Comer vs. Bank of Canada - Need Opinions on this
This has been circulating my Facebook newsfeed for the past week or two. The Canadian Court Case the Mainstream Media will not cover
The premise is as follows.
- Bank of Canada used to issue interest free loans for small business, education, social services, etc.
- After 1977, Canada divested from BoC and started borrowing from private banks
- Current Canadian (federal only) debt is around 676-billion
- Today, 95% of that debt is compound interest owed to private banks
- 37-billion is paid per year by Canadians to service this debt. This costs the average Canadian about $5/day
COMER (Committee for Monetary and Economic Reform) on December 12th, 2011 filed an action in Federal Court, to restore the use of the Bank of Canada to its original purpose , by exercising its public statutory duty and responsibility. That purpose includes making interest free loans to the municipal/provincial/federal governments for “human capital” expenditures (education health, other social services) and / or infrastructure expenditures.
Seems to make good intuitive sense - but I am not a financial expert. There are some smart RFD'ers here. Can someone explain why we are paying so much money to private banks unnecessarily?
The premise is as follows.
- Bank of Canada used to issue interest free loans for small business, education, social services, etc.
- After 1977, Canada divested from BoC and started borrowing from private banks
- Current Canadian (federal only) debt is around 676-billion
- Today, 95% of that debt is compound interest owed to private banks
- 37-billion is paid per year by Canadians to service this debt. This costs the average Canadian about $5/day
COMER (Committee for Monetary and Economic Reform) on December 12th, 2011 filed an action in Federal Court, to restore the use of the Bank of Canada to its original purpose , by exercising its public statutory duty and responsibility. That purpose includes making interest free loans to the municipal/provincial/federal governments for “human capital” expenditures (education health, other social services) and / or infrastructure expenditures.
Seems to make good intuitive sense - but I am not a financial expert. There are some smart RFD'ers here. Can someone explain why we are paying so much money to private banks unnecessarily?
In a perfect system, corporations would fear the government and the government would fear the people. - David Wong
Check out caRpetbomBer's picks in this thread.
Check out caRpetbomBer's picks in this thread.