Look Jem, I just accept what the Fed itself posts about ownership and Structure of the Federal Reserve System. It is that simple. Read again what is written on the Fed's website. That is exactly my position on ownership of the Federal Reserve System, i.e., it is not owned by anyone. What is evasive about that? If you think they are lying that's OK with me.
Tax Cuts and Revenue
- Thread starter Spike Trader
- Start date
Seems like a good background in financial journalism, but I don't see anything in his background that would make him particularly qualified to be Fed Chairman. Why would you pick him? Neither of us is qualified, but I'd be the better Chairman, because I'd have enough sense to call up Soros and ask him what to do
.
Seems like a good background in financial journalism, but I don't see anything in his background that would make him particularly qualified to be Fed Chairman. Why would you pick him? Neither of us is qualified, but I'd be the better Chairman, because I'd have enough sense to call up Soros and ask him what to do
As I mentioned before, Bernanke has frequently invited him to the Federal Reserve to give speeches on interest rates and their impact on the greater economy.
But you think you'd be a better chairman. I kinda figured you'd say that.
The fact that you have no idea who Jim Grant is shows how incomplete your training and experience is in economics. It's not that you know him and have several key points with which you disagree with Grant - that I could accept. I purposely picked him because he is the best known individual out there who has an alternative view of the Federal Reserve, and the fact that you don't know who he is speaks volumes as to your familiarity (or lack of, actually) with the subject of the Federal Reserve, interest rates, and their effect on the economy.
that did not answer the question. But... after removing the red herrings that confuse you... the website it does say....
the operating arms of the nation's central banking system, are organized similarly to private corporations...
For example, the Reserve Banks issue shares of stock to member banks.
---
here was the whole quote with the sentences which confuse statists.
"The 12 regional Federal Reserve Banks, which were established by the Congress as the operating arms of the nation's central banking system, are organized similarly to private corporations--possibly leading to some confusion about "ownership." For example, the Reserve Banks issue shares of stock to member banks. However, owning Reserve Bank stock is quite different from owning stock in a private company. The Reserve Banks are not operated for profit, and ownership of a certain amount of stock is, by law, a condition of membership in the System. The stock may not be sold, traded, or pledged as security for a loan; dividends are, by law, 6 percent per year."
the operating arms of the nation's central banking system, are organized similarly to private corporations...
For example, the Reserve Banks issue shares of stock to member banks.
---
here was the whole quote with the sentences which confuse statists.
"The 12 regional Federal Reserve Banks, which were established by the Congress as the operating arms of the nation's central banking system, are organized similarly to private corporations--possibly leading to some confusion about "ownership." For example, the Reserve Banks issue shares of stock to member banks. However, owning Reserve Bank stock is quite different from owning stock in a private company. The Reserve Banks are not operated for profit, and ownership of a certain amount of stock is, by law, a condition of membership in the System. The stock may not be sold, traded, or pledged as security for a loan; dividends are, by law, 6 percent per year."
OK. Whatever. Your silly question got the answer it deserved.
ok, whatever, the original topic was how do tax rates affect revenue. Not sure how we got into a pissing contest on the federal reserve.
My only point was the idea that increased revenue was good.
Nobody ever asks, "What can we do to decrease tax revenue?"
As if the more money the government consumes, the better off we will all be.
My only point was the idea that increased revenue was good.
Nobody ever asks, "What can we do to decrease tax revenue?"
As if the more money the government consumes, the better off we will all be.
If you want to decrease tax revenue, cut taxes. But then you'll have to cut back on services.
What services do you want to reduce or eliminate?
No need to cut taxes, have a recession!
There ya go! That's worked out so well.