Canadian Appelate Court Rules Borrowing Maybe Illegal for the Bank of Canada
An amazing legal decision came down last week in Canada on Monday, January 26, 2015, in Toronto. Effectively, two individual Canadians and COMER COMMITTEE FOR MONETARY AND ECONOMIC REFORM confronted the government in the Canadian federal court. The Bank of Canada is wholly owned by the people of Canada for it was nationalized in 1938.
The Canadian Appellate Court has thrown out the punitive damage claims of COMER and allowed the Declaratory Judgment to proceed with respect to the constitutional authority of the current operations of the Bank of Canada.
While some are jumping for joy, the simple reality – this is a statutory challenge. That means the politicians can simply revise the statute and correct the problem. This is not a challenge on the legality of a government to even borrow money. There is a subtle yet important distinction legally speaking. A constitutional challenge to that authority is not likely to win. Historically, however, the King under common law HAD NO RIGHT to tax the people. He would have to summon Parliament to ask for its consent on behalf pf the people to levy taxes. Taxes were allowed ONLY to defend the nation in times of war. This naturally created the incentive for war. Over time, career politicians resulted in a switch of roles. No longer would Parliament truly represent the people, it became the government indistinguishable from the king.
Prior to the 13th century, the king made money exclusively by fining people, which were called “amercements”. At the time of Magna Carta, the right to a jury trial was established to stand between the king and the accused. The contemporary writers of the time said that there was hardly a man in England who had not been amerced once or twice a year for something. The king’s abuse of amercements became notorious and thus establishing rights was forced upon King John in 1215.
The question really becomes constitutionally, DOES THE STATE(King) have the right to tax the people? Is socialism really constitutional under equal protection of the law? The US Supreme Court upheld the proportionality of taxation without any real historical precedent. That decision was really a singleton in law and violated the democratic principles to begin with since the people never voted on such an issue. It was in Brushaber v. Union Pacific Railroad Company, 240 U.S. 1 (1916) when the Supreme Court indicated that the amendment did not expand the federal government’s existing power to tax income (meaning profit or gain from any source) but rather removed the possibility of classifying an income tax as a direct tax on the basis of the source of the income. The Amendment removed the need for the income tax to be apportioned among the states on the basis of population. Income taxes are required, however, to abide by the law of geographical uniformity. The court said: “the 16th Amendment provides for a hitherto unknown power of taxation; that is, a power to levy an income tax which, although direct, should not be subject to the regulation of apportionment applicable to all other direct taxes.” Therein, the Supreme Court allowed Marxism to overrule the Constitution of the United States by taking the negative position the 16th Amendment did not impose a proportionality test. This type of interpretation was actually unconstitutional for instead of strict interpretation, it use the broadest possible interpretation.
We can see the net result of the BRUSHABER decision – it allowed socialism and really communism to take hold in the United States where you own property only in name – the state can take more than 90% of all income if it desires.
So while people are celebrating this ruling in Canada saying mainstream media has been told not to report it, this ruling will eventually go nowhere for the argument does not cut off the right to tax or borrow. It may take a revolution for that to unfold in Canada and there are a lot of people who believe in socialism up there so it is hard to see a trend at this time emerging without the pain.
Australian Police Hiding in Woods to Catch Speeders
Australian police are really waging war against the public to raise money for government to fund their own salaries. They are Camouflaged hiding in the woods to catch speeders on the Geelong Ring Road. This is becoming a international sport – hunt down the people and shake-em down for whatever you can get.
Nonetheless, nothing beats Switzerland where they are totally unjust and insane when it comes to fining people and its all cameras. Switzerland is the most Draconian place in the world when it comes to fines. What they pretend to be low in taxes, they are the highest fining nation in the world. Just call it Swiss extortion. Switzerland doesn’t have fixed fines for speeding. Instead they use a formula similar to that in Finland where the fine is calculated based on the vehicle’s speed and the driver’s income. Yep – Marxism at its very best in the land that was born out of a tax revolt. They maybe should have remained under the Hapsburg rule.
Back in 2002, a Nokia executive Anssi Vanjoki had to pay a fine of $103,600 for going 47 mph in a 31 mph zone. This may be topped now by a Swedish man who was clocked at 180 traveling between Bern and Bern and Lausanne in Switzerland. In this latest incident, the driver faces a penalty of just over $1 million for traveling at the highest speed ever recorded on a public road in Switzerland. Apparently the SLS Mercedes escaped being clocked by several older cameras that are limited to 125 mph before finally being recorded by a new camera with a higher radar speed range. His excuse: The speedometer was faulty.
Lausanne is really insane. They have speed cameras set up and they drop the speed limit suddenly going into the city. I myself got a few tickets because in Switzerland, the camera goes off and you will get a ticket for 2 miles over the speed limit. This is something very hard to get use to for foreigners. They naturally take advantage and the fine will be based upon your income. Totally insane.
Danger of Politically Correct Analysis
The greatest danger we face is that far too often I am the only one saying something. Surely I cannot be the only person who comprehends the real trends. The danger we face is that those with experience on trading desks of fixed income and FX, see what I see, but cannot speak out. When you work for an institution, you cannot speak for whatever you say will be attributed to your employer.
This is the same problem with the mainstream media. There are good journalists who would like to write the truth but the editors upstairs grab the piece and shut it down or remove the truth. This is a common practice because the press is a big corporation that must knuckle down to whatever government demands.
In the end, muzzling those who would help to save the day is sealing our fate. I get a lot of emails from people in the business. They often take the theme that was great – I wish I could say that.
The bulk of people claiming to be analysts have no experience. They have never worked in the industry and never peeked behind the curtain. In the early 1980s, tips were often coming from government – hey we are about to raise rates. Forming the Euro, we have those opposed leaking papers to us to get the truth out.
Hopefully, when the crash comes, for once, lets call in people with experience. Not the heads of banks. Call the traders on the front line. They get to see the capital flows live. Political correctness will cost us our future and hide the truth about what is unfolding.
ECB’s Is NOT Stimulating Economy – Its a Bank Bailout
The ECB’s monthly spending will include its existing programs to buy covered bonds and asset-backed securities. However, of the added purchases, Draghi said 12% will be debt issued by European Union institutions and agencies, and the rest will be government bonds – 88%. Given the problem that the banks use government bonds for reserves and these are NOT marked-to-market, you can read between the lines and see this is buying in bad debt that is not worth the pretend face value to begin with. This is a continued bailout for the banks – NOT a stimulus plan for the economy. This will have ZERO impact upon saving European economy for the money will NEVER create a single job. This is a drop in the bucket for this group of assets amounts to about €2.7 trillion euros. This is reserves and they will swap the bad debts and switch to German bunds. They will be looking to change the way sovereign debt is held without mark-to-market accounting.
You do not have Daniele Nouy, the euro area’s top bank supervisor, coming out saying the loophole needs to be changed without Draghi buying in all the crap first. So sorry, this is a coordinated attack that will by no means create inflation, it is trying to save the banking system that is going down in flames. If Greece defaults, holy hell will be unleashed as a contagion in sovereign debt.Our Sources in Germany – Isolate Greece
Our sources in Germany are revealing the silent strategy will be to virtually not recognize the Greek Premier Alexis Tsipras pretending nothing really took place. They are employing the Putin strategy to Greece – our way or no way. German Chancellor Angela Merkel will avoid being drawn into any direct confrontation with Tsipras pretending that the EU knows best. While Tsipras will be at the European Union summit next week, they intend to really ignore him. This is the word we are getting behind the curtain. They want to now show Tsipras that he is isolated in Europe and he had better do as they tell him or else.
There also appears to be little room to provide further support for Greece without Greece yielding to EU demands. They remain skeptical about Tsipras’s claims that he can raise revenue by cutting corruption and increasing taxes on the rich. It is a shame that he is left wing for his warmed-over Marxist theories have been proven to be so wrong just looking at France. Tsipras is not willing to turn his rhetoric into real reform just yet so Greece will more than likely continue to slowly bleed to death until the people see nothing has changed. What then? Revolution?