If Germany's currency was backed by the productivity of the nation then why did they issue out silver coins...

If Germany's currency was backed by the productivity of the nation then why did they issue out silver coins? Did they essentially have 2 separate currencies? 1 currency that was labour certificates backed by the productivity of the nation and created through fractional reserve banking and another currency that was coins backed by rare metals?

Other urls found in this thread:

archive.is/r3ZsP
youtube.com/watch?v=QAUYGqabOWE
henryckliu.com/page105.html
federsgenius.wordpress.com/
realcurrencies.wordpress.com/2013/09/16/hitlers-finances-and-the-myth-of-nazi-anti-usury-activism/
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bank_run
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

>archive.is/r3ZsP

Because silver and gold are money

...

Wait, did Germany have commercial banks that were allowed to create money out of nothing through fractional reserve banking and then lend it out? This goes against the whole national socialist movement. It can't be true

It wasnt interest based. Usury is a game of the jew.

dubs of truth

It doesn't matter if they demanded interest on the loans or not. In fractional reserve banking, banks can make a profit even if the lender only pays back 91% of his loan, because 10% of the money that they lend out is created out of nothing while 90% comes from their vault. That's assuming that the ratio is 90% to 10%. It can be 50% to 50% too and then the bank only needs to be paid back 51% to make a profit.

Actually banks create the entire credit of the loan they give you out of nothing

>https:// shitty blog .is/ a shi11

Actually MONEY is money. You might as well say COPPER is money, or PLATINUM is money. Metals are metals, money is backed by the law as a currency for exchange…

Now as for your SHIT BLOG, its sources are total fucking shit.
This actually counter's the blog's supposition, showing that Hitler made laws and declarations that took control of the banks.
Ziopedia on MEFO’s
A shit wiki-article that sources to the NUREMBERG trials.
I'm sure this isn't biased… WHEN ITS TALKING ABOUT NUREMBERG TRIAL DEFENDANTS!!!
Wall Street was financing the Bolsheviks and Stalin too.

Literally everything you said was wrong.


Doesn't matter, they issued out Paper Notes.

What does that mean?

I want an answer to this too. Were the commercial banks banks in Germany allowed to print money?

...

It works. The system works. Banking and Interest are pike firearms and swords. Useful and positive in the right hands.

it means that there isn't even a "restrictive" element of how banks can create credit by creating loans. every dollar you pay back of a loan to a modern bank is profit to them, because the banks literally just manifest a number that represents how much money you can spend with absolutely no cost to them. this money then cycles through other banks and creates mutual benefit for all banks as the money supply effortlessly spirals out of control, with every fictional dollar created generating interest that also does not exist.

people then place bets on whether money that never existed will be used to pay back debts that only exist as numbers in a hard drive accruing interest that only exists in theory. they are called derivatives, and people buy and sell them based entirely on speculation that consists of the world running for at least another hour so they can sell it to some other speculative mook and make a quick buck

its damn well horrifying how the banking system works these days. the entire world economy is hanging on a single thread made of hopeless optimism where everyone keeps betting double or nothing on which way the wind blows.

tl;dr

only for the ones that control it. Every boom and bust cycle is controlled and planned. Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke admitted the Great Depression was planned and caused by the Fed.

All Interest Lending destroys productivity. The practice of Interest Lending itself has been banned in the past; In England, Spain and the Roman Empire. Our current practice of interest is less than 300 years old
youtube.com/watch?v=QAUYGqabOWE
There are two sides to (((compound interest))), those that collect it, and those that pay. the Federal Reserve Act included the IRS and Income tax to pay the interest on the Fed's money. Interest Drains society, its better to abolish it all together and let people live. Hitler did this, and the people loved him for it.

It is 5%. So at 6% return they make 20% profit…

You know you can still have labour backed currency and use coins for the things like pfennigs and paper for thing like marks.

henryckliu.com/page105.html

...

insight on why Germans hated Jews and the Folks Economy Hitler established.

It's good. Watch it. Also blocked in cuck nations so bypass with a VPN.

And even by Muslims. Muhammad was a illiterate, pedophile warlord, but he must have surrounded himself with some smart individuals to handle such affairs.

Well I guess this thread is settled then.

I miss the days when shills were a conspiracy theory.

OP when I image search your coin, I get reddit.
Fuck off.

What was even the point of this thread? What were they trying to make us believe?

"What the fuck I hate money now?"

Reread the faggot OP's second response a few times and if you aren't slow you'll figure it out.

...

Kill yourself, retard.

OP reposts this 'labor-backed currency' meme every month or so. OP posted no source this time. Last time I looked into it, it was from green-party candidate's blog.

It all hangs on this one quote:
"For every mark issued, we required the equivalent of a mark's worth of work done, or goods produced."

These fags then try to imply that means (somehow) that everyone was paid the same wage, or that somehow nothing was backing the currency except for some undefined 'labor' (when in fact it was initially backed by landbonds). These WCBs (>>10060202) sound like nothing more than short-term bonds, and were nowhere close to being the entire money supply for Germany.

Did Brock cut you faggots paychecks again? Or did he outsource to india or something?

You must really think highly of yourself?

Yea, just don't call it money.

Not blocked in France lol

Oy Vay!
Finally get your vpn working there hebe?

Actually there is a restrictive element. It's called capital requirements. Capital requirements are calculated based on the nature of the assets possessed. US Treasuries and mortgage backed securities essentially have zero capital requirements allowing banks to lend infinite money so long as their returns are above the central bank lending rate.

So for example if the central bank lending rate is 2% then a bank could buy infinite US Treasuries at 2.5%. In practice that means treasury yields are below the central bank rate. However mortgage backed securities work nearly the same way such that a bank could lend infinite money so long as their post-default returns are above 2%.

Who cares about currency.
As long as there is no Usury and no Kikes allowed in, there is no problem.
This is all you need to know: federsgenius.wordpress.com/

Muhammad was a smart individual, and some of the men he surrounded himself with were on the caliber of Alexander the Great.

We wouldn't have Islam as a problem otherwise.

A french Rabbi said on a jewtube video: Islam is the broom of jews

Source; I want this ammunition.

Why can't we have a currency like this?

Because jews.

doesn't matter if it's in french?

https:// www.youtube.com/watch?v=AK8ShUX8rDE

Moneta - meaning 'to mint' - Money IS Metal. If it isn't Minted into Fine Metal Coinage or Bars, it is NOT Money. Money is NOT a "medium of exchange"; this is a Lie that Binds us to a Global Slavery Scheme. Money has an intrinsic value as a measure or weight of Gold, Silver or Copper. When you exchange Real Money for Goods of Equal Value, it is a Barter Exchange; Value for Value.

Germany had no Gold, thus the Silver Reichsmark was pegged to the Gold Standard. This was done by Schacht in '24. He saved Germany. Then later on Hitler increased the purity of Silver Coins in '33. This is important because (((they))) don't have a monopoly on Silver. They're manipulating the markets to hide this fact.

Don't be fooled by books like Web of Debt. Mefo bills and other cerificates never existed. Try to find evidence for these bills of exchange, they were supposedly printed by the billions. Fiat is anti-Aryan. The Third Reich did not use such as system, at least not before the war.

Since the ones below are a bit confusing, here it is in more simple terms. I'll state the obvious so you get the idea: Banking is a scam. At least proper banking is. There are financial institutes that recycle loans, but regular banking, actual banking, is a scam from start to finish.

Let's say I'm a banker, and you're a customer. You visit and ask:
Then I make you an offer. I loan 500 grand to you, and you put up your house as a security in case you end up incapable of paying my loan back. I need to be sure my money is in good hands, and that I somehow get my money back after all, right? So arguing this way, I convince you to sign the contract. Should you find yourself incapable of paying my loan back with interest on top of it, I can legally sue you to forcibly strip you of your property. So then comes my part of the bargain. I use the software on my computer to make a bank account for you, and type '500000' as the number of digital money in your account. Full stop. That is it. I didn't actually give you 500k, I didn't transfer it from anywhere else. Except for my wage and the electric power it takes to run my computer, my bank doesn't have any costs to bear for those 500k you just got. Yet the contract entitles me to receive 1mil from you 40 years later, or else goodbye property.

And then you surely think 'well you're just one scam artist then, right?', and the answer to that is no. This is the standard. Pretty much all banking works that way. And that doesn't even cover the insidiousness behind what interests mean. It is a system bound to fail. People not being able to pay their loans and losing their propety to (((banks))) is the entire point of the system. And yes, this entire thing is also how central banks operate. All money in circulation is debt. Every dollar in your bank accounts, every dollar bill, everything is debt. In the event that the scam falls apart, the only 'money' that's worth anything is coins. The rest is either worthless (bills) or exposed to have never existed (credit).

And the entire scam is incredibly fragile, too. It would be really easy to crash the entire financial sector within days if a large bunch of people with a lot of money (not even talking multibillionaires) got together to do it. All it would take would be to get all your digital money into bank accounts, then concertedly demand the bank to pay out your money in bills and coins (preferably coins), and due to fractional reserve banking, they're bound to be exposed to have their loans unbacked, and literally go bankrupt. You can very easily kill any medium-sized bank that way. The other way would be to create some other currency like dogecoin and across businesses simply stop accepting dollars/euros as payment. Problem is that most industries are effective monopolies owned by people that share an (((ethnicity))) with the same people as the ones behind the banking system.

I thought we had gotten rid of you.

WATCH THE VIDEO

It's the reason I keep experimenting with thoughts on how a better system would be. My approximation to it is called samaritan currency. Slightly less insidious than debt currency.

The problem with debt currency is that it is bound to have collateral damage (eg people who cant pay their loans and lose their property) and that it causes behaviour that is often mistaken for human greed. Say there is no money at first, and I loan out $100. Then there are $100 total in circulation, yet there is $106 in debt, and that debt needs to be paid back. You are forced to cut corners and do everything you can to make a quick buck. It's not that you're greedy, it's that you don't have a choice. You sure think 'then another loan will pump into circulation what I need'. Say someone else took out another loan. Then there are $200 total in circulation, but there is $212 in debt, and without more money getting pumped into the market, that debt rises every year. Everyone is forced to fight others for what little money they have, in order to pay back one's own loan, and the entire system depends on inflation to continue to exist, because assuming that the credits were defrauded, the currency would continue to exist. The loans and in turn, the debt ARE the currency.

So my conclusion is that the main problem is the usurious trap it contains. It forces the recipient of the loan, the people at large, to play a game they can't win. So why not keep the game, but make adjustments that make it possible to win it? For a start, interest is additive, not exponential, because that's really just part of the trap that regular debt currency is set up to be. With that, even at 6%, a credit is paid back, like in the simplified way above, with double the money after 40 years. Additionally, credits can't just immediately be paid back in full, the interest keeps ticking for the duration that the contract is set for. And then comes the part where the change comes in that it gets it's name from. In the same moment I issue a loan of $100 to you, I issue a $100 donation to a random recipient, preferably a person in need. Someone who has promise of being productive, but has had bad luck, would be best. This donation is what the word implies. A donation. The recipient is of my choosing, but that 'loan' comes with neither interest, nor a need to repay it. That way, even after one year, there is $106 of debt, but $200 in circulation. While it is still a number in a record, much like it's needed to do business at a speed at which it's needed today, it has effectively become just a regulated currency, issued by a central entity, like paper money over a hundred years ago.

Nice rebuttal, boy. You can find everything I wrote in the archives of the "Reichsgesetzblatt" (1924 & 1933). But you won't do it because you're too lazy to do your own research. You will never take up the task to translate old German into English. Instead you will mindlessly consume predigested information in books like Web of Debt. You're a fucking normie.

I've never been too fluent in economics. I got interested in politics about a year and a half ago, and I was only awakened to Holla Forums and the surrounding philosophy maybe a year ago, and I've always been focused on the cultural aspect, because with a poisoned culture, your economic system doesn't mean shit, and of course, the 14 words…
To my very limited understanding, what OP is writing about (Basically the elimination of debt-slavery and jewish usury/fractional reserve banking BS, and an issuance of a strong currency by the govt instead of by a private central bank) is what really caused the German economic miracle, as well as soaring confidence of the people (which really does seem to have an effect on economies)
However, from everything I have read at least, subsidy based economies, economies structured in a socialist manner, are unsustainable. Even the third reich economy, after its incredible recovery from the jewish sludge of the Weimar republic and the financial ruin the jews put upon germany, began to falter, and was actually saved by the necessity for wartime production. I know germans who owned their own private enterprises had qualms with the overly regulatory part of the government, regulating and taxing their businesses to death, to the point where productivity was stifled. And it seems to me like the highly regulatory and restrictive governmental measures dampened the potential of the reich.
Now I've heard people on here say "The socialism of germany is not like the socialism of modern times, nor is it like national bolshevism."
But what is the difference? I understand racial makeup, and immigration control, but other than that?
I cant help but shake the feeling that they could've been so much more if they had freer markets in the third reich. They won the culture war, they established a beautiful culture. At that point, wouldn't it be better to give more freedom to the people and their markets? I understand the concepts of making certain businesses illegal, namely the pornography industry, and other industries that do nothing but offer degeneracy in order to turn a profit..but the overregulatory state I feel wasn't sustainable. Would, if victory was achieved in WW2, the third reich have freed up the markets eventually? Or am I just totally wrong? I'm not shilling, I really am hoping someone can enlighten me.

The Autobahn net got Germany back on its feet productionwise and economically.

Answer is simple. While regulations do indeed stifle business, that isn't supposed to be the core of how national socialist nations operate. Universal rules in and of themselves, aren't so good. The idea is instead, that the individual is free to try to make money to the benefit of the nation without being obstructed by regulations, but is, upon doing so, guided by the party. If you run a genuine furniture-making business, that is good. But if you overtax your workers or produce faulty products, you'll sooner or later get visited by a government official, who will instruct you on what to do differently and how. If you fail to adjust your private policies to the benefit of the nation and it's people, you will have to face consequences. Sometimes, those consequences can consist of you simply disappearing. Rules are necessary, but a lot of things that are necessary, become poisonous when taken in excess.

They were blocked off from world markets, so they had to expand east.

Capped for reference. Good description on the workings of NatSoc economics.

Listen I'm Nat Soc as they come but honestly don't buy into the whole "Hitler killed usury" meme. Yes he subjugated the needs of the economy completely to the German people but he really did not kill usury. It was all just playing the books with MEFO bills. The main anti-usury guy in the party was Gottfried Feder, who wasn't even in charge of the economy and had some meaningless token position. Hjalmar Schact ran Hitler's economy, and he was as much of a banker as bankers come.

Can't be bothered to say more because I've had this argument so many times but most of the points are listed here - realcurrencies.wordpress.com/2013/09/16/hitlers-finances-and-the-myth-of-nazi-anti-usury-activism/

Interesting, I see. I could definitely see serious arguments for that being implemented. But, lets just take your example, a furniture-making business is making quality furniture for people, at a very reasonable profit margin. In the third reich, this company still wouldn't be free of a lot of regulations or barriers to entry, etc, right? They'd still be under the same regulatory burden as every other business. I totally agree with monitoring, actually, and ensuring the business is up to par in helping the nation, the workers, and their own families as well (everyone has to profit in some way, including the community).
And yes, I also agree that certain regulations are absolutely necessary. However, only from what I've read, which could be (((incorrect history))), Hitler's germany did not have very free markets at all. Why not, once the culture is secured, have freer markets than what their socialistic/bureaucratic system enabled? Those that don't benefit the nation are reported by the citizenry, or the workers, and it could be reviewed and visited, and if there was indeed an issue, they would be coerced into changing their model into one that benefits the nation and the workers, while still benefiting themselves and their family?
I know that^ is still bureaucracy, but it's much less than an expansive regulatory state.
I understand if this sounds more like an amateurish idea or even a little bit of a pipe dream, but I learn through discussion. I appreciate your response.

NatSoc Germany had a rather extensive bureaucratic regulatory apparatus but taxation even on businesses was a third of what it is in America or Western European economies. I agree instead of making literally thousands of pages of bullshit arbitrary rules that stifle the economy it should be as simple as citizens reporting unjust business practices and the state investigating. If a business helps its community and is run justly it should be inhibited as little as possible including with taxation IMO.

One good thing is that Hitler used fractional reserve banking to help the Volk. The home loans that were paid off with 4 or more kids are an excellent example, even if fractional reserve banking is a scam, the wealth created from it incentivized large healthy families instead of having the profits funneled into kike bankers pockets so it was arguably ok tbh. Especially since the 4 kids for a free home program ensured expansion of the money supply directly coincided with expansion of a healthy population and thus with economic growth, inflation from expanding money supply was not a problem. Alternative monetary systems should absolutely be considered and private central banks/derivatives and other kike scams are totally unacceptable but it might be self defeating to by hyper purist about it.

Ouch..jfc. It's disgusting how jewed we've become.
But I think that's where I stand as well. Thanks for the insight!

I watched it. Good information. Shitty video. Talking and text at the same time causes me to have to pause the video to read, and then go back to hear what the guy was saying.

The name is "Run on the bank", or "bank run".

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bank_run

ITT Shills & Dumbfucks

Simply put it was a backup system. If for some reason the amount of labor inflated immensely, the cost of the actual metal would keep it in check. Also keep in mind that the voucher system was a viat between the mark and companies.

That happens to be due to the fact that it fucking isn't true. Commercial banks can't print money in the first place, they can only request it from a central reserve, even in the US. Second of all the central bank of Germany was kept under direct control of the government, so even if commercial banks applied pressure interest rates wouldn't go up.

The anti-usury is literally in the NSDAP's party program.

so by "capital" in terms of capital requirements, you mean something like physical treasury notes, or some kind of forced tangible asset ie. a house? because like you said if you can buy infinite treasury bonds so long as you buy them at a higher rate than the central bank expects back on their loans, doesn't that essentially make those bonds as intangible and pointless as the credit of the loan itself? is there some kind of limiting of the kind of capital banks can have as part of the capital requirements?

I mean if the banks get their way they'd be eliminating cash entirely so there could never be a run on the bank, but as things stand now do capital requirements even realistically hinder the issuing of loans or is it just a swinging gate?

This is the answer to many questions that are raised regarding how shitty the world has become.

You havn't found or done shit. You are just making up a story to make it seem you have the high ground. You most likely found things for your post on some sketchy website. I have seen your post before (or post very similar to it) and your driveling arent going to change anything.
Kill yourself.

You retarded piece of shit. The Reichsgesetzblatt was the official publication of the various enacted laws of the German Reich from 1871 until 1945. Here is the online archive of the Austrian national library:
alex. onb.ac.at/cgi-content/alex?aid=drb&datum=1924&page=280&size=45

On the right side further down you can see the headline "Münzgesetz. Vom 30. August 1924." which means monetary or coinage act. Below this you can read "§ 1 Im Deutschen Reiche gilt die Goldwährung" (gold standard) and § 2 is about the various coins that are to be minted. Which basically means that the Silver Reichmark was pegged to a Gold standard.

Now fuck off pathetic consumer slave. You provided absolutely nothing of value in this thread.

because they got a shill instead of Feder