SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Strategies & Market Trends : Booms, Busts, and Recoveries

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: smolejv@gmx.net who wrote (25480)11/17/2002 10:31:19 PM
From: Haim R. Branisteanu  Read Replies (1) of 74559
 
"Great trust in government managing wealth" was even then

On 23rd November 1938 the executives of Berlin's major banks - the Reichskredittgesellschaft and
Berliner Handelsgesellschaft additional to the three banking houses, that are still active today,the
Dresdner, Commerz and Deutsche, - met in the Ministry of Economic Affairs to discuss "the situation
resulting from the Jew legislation" and to hear about of the decision onthe "complete transfer of
real-estate properties and securities out of Jewish hands, first into state and possibly later into private
hands". Additional six billion Reich marks were thus expected, a steady stream of additional income
for years to come. German banks granted no more loans to Jews, because technically speaking they
became a bad risk. Therefore, in order to come up with the obligatory dues, they had to sell securities,
jewelry and real estate.

That made the bankers nervous, since they feared an "uncontrolled and unprofessional run-up" in sales
of equities and thus the danger of a "stock market dislocation". After all the subject was for those times
a " gigantic block of securities" at the market value of 1.5 billion Reich marks. They wanted, that the
goods were to be sold "slowly and under appropriate cultivation of the market", with the restriction
however, that "the course risk of any kind is not to be shouldered by the banks". Regarding the
technical execution they stated: "We suggest, that to avoid any unnecessary work in the public trust
offices, where the stock certificates are deposited at the moment, they be put in trust for the Reich
Treasury and be later sold in the name of the Reich financial administration in an orderly and
professional manner, depending on the situation in the capital markets." But the Hitler state was broke.
Reich bank board of directors has already been warning for a long time against "unlimited swelling of
the public expenditures", which",in spite of tremendous squeeze of the tax screw,"... forced ..." the state
finances to the edge of the collapse" . In this situation the banks offered " to grant the Reich finance
administration the option of appropriate prepayment for (Jewish , author) securities, under conditions,
which should not be that difficult to agree upon" . That's also what also happened..

The heads of major German banks in this case did not act as robbers,however very much as a the
robber's sidekick, as the accommodating organizers, who made sure, that the process of expropriation
unraveled in a most effective fashion. Furthermore they exposed their hypocritical side. They
transformed the take of the robbery into cash. For this breach of trust and betrayal of their customers
Deutsche bank for example deducted half a per cent of sales commission plus transfer expenses,
payable by their Jewish customers. Also, the additional trade with securities, temporarily put under
state control, animated the business and opened up the possibility of privileged trading for their own
account. The main point however was, that the proceeds flowed into the German treasury and reduced
the load for the public. The same applied naturally also to life insurances, whose contractually
specified buy-back values were also transferred to the Reich treasury.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext