Federal Reserve: fact or conspiracy?

[moarla]

Quote from Martinghoul:

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.

i am for free money. the best money will win. and that will decide the people.
Or its the dollar, the Deutsch Mark, the Remimbi, the xxx, gold, silver, wheat or what else.
AND the price for that money will befound in free markets NOT thrue central banks

 

[moarla]

Quote from Kassz007:

LOL You pussy. It's a fucking animal. Do you cry when you eat steak because the poor cow was slaughtered?

well i would like to love canadians, but only for this sneseless killing Canadians are big mother fuckers, nothing else

 

[Kassz007]

Quote from moarla:

well i would like to love canadians, but only for this sneseless killing Canadians are big mother fuckers, nothing else

Are you aware that thousands of Inuit make their living from the yearly seal hunt? Are you aware that there are many other countries that have their own seal hunt? Why is it OK to slaughter a cow but outrageous to kill a seal? Because it looks cute? The seal hunt is certainly not "senseless killing".

 

[MohdSalleh]

Quote from Retief:

I don't give a shit about Canada. It's a different country with barbaric laws, where people bash baby seals in the head with clubs for their white fur.

BABY killers!!!!!

 

[nutmeg]

Quote from Hello:

I can assure you that the vast majority of the stuff printed about FED conspiracies is bullshit, my old man was on the board of the bank of canada in the 70's, which is basically the Canadian version of the Fed and there was nothing corrupt going on there, the central banks are lined up the way they are for a reason, feel free to ask a question, .

Going forward can we expect more of the same- fact vs conspiracy (mis & dis information)?

What's new and different on the horizon?

Without going back specifically and checking the new Finance regs in effect, will the Fed Reserve have more "power". This power may be neither here nor there re effect, my question is: have we given the Fed more power or just by way of the new reg confirmed what has been policy all along?

 

[Hello]

Thx for the question, i will ask, cheers. My personal assumtion is the latter, and that we have just given the fed more power, but i will ask what the old man thinks.

Quote from nutmeg:

Going forward can we expect more of the same- fact vs conspiracy (mis & dis information)?

What's new and different on the horizon?

Without going back specifically and checking the new Finance regs in effect, will the Fed Reserve have more "power". This power may be neither here nor there re effect, my question is: have we given the Fed more power or just by way of the new reg confirmed what has been policy all along?

 

[nutmeg]

One more question.

There is a provsion re bonus for bankers to limit or rescind a bonus if institution fails. To me this look like someone is covering their ass for the next too big to fail. I would assume incorrectly that the new regs would not eliminate "too big to fail". So what is it? Is the new regs going to work or not?

 

[Hello]

Quote from nutmeg:

One more question.

There is a provsion re bonus for bankers to limit or rescind a bonus if institution fails. To me this look like someone is covering their ass for the next too big to fail. I would assume incorrectly that the new regs would not eliminate "too big to fail". So what is it? Is the new regs going to work or not?

Your asking a question which is not the feds duty, and this bring the entire problem to the forefront, people just do not understand the reason the central banking system is there, and thus they assume some giant conspiracy is going on.

 

[Martinghoul]

Quote from MarketMasher:
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?

Well, I don't know... Are you making this conclusion on the sole basis of what the Fed is doing? Moreover, even if you only look at the Fed, how can you say that, while Volcker is still alive and kicking? In the UK, Mervyn King is just about the only good thing that's happened recently. How about the Bank of Spain, which is the only reason the Spanish banks are still around (due to the prohibition from holding any structured credit product)?

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.

Well, groupthink has nothing to do with the Fed specifically. It has a tendency to infect any consensus-based system, including financial mkts, as we have seen.

Also - what if the Fed is actually providing cover for political wants/spending. How would we ever know?

Well, what if Britney Spears were an alien? 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.

What do you mean "member banks"? Any state-chartered bank can become a member of the Federal Reserve System (and most are) and get what you call "cheap financing". If you have a beef with the banks financing their profits at your expense, you have a beef with the entire US commercial banking system, rather than the Fed per se.

The distortion of saving what should have been failed banks has turned us Japanese. We should have done Sweden instead.

Hell, yeah, you'll get no disagreement from me there. However, if you look at what Sweden did, it wasn't just letting the banking system go.

 

[Hello]

Quote from MarketMasher:


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.

.

Greenspan and bernanke did, Dave dodge, (who ive met) and Mark Carney didnt, why do you think canadian banks came out basically unscathed?