A Call for a new Dealing Place

[Sapphire Capital]

May be you will find this posting wrong or annoying but I give it a try anyway.

The US and the EU in their effort to go after funds related to tax fraud and money laundering have weaved a net of regulations which makes it difficult to do transactions in currencies such as YEN, EURO, USD, CHF and STG without either filling out a bunch of papers, providing tax information or otherwise waiving all privacy. Under the guise of anti-terrorism and anti drug operations the economic freedom is ceasing to exist, creating a free operational area only for the very big players and even that only in parts and pieces.

I'm calling for a new start, a new form of financial transaction set up which should allow again the wheeling and dealing of old within reason and common sense. I believe that the way to go is starting over bank operations on the level of trust banking, abandoning central bank clearing through governments and a negation of fractional reserve banking.

Bank like institutions should be recreated on the base of members only and cooperative structures allowing the freedom of a club like environment where like minded people do their transactions.

Let me know what you think, even if you do not like it.

[discerningeye]

you have not included GBP, RMB, HKD, et al, and other currencies that borrow from their central banks?

Will be absolutely a new start in the envisioned system, everything will be like for like. One unit for one unit. No way to create money/ debt out of the thin air.
Looking at the pragmatism side of it, if you attract masses towards the new system, then you will upset the big daddy who has had power and the control over the masses as many eons as you can go back, and now, it's control over the power, money/debt is being threatened, and wielding it's power, it will step in and take away the freedom again.

Another aspect of this is: since you will inhibit the creation of the money (as a debt) in the new system, you will curtail the growth of the economy, development of the infrastructure, local and the international trade, research/ development of just about everything. If you look as why the 'developed' or the 'technological advanced' nations in the west were able to surge ahead against the rest of the world, then you will observe that everything was developed on the basis of IOU, abilities to create money/ debt out of the thin air. Otherwise, all of the world would have been at the same level field now.

On the positive note, trust banking, strictly for it's members, doing everything within it's structure and keeping it strictly private, can work. But, when you want to have access to the public portals, and get into public domain, then you make yourself vulnerable again and be at the mercy of 'organised' system. But, if you don't use the public system, you are fighting with your hands tied in the back. The public system is so prevalent in our lives that without it, it will be like living in times where everything was moved physically and then you can not move at the pace you are so used to.
If you are looking to create the system for the select few and do not upset the big daddy, then an excellent model, in closing and respectfully speaking.

[Noor]

Interesting discussion - but maybe instead of calling the system "big daddy" it should be called "big holy mommy" considering the products and activities big banks have been laundering.

However, could any of you explain the following:

1)How would a non-public entity such as a trust enable you to survive and make long-term profits despite the presence of big global players out there?

2) What guarantee/s would you give someone interested in your proposal that your trust won't involve the same games played by the big banks or be just a vector to re-channel the same activities?

3) What type of investors would be interested in your proposal and what screening criteria would you use in order to select your clients?

It seems that the high secrecy level involved in this trust model will expose both you and the potential clients to a variety of unpleasant surprises, to say the least

[Sapphire Capital]

Noor,

There are transactions and investments possible, always have been, the private way has created some extensive wealth, risks as well but also very positive results. Guarantees that the trust is not falling in the same pits as banks? hm, its member based, so members control and have the say, if they want to risk it, than thats their business, however its checks and balances within the trust and its officers. Plenty of interest already, however the screening criteria would be set up by the members, remember: By invitation only!
Sure there are always bad apples but you can work on the surprises to keep them in the low area.

[Sapphire Capital]

Discerningeye,

sure in the beginning it will be a few select, but cooperative banking can be for the broader membership base. In regards of the money and economy, sure there will be less money creation but there will also be investment as the members want it.

I'm just suggesting a different set up than the global system is now, there will be interlacing for sure but the banks are already loosing out on the big players, some investors have created a private exchange run by themselves.

[Noor]

Nov 18, 2012 20:45:14 GMT 4 Sapphire Capital said:

Noor,

There are transactions and investments possible, always have been, the private way has created some extensive wealth, risks as well but also very positive results. Guarantees that the trust is not falling in the same pits as banks? hm, its member based, so members control and have the say, if they want to risk it, than thats their business, however its checks and balances within the trust and its officers. Plenty of interest already, however the screening criteria would be set up by the members, remember: By invitation only!
Sure there are always bad apples but you can work on the surprises to keep them in the low area.

Thanks for your clarification. We are living at times when both terms like Rex Publica or even Democracy do not have the ethical meaning or ideal they used to have in the past, anyway. Political platforms are ever changing and abuses are everywhere rampant, that it makes it very difficult to know who one is really dealing with in business or in other life matters. It is indeed easy sometimes to be lured by the huge public size of some entities thinking they are safer, without knowing what these big players have in store at the end of the day.

[discerningeye]

Sapphire - the model of which you are proponent is interesting and refreshing considering it is strictly a trust and it's members only, and that too with invitation only. So, the risk is addressed and mitigated between the members only and no outsiders; no need to step into unchartered waters. However, the investment returns and the model of the investment which works with one's appetite can be sorted out between the members.

Another aspect need to be considered, which can be of paramount importance is the jurisdiction. More or less, all jurisdictions are still within the reach of the tentacles of the central power that controls the respective currencies through it's delegated central or governing body of the currency. Since, all the central governing bodies are cooperative and on friendly terms with each other, you are still at their mercy, should you choose to use one of their currencies.
Just the right balance has to be found as how much one needs to be in the public domain vis-a-vis with private structure.

With too big to fail banks, they are controlled and monitored by the jurisdictions they sit in and also where their headquarters are. All centralised. No independence here. Just from the facade perspective, they seem to make decisions, but it is all a sham. If you are too big, then you are 'in', and not on the outside; whoever is on the outside can lose out.

So, in essence, the new structure and smaller institutions with manageable risk and investment growth as how members desire (not the whimsical returns) is a way to go. Just like family offices are like the new kid on the block and works even for the big boys.

[Noor]

Are you talking about a Family Trust model? Any steady success stories behind this model?

[Sapphire Capital]

discerningeye,
You are right that there is always the jurisdiction and government rules. But I learned over the years that governments seem not to care to much as long as the business is not for the public, sure there are rules and regulations, but they can be used for protection in countries which have due process (not the US because due process without common sense creates abuse).
Interesting that you mention the Family office, Remember when the Family LP came about, you know what more or less made that one difficult? lawsuits between family members and taxes.
Guess that means there has to be an arbitration facility for the members as well when American's are engaged (may be they are out for any financial engagement?!)