×

Notice

The forum is in read only mode.
×
July 2017 ~ Archival of WFS Public Forums (18 Jul 2017)

Archival & restoration complete!
After two weeks of intense attention these forums are restored and my job is done, only two days late.
New moderators and admin will be introduced after this years General Assembly.

Members are encouraged to attend WFS General Meeting 2017.
Contact and Linking information available on wfs.me

Waiver of Protest, Presentment, and Notice of Dishonour

  • Sharpwise
  • Sharpwise's Avatar Topic Author
  • Offline
  • Newbie on the Land
  • Newbie on the Land
More
5 years 10 months ago #106960 by Sharpwise
Sharpwise created the topic: Waiver of Protest, Presentment, and Notice of Dishonour
Hey everyone,

I've been wondering about my rights of Presentment, Protest, and Notice of Dishonour in regards to the agreement I have with my bank.

In looking at the agreements several OTHER Canadian banks have, I've seen that many of them include a waiver similar to the following(This one is from TD):


10. Waiver of protest - You waive presentment, protest and notice of dishonour on all Instruments which we receive in any way for discount, deposit, collection or acceptance on your account. You will be liable to us for any Instrument received for your account as if it were presented, protested and given notice of dishonour in the usual way.


What I'm wondering, is whether or not my bank(Bank of Montreal) has a similar waiver? Though I don't understand all of the implications of this waiver, I can't seem to find it at all in my agreement.

I asked the bank for ALL of the terms/conditions for the relationship/contract I have with them, and they pointed me to the following:

www.bmo.com/pdf/Agreements_EDB_EN.pdf
and
www.bmo.com/pdf/BBG_Retail_EN.pdf

I've read them both, and though its possible that I'm just blind, I can't find such a waiver anywhere.

I have a meeting with the branch manager on Monday. If anyone can see something I can't, or has any other suggestions of what I should ask/discuss with the branch manager, the help would be much appreciated.

Thanks in advance!
  • Sharpwise
  • Sharpwise's Avatar Topic Author
  • Offline
  • Newbie on the Land
  • Newbie on the Land
More
5 years 10 months ago #107022 by Sharpwise
Sharpwise replied the topic: Re: Waiver of Protest, Presentment, and Notice of Dishonour
Bump? Anyone? No thoughts?
  • verynewtothis
  • verynewtothis's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Freeman on the Land
  • Freeman on the Land
More
5 years 10 months ago - 5 years 10 months ago #107023 by verynewtothis
verynewtothis replied the topic: Re: Waiver of Protest, Presentment, and Notice of Dishonour

Sharpwise wrote: From this PDF
www.bmo.com/pdf/Agreements_EDB_EN.pdf

I. Personal Account Agreement
By applying for an account you agree to the following terms :

1) General Terms and Conditions

a. Deposits

Point 2a (page 1)

We may require deposits to comply in all respects with all applicable by-laws, rules, regulations and standards of the Bank (That means that YOU AGREE that the BMO Bank has the right to decide as to what constitutes a deposit and as to what DOES NOT constitute as a deposit. So, you see that the BMO Bank has NO need to have you WAIVE any of your rights, because you already WAIVED those rights BY AGREEING TO GIVE the BMO Bank the right to decide as to what constitutes a deposit FROM YOU in THEIR EYES.) and/or the Canadian Payments Association.
Last Edit: 5 years 10 months ago by verynewtothis.
  • verynewtothis
  • verynewtothis's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Freeman on the Land
  • Freeman on the Land
More
5 years 10 months ago - 5 years 10 months ago #107024 by verynewtothis
verynewtothis replied the topic: Re: Waiver of Protest, Presentment, and Notice of Dishonour
SOME MORE STUFF ;) :(

I. Personal Account Agreement
By applying for an account you agree to the following terms :

1) General Terms and Conditions

Point 8 (page 1)

• We may apply a credit balance in any of your accounts with us against any debit
balance you may have in any other of your accounts with us. We may do so without
first giving you notice
(sound familiar) and regardless of whether the accounts involved are joint or
individual accounts. This right is in addition to any rights which we may have at
common law with respect to set-off or consolidation of accounts.

Point 11 (page 1) (there goes the ORIGINAL instrument of indebtedness in its original form) NOT SURE! :unsure: :unsure: :unsure: :unsure: :unsure: :unsure: :unsure: :unsure:

• You acknowledge that digital or electronic representations of cheques and other
payment items may be made and used by financial institutions, including the Bank,
and we may elect to provide such digital or electronic representations of cheques or other payment items to you, in which case the original paper item may be destroyed
and not returned to you
.
We are entitled to act upon such a representation for all
purposes as if it were the paper item.
Last Edit: 5 years 10 months ago by verynewtothis.
  • Sharpwise
  • Sharpwise's Avatar Topic Author
  • Offline
  • Newbie on the Land
  • Newbie on the Land
More
5 years 10 months ago #107026 by Sharpwise
Sharpwise replied the topic: Re: Waiver of Protest, Presentment, and Notice of Dishonour
See, this is why I posted/asked here first. Thanks for pointing this out, this kind of dry legal non-sense is like a blind spot. Written in a way you can be staring straight at, and still not see it.


I'm wondering if I should just cancel my meeting, or go in anyway?

Unlike with those other banks, if I haven't waived my right to presentment, I can still present the bank with a negotiable instrument, even if they may not accept it.

So here's another question; If I did present such a negotiable instrument to them, and the bank DID choose to accept it, and then they tried to deposit/present(correct term?) it to the Bank of Canada, would the Bank of Canada HAVE to honour it?

I guess what I'm driving at is; Is ONE of the reasons that they almost certainly WON'T accept it, because they, in turn, are unlikely to be able to get anything for that negotiable instrument?
  • verynewtothis
  • verynewtothis's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Freeman on the Land
  • Freeman on the Land
More
5 years 10 months ago - 5 years 10 months ago #107027 by verynewtothis
verynewtothis replied the topic: Re: Waiver of Protest, Presentment, and Notice of Dishonour

Sharpwise wrote: Unlike with those other banks, if I haven't waived my right to presentment, I can still present the bank with a negotiable instrument, even if they may not accept it.YES, of course and the so-called bill is legally paid. To tired now to try and explain to you adequately WHY....SORRY about that! ONLY if the bank and you agree that Point 2a (page 1) is NON APPLICABLE…CAN’T SEE THAT HAPPENING, though!

So here's another question; If I did present such a negotiable instrument to them, and the bank DID choose to accept it, and then they tried to deposit/present(correct term?) it to the Bank of Canada, would the Bank of Canada HAVE to honour it? The answer to that question will DEPEND greatly on the NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT used and for what purpose. I will say it again, that I am to tired right now to trying to explain to you adequately as to WHY....again SORRY about that!

I guess what I'm driving at is; Is ONE of the reasons that they almost certainly WON'T accept it, because they, in turn, are unlikely to be able to get anything for that negotiable instrument? YES, I believe that is exactly why and I also believe that it has a great deal to do with control. You know control of us through this debt based financial system that is currently put into place.

Last Edit: 5 years 10 months ago by verynewtothis.
The following user(s) said Thank You: silent witness de jure, freshrom
  • Sharpwise
  • Sharpwise's Avatar Topic Author
  • Offline
  • Newbie on the Land
  • Newbie on the Land
More
5 years 10 months ago #107036 by Sharpwise
Sharpwise replied the topic: Re: Waiver of Protest, Presentment, and Notice of Dishonour

verynewtothis wrote:

Sharpwise wrote: Unlike with those other banks, if I haven't waived my right to presentment, I can still present the bank with a negotiable instrument, even if they may not accept it.YES, of course and the socalled bill is legally paid. To tired now to try and explain to you adequately WHY....SORRY about that! ONLY if the bank and you agree that Point 2a (page 1) is NON APPLICABLE…CAN’T SEE THAT HAPPENING, though! There is no bill. I would essentially be trying to deposit the negotiable instrument into my account. Presumably, I received it from someone else who owed me for some service, and paid me with such an instrument.

So here's another question; If I did present such a negotiable instrument to them, and the bank DID choose to accept it, and then they tried to deposit/present(correct term?) it to the Bank of Canada, would the Bank of Canada HAVE to honour it? The answer to that question will DEPEND greatly on the NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT used and for what purpose. I will say it again, that I am to tired right now to trying to explain to you adequately as to WHY....again SORRY about that! If you could provide more info tomorrow, when not so tired, that would be much appreciated. Is there any instrument that the Bank of Canada could NOT refuse?

I guess what I'm driving at is; Is ONE of the reasons that they almost certainly WON'T accept it, because they, in turn, are unlikely to be able to get anything for that negotiable instrument? YES, I believe that is exactly why and I also believe that it has a great deal to do with control. You know control of us through this debt based financial system that is currently put into place.Yeah, I understand the control motive, hence why I emphasized 'ONE of the reasons'. The thing is, it seems that for all of this stuff, you essentially have to find other people within the system who will follow the law for the right reasons, as opposed to stonewalling you at every opportunity they can. If the bank isn't going to get paid/can't redeem the instrument I give them for government money, they DEFINITELY aren't going to accept it. However, if they could redeem it, well at least that is one less reason for them to refuse it. Thanks again!

  • verynewtothis
  • verynewtothis's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Freeman on the Land
  • Freeman on the Land
More
5 years 10 months ago - 5 years 10 months ago #107044 by verynewtothis
verynewtothis replied the topic: Re: Waiver of Protest, Presentment, and Notice of Dishonour

Sharpwise wrote:

verynewtothis wrote:

Sharpwise wrote: Unlike with those other banks, if I haven't waived my right to presentment, I can still present the bank with a negotiable instrument, even if they may not accept it.YES, of course and the socalled bill is legally paid. To tired now to try and explain to you adequately WHY....SORRY about that! ONLY if the bank and you agree that Point 2a (page 1) is NON APPLICABLE…CAN’T SEE THAT HAPPENING, though! There is no bill. I would essentially be trying to deposit the negotiable instrument into my account. Presumably, I received it from someone else who owed me for some service, and paid me with such an instrument. Well The Supreme Court of Canada , in its ruling in:

Duplain v. Cameron et al., [ 1961] S.C.R. 693

http://scc.lexum.org/en/1961/1961scr0-693/1961scr0-693.html
- Per Locke J dissenting, referring to the Bills of Exchange Act, states:

“...that ALL persons throughout Canada may FREELY contract by BILLS OF EXCHANGE, promissory notes and cheques...”
(this part is from me) If, NOT for the banks , in your case the bank of Montréal’s (the BMO`s) ABILITY to NOT EXCEPT those bills of exchange as a DEPOSIT and then, because of this NON DEPOSIT, turn those bills of exchange into legal tender money. So, that the people of Canada will know that they can use those bills of exchange as actual cash in our daily lives. AGAIN The ONLY way I can see this working is if, the bank of Montréal (the BMO) and you agree that Point 2a (page 1) is NON APPLICABLE...AGAIN I CAN’T SEE THAT HAPPENING!

Last Edit: 5 years 10 months ago by verynewtothis.
  • Sharpwise
  • Sharpwise's Avatar Topic Author
  • Offline
  • Newbie on the Land
  • Newbie on the Land
More
5 years 10 months ago #107047 by Sharpwise
Sharpwise replied the topic: Re: Waiver of Protest, Presentment, and Notice of Dishonour
I know that I have the right to contract with BoEs, but do they have a duty to accept them? Does the Bank of Canada?
  • verynewtothis
  • verynewtothis's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Freeman on the Land
  • Freeman on the Land
More
5 years 10 months ago - 5 years 9 months ago #107049 by verynewtothis
verynewtothis replied the topic: Re: Waiver of Protest, Presentment, and Notice of Dishonour
REVISED by ADDING WHAT I THINK are NEEDED PASSAGES

Sharpwise wrote: ... do they (the banks) have a duty to accept them (negotiable instrument)?
Does the Bank of Canada (have a duty to accept) them (negotiable instrument)?

YES, on both counts! I recommend that you lissen to what Robert of the Menard family says to do at this LINK public.worldfreemansociety.org/index.php...-consumer-purchasers concerning consumer purchasers. According to the Bank of Canada Act, which is An Act respecting the Bank of Canada. Under section 18 concerning its Powers and business www.canlii.org/en/ca/laws/stat/rsc-1985-...985-c-b-2.html#sec18 , after you have CLICKED on this LINK, scroll DOWN to subsection (o) which states :
"The Bank may" "accept deposits of money that are authorized or required by an Act of Parliament to be transferred to the Bank, and, in accordance with that Act, pay interest on money so deposited and pay out money to any person entitled to it under that Act ;
and

YES, according to the FINANCIAL ADMINISTRATION ACT, which is the act which governs the financial administration of the Government of Canada, the establishment and maintenance of the accounts of Canada states quite plainly that a negotiable instrument, which is a bill of exchange by the way, is MONEY here in Canada. Check out this LINK laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/F-11/page-1.html#h-2 Scroll DOWN to “money” and “negotiable instrument”.

According to section 18 subsection (o) of the Bank of Canada Act, which shows me quite well that in order to stimulate the economy of Canada, THAT IT DOES NOT JUST fall on the heads of the private sector. But, I do believe that in reality it needs to be under a kind of joint venture, whereby the private financial sector entities HAVE to accept these Negotiable Instruments for DEPOSIT from their clients and on presenting those Negotiable Instruments, through transfers to the Bank of Canada from these private financial sector entities in order for these private financial sector entities to HELP their clients to pay their daily life bills. Basically, the private sector works in tandem with the Bank of Canada in order to achieve this economic stimulus. I believe that this economic stimulus will be achieved solely through the acceptance of these Negotiable Instruments by the private sector and the Bank of Canada.

I almost forgot this:

Canada's federal government has sole jurisdiction for banks according to The Constitution Act, 1867 (30 & 31 Victoria, c.3 (UK)), formerly known as the British North America Act, 1867, specifically Section 91. subsection 15. http://www.canlii.org/en/ca/laws/stat/30---31-vict-c-3/latest/30---31-vict-c-3.html#sec91 .
- Section 91. subsection 15. of the British North America Act, 1867 was included in the 1982 Constitution Act of Canada www.canlii.org/en/ca/laws/stat/schedule-...82-uk-1982-c-11.html

THE MAIN FEDERAL STATUTE for the INCORPORATION and REGULATION of BANKS, or CHARTERED BANKS, is the Bank Act [S.C. 1991, c.46] which is the charter of and applies to each bank lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/B-1.01/index.html example of this:

Application of Act

lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/B-1.01/page-7.html#h-5
Section 13. of the Bank Act states:
This Act is the charter of and applies to each bank.


Schedules I, II and III of this Act list all banks PERMITTED to operate in Canada under these three distinct categories:

Schedule I banks lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/B-1.01/page-362.html#h-237 are the TRUE domestic banks of Canada, these banks are allowed to accept deposits and which are NOT subsidiaries of a foreign bank and are the only banks allowed to receive, hold and enforce a special security interest lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/B-1.01/page-137.html#h-67 described and provided for under the Bank Act.

Schedule II banks lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/B-1.01/page-363.html#h-238 are banks that are allowed to accept deposits and which are subsidiaries of a foreign bank and

Schedule III banks lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/B-1.01/page-364.html#h-239 are foreign banks PERMITTED to carry on business in Canada laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/B-1.01/page-199.html#h-108 . Unlike the Schedule I and Schedule II banks, the Schedule III banks are NOT INCORPORATED under the Bank Act, but are still REGULATED by the Bank Act laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/B-1.01/page-199.html#h-108 .

Section 91. subsection 15. Banking, Incorporation of Banks, and the Issue of Paper Money.

I just want to ADD this:

According to The Supreme Court of Canada , in its ruling in:

R. v. Big M Drug Mart Ltd., [1985] 1 SCR 295

www.canlii.org/en/ca/scc/doc/1985/1985ca...69/1985canlii69.html
Scroll down to the section named “Standing and JURISDICTION ” number 38, referring to the 1982 Constitution Act of Canada] www.canlii.org/en/ca/laws/stat/schedule-...82-uk-1982-c-11.html , which states quite plainly that "Section 52 sets out the fundamental principle of constitutional law that THE CONSTITUTION IS SUPREME "

Primacy of Constitution of Canada
www.canlii.org/en/ca/laws/stat/schedule-...11.html#sec52subsec1
52. (1) The Constitution of Canada is the supreme law of Canada, and any law that is inconsistent with the provisions of the Constitution is, to the extent of the inconsistency, of no force or effect .

Charter
A charter is the grant of authority or rights, stating that the granter formally recognizes the prerogative of the recipient to exercise the rights specified. It is implicit that the granter retains superiority (or sovereignty), and that the recipient admits a limited (or inferior) status within the relationship, and it is within that sense that charters were historically granted, and that sense is retained in modern usage of the term (My questions are then “Who grants this authority to the banks in Canada? and Who grants these rights to the banks in Canada?…could it be the Canadian FEDERAL government.). Also, charter can simply be a document giving royal permission to start a colony.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charter

YES again, the bank of Canada has a DUTY to accept negotiable instrument. Check this out:

verynewtothis wrote: According to section 18 subsection (g) part (i) of the Bank of Canada Act [B-2] states:
http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/B-2/page-7.html#h-10

(g) for the purposes of CONDUCTING monetary policy or promoting THE STABILITY of the Canadian financial system,

(i) BUY and sell FROM or to ANY PERSON any securities and ANY other FINANCIAL INSTRUMENTS ,
- OTHER THAN instruments that evidence (demonstrate or proves) an ownership interest or right in or to an entity - that comply with the policy established by the Governor (of the Bank of Canada) under subsection 18.1(1), and

But, because of this:

Policy established by Governor
http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/B-2/page-8.html#docCont
18.1 (1) the Governor (of the Bank of Canada) shall (must) establish a policy for the purposes of subparagraph 18(g)(i).

Section 18 subsection (g) part (ii) of the Bank of Canada Act [B-2] states:
http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/B-2/page-7.html#h-10

(ii) if the Governor (of the Bank of Canada) is of the opinion that there is a severe and unusual stress on a financial market or the financial system, BUY and sell FROM or to ANY PERSON any securities and ANY other FINANCIAL INSTRUMENTS , to the extent determined necessary by the Governor (of the Bank of Canada);

Well, according to section 18 subsection (g) part (i) of the Bank of Canada Act. Which shows to me that ANY PERSON (I just hope that this ANY PERSON is in reality, any Natural Canadian Person) doesn’t have to DEPOSIT any of these Negotiable Instruments into any private sector financial institution FIRST in order for these said PERSONS to access the Bank of Canada, in order to get that bank to issue cash or to pay any supposed bill that those Negotiable Instruments were created by you for. Then that created cash can be DEPOSITED in any private sector financial institution by way of a financial transfer, for future use by that said PERSON. According to section 18.1 subsection (1), ALL this is contingent on the POLICY that HAS to be ESTABLISHED by the governor of the Bank of Canada.

I believe that this WILL give YOU something very BIG to THINK ABOUT:

SO THEN. WHAT IS THE OPINION OF the Governor, in which HE DETERMINED IT WAS NECESSARY, TO STAVE OFF a severe and unusual stress on THIS financial market or THIS financial system. BY NOT ALLOWING the BANK of CANADA TO BUY and sell FROM or to ANY PERSON any securities and ANY other FINANCIAL INSTRUMENTS :?:

GOVERNMENT DIRECTIVE
http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/B-2/page-6.html#h-6

Consultations

Section 14. subsection (1) The Minister (of Finance) and the Governor (of the Bank of Canada) shall (must) consult regularly on monetary policy and on its relation to general economic policy.


Minister’s directive

Section 14. subsection (2) If, notwithstanding (If, in spite of) the consultations provided for in subsection (1), there should emerge a difference of opinion between the Minister (of Finance) and the Bank (of Canada) concerning the monetary policy to be followed, the Minister (of Finance) may (can if he wants to), after consultation with the Governor (of the Bank of Canada) and with the approval of the Governor in Council (which is composed of a Governor, a Deputy Governor and twelve directors, who are appointed by The Minister of Finance , to fill vacant seats on the Board for a three-year term http://www.bankofcanada.ca/about/faq/ , all this should be done in accordance with this Act laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/B-2/page-2.html#h-4 ), give to the Governor (of the Bank of Canada) a written directive concerning monetary policy, in specific terms and applicable for a specified period, and the Bank (of Canada) shall (must) comply with that directive.

In other words:

In the event of a disagreement on broad policy between the Governor of the Bank of Canada and the Minister of Finance, the Minister of Finance HAS THE RIGHT with the approval of the Governor in Council (which is composed of a Governor, a Deputy Governor and twelve directors, who are appointed by The Minister of Finance , to fill vacant seats on the Board for a three-year term http://www.bankofcanada.ca/about/faq/ , all this should be done in accordance with this Act laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/B-2/page-2.html#h-4 ), where the Governor of the Bank of Canada HAS TO COMPLY or CONFORM TO the Minister of Finance`s DIRECTIVE .

If that does not add up to the good old capitalistic definition of ownership,
i.e. non-independence from the Federal Government,
THEN WHAT DOES?

[/quote]

JackieG wrote: Note the word: "SHALL".
Now, we look to the Interpretation Act for the definition....
http://www.canlii.org/en/ca/laws/stat/rsc-1985-c-i-21/latest/rsc-1985-c-i-21.html
Imperative and Permissive Construction
http://www.canlii.org/en/ca/laws/stat/rsc-1985-c-i-21/latest/rsc-1985-c-i-21.html#sec11
Shall” and “may
11. The expressionshallis to be construed as imperative and the expression “may” as permissive.
R.S., c. I-23, s. 28.

And what is the meaning of "imperative" :?:
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/imperative
im·per·a·tive   
[im-per-uh-tiv] Show IPA
–adjective
1. absolutely necessary or required; unavoidable: It is imperative that we leave.
2. of the nature of or expressing a command; commanding.
3. Grammar . noting or pertaining to the mood of the verb used in commands, requests, etc., as in Listen! Go! Compare indicative ( def. 2 ) , subjunctive ( def. 1 ) .
–noun
4. a command.
5. something that demands attention or action; an unavoidable obligation or requirement; necessity: It is an imperative that we help defend friendly nations.
6. Grammar .
a. the imperative mood.
b. a verb in this mood.

And also what is the meaning of "permissive" :?:
www.thefreedictionary.com/permissive
adj.
1. Granting or inclined to grant permission; tolerant or lenient.
2. Permitting discretion; optional.
3. Archaic Not forbidden; permitted.

An Act respecting the Bank of Canada

Preamble

[url] http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/B-2/page-1.html [/url]

WHEREAS it is desirable to establish a central bank in Canada to regulate credit and currency in the best interests of the economic life of the nation
By the Bank of Canada allowing this DEBT based monetary system to be the ONLY financial system for ALL Canadians to use, without challenging it with the Negotiable Instrument system, which is NOT a DEBT based system, by the way. That this action taken by the Bank of Canada, leads one to ask this simple question: Does the Bank of Canada really do this in “THE BEST INTEREST OF THE ECONOMIC LIFE OF THE NATION”? Considering that the people of Canada are in a VERY BIG WAY what makes up the Nation of Canada.
I also thought, as do many people here in Canada think that the Bank of Canada was founded on the principal of HELPING the people of Canada…NOT TO PUT THE PEOPLE of Canada INTO DEBT and have them spend most if, NOT ALL of their life struggling to get out of that DEBT.
So, in your opinion do you think that the Bank of Canada really does this “FOR THE BEST INTEREST OF THE ECONOMIC LIFE OF THE NATION”?...Personally, it seems to me that the answer to this question should be NO!
...


THEREFORE, His Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate and House of Commons of Canada, enacts as follows:

I just want to ADD this:

If the use of Negotiable Instruments did cause Inflation, all the Government needs to do in order to counter this inflation is just collect Tax Money that it then takes out of CIRCULATION/USE, thus reducing the Money Supply and restoring its VALUE.
And/or,
If the use of Negotiable Instruments did cause Deflation, which is the phenomena of falling wages and prices. All the Government would have to do is quite simply SPEND more Money into existence.

Last Edit: 5 years 9 months ago by verynewtothis.
Moderators: UserAbuser
Time to create page: 0.407 seconds
Powered by Kunena Forum