Translate

Friday, July 13, 2012

A Simple Explanation of Securitization




JULY 13, 2012

This was originally written in terms of South African Rand, I've changed Rand into Dollars, and various British spellings for sake of clarity to American readers. I apologize for the lack of attribution, I do not know who the original author is. -Terran

A Simple Explanation of Securitization

It is the simple basic task of taking a whole pile of simple single things, joining them all together and calling the collective of them all a new thing, and then selling that thing.

In the banking sector its the taking of a bunch of loans, bundling them together, calling a group of 10 loans a 'structured investment vehicle', and then selling the 'structured investment vehicle' to someone else.

In the Stock Exchange it just taking a group of separate stocks, bundling them together, calling them a unit trust, and selling a unit trust.

In the insurance industry its just taking a bunch of insurance policies, grouping them all together, calling them a re-insurance group, and selling the re-insurance group.

The underlying common principle behind every one of these acts is that the new thing that is formed is not an actual physical thing, and therefore somebody is not paying for an actual physical thing and that is where the whole monetary system collapses.

It's the whole 'widgets in your hand' story.

If you have a factory making widgets and it makes 10 widgets and sells them for $1 each, then the factory has received $10 rand and somebody else has 10 widgets. If that someone else then bunches them together into a 'box of widgets' and sells "A box of widgets" to someone else for $15, then someone else has paid $15 for 10 widgets THAT ARE ONLY WORTH $10.

If that someone else ever tries to sell one of those widgets he has to ask $1.50 for it just to break even, but no-one will ever pay him $1.50 for it because they can buy it from the widget factory for $1.00 already, so at some stage someone will always end up sitting with something that he has paid too much money for that he cannot sell to anyone. And if that someone is a bank, who said to 10 customers give me $1.50 each so that we can buy this 'box of 10 widgets' for $15, and therefore the bank didn't use their own money, then the bank just turns round to those 10 guys and just says "sorry I've lost your money its not my problem its you who lose out, I'm alright jack because I just get paid a salary for going shopping for "boxes of widgets."  And those 10 customers who gave the bank their money are left sitting with a widget each that they have paid $1.50 for that anyone else can buy at the widget factory for only $1.00.


It doesn't matter if widgets are house loans, stock shares, insurance policies, personal loans, investments, rare paintings, whatever, and they call it securitization or re-insurance or unit trusts or underwriting or whatever, as long as somebody is taking AND DOING NOTHING TO IT (Adding no value) AND CHARGING SOMEBODY ELSE MORE FOR IT, THERE WILL ALWAYS BE AN END PERSON GETTING STUCK WITH IT WHO HAS PAID TOO MUCH FOR IT AND CANT GET HIS MONEY (OR THE PEOPLES WHOSE MONEY HE IS USING) BACK.

(Of course house prices going up and down and stock fluctuations and exchange rates all play a part but the above is the basic fundamental principle)

Of course all of this must never be confused with someone buying widget A (a car engine) for $1 and widget B ( a car body) for $1 and widget C (tires glass seats etc) for $1 and putting them all together to make widget D (a fully functioning car) and selling that for $5. In that instance the person buying widget D (a fully functioning car) IS GETTING SOMETHING THAT DIDN'T EXIST BEFORE so therefore its right to pay more for something that didn't exist before.

But with Securitization etc, THEY ARE NOT MAKING SOMETHING THAT DIDN'T EXIST BEFORE. There is no more widgets than there were before, there are no more houses than there were before, there are no more signed loan agreements than there were before, there is no more stocks or shares than there were before, there is nothing more than what was just there originally but somebody is paying more for just exactly what was there before, and that is where the system will always fall apart.

It's exactly the same as interest.

$100 exists

It sits in the bank
The bank lends 10 people $10 each
Still only $100 exists.
each person has to pay back $11 to the bank
They can't, $110 doesn't exist, it cannot be done.

They will keep paying until they have each paid $10 and then they are stuck, another $1 each DOES NOT EXIST to pay back.

So then the whole system will collapse.

That is a very simplified version and the borrowing goes on and on for decades before it all falls apart but the basic principle is the same.*

*Terran Note: this is also why under our current economic system there will always be losers, poverty, and unemployment, its a direct result of a system that by nature is not sustainable, since the banking system creates no real new net value, it only extracts value.




Editorial in Oil Industry Trade Magazine Focuses on LENR Threat



July 13, 2012

Note: LENR = Low Energy Nuclear Reaction (aka Cold Fusion)

Editorial in Oil Industry Trade Magazine Focuses on LENR Threat

July 7, 2012
Many thanks to reader Steve Jacobs who sent this comment today ( I just got home and approved it — all comments from first time posters are moderated)

“I am from the petroleum industry and LENR is now being watched closely. An article was just published in the July Journal of Petroleum Technology. I authored it. LENR is definitely on the radar.”

I was able to find an online version of the article which is a guest editorial in the JPT entitled “On the Precipice of a New Energy Source” co-authored by Steve Jacobs, COO of Decision Strategies, Patrick Leach, CEO of Decision Strategies, and David J. Nagel, CEO of NUCAT Energy.

Decision Strategies is a Houston, Texas based consulting firm that advises the petroleum, chemicals, and oilfield services industries. NUCAT Energy provides educational and consulting service in the field of LENR.

I thought the introduction was very thought provoking and appropriate. It starts out:
In the late 1850s, the whaling industry was in a veritable boom in the town of Lahaina on the Hawaiian island of Maui. Business was great and many in the whaling industry believed that increased demand would continue for decades to come. But in 1859 oil was discovered in Titusville, Pennsylvania by Edwin Drake. The rest is history.
That was 150 years ago. A small but increasing number of people around the world believe we are on a similar course, except that this time it is the petroleum industry that might be threatened.
The article then goes on to provide an overview of the history and current state of LENR, and discuss its very disruptive nature should it emerge as a useful source of energy.

The authors do not predict that LENR will definitely replace petroleum’s place as a primary energy source, but are willing to countenance that it is a real possibility. They emphasize that the petroleum industry needs to be prepared to deal with the possible disruptions that could come if LENR pans out to be a viable alternative energy source. They state:
If proven to work, what impact would LENR have on the petroleum industry? It is difficult to say for certain, but it would undoubtedly be significant. The vast preponderance of oil is used for transportation and heating which would now be competing with LENR. While there would still be need for petroleum chemicals and other applications, collectively these end uses represent less than about 20% of each barrel. Natural gas would not fare much better; its main applications are heating and electricity. If LENR works the impact on the petroleum industry, power generation and coal industry would be enormous.
It’s quite a significant thing in my opinion, for an article like this to be published in a respected publication in the petroleum industry. The Journal of Petroleum Technology is the official magazine of Society of Petroleum Engineers. I would not be surprised if this starts a conversation among professionals in the oil industies, and leads to more attention being paid to the emerging LENR story.

To read the article you will need to go to this link, http://www.mydigitalpublication.com/publication/?i=116298and choose ‘Contents’ from the menu at the top. The article begins on page 18.

Wednesday, July 11, 2012

Tuesday, July 10, 2012

🛸 What My Father Saw in World War II



July 10, 2012

My father saw these in WWII as a P-38 fighter pilot. He dive bombed German supply trains and munitions factories.   He also saw German built jet aircraft breaking the sound barrier.

This clip is a fictional account from the Steven Spielberg TV mini-series "Taken" (not to be confused with a very different Liam Neeson movie by the same name). Its very much like dad described of a mission over Germany, while I working for him during my high school summer break.

Dad always believed UFOs were real. He saw them.  My heart jumped when I saw this sequence on TV. Remember these men had no preconceptions of UFOs, they didn't know what they were.

WWII pilots called them "foo-fighters", perhaps a corruption of French words "le feu" for "the fire",Wikipedia has an article on foo-fighters here.

After seeing this clip I realized the remarkable youth my father had. Unfortunately he had passed away when this aired. I was unable to ask him questions.  Do we every really know who our parents were?






Dad in front of his P-38 Foggia Italy

Sunday, July 8, 2012

💰Salmon Portland Chase,
Ended overt US human slavery,
began human debt slavery.


Salmon P. Chase's Portrait on the $10,000 bill.
July 8, 2012

"Poof" (who posts on Rumor Mill News) mentioned something about how our current situation goes back to the Civil War, and I believe that is indeed true.  This is a little bit of research I did last year, I don't claim its complete, there's much I am still learning but I noticed neither Benjamin Fulford nor David Wilcock have gone into this part of American history all that much.

From my personal research the civil war is the start of the circumstances that inserted the cellophane wrapper of the corporate US of A between the people and the Republic and the organic US Constitution.  The USA went bankrupt with the costs of the Civil War and the USofA lacked liquidity after the crash that resulted from pumping and dumping of the Railroad stocks by the Rothschilds and allied bankers. U.S. Grant did a deal with the devil, the Rothschild bankers, to regain liquidity of finances.

Salmon P. Chase, a Senator from Ohio who opposed Slavery, was made Secretary of the Treasury in Lincoln's administration.  He was also later a Supreme Court Justice.   Chase, as US Secretary of the Treasury, introduced our paper money system and created the first market for US Bond sales (government debt) with Jay Cooke and Company, who operated a telegraph based bond marketing system across the USA.  Cooke and Company partners were later involved in some serious financial scandals.

The "greenback" as a demand note, got its start in 1871-1872 during Chase' tenure. A demand note is a loan with no set period of payback.  Salmon P. Chase's portrait appeared on the now discontinued $10,000 note and he was the man to add the words "IN GOD WE TRUST" to our money.


Terran note 8/22/2020: The phrase "IN GOD WE TRUST" is not a reference to trusting the providence of God/Source.  Its a reference they are using a legal trust that is funded by inbodyments of Source (aka the Children of God),  This is a form of hidden in plain sight disclosure.  Very few get what it really means. 

🛸 UFOs over Hollywood - 7/8/2012

July 8, 2012