creation of GSIGs to consolidate their power and control throughout the world. All of the corporate tax evasion from Amazon, Microsoft, Apple, Facebook, and Starbucks is all legal. Why? Because that’s the way GSIGs want it.
These corporations get a free pass. But you never will. Governments will bail out corporations that serve the interests of GSIGs from bankruptcy. But they won't bail you or your small business/corporation out if you get into the red. That’s not accidental. That's intentional. Remember, this is a system designed to f*ck you over in every aspect of your life. Why? Because you're just cattle to be exploited in the mind of GSIGs.
But on the optimistic side, things can always change. Just because you're born and grow up in a world of particular ideologies, structures, and systems doesn't mean that it’s absolute and can’t change. Everything can change. It's a matter of ideologies, character, and your purpose in life. But be warned. Those who try to overturn old systems that benefit GSIGs will eventually become a target one way or another.
As a side note, some conspiracy theorists believe that people are seen as corporations once they get their social security number or equivalent. But this is false. These are people who believe that legal courts represent maritime law and such things. Yes, there are people who write books on how they avoid paying taxes because they claim that they're not the person on paper. But if enough people do this, GSIGs (via Big Gov't) will make sure to close that loophole.
But let's get back to the brief history lesson. Prior to 1933, the Federal Reserve is allowed to issue legal tender for the US monetary supply backed by gold. In March 1933 US President Franklin D. Roosevelt enacts the Emergency Banking Act which removes gold as backing and criminalizes its possession. This is the real beginning of fiat currency. Currency backed by nothing except debt. This is not only unethical, it's illegal according to the US Constitution:
No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or grant any Title of Nobility. [20]
How do GSIGs get around this? The same way they get around everything. Interpretation. They just interpret the text in a way that benefits them. And then we get to the courageous act of JFK in June 1963 where he enables the US Treasury to issue legal tender under Executive Order 11110. As a conspiracy theorist, I believe this is the act that seals his fate. If Trump ever issues such an executive order, I don't recommend riding in an open car.
And then of course, there's the massive national debt that governments have. In Canada it's over $600 billion (CAD). In the UK it's over £1.5 trillion. In the US it's almost $20 trillion (USD). Why are they in debt? Because they run deficits each year and borrow in order to cover the difference. Why are they running deficits? Because their expenses/spending is greater than their revenue (your taxpayer dollars).
Why don't politicians (especially during the 2016 US election) care? Because of credit. Canada, the UK, and the US have great credit. Private banks, pensions, the government itself (intra-government holdings), corporations, states/municipalities, individuals, and foreign governments will keep them afloat by buying their debt via bonds.
And where are governments going to get the money to pay the interest on these bonds? More bonds. Debt is propping up more debt. The fact that this is the normal way of doing business is evidence of the irrational financial system in WE society.
A rational business will spend less than the amount they take in (revenue). That's proper business principles. Irrational businesses spend more than what they have by borrowing from banks. The fact that the latter seems normal to people is evidence of how badly you’re perception of reality is warped and how good the GSIG conditioning is.
But governments and businesses today continue to spend more than what they have and will continue to do so. Why don't both Democrats and Republicans address the almost $20 trillion (USD) in national debt?
Again, they don't care. Why not? Because GSIGs want people to think of debt as the normal way of doing business. Why? Because they can create fake money out of thin air while you pay it back with real money. That's a magic trick worthy of praise for GSIGs for their ability to f*ck people over.
The fact that governments are applauding themselves for borrowing a few billion less than the previous year is a hollow victory. Even if your deficit is zero one year, you still have to pay the massive debt for all the prior years. Start reducing spending in the tens of billions/year and start increasing revenue in the single billions/year and then you can have your cake and eat it.
What happens if we finally pay back the debt? Great. You're now at zero profit. It's not much, but it's better than negative $20 trillion (USD). Oddly enough, 1835 is the only year when the US national debt is paid off under the great stewardship of US President Andrew Jackson.
Allow me to be crystal clear. Even if governments pay off the national debt, they can never repay the entire debt. Why not? Because each dollar has interest on it. There is no amount of money in existence capable of paying back the principal amount and the interest (created from thin air).
The debt can NEVER...EVER be repaid. If you remember anything from this article remember that point. That's the magic trick of private banks lending money to governments as legal tender. And again, all of this is 100% legal under governments because this is how GSIGs want it.
Whether it's the Bank for International Settlements (BIS), central banks, or state banks, all of it is for-profit. But central banks in the US and Canada give net profit back to their respective governments. Yes and no. Yes, money is given back to the government, but Hollywood/Government accounting plays with the numbers.
Technically speaking, all net profit goes toward respective government treasury departments. But if that were true, private banks would have very little money left for themselves. But in reality, the Bank of Canada, Bank of England, and the Federal Reserve have massive amounts of money:
Total Assets for 2016 or 2016/2017
*Note: Amounts are rounded up to one decimal point.
*Note: All amounts are in their respective currencies.
Bank of Canada - $106.1 billion. [21]
Bank of England - £517.7 billion. [22]
Federal Reserve - $4.5 trillion. [23]
This is one reason why nationalizing a bank isn't a solution. Both the Bank of Canada and Bank of England are already government owned banks. But all of the net profits aren't going to their respective governments. It's staying in the pockets of these public or private banks:
Bank for International Settlements 2016/2017 annual report
It is my pleasure to submit to you the 87th Annual Report of the Bank for International Settlements for the financial year which ended on 31 March 2017.
The net profit for the year amounted to SDR [a unit created by the IMF based on major currencies] 827.6 million...
...If these proposals are approved, the Bank's dividend for the financial year 2016/17 will be payable to shareholders on 29 June 2017. [24]
Federal Reserve website
(a) Dividends And Surplus Funds Of Reserve Banks.
Stockholder Dividends.
Dividend Amount. After all necessary expenses of a Federal reserve bank have been paid or provided for, the stockholders of the bank shall be entitled to receive an annual dividend on paid-in capital stock of--
in the case of a stockholder with total consolidated assets of more than $10,000,000,000, the smaller of--
the rate equal to the high yield of the 10-year Treasury note auctioned at the last auction held prior to the payment of such dividend; and
6 percent; and
in the case of a stockholder with total consolidated assets of $10,000,000,000 or less, 6 percent.
...(c) Exemption From Taxation. Federal reserve banks, including the capital stock and surplus therein, and the income derived therefrom shall be exempt from Federal, State, and local taxation, except taxes upon real estate. [25]
The dividend is tax free? What? Only private for-profit banks have the power to create such sweetheart deals. While you're getting taxed on all of your income, private bank members of the Federal Reserve get a free pass. That's not accidental. That's intentional.
Amazingly, the Obama administration steals some of the Federal Reserve's dividends:
The complaint from the American Bankers Association in the Court of Federal Claims in Washington said the December 2015 Fixing America's Surface Transportation, or FAST, Act violated more than 100 years of federal law. To cover part of the costs of the $305 billion in highway maintenance and other upgrades that the bill provided, it slashed a mandatory 6 percent dividend payment that regional Federal Reserve Banks pay to member banks with more than $10 billion in assets that purchase stock in those financial institutions.
As a result of the FAST Act, the Fed has transferred some $1.1 billion to the U.S. Department of the Treasury that would have otherwise gone to plaintiff banks since the law went into effect in January 2016. [26]
That's hilarious. I think this is the Obama administration's boldest action ever undertaken. Even the Bank of Canada, a government corporation, charges the Government of Canada interest:
The Bank's primary source of revenue is Interest earned on investments, which is derived from investments in Government of Canada securities and fluctuates with market conditions. [27]
What's the solution?
The only solution in a false democracy is for governments to authorize their treasury departments to be responsible for monetary policy and issue legal tender. And only US President Trump has the best shot in implementing this solution.
All it takes is an executive order. I would bet that if Trump starts to get serious in bypassing the Federal Reserve, a number of US Supreme Court judges and Federal Reserve directors will retire. Why? Because GSIGs want the current financial system to remain in place. And they'll sweeten the pot to do so.
Of course, Trump can make the threat, get a few more choices on Supreme Court judges and Federal Reserve directors, and then next year...f*ck GSIGs over by authorizing the Treasury Department to print legal tender and end public/private central banks.
Of course, such an action would definitely lead to his public assassination. But Trump is pushing 70 years of age. He might as well go out with a bang and cement his legacy in US history.
But what will happen to the US if we do nothing? The US national debt will continue to increase and will eventually get to a point where the GDP to debt level is too low. What then? A default by the US government becomes a possibility and the only way out will be for GSIGs (via private banks) to save them.
And the cost will be the soul of America. Aside from the infrastructure, GSIGs will demand the US enter into global trade agreements and abolish any sense of nationalism. If GISGs do it correctly and push the Canadian government to that same brink of debt, they can demand that the US and Canada have the same currency.
And just in case you're wondering, no, Bitcoin can't save the US or global economy from GSIGs. Why not? Because the technology isn't scalable at the global level. Nor is it anonymous. If the government wants to see your Bitcoin wallet, they can. It's a bit difficult but definitely possible.
While the intentions of Bitcoin come from the anarchist movement, it has no basis in reality. While its founders may have wanted to use it to overthrow the current financial system, almost 10 years later it's barely a conversation starter.
Again, to all the visionaries out there, there's no blank slate where you can create your utopia and then it's clear sailing from there. If you want to change the system, you have to do it in the current regulatory/political/economic/financial environment.
This is something that Bitcoin founders and advocates don't understand. The lack of oversight of Bitcoin leads to numerous illegal transactions and the theft of thousands of Bitcoins through incompetence or the collapse of digital exchanges.
And Bitcoin is about tracking every single transaction. That's not an empowering ideology. That's a surveillance state ideology. Bitcoin has value to GSIGs because of its blockchain and surveillance state characteristics. Sadly, anarchists and progressives who support Bitcoin are just advocating for a new form of surveillance.
And remember, if you don't like the current solutions above, you can advocate for a real democracy in a skoparxist government (see Philosophy of Governance & Economics in Philosophy Reborn Part I: Purpose), where the majority will (80% of the people) have the final say on monetary policies.
The Welfare State & Unions & The Middle Class & Universal Income
***Taken out, due to steemit limit, please see original article:
http://www.shawnalli.com/conspiracy-theories-101-series-part-6-of-12-the-banking-state.html
References:
[1] Where Does the Mortgage Settlement Money Go? New York Times. December 24, 2016.
[2] Bernard, Stephen. Bailed-out banks gave millions in exec bonuses, NY AG report shows. ABC News. April 3, 2016.
[3] Noonan, Laura and McLannahan, Ben. Pay for big bank chief executives jumps nearly 8%. Financial Times. July 12, 2016.
[4] McCoy, Kevin. Study: Largest U.S. banks still charge high overdraft fees. USA Today. December 20, 2016.
[5] McGee, Suzanne. The debit card fee driving US banks crazy – and costing consumers more than they realize. Guardian. January 27, 2015.
[6] Flavelle, Dana. Royal Bank apologizes to outsourced workers. Toronto Star. April 11, 2013.
[7] Johnson, Erica. 'I will do anything I can to make my goal': TD teller says customers pay price for 'unrealistic' sales targets. CBC News. March 6, 2017.
[8] Johnson, Erica. 'We do it because our jobs are at stake': TD bank employees admit to breaking the law for fear of being fired. CBC News. March 10, 2017.
[9] Rankin, Eric. TD bank claimed $2.8M tax refund under B.C.'s corporate incentive program, court ruling reveals. CBC News. May 4, 2017.
[10] Harris, Sofia. 'Very depressing': CIBC staff losing jobs to workers in India, expected to help with training. CBC News. March 30, 2017.
[11] Moyer, Liz. Maurice Greenberg Loses Bid for Damages From A.I.G. Bailout. New York Times. May 9, 2017.
[12] Thompson, Elizabeth. Banking industry has lobbied officials, MPs hundreds of times. CBC News. June 12, 2017.
[13] Schwartz, Jon. "You've Got to Cozy Up": more Politicians Admitting that Money Controls Politics. Intercept. August 18, 2015.
[14] Quigley, Carroll. Tragedy and Hope: A History of the World in Our Time. Macmillan Company. 1966. p. 277-279 of ebook.
[15] Eisinger, Jesse. Why Only One Top Banker Went to Jail for the Financial Crisis. New York Times. April 30, 2014.
[16] Dayen, David. Eric Holder's Longtime Excuse for Not Prosecuting Banks Just Crashed and Burn. Intercept. July 12, 2016.
[17] Morgenson, Gretchen. A Bank Too Big to Jail. New York Times. July 5, 2016.
[18] Silver-Greenberg, Jessica. 2 Banks to Settle Case for $417 Million. New York Times. November 16, 2012.
[19] Shecter, Barbara. Ontario's measures to cool housing could be 'positive' for Canada’s banks. Financial Post. April 20, 2017.
[20] US Constitution. Article 1, Section 10.
[21] 2016 Annual Report. Bank of Canada. 2017. p. 82.
[22] Annual Report and Accounts: 1 March 2016–28 February 2017. Bank of England. 2017. p. 84.
[23] 103rd Annual Report 2016. Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System. 2017. p. 318.
[24] 87th Annual Report 1 April 2016–31 March 2017. Bank for International Settlements. p. 1. June 25, 2017.
[25] Federal Reserve Act: Section 7. Division of Earnings. Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System.
[26] Weinberger, Evan. Banks Sue US Over Fed Dividend 'Bait And Switch.' Law360. February 9, 2017.
[27] 2016 Annual Report. Bank of Canada. 2017. p. 75.
[28] Ireton, Julie. Nortel executives continue drawing bonuses years after bankruptcy. CBC News. October 7, 2016.
[29] Kassam, Ashifa. Ontario plans to launch universal basic income trial run this summer. Guardian. April 24, 2017.
[30] Gollom, Mark. Basic income finds support on right as 'most transparent' form of redistribution. CBC News. April 25, 2017.
[31] Alcindor, Yamiche. Don't Make Housing for the Poor Too Cozy, Carson Warns. New York Times. May 3, 2017.
[32] Harkinson, Josh. Hawaii Considers Radical Idea to Make Life in Paradise a Little Easier. Mother Jones. June 15, 2017.
[33] Kelly, Heather. Mark Zuckerberg: Getting into Harvard made my parents proud. CNN. May 25, 2017.
[34] Bogart, Nicole. Elon Musk says universal basic income will be necessary as robots take your jobs. Global News. February 15, 2017.
[35] Downs, Ray. Richard Branson says universal basic income 'important' as tech reduces jobs. UPI. August 17, 2017.
[36] Fifield, Anna. Do Japanese really work themselves to death? In some cases, yes. Washington Post. July 31, 2016.
[37] Kanter, James. Europe Agrees to Bailout Fund for Euro of Over $1 Trillion. New York Times. March 30, 2012.
[38] Snavely, Brent. Final tally: Taxpayers auto bailout loss $9.3B. Detroit Free Press. December 30, 2014.
[39] Keenan, Greg. Canadian taxpayers lose $3.5-billion on 2009 bailout of auto firms. Globe and Mail. April 7, 2015.
[40] Federal government to give $372.5M in loans to Bombardier. Canadian Press. February 7, 2017.
[41] Ford, federal and provincial governments pledge $600M for Windsor plant. CBC News. March 30, 2017.
[42] Hirsch, Jerry. Elon Musk's growing empire is fueled by $4.9 billion in government subsidies. Los Angeles Times. May 30, 2015.
[43] Bruser, David. Here's how Ontario casinos blew $10 million in interest-free loans to gamblers. Toronto Star. June 16, 2017.
[44] Story, Louise. Michigan Town Woos Hollywood, but Ends Up With a Bit Part. New York Times. December 3, 2012.
[45] Isidore, Chris. NFL gets billions in subsidies from U.S. taxpayers. CNN. January 30, 2015.
[46] McKenna, Barrie. The losing game of publicly financed sports venues. Globe and Mail. July 17, 2015.
[47] Greenhouse, Steven. L'Oreal Official Investigated By U.S. Over Pro-Nazi Past. New York Times. June 20, 1991.
[48] Gentleman, Amelia. L'Oreal profited from victims of Nazis, court told. Guardian. October 13, 2004.
[49] Andrews. Edmund. Volkswagen to Create $12 Million Fund for Nazi-Era Laborers. New York Times. September 11, 1998.
[50] Hall, Alan. Revealed: How the Nazis helped German companies Bosch, Mercedes, Deutsche Bank and VW get VERY rich using 300,000 concentration camp slaves. Daily Mail. June 20, 2014.
[51] Burnett, Josh. Halliburton Deals Recall Vietnam-Era Controversy. NPR. December 24, 2003.
[52] Fifield, Anna. Contractors reap $138bn from Iraq war. Financial Times. March 18, 2013.
[53] Weigley, Samuel. 10 companies profiting the most from war. USA Today. March 10, 2013.
[54] The International. Columbia Pictures. 2009.
[55] Aris, Ben and Campbell, Duncan. How Bush's grandfather helped Hitler's rise to power. Guardian. September 25, 2004.
[56] LeBor, Adam. How six months before WWII Britain gave Hitler $9-million in gold (that belonged to another country). Telegraph. August 1, 2013.
[57] Brierley, David. How Swiss oiled Hitler's killing machine. Independent. March 23, 1997.
[58] Declassified: Apartheid Profits - nuclear bunkers and Swiss bankers. News24. August 23, 2017.
[59] Kollewe, Julia. Barclays faces apartheid court action. Independent. January 21, 2006.
[60] Caesar, Ed. Deutsche Bank's $10-Billion Scandal. New Yorker. August 29, 2016.
[61] Treanor, Jill. Deutsche Bank fined $630m over Russia money laundering claims. Guardian. January 31, 2017.
[62] Raymond, Nate. BNP Paribas sentenced in $8.9 billion accord over sanctions violations. Reuters. May 1, 2015.
[63] Blanchfield, Mike. 4 Canadian financial institutions invested in firms that make cluster bombs: report. Canadian Press. June 16, 2016.
[64] Taylor, Jerome. UK banks fund deadly cluster-bomb industry. Independent. August 15, 2011.
[65] Harding, Luke, et al. British banks handled vast sums of laundered Russian money. Guardian. March 20, 2017.
[66] Syal, Rajeev. Drug money saved banks in global crisis, claims UN advisor. Guardian. December 13, 2009.
[67] Goldman Sachs makes an irresponsible deal with the corrupt Venezuela regime. Washington Post. June 4, 2017.
[68] Outrageous HSBC Settlement Proves the Drug War is a Joke. Rolling Stone. December 13, 2012.
[69] Berwick, Angus, et al. Spain probes ICBC's European unit over money laundering. Reuters. September 11, 2017.
[70] Saviano, Roberto. Where the Mob Keeps Its Money. New York Times. August 25, 2012.