Issue: Economic: On the Federal Reserve

[G-khan]

It's possible, if we can get the Federal Reserve, other Central Banks, World Bank and the Bank for International Settlements to cooperate in the transition, of course they'll be wondering what's in it for them that they would give up such a valuable resource as the U.S. Economy.

You just can't take half of the red pill, you have to swallow the whole thing.

But I suppose we could just have the Treasury Department start printing notes under their name to replace the Federal Reserve notes and continue on as if we've accomplished something grand and high minded.


.

All the banks IMF etc. all are one and the same.. The Fed makes money on what the US Gov. borrows and the discount rate it gives to its member bankers who are the shareholders.. It sets the requirements of the fractional bankers normally about 10% and the Fed discount rate to its members.

When it sets the requirements it is saying to its members you must have 10% in their books on hand. So say you come in and sold a boat for 20,000 bucks and deposit it! The bank can then create a loan for say 180,000 for someone to say buy a house. The banks themselves create this new money out of thin air.. and charge you interest on it.

The banksters run the world and finance all the wars.

We gave the Fed (banksters) the right to create money from nothing. The Fed has nothing to back anything they just have the right to create money and charge interest.

How would you like the right to be able to create money from nothing and then loan it out and collect interest on it.

We should create our own money and collect our own interest and we would not need taxes. Why do the banksters get it?

Thomas Jefferson
I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. Already they have raised up a monied aristocracy that has set the government at defiance. The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people to whom it properly belongs.

 

[Carl]

All the banks IMF etc. all are one and the same.. The Fed makes money on what the US Gov. borrows and the discount rate it gives to its member bankers who are the shareholders.. It sets the requirements of the fractional bankers normally about 10% and the Fed discount rate to its members.

When it sets the requirements it is saying to its members you must have 10% in their books on hand. So say you come in and sold a boat for 20,000 bucks and deposit it! The bank can then create a loan for say 180,000 for someone to say buy a house. The banks themselves create this new money out of thin air.. and charge you interest on it.

The banksters run the world and finance all the wars.

We gave the Fed (banksters) the right to create money from nothing. The Fed has nothing to back anything they just have the right to create money and charge interest.

How would you like the right to be able to create money from nothing and then loan it out and collect interest on it.

We should create our own money and collect our own interest and we would not need taxes. Why do the banksters get it?

Thomas Jefferson
I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. Already they have raised up a monied aristocracy that has set the government at defiance. The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people to whom it properly belongs.

Yes, I understand all that but they're not doing all of this from a home made hooch built in the woods someplace. Also, the banks hold real assets as part of debt collateral and acquisitions. They acquired these assets in exchange for the use of their FRN’s, give them back their FRN’s in exchange for the assets they hold.

I think it is a fair deal.


.

 

[G-khan]

Yes, I understand all that but they're not doing all of this from a home made hooch built in the woods someplace. Also, the banks hold real assets as part of debt collateral and acquisitions. They acquired these assets in exchange for the use of their FRN’s, give them back their FRN’s in exchange for the assets they hold.

I think it is a fair deal.


.

Their FRNs? You mean they gave us paper for land and houses and such..

I sure wish I could print numbers on paper and trade them for a lake home!

Please tell me what real assets banks hold - bullion banks and the IMF have gold?

 

[fsk]

Yes, I understand all that but they're not doing all of this from a home made hooch built in the woods someplace. Also, the banks hold real assets as part of debt collateral and acquisitions. They acquired these assets in exchange for the use of their FRN’s, give them back their FRN’s in exchange for the assets they hold.

I think it is a fair deal.

The banks hold real assets because they used their money-printing power to confiscate real assets.

For example, suppose banks collectively lend out $1 trillion at 5% interest for a year. A year later, $1.05 trillion needs to be repaid. However, there's only $1 trillion in circulation, because in the Federal Reserve System money is only created when a loan is taken out. There's a $50 billion shortfall, so either the banks foreclose on $50 billion worth of assets, or more loans are issued to keep up the money supply.

When money is only created by the issuing of loans, the only possible outcome can be that the aggregate indebtedness of society increases exponentially over time. The only time debt gets canceled is bankruptcy. In bankruptcy, banks convert their loans to real assets.

This process is facilitated by the expanding and contracting of the money supply. When interest rates are raised, fewer new loans are issued. The money supply contracts as more loans are repaid than new loans issued. By statistical necessity, some borrowers are forced into bankruptcy. The banks confiscate assets during bankruptcy. When interest rates are lowered, more loans are issued, and the money supply expands. Now, the banks sell back some of the assets they confiscated when the money supply was tight.

In the long run, the only possible outcome can be for banks to eventually own practically anything. The sum total of all debts is far greater than the sum total of the money supply. This means that the wealth confiscation rate can be carefully calibrated so that wealth is confiscated nearly as fast as workers produce it.

Under these economic conditions, are the assets owned by banks and the banks' owners really valid? Is their claim to this property legitimate?

I'd be satisfied if the Federal Reserve was abolished or reformed and their ability to confiscate wealth eliminated. Let them keep what they already stole and let people start working under a fair monetary system.

The end of the scam may be near anyway, even if Ron Paul is not elected President. The money supply is expanding at a rate of more than 6% per year, according to the Federal Reserve's M2. Interest rates are now 5.25%. That means the effective real interest rate is less than -0.75%. Real interest rates have to be negative just to insure enough borrowing occurs to keep the money supply up.

 

[G-khan]

@fsk Looks like we agree.... Thanks for explaining more, it seems you have a good grasp of it..

 

[AaronAbel]

Theres an -->interesting thread<-- in this techie forum, some calling Ron uneducated regarding economics and gold.

I've tried with these guys before, maybe someone more eloquent and knowledgable take a stab?

Rainsford basically hangs himself with his own words:

the value of oil and gold can't be controlled or linked to a constantly changing economy

That is exactly the point of hard money, central bankers can't manipulate it to make themselves richer and us poor. He believes central planning is superior to a market economy. Really no point in arguing with him until he realizes the central bankers only see him as a serf.

I haven't found a way to help people who believe a bunch of secretive bankers planning the economy from a marble palace is a good idea.

 

[beermotor]

We need to be consistently pushing the point that a hard currency system effectively BARS the government from committing all the atrocities that it does. It is the Federal Reserve which allows the government to do all of the socialist horsehockey that has caused us so many problems, internally and externally. The Founding Fathers were right, Lincoln (and FDR, et al.) were wrong, etc. I mean, this is common sense. But people haven't heard it before - you gotta educate them!

Just because we'd be on a gold standard doesn't mean you would never have banks or be able to borrow money! It means the GOVERNMENT would be constrained from taking such aggressive actions...

 

[Carl]

Their FRNs? You mean they gave us paper for land and houses and such..

I sure wish I could print numbers on paper and trade them for a lake home!

Yes, I wish I could do that as well, but I went to a bank and they printed numbers on a piece of paper for me to borrow and use instead.

Please tell me what real assets banks hold - bullion banks and the IMF have gold?

Yes, there is that too but....

The actual holders of the lake home is the bank and by extension the Federal Reserve who issues the FRN's which also gave the bank the power to create.

I think that it is only fitting that the original creators of the Federal Reserve System should be made responsible for the redemption of the FRN's. J. P. Morgan Company, First National Bank of New York, Kuhn, Loeb & Company now Lehman Brothers etc, etc, etc, to include anything associated with the Rockefellers.

They created the system, it’s their FRN’s, they can have them back in exchange for the assets they hold which they acquired using FRN's.

 

[Carl]

What fsk said!

 

[RonPaul4President]

I'd be satisfied if the Federal Reserve was abolished or reformed and their ability to confiscate wealth eliminated. Let them keep what they already stole and let people start working under a fair monetary system.

I wish that "could" happen but it can't. There lust for wealth and power is insatiable. If they had even an ounce of reason they would not impoverish the entire planet. They're sickos. Logic and reason is moot.

 

[Gee]

I wish that "could" happen but it can't. There lust for wealth and power is insatiable. If they had even an ounce of reason they would not impoverish the entire planet. They're sickos. Logic and reason is moot.

Ehh, a number of Fed chairmens have stated they weren't able to keep inflation under control with congress demanding more money for their programs. I seriously doubt your average Fed employee is any more "evil" than your average government employee. The problem is systemic, otherwise it could simply be fixed by putting the right people in charge.

Central banks employ a large number of the world's economists, and its hard to speak out against your employer. Even still, I'd bet a lot of them think central banks are necissary. Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity.

 

[RonPaul4President]

Ehh, a number of Fed chairmens have stated they weren't able to keep inflation under control with congress demanding more money for their programs. I seriously doubt your average Fed employee is any more "evil" than your average government employee. The problem is systemic, otherwise it could simply be fixed by putting the right people in charge.

Central banks employ a large number of the world's economists, and its hard to speak out against your employer. Even still, I'd bet a lot of them think central banks are necissary. Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity.

Have you seen the youtube movie Freedom to Fascism? The whole thing? I agree the problem is systemic but Congress is helpless. They have lost their power to legislate us out of this mess.

 

[fsk]

The Federal Reserve Chairman is going to be asking "Should we raise interest rates?" or "Should we lower interest rates?".

The Federal Reserve Chairman isn't going to be asking "Should we let the free market determine interest rates?". He isn't going to question the fundamental nature of the price-fixing cartel he's running.

 

[Bob Cochran]

Of course, I doubt that getting rid of the Fed is a realistic prospect. Maybe in Ron Paul's second term, but not in his first.

Right. We have issues like unintended consequences and throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

I would rather see overhauls in government spending....like pork spending. John McCain said in the last debate that he'd make famous the politicians who tack pork onto bills...but I don't believe him.

I also believe that we need to maintain a superstrong military, but be extremely careful how we deploy them. We DON'T want to try to maintain an omnipotent military at ANY cost, which seems like our current policy.

One benefit to our current adventure in Iraq is that our next half-generation of military people will be trained by those who have seen real combat. This is very important in maintaining a strong military.

I was in the Army in the early to mid 80s. The Korean war era guys were mostly gone, and the Vietnam guys were getting close to retirement. But we got GOOD training from guys like my senior drill sergeant, who had served in Vietnam, and several of my senior NCOs and officers in Germany who had also done Nam tours. Those guys knew what it was all about, were very professional, and worked hard to make sure we were ready to fight, but prayed that we would not have to.

And let me say that, even though I didn't know it at the time, Ronald Reagan was a GREAT Commander in Chief. He knew we had to be ready to fight, but wanted to keep us out of fights if possible. That's the kind of guy you want. NOT a dry drunk like Dubya who has to swagger around the world and kick everyone's butt so he'll be feared.....or whatever his deal actually is. It's painful to watch.

Sorry for that....this thread is about the Fed..... I get carried away.

 

[fsk]

I thought that Ron Paul was quoted in one debate as saying he would eliminate the Federal Reserve and IRS during his first two weeks in office.

 

[Gee]

Have you seen the youtube movie Freedom to Fascism? The whole thing? I agree the problem is systemic but Congress is helpless. They have lost their power to legislate us out of this mess.

Yeah, I've seen the whole thing. I don't know if I'd call that movie terribly factual, though.

fsk, Ron Paul has said he wants to allow competition with it, by legalizing other forms of currency, not actually abolish it outright. Just like he talked about with the USPS on the Daily Show, the best way to transition these things is to allow competition, and let the market decide.

 

[Mr. Green]

The Fed is pretty much pure evil and I think it's time to put it out to pasture. And as far as inflation goes, there is only one way that inflation is caused: PRINTING MONEY.

This happens a lot with the Federal Reserve because they give the government loans out of thin air. They say, "You need 2 billion dollars?" they print 2 billion dollars and they make sure more money is printed so they can be paid the interest as well as the original loan.

They pretty much control the media, the government, and thus they control the knowledge and actions of most Americans. It's a disgusting situation and the only way it can be stopped is to shut them down.

Ron Paul is the ONLY politician who even brings this up much less the only politician who would shut them down.

 

[Mr. Green]

Yeah, I've seen the whole thing. I don't know if I'd call that movie terribly factual, though.

It was VERY factual.

And it is truly disturbing that all that information is out there about the Fed and this unconstitutional regulation being passed-- and NO MAINSTREAM MEDIA reports on it!

So that says quite a bit about mainstream media...

 

[fsk]

Suppose Ron Paul doesn't get elected President. Then what happens? Is this group of supporters going to just dissolve?

I don't like the idea that the Federal Reserve and IRS collectively steal 50% or more of what I produce, through inflation and taxation. Is there anything I can do about it?

Are there any viable options for someone who wants to do productive work, but not report all their activities to the government? The huge government spying apparatus would make it very risky to do this sort of thing. It may not be worth the risk of being hassled by the IRS if you get caught. However, when you take into account the effect of taxes and inflation, I'd only have to get paid half as much for grey market work for it to be worthwhile.

One interesting solution I read about was the idea of a grey-market economy. People can do productive work and get paid in barter, without having to report their activities to the government for taxation. Currently, the only hidden economy is illegal activities such as drug dealing. I'd like to do work that is otherwise legal, but not report it for taxation.

Another idea I had was setting up a corporation or trust. People would have their assets be owned by the trust instead of individually. The bylaws would respect everyone's individual property rights. Since the assets are in the trust, instead of individually held, transactions between trust members might not be taxable. I'm not a lawyer, so I don't know if that would work. Normally, really wealthy people set up trusts to avoid taxes. I was wondering if it was viable to set up a trust for the collective benefit of many people.

 

[Mr. Green]

One interesting solution I read about was the idea of a grey-market economy. People can do productive work and get paid in barter, without having to report their activities to the government for taxation. Currently, the only hidden economy is illegal activities such as drug dealing. I'd like to do work that is otherwise legal, but not report it for taxation.

Many people get paid under the table but I think that, like you said, is very risky and maybe not worth the hastle. It just depends. I suppose if everybody did it and refused to be bullied by the IRS, there would be nothing anybody could do about it. This is our government afterall. It only makes sense that we would be able to bypass the IRS completely.

I do believe that is a major reason that the Federal Reserve is working so hard through the government to put the US on a credit system. It appears as if the Real ID act is merely a stepping stone in which everyone must eventually have an RFID chip put into their body (they already have the technology) and nobody could spend or recieve money, or in this case credit, without it.

ALL money could be taxed and all debt could be collected without your permission. For a example, waiters and waitresses can keep cash tips without reporting them or paying tax on them. They cannot do this with credit cards however. Under a credit system ALL transactions will automatically be reported and taxed.