Video scenes shots:
Watch the video:
| URL: | |
| Embed: |
Display Video Comments | Hide Video Comments | Add Comment
Other videos by this author:
 |
Oil & Gas Mineral Rights Leases - Tips for Owners Before Signing a Lease Posted by: newculture
Video duration: 2461 seconds Related: N/A Display Video Comments | Hide Video Comments | Add Comment |
Latest comments made on this video:
By: axlrod05. on 13 May 12, 16:24:12
if this is the case ellen, that the bank has all this? capital and can fund things why is there such a huge housing shortage in North Dakota? is it merely that the influx of people is so tremendous that the infrastructure is lagging?
By: RAMB0IV. on 10 Oct 11, 12:49:36
@TheSwissRepublic The monetary system is far from perfect. Money should be only a means of exchange not a product what benefits the banks. There wouldn't be any crisis if we would reform the money system. When? the entire system is based on debt the system will become eventually unsustainable because of the rising interest. As the amount spent on interest rises so do taxes. It's a huge pyramid scam where the big banks keep growing at the expense of others.
By: RAMB0IV. on 07 Oct 11, 12:05:55
Has it occurred to you that the people actually form the government? That's why people all over the world should revolt and? demand new set of rules, because the ones we have right now are not working. Politicians care about money and in their idiocy and greed they try to please the bankers. I understand what you are saying with no welfare, but in modern urban condition it is impossible for everyone to get a job. Without job you cannot get money, without money no food, no roof.
By: Warzoooooo. on 06 Oct 11, 21:16:45
Govt like to make the voters think they can get something for nothing. While that is impossible, you can give if you steal from others. And the best way of stealing is through inflation, as only 1 in a million understands how that works. So chance to get caught is slim to non. And in many western countries politicians have an enormous wage, that they like to keep. As they could not find a job that well paid in the private market. If there were savings, money would? not have to be printed
By: RAMB0IV. on 06 Oct 11, 19:39:53
Why is the government worse option to print money than the private banks? Everyone tries this ridiculous argument, that if governments issue money they will cause hyperinflation! All you basically do is change the printer and save money. There is no reason to assume that government would do worse? than the speculating bankers.
By: Warzoooooo. on 06 Oct 11, 16:45:03
Govt. would spend even faster if they didn't have to account the spending to a credit account. So even though the? problems would not be the exact same, the total problems for the society would still remain. Banks now they get bailed out, because ppl vote for politicians that promise to redistribute wealth.
By: Warzoooooo. on 06 Oct 11, 16:42:38
The problem is not that banks are privet, but that they are allowed to do things other ppl are not allowed to do, that is create money from thin air. Profit comes from making more than you put in. In order to survive, any specie have to make "profit" by getting more energy from the food they eat than it takes to get that food. In the economy, before the time of over trust in govt. the most? common way to make profit was actually thing ppl were willing to pay for.
By: RAMB0IV. on 04 Oct 11, 17:04:56
You forget that the government doesn't control the banks at the moment. The banks are their own entities and do what they please. Banks job is to make profit and? profit cannot be made without someones loss and usually banks get too greedy and need to get bailed out. I don't see this scenario happening if the government controlled it's own money. The bankers take risks because they know that they will get bailed out if something goes wrong. Current system is horrible for the people
By: Warzoooooo. on 04 Oct 11, 14:26:40
Govt dont care about growth. Otherwise they would not tax creative ppl, and subsidise failing companies. Look at europe yes, where it is politicians bailing out the banks, not the free market. They can still retrieve their bonus because politicians keep feeding the taxpayers money, in hop for growth. A video that explains difference between govt jobs and market jobs. search for "Government Spending Doesn't Create Jobs"?
By: RAMB0IV. on 02 Oct 11, 13:04:50
Governments interest is growth, true growth. You cannot get real growth from creating bubbles. Banks are not accountable for anyone, just look at? Europe today, we are bailing out banks who created the crisis and the people have to pay the bill. No banker has been fired over this, they have gotten huge bonuses instead. The problem is corruption. According to a study banks are responsible for 60 - 70% for all the campaign support for politicians in Europe, probably more in USA.
By: Warzoooooo. on 01 Oct 11, 18:32:16
Govt if any have all the reason to? distorting the market. As thats what makes ppl ask for govt help. At which point highly paid bureaucratic jobbs are created for highly paid politicians friends. If govt didnt get bonuses from the housebubble, why did they make the foundation for the bubble then? Bankers can only not get fired if govt secure them with other ppls money. Banks are accountable to the govt. and the govt has proven their way of making money. Govt care about re-election!!!
By: RAMB0IV. on 30 Sep 11, 10:40:28
It is not foolish, because government has different interests and gains nothing from distorting the markets. Politicians do not get billion dollar bonuses from banks from making money from a real estate bubble. When bankers become just employees who can get fired they will have a different mindset. In current situation bankers cannot get fired because they are not accountable to anyone? and they can make money anyway they wish. Governments care about employment, bankers money only.
By: Warzoooooo. on 30 Sep 11, 06:58:50
I understand the point. What is foolish is to think that govt. would care any more about the individuals than anybody else. Ppl seem to forget that politicians are people as well.? If ppl want to harm other ppl in the free market, guess what they'll do when they get the power to force their ideas on anyone. The central banking system is actually supported by govt, as they need the inflation to keep pretending being santaclaus, while being able to blame the market.
By: RAMB0IV. on 28 Sep 11, 22:27:10
You don't understand the point of the video. The point is that you can cut off the private banks entirely who charge interest and cost the government money. Your assumption that government is incapable of running the banks correctly is just foolish. Everybody starts to talk about inflation when this is suggested and that's irrelevant, because you basically only change? the bank manager to someone who doesn't charge interest and cares about the people.
By: darthvader5300. on 21 Aug 11, 17:54:50
A State-owned bank must be accompanied by sound economic policies that encourages? investments in the physical-economy that produces real tangible goods and services for an economy is essentially physical in nature. A financial-economy only serves to provide a convenient means of exchanging tangible physical goods and services, that's all. Money by itself is not wealth for it has to be backed by a physical-economy that produces, manufactures, processes,& provides the services for these industries
By: Darksteelbeast. on 01 Aug 11, 05:37:20
I wish my State of Oregon would finish up crafting the bill and vote on it instead of it sitting in the legislature. I would also love to read some books on state banks? or watch a documentary on the subject .
By: saturnined. on 25 Jul 11, 15:32:46
What I'd like to know is, would the state owned bank combined with it's private banks be able to handle natural disasters- earthquakes, hurricanes, floods, etc.-so FEMA could be axed? The? state in effect would have it's own contingency fund.
By: rvrola. on 07 Jul 11, 08:17:05
IN OTHER WORDS, THE ONLY WAY ANY STATE IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA CAN RECOVER IS TO DO AWAY WITH WALL STREET SPECULATORS - SO THIS IS REALLY THE ENACTMENT OF GLASS-STEGALL ACT - A SEPARATION OF COMMERCIAL AND INVESTMENT BANKING WHICH OBAMA TODAY REFUSE TO IMPLEMENT IN THE COUNTRY. THE LAROUCHE PLAN? IS THE ONLY SOLUTION.
By: etzel33. on 12 May 11, 13:01:23
Excellent video. The micro currency idea is very interesting. The state bank idea? is a harder sell, but I think there's a good argument for it.
By: Warzoooooo. on 02 May 11, 16:24:36
If spending is the solution, why are there poor ppl in the world? I believe anyone can spend and waste resources, that should? not be a problem for ANYONE! So spending cant be the solution as it can easily be done. I have a hard time imagine africans not being able to walk in to a mall and shop til they drop. How hard is that to do?
By: Warzoooooo. on 02 May 11, 16:20:51
Without spend noone would survive as we have to consume food and energy. So there is not a model where spending comes to a halt. But we dont need unnecessary spending, which translate to wasting of resourses, like building wind turbines. And why do not ppl just grow? food and get productive now? Because govt. keeps promoting unproductive parts of the economy.
By: kermitcintronsucks. on 02 May 11, 04:38:18
If you dump a lot of money irrespective to goods and services you have inflation and poverty. You only have to control the quantity. The economy IS the problem. Throw the baby out? with the bath water. We're living in an old paradigm. The problem is economic in nature. Not monetary in nature. That's snake oil. The issue is not money. Even if money was created by the government and was non-inflationary you would still have high unemployment because effectiveness in the economy is gaining.
By: publicbankingtv. on 04 Feb 11, 06:47:09
Isn't it interesting that "newculture" posts this to criticize it. His arguments are poorly reasoned. The "too big to fail" banks that control the Fed have taken 40% of the money out of circulation, so putting money back into the economy would not be inflationary. Second of all, "newculture" claims people would do stupid things if they had the credit they needed , as if the TBTF banks? have shown any kind of intelligence in handling the money they steal from us via the Fed.
By: Johnhoulgate. on 22 Nov 10, 07:58:17
I agree in principle with the concept of state banks that work for the people. I think she gets it wrong talking about the government needing to print more money to get things going. That is what causes inflation. That said, the biggest advantage of the state-owned bank is transparency.? When the owners are the people, the bank is fully accountable to them.