The fed has almost 0 power over who gets bailed out. This is another common misconception. All the fed can do is set lower interest rates, and print more money, The fed has very little control over who gets "bailed out," from a direct monetary standpoint. Obviously this is somewhat up to debate because of loans to the banks, but the current times in history are definately an anomally, central banks do not typically operate in direct loans to specific businesses, they operate through money supply, which is supposed to be indiscriminate.
Federal Reserve: fact or conspiracy?
- Thread starter rselitetrader
- Start date
I think Debaser is referring to specifically those exceptional rare cases where there are specific decisions to be made "to bail or not to bail". In these cases, it's got nothing to do with monetary policy and interest rates.
Yeah, both you guys are probably right, rich people invariably recieve the bailouts.....but it aint based on th fed......
I just hate the conspiracies wrapped around the fed/central bankers...I tried to clear it up, and all i managed to achieve was a new sense of anger..... like i said before i will still be more than willing to answer questions in regards to central banking.....
Cheers debaser and martinghoul!!!
#
well i think the actual central bankers are serving the banks (from where they actualy come from).
we are in that mess because the cntral banks have artificially low interests (too cheap money).
so i dont see, where the CB are serving the people??? they need to get canceled
CLOSE CENTRAL BANKS, GIVE BACK THE POWER OF THE MONEY TO THE PEOPLE
This is the whole point, Greenspan fucked up just as every government agency does, if anyone had expressed fiscal responsibility we would not be in the mess we currently are. Greenspan went the total opposite direction in the mid 90's and cut rates to zero, and bernanke should have had rates over 10% in the mid 2000's. You wont hear arguments from me over that, it was no conspiracy, it was just due to the fact that they were all self serving pricks.
The fed, just like every other agency started serving themselves a long time ago. And this also refers to the central banks everywhere. My goal here was to dispel the myths that these institutions were being controlled behind the scenes.
I can assure you that if we dispelled the central banks altogether things would be ten times worse, giving the government direct control over intrest rates/money supply would be a disaster.
The fed, just like every other agency started serving themselves a long time ago. And this also refers to the central banks everywhere. My goal here was to dispel the myths that these institutions were being controlled behind the scenes.
I can assure you that if we dispelled the central banks altogether things would be ten times worse, giving the government direct control over intrest rates/money supply would be a disaster.
Sorry, who are these mythical "THE PEOPLE"? I have never met them... Don't you mean to say "give back the power of the money to the people's elected representatives, the politicians"?
I'll only agree to this if you solemnly promise me and guarantee that the politicians in Congress, immaculate paragons of virtue that they are, will do a better job than the central bankers with all the errors they have committed.
It seems that central banks are subject to the same problems as politicians. Politicians want to spend, and so far I see no evidence that the central banks is any hindrance to that whatsoever. So how is having a central bank curtailing any political influence?
On the other hand, Greenspan proved that the CB (and ALL its members!) can be swayed by a cult of personality. This is extremely dangerous and there is nothing that says it can't happen again. Insulated from the influence of the rest of the country, they can be and have been mired in groupthink.
Also - what if the Fed is actually providing cover for political wants/spending. How would we ever know?
Also, member banks start with an unfair advantage over all other real companies in that they get the cheapest financing of all from the Fed. They then act like they are profitable and reward their executives outrageously, when they should rightly be bankrupt. The Fed is financing their "profits" at the cost of the rest us. Some of those profits then flow into lobbying, so the CB is de facto financier for the banking lobby.
The distortion of saving what should have been failed banks has turned us Japanese. We should have done Sweden instead.
On the other hand, Greenspan proved that the CB (and ALL its members!) can be swayed by a cult of personality. This is extremely dangerous and there is nothing that says it can't happen again. Insulated from the influence of the rest of the country, they can be and have been mired in groupthink.
Also - what if the Fed is actually providing cover for political wants/spending. How would we ever know?
Also, member banks start with an unfair advantage over all other real companies in that they get the cheapest financing of all from the Fed. They then act like they are profitable and reward their executives outrageously, when they should rightly be bankrupt. The Fed is financing their "profits" at the cost of the rest us. Some of those profits then flow into lobbying, so the CB is de facto financier for the banking lobby.
The distortion of saving what should have been failed banks has turned us Japanese. We should have done Sweden instead.
I personally do not like the idea of a "Central Bank" as I have a few problems with their structure.
1....On the money they print it clearly states "Federal Reserve Note" in other words a promissory note ( IOU)
2....How do I as a forced lender to them verify that they are worthy of my credit granting
3....They have never allowed a thorough auditing of their books to see what condition they are in so as to apply a credit rating to them
4....The "Board of Governors" are appointed from a "Central Bankers" proposed list so any attempt at suggesting independence from the "Central Bank" is at best a conflict of interest or fairy tale
5....It is not possible for the "Central Bank" to have assets to satisfy all the IOUs they have in circulation
6....Through their money printing they have conspired with our idiot legislators to keep our country in debt and thus enslave us all
years ago when I sold a home, at the closing I had to accept a check drawn on one of the largest banks in the area. I immediately went to that banks headquarters and cashed the check. It took them over 5 hours to get enough cash to handle that one check (which I consider a small amount). That incident proved to me without any doubt that banking is nothing more than "Smoke and Mirrors" and no bank, S&L, credit union, etc is to be trusted with anything especially the financial future of ourselves and our world.
I agree with the others, do away with central banks allow our countries to be the only ones printing money and this will force our legislators to live within a budget, which will reduce government size, entitlements, power and FREE everyone on the planet from slavery including the idiot legislators.
btw...the Fed is NOT an agency as you pointed out earlier, and Greenspan , Bernanke, etc work for a private organization with private goals, agenda, etc...If you can please Name Names and beneficial owners of the banks (like an SEC filing)
To answer the thread title, "Federal Reserve: fact or conspiracy?" the Federal Reserve and our legislators have joined in a scheme of swapping one piece of paper for another but one of them is considered money. The legislators do this so that do not have to be fiscally responsible and the Federal Reserve "central bank" aids them in this, thus by my thinking there is a conspiracy or at best bad business practices by the Federal Reserve
LOL You pussy. It's a fucking animal. Do you cry when you eat steak because the poor cow was slaughtered?