Additional Titles









The Difference Between Wealth and Profit











By Marilyn M. Barnewall
April 18, 2009

When one reads the glowing mainstream media reports covering the G-20 meeting, one would think it was all about whether Michelle Obama offended UK citizens by putting a friendly arm around the Queen’s back. Some seem to be charmed by the action.

It is verboten to touch the Queen. It should be verboten for a sitting American president to take something as stupid as an iPod to another head of state as a gift – but it isn’t and the Obamas took one to the Queen. It’s the old “class” vs “style” question. The Obamas have style.

Like most things it covers, the press appears committed to keeping Americans entertained rather than informed – and far too many Americans appear to like it that way. They enjoy being uninformed. It’s so much more fun to live life unaware that the world you are leaving your children will enslave them to perpetual debt – depending on your age, possibly you, too.

I have said for many years that the greatest problem Americans as a people have is their tendency to be reactive rather than proactive. After so many crises, you would think we would learn. The truth is, any intelligent group would learn from past errors if, indeed, it wanted to learn. I have also said that the most serious challenge this country faces regarding its sovereignty is that the global economy being openly created by multi-national companies with no loyalty to a single country would be used to back us into world government.

That, too, may have happened at the G-20.

To be proactive requires people to pay attention to what is happening and take steps to prevent those things that will have a negative impact on their nation. To be reactive is to read the news each day and, using information most people know to be far from reliable, begin wringing one’s hands and tearing at one’s hair and talking about how we need to change things. Oh. I forgot. It was “change” that got us into this problem in the first place, wasn’t it? The only methodology that has ever preserved freedom within governments is the proactive approach.

Did a man who many people say is ineligible to be President of the United States hand over the sovereignty of this nation’s economy to the Europeans at the G-20 meeting? Oh. You hadn’t heard? Well, when loan policies and interest rates are dictated by the International Monetary Fund (IMF), perhaps your mainstream media newspapers will get around to reporting it. Perhaps then you’ll have time to react to the seriousness of what has happened.

The Financial Stability Forum (FSF) was established in April of 1999. Its job was to promote international financial stability through information exchange and international co-operation in financial supervision and surveillance. Since the entire world is in economic crisis, we could logically assume the FSF has not done a very good job.

However, like most things government produces, poor performance is always deserving of reward. The FSF has now been upgraded to the Financial Stability Board (FSB). Its job is to tell American bankers how to run their organizations – maybe even say who can and who cannot qualify for loans, regardless of credit qualification. Perhaps you have a bumper sticker on your car that is pro-U.S. Constitution or you have taken a gun training course recently. If it can make you a potential terrorist in Missouri, surely it can make you a poor credit risk?

And, its job is to tell companies how much executive pay can be granted to various executives who shoulder certain responsibilities (those who get too much pay can have a negative impact on a company’s credit rating, after all). It will tell all companies, not just a few. That means Mom and Pop stores as well as the multi-nationals.

Who oversees this new regulatory body?

Mario Draghi, governor of the Bank of Italy, will Chair this new group. Since it is no secret just how badly run the Italian economy is (and has been for some time), I guess this central bank bureaucrat will immediately set off to equalize the rest of the world with the Italians. The secretariat is based at the Bank for International Settlements' headquarters in Basel, Switzerland. Everything today is communitized and equalized.


According to a new press release, the group created on April 3, 2009 in London by the G-20 will monitor potential risks in the world economy. It will pay particular attention to the biggest firms, and will conduct "early warning exercises" and periodic reviews to spot potential trouble. Because under this new socialist system everyone will cooperate with everyone else, the FSB will cooperate with the IMF (which will cooperate with BIS – the Bank of International Settlements – and the World Bank). The IMF, of course, already monitors member countries' financial health, lending funds if needed. I still haven’t figured out under which desk the IMF has been hiding since the American economy began its downhill run in 2007. However, FSB duties include the reportage of any threats to the stability of the global financial system. If they find a threat, they will report it immediately to the G20 finance ministers, the IMF and central bank governors – the same people who seem incompetent in their handling of the current world financial crisis. Wow! Does that make me feel better, or what?

In short, it appears the IMF will be our new “global” central bank. Now that’s an objective it’s had since the day it was born – that, and a global currency.

You may ask, “What’s wrong with that? In this global economy, don’t we need global controls to prevent the kind of world crisis in which we now exist?”

And that is precisely how the powers that be want you to feel. Congratulations! You have just passed an early warning system test that seeks to determine how easily a global regulatory body can be established to control finance worldwide. If people will allow globalists to control their money, it’s a slam-dunk they will let them control their government.

What’s wrong with global government?

Look around the world. Can you tell me any single nation’s government that is compatible with the government of any other sovereign nation? The Brits can’t agree with the French about anything. The Germans disagree with everyone – they always have. They all dislike the way capitalism works in America – they’re jealous of our standard of living.

That means socialism and communism are the only forms of government with sufficient power to force the people to accept the changes required for global governance.

Nations have competing interests. That’s the way it’s supposed to be. A nation that becomes non-competitive loses its position in world markets. When citizens suffer a reduction of lifestyle, they become unhappy with the government running the country and vote the jerks out of office. They want legislators that will make them more competitive. This causes productivity to move higher rather than lower.

Americans are being taught that there is something wrong with competition. Not only is there nothing wrong with competition, everything is right about it. In case you haven’t figured it out yet, it is the people who are afraid of competition that want socialism. Socialism minimizes the need to compete. It is the insecure who find solace in the thought of a socialist state! This is who the people of the world want as leaders?

I guess we might add to the above that socialism has never worked anywhere it has been attempted. Before we think “change” is such a hot ticket item, we might want to become better informed about precisely what kind of change the new leadership in Washington, D.C. has in mind.

Regardless, it seems President Obama has agreed to let American financial institutions do the bidding of the new Financial Stability Board.

It seems the world’s bankers have executed a bloodless coup and now represent all of the people in the world.

Who do they really represent? They certainly do not represent the peoples of the various nations of the world. They’re the ones who elect people to be responsive to their needs. The U.S. Constitution, for example, makes Congress responsible for managing the finances of this country. Has a sitting President of the United States just erased another paragraph from the legal documents our founders gave us to protect us from precisely what is happening? Even though Congress has for years ignored the financial responsibilities given it by the Constitution, they always maintained a respectable form of subterfuge about it. President Obama agreed at the G20 meeting in London to create an international board with authority to intervene in U.S. corporations by dictating executive compensation and approving or disapproving business management decisions.

Subscribe to the NewsWithViews Daily News Alerts!

Enter Your E-Mail Address:

Under the new Financial Stability Board, the United States has only one vote. In other words, the group will be largely controlled by European central bankers. My guess is, they will represent themselves, not you and not me and certainly not America.

Hmmm. As I think about it, European central bankers may be the only group of people less qualified to handle financial crises than American central bankers.

� 2009 Marilyn M. Barnewall - All Rights Reserved

Sign Up For Free E-Mail Alerts

Marilyn Barnewall received her graduate degree in Banking from the University of Colorado Graduate School of Business in 1978. She created the first wealth creation (credit-driven) private bank in America in the 1970s. Prior to her 21-year banking career, she was a newspaper reporter, advertising copywriter, public relations director, magazine editor, assistant to the publisher, singer, dog trainer, and an insurance salesperson and manager.

She was named one of America's top 100 businesswomen in the book, What It Takes (Dolphin/Doubleday; Gardenswartz and Roe) and was one of the founders of the Committee of 200, the official organization of America's top 200 businesswomen. She can be found in Who's Who in America (2005-08), Who's Who of American Women (2006-08), Who's Who in Finance and Business (2006-08), and Who's Who in the World (2008).

Web site:











Like most things it covers, the press appears committed to keeping Americans entertained rather than informed – and far too many Americans appear to like it that way.