Reinstatement of the Bank of Canada.

[ZenOps]

http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-case-to-reinstate-the-bank-of-canada/5430132

Seems to have won. Which should technically mean that Canada can reinstate debt free money issuance (no interest money printing) like we used to have before 1974.

Unknown to many, most nations around the world have a debt based monetary structure (its printed right on the US dollar bill) For most of US history, they have paid 6% to the Federal reserve for every dollar printed.

I'm very surprised this passed. It does mean that they have essentially taken off a major restriction in Canadian money printing. This is a "not friendly" stance to foreign nations, and could be considered an economic act of war to some. Probably in retaliation for the $720 Billion printing by Japan and $1.1 Trillion by the ECB.

[Arash Boodagh]

The Plaintiffs state that the defendants (officials) are unwittingly and /or wittingly, in varying degrees, knowledge and intent engaged in a conspiracy, along with the BIS, FSB, IMF to render impotent the Bank of Canada Act as well as Canadian sovereignty over financial, monetary, and socio-economic policy, and bypass the sovereign rule of Canada through its Parliament by means of banking and financial systems.”
What Beyond-ers think.
http://i.imgur.com/AYlHUhe.jpg

[JRSC00LUDE]

No, no one but you thinks that. :nut:

[BigMass]

in theory a separate central bank promotes fiscal responsibility and a sounder foundation for fiat currency valuations as it promotes price discovery through interest rates on the "free market". If a government could print it's own currency without any cost, our dollar would become worthless faster than you can say "Zimbabwe". In the end both systems in practice are terrible because elites within central banks collude with elites in government and only really function as a middle man getting rich doing nothing more than shuffling money around at the expense of regular citizens that have no say in the process. So really, this wouldn't accomplish anything of real value and would most likely make things worse. It's like being shot with a Barrett 50 caliber, putting a bandage over the hole in your body then trying to find different ways of rearranging that bandage to make things better. Sorry buddy, you're dead.

[Nitro5]

Mumbo is the worst kind of jumbo

[Arash Boodagh]

@BigMass
So you're saying no country today prints its own money because if they did, their economy would be in shambles like Zimbabwe and their currency run?
Do you think Rothschild banks then print ever countries money?

[ZenOps]

I don't know if this is a good or bad thing.

Having a debt based currency (at around 6%) was a great way to spur international trade, where everyone could invest in a little piece of each nation on earth.

As things progressed after the crash, banks have been pegging and depegging to other currencies. Sovereign banks have gone on well documented printing runs of unimaginable size (Japan 25%, or $720B in one year) Ruble instability is back as well.

[suntan]

Originally posted by BigMass
in theory a separate central bank promotes fiscal responsibility and a sounder foundation for fiat currency valuations as it promotes price discovery through interest rates on the "free market". If a government could print it's own currency without any cost, our dollar would become worthless faster than you can say "Zimbabwe". In the end both systems in practice are terrible because elites within central banks collude with elites in government and only really function as a middle man getting rich doing nothing more than shuffling money around at the expense of regular citizens that have no say in the process. So really, this wouldn't accomplish anything of real value and would most likely make things worse. It's like being shot with a Barrett 50 caliber, putting a bandage over the hole in your body then trying to find different ways of rearranging that bandage to make things better. Sorry buddy, you're dead. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nixon_Shock

[v2kai]

wow, was completely unaware of this legal battle despite the far reaching impact it will have. I can't believe mainstream media is unaware of this case, begging the question why it is being omitted from the news stream. glad this was posted up
:thumbsup:


Originally posted by BigMass
in theory a separate central bank promotes fiscal responsibility and a sounder foundation for fiat currency valuations ...

the key part of what youre saying is 'in theory' which I think can be readily agreed upon is not what we see in the real world.

[suntan]

Only a few central banks are considered arms length. Most are not. Even the EU central bank cannot make policy on its own.

[MGCM]

guess Canada is butt hurt about all this oil business crap, wish I could just print money whenever something didnt go my way.


Originally posted by v2kai
wow, was completely unaware of this legal battle despite the far reaching impact it will have. I can't believe mainstream media is unaware of this case, begging the question why it is being omitted from the news stream. glad this was posted up
:thumbsup:

simply put, the government controls the media, period.

[ZenOps]

The Crown has 60 days to appeal, which does mean that the Queen herself might just clamp down.

Which has more power, legislative or judicial?

[BerserkerCatSplat]

Originally posted by v2kai
wow, was completely unaware of this legal battle despite the far reaching impact it will have. I can't believe mainstream media is unaware of this case, begging the question why it is being omitted from the news stream. glad this was posted up
:thumbsup:


The reason this hasn't been reported on is that there's really nothing to report. The whole case is extremely preliminary and the plaintiff's claims have been struck down repeatedly based being very broad and vague.

From another site:



The Committee for Monetary and Economic Reform (COMER) has filed suit against Canada, suggesting that the Bank of Canada has failed in a constitutional duty to provide interest-free loans for government expenditures. This claim is based on a strict reading of the Bank of Canada authorization act (to interpret what is now considered an ability as an obligation), and the underlying rationale that this would be a good idea comes from heterodox economics. It reminds me of the original Social Credit movement, actually.

In 2013, upon initial review the movement's claims were struck down (http://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/item/62535/index.do) (2013 FC 855) by the case management officer as not justiciable (basically not matters that the courts can deal with).

That decision was appealed (http://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/item/72554/index.do) (2014 FC 380). Upon review, the judge found that the claim was still far too broad and it was struck in its entirety, but the decision gave the plaintiffs leave to amend their claims to address failings. Taking a glance at the decision, this may be a tough task, since the furthest-reaching claims were the ones that were most problematic.

Now, that was also appealed. This is as far as I can get with the claim of "just sued the Bank of Canada and won," except that as far as I can tell the exact opposite happened. The appeal in question appears to be 2015 FCA 20[5] , where reasons were delivered from the bench (rather than having judgement reserved and released later). Both the appeal (to have the claims un-struck) and the cross-appeal by Canada (to have the claims entirely dismissed) failed; the judgement from 2014 FC 380 stands.

Now, no final win (or loss) has yet happened. COMER can amend its claims and re-submit them to the Federal Court. Upon doing so, Canada can also file a motion to have those claims dismissed. Essentially, COMER has been given a redo-from-start.

There does indeed appear to be no mainstream media reporting on this issue, but I also wouldn't expect there to be. Since all court filings in this case have been extremely preliminary, there is no actual legal ruling (or even impending legal ruling) that could possibly change the state of law in Canada. The media reports only rarely when people file suits, and even then the appropriate time for such reporting would have been in 2012-2013.


By far the most likely outcome is that the plaintiff's claims will be rejected again and the case will have no implications whatsoever. It's unlikely they'll even be given leave to appeal to the SCC.

[ZenOps]

For reference on the appeal:

http://decisions.fca-caf.gc.ca/fca-caf/decisions/en/item/100762/index.do

I think thats the one anyhow.