Why don't the governments of the US and Canada nationalize the banks? they lend money they don't have, just create credits to your account and look forward to the interest they'll earn on money they didn't have in the first place?

Such scandalous thinking is not permitted. Any notions diverting the flow of money away from the rich must be shouted down and those promoting such heresies ostracized and ridiculed!

The rich are few, the aspiring middle-class are many. So, soak it to the middle-class borrowers as the poor have nothing but their needs.

The problem is that those who control the government, the rich and powerful, already control the banking industry and profit handsomely by doing so. And by controlling both, if the banks have problems the government will bail them out, as we have already witnessed, thereby acquiring the gains while not suffering the losses or, at the very least, spreading the losses over a much broader base; the US population. They would gain nothing by nationalizing the banks and spreading the profits to the nation instead of their own pocketbooks so where is the incentive?

Victoria Banks wondered that a few years ago.

Really good question. Answer seems to be the same as the answer for so many things, that the banks own most wealth and power and politics on the planet. Funny how compound interest generates infinite wealth and power…

Do you understand the banking system? Not just the US banking system, but banks going back 500 years?

Banks have always loaned money that they don’t have, based on the promise of repayment from their customers. Banks make their profits from loaning money (Read your New Testament – money lenders being thrown out of the temple).

Banks, and credit, are what makes the world go round.

Apparently nationalised banks are more likely to be susceptible to hyperinflation. This is why the Bundesbank was set up after the hyperinflation in the 1930s in Weimar in Germany. The separation of interest rates and the state helps to control inflation. I read a book about economics recently called the Undercover Economist which is aimed at the general public. You might find a book like that helps you understand a very complex topic

I can’t help wondering if some responders are bankers.

The Jews stick together and use the power of compound interest to eventually control countries. E.g. Rothschild and Rockefeller (originally financed by Rothschild interests). I believe nothing coming out of the University of Chicago’s School of Economics because this U. was funded by Rockefeller.

US Banks can no longer lend money they don’t have. Passing of Dodd Frank bill in 2010 made sure of that. Simply put Banks are now required by this 2010 regulation to have a 10% reserve requirement which is thought to help keep a bank from going too far underwater with loan commitments. Other aspects of Frank Dodd regulated the lending limits of the quality of the borrowers ability to repay the loan. These 2 aspects of the banking industry were in part of what led to the catastrophic collapse of the banking system in the fall of 2008.

@Cruiser Many parts of Dodd-Frank have already been overturned by the lobbying power of the banking cartel. I don’t know if this particular item is one of them but I can certainly see it as one the bankers would be trying to mitigate.

@rojo Having bought a business and homes since the new 2010 regulations I know firsthand that the lending requirements are tighter than a frogs ass. My business bank said prior to 2010 and based on our long strong relationship that they could have easily lent me what ever I needed but since my loan was after the 2010 regs I had to collateralize the down payment loan dollar for dollar and the same applied to my home loan There they had very strict loan to value percentages based on 2 years of income, my assets and of course credit score. The mortgage company lamented at how difficult it had become to lend money for home purchases. It sure made things difficult for me but I got through it and can at the same time recognize the necessity of these regs to prevent the lending climate that helped create the housing bubble and junk loans fiasco withing the Freddie May/Mack loans that then pushed our banking system into chaos when the crash occurred.

@TheRealGodzilla

Overlooking the fact the Rockefeller family wasn’t Jewish, your comments about how the Jews control the banks is simply wrong, historically.

One group of inter-owned banks and companies owns most of the wealth on the planet:

The network of global corporate control

The 147 Companies That Control Everything

While some established lines of thought have it that “this is just the way the world economy works”, another perspective is that this is the way the world is dominated by a self-sustaining system of keeping wealth and power with the wealthy and powerful, to the financial benefit of a few, but to the overall detriment of everyone else (both in wealth and in terms of exploitation, deprivation, violence, servitude, buying politicians, and promoting acceptance of this system in as many ways as possible).

World’s richest 1% own 40% of all wealth, UN report discovers

Report says richest 1% will control most wealth by 2016

In the interest of disclosure, @Zaku , you might have noted the following:

1) the 147 companies article from Forbes is about four years old.

2) the “world’s richest 1% ” article is a year old and is probably the closest to being accurate. However it was from USA Today. Not a scholarly treatise.

3) the ‘network of global control’ article is almost 5 years old and may or may not reflect current research. And the source journal is not identified, and there is no way to know if this is peer reviewed or even good research.

4) the ‘40% of all wealth’ article is from the Guardian in 2006 (!) and cannot be considered good source material.

If your goal is to prove the mendacity of the banking system, then I would propose that you have better evidence than the old (and not particularly believable) citations that you listed.

I didn’t mean to imply that the Rockefellers are Jewish. I stated that Rockefeller was helped by the Rothschilds. As they helped J.P. Morgan who was also not Jewish. The Rothschilds took over the Bank of England. In effect if not in name.

As Sharon of Israel is alleged to have said, “Don’t worry about the Americans. We have them in our pocket.”

When the Federal Reserve was created, foreigners were deeply involved.

10% reserve requirement? They’re still crediting a borrower’s account with money they don’t have. If there was a run on a bank, the Fed would step in. With what? The Fed is in trouble itself. The US government could do the same thing the banks do, with the interest doing away with the need for income tax. Go read “The Public Bank Solution.”

“They’re still crediting a borrower’s account with money they don’t have.” @TheRealGodzilla Can you cite a source? I would be interested to know where I can get at cash I cannot afford.

Go read “The Public Bank Solution”. Or start your own bank!

@TheRealGodzilla Ummmm….nice Dystopian thought there but current Federal lending Regulations prohibit me not only to be able to borrow beyond my means but also prevent me from printing my own money which by the way is a Felony yet perfectly legal for the Fed to do. Go figure.

Supposing the bank lent 90% of the money to a corporate borrower (they just credit the borrower’s account with the 90%). The borrower’s credit of 90% enables the bank to lend 90% of that money again as the 90% has become an asset as well as a liability. Then 90% of that is lent again and so on.

When William took over the throne in Great Britain, he came from Dutch banking interests. The monarch no longer controlled finances in GB after he became joint monarch with his wife, Mary.