Repudiation and Social Credit must be done together.


If all the 17 trillion were owed to me, Dick Eastman, you would want everyone to repudiate that debt, wouldn’t you?  What’s so special about Rothschild that you will sacrifice your country, your business, your home, your job and your family’s future to him?


by Dick Eastman

Millions will die, and ten million minds will crack and a hundred million lives will fall apart.  The pain and grief for what has happened and the future that has been robbed will be intolerable.  And the talking heads go on:  The government must cut this, the people must do without that, wages must be cut drastically, benefits must disappear, packages smaller, ingredients more inferior etc.  Because the we owe $17 trillion and it has to be paid.
But do we really have to pay Mr. Rothschild and Mr. Rockefeller and Mr. Soros etc.?
If all the $17 trillion were owed just to me, would you still feel obligated to inflict all that damage on so many lives?  Or would you repudiate and say, “To hell with you, Dick Eastman”
And what kind of person would I be if I insisted that $17 trillion had to be taken from everyone so that I could possess that much wealth?
Wouldn’t it be very strange that no one in the media or in government or in the economics departments of our great universities ever once asks, is Rothschild really that wonderful that 300 million people must live short lives of agony so that he can add to the astronomical amount of wealth he already possesses?
All the news media talk about our debt and the suffering that must come of it — where from our bodies we should cut our pound of flesh — and more than a pound! —   hundreds of millions of people ruined and thrown into misery —  and not one of them ever asks the basic questions:
Who is getting this $17 trillion dollars?
Where is what we bought with that $17 trillion dollars?
What did the lenders give up to make that $17 trillion available to us?
Since we are the ones who work and invent and manage and they are the ones who make loans, how is it that they end up owning it all?
Did they provide the money for the bubbles — or in fact did we ourselves make the bubbles by putting up our own equity in second mortgage agreements?  Yet they get the houses and the compound interest over principal when all they put into the job was a half hour of keyboarding.
Government can declare eminent domain and take our houses, they can vote to tax away all we have, but why do they never put a graduated earnings tax on interest earnings?  Why do they never pass a law requiring that debt burdens adjust to average household purchasing power?
Why is government borrowing from international bankers the one thing in all the world that is not regulated in any way?
Politicians don’t call for debt repudiation because they know doing so would get them killed.
Arm chair economists don’t advocate repudiation because they think they know that a nation needs credit in order to have the money necessary for the economy to function at all.  If we repudiate, all loans will be recalled and no one will have money to buy anything.
But guess what?  Social Credit makes them unnecessary.  The government can set up a system whereby all the new money that the economy needs can originate by fiat in the household sector, in the hands of the people, so they can go out and buy so that businesses can be profitable and keep people employed.  No longer will people have to trade their equity for purchasing power to meet their debt obligations.
Debt slaves sacrificed to Goldman-Sachs
The answer is simple.  Repudiate while at the same time issuing new money to households.  It would be like having an income tax refund every month — no interest, no pay back of principal.
And if every nation in the world called for repudiation of national debt — and all interest due on loans to banks, so that only principal must be paid back  —  then where would be the recession?
Only repudiation and social credit together can save this country and every country.  You can’t repudiate national debt unless you have a system of social credit to replace the credit that Rothschild will forever withdraw.
This imp says:  “Congress allowed the wars and voted the money — it would not be honorable for you to refuse to pay the debt they incurred — even if it was Rothschild/Rockefeller/Soros etc. who bought their elections and own the political operatives how froze you out of the nominating process.”
Repudiation is justified.  They have been running a crooked wheel and fraud vitiates all contracts.
Repudiate all debt and remove any official that puts the Rothschilds above the nation and the people.
If we make it a world repudiation and if we replace the withdrawn credit with social credit — it will not be the end.  It will be the beginning.  Recessions and economic scandals should never be. With Social Credit they won’t be ever again.

Dick Eastman
Yakima, Washington
Every man is responsible to every other man.

And Rothschild is responsible to the billions who owe them money or owe them rent or pay them their monopoly profits.  Or, if he is not, then he has no business being the richest man on earth.  (I speak of course of Rothschild as representing all the breed of merchant bankers — I am not talking about one man, but a network of crime families who dominate high finance.)
Here are the great “heretics” (from the Rothschild point of view)  who really have delivered the solutions to debt slavery and endless depressions and redistribution of all wealth to a criminal financial sector.


Men who layed the foundations of American Social Credit

Feder and Soddy: Exposed the workings of interest slavery and international finance capitalism.

Soddy   Wealth, Virtual Wealth and Debt

Kitson: Exposed the true nature of the Gold Standard, identified the great advantages of national credit, and fiat money

Kitson   The Fraudulent Standard

Douglas: Invented the substitute system in which new money originates free and clear exclusively in the household sector so that consumer market demand and not “banker investment/speculation planning/conspiracy” directs production.  Actually, Douglas saw his invention only as a “patch.”  American populists today see at as a complete alternative to the system of private monopoly credit.
Clifford Hugh Douglas – Social Credit(1924)
Eastman: Two-loops, the international creditor  loop feeding on the lower loop of chronic deflation  punctuated by debt-financed loan bubbles where the new businesses build up in the bubble eventually succumb to interest payment and ownership of the assets are transferred to the Eliteworld loop. (More or less Hobson imperialism practiced at home.)
Citizens America Social Credit
Social Credit America

Hobson: The upper-loop’s use of accumulated interest earnings to pursue Imperialism ventures (take over the economies of the world — now through IMF and World Bank loans, in the so-called “developing world.”

Herman Daly: Globalist Free Trade does not give mutual gains to each nation engaged in it.  While Economist David Ricardo showed that there would be mutual gains from trade if each nation specialized in producing products for which it has comparative
advantage (oranges in Florida, maple syrup in Maine, sugar in Haiwii, artichokes in California, apples in Washington, trash movies in Hollywood, wall street speculation in New York, retirement facilities in warm dry Arizona etc.)  Herman Daly pointed out that if capital and labor are free to cross boundaries then all capital and labor would migrate to the country with absolute advantage rather than comparative advantage.  Instead of Ricardo comparative advantage where China makes rice and tea and the US makes maple syrup and apples according to comparative advantage, we have instead a situation where China makes everything because the Communist Dictatorship of China has turned itself into a giant corporation selling its own docil, intelligent and diligent wage slave labor (absolute advantage in production) which attracts mobile investment capital from the US to the point where all production in the US stops.  This is the policy of globalist internationalists and under this policy nations with absolute disadvantage (like minimum wage laws, workers rights, union power, safety regulations, environmental protections, and corporation taxation) will suffer absolue disadvantage in trade — especially if the decay is allowed to swallow up all wealth by allowing the absolute disadvantage nation to continue importing through debt financing — until the nation has hocked all of its equity in itself and the credit runs dry and everything the “absolute disadvantage country one had belongs to the international speculators.    If you didn’t follow that try googling Herman Daly to find a better explanation.
Daly   For the Common Good  Redirecting the Economy
(see pages 213-218 for discussion of Ricardian “free trade”)

Margit Kennedy: No Anglo-American economist has come close to countering the scam of usury —  losery — as has Dr. Margit Kennedy.   Her empirical findings simply wipe the field of all opposition. In Germany the poorest 80% pay 1 billion Euros in interest to the richest  10% PER DAY. Yes, that’s right, one billion euros per day. That is a grand  total of 365 billion euro’s per year. That is one seventh of German GDP and  extrapolating this to America, the poorest 80% must be paying at least a  trillion a year. (Migchels)

Kennedy   Why Do We Need Monetary Innovation?

Anthony Migchels: When the bank creates some money by giving you a loan, it takes the money  out of circulation when you repay. Repaying debts means a diminishing money  supply. The banks only provide the principal, in our previous example 200k.  But after thirty years, 600k has been repaid and only 200k was created. So  how can this be? How can 600k be repaid by 200k?

It can’t. Somebody else needs to get into debt to create sufficient liquidity to pay the 400k interest. And the borrower of the original loan must start competing for this liquidity with everybody else to obtain that, intrinsically scarce, cash.

This means that because of the combination of debt and interest, the money supply must grow forever. But we know that a growing money supply is the definition of inflation and that inflation is closely linked to rising prices.

So inflation is inherent in the system. This sounds strange, because Central Banks raise interest rates to lower inflation, reasoning less credit will be issued because of rising prices for it. But the higher the interest rates  go, the more money must be created to pay for this interest.

Just one of the perverse side effects of interest in the current wealth  transfer system we call ‘finance’.

George: Speculators buy the land cheap, then as the land is developed they charge rent becoming the wealthy elite is the city grows and land rent increases.  Note that as homes are foreclosed and government sells off government lands the new owners are foreign bankers or “ex-pat” international speculators of the American upper loop.

George  Progress and Poverty


Loans from banks are a flow.  So many million are loaned each month.
Payments to banks are also a flow.  So much principal and so much interest
repaid each month.

If there are no boom periods alternating with bust periods, the flow of
loans injected will be equal to the amount of principal being paid off.  The
interest on the loans will be the net drain on the economy.

The net drain causes the recession.  This is solved by either government
spending — usually a war  which actually involves more payment of interest
later on  — which is not a solution.

Or else it is solved by liquidation of all debtors and the lender gaining
control of everyone’s homes or other collateral on their loans.  And the
people get to start off with a clean slate, starting again as a nation of
powerless street people.

Von Mises or Major Douglas?  Gold standard or Social Credit?  Libertarianism or Populism?
It is upon the outcome of the contest between the ideas of
von Mises and  Major Douglas that our economic future
will be determined.  (Assuming we escape hot slaughter
in the final showdown of the Cold War that never really
ended.) Is von Mises right that Depressions are
caused by Inflation and Malinvestment and fixed by
Deflation and Liquidation?  Or are Social Crediters right
who say depressions result from drainage of purchasing
power leading to underconsumption, deflation  and
general business loss  that can only  be corrected  by
reflating with debt-free money originating in the
household sector to lift the economy by increased
demand that will later become a drag as the money
is paid back with interest?

About oldickeastman

Born 1949 Oakland High School 1967 Lake Forest College B.A. Western Michigan M.A. Texas A & M University M.S. and two years completed in the doctoral program in economics, passing prelims in Macroeconomics I am living in Yakima, Washington and spend much of my retirement writing on public issues.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

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

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

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ 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 )


Connecting to %s