You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Who controls the FED?
- Thread starter UnFoRGiVeN
- Start date
Quote from Haroki:
The banking system is indeed able to create money with a mere computer keystroke. However, a bank's ability to create money is tied directly to the amount of reserves customers have deposited there. A bank must pay a competitive interest rate on those deposits to keep them from leaving to other banks. This interest expense alone is a substantial portion of a bank's operating costs and is de facto proof a bank cannot costlessly create money.
But how is this illegal?
I don't believe I mentioned illegal. My position is that the Federal Reserve system as currently structured is a poor and ultimately destructive entity in the course of American fiscal policy.
As far as reserves go, if reserves are mandated in paper, what's to keep the fed from ordering the treasury to just print more paper to pay for whatever it is they want and to maintain the reserve requirements? It's a scheme. I detest a fiat currency system as there has never been one in the history of the world that has succeeded indefinitely. All have failed at some point.
Obviously, you have researched and understand the structure of the Fed. Let me ask you a simple question. Do you think this country faces larger or smaller economic problems than the 1907 money shortage?
Quote from JSSPMK:
Then how would you explain your government's inability to come up with proof, where does it say that a citizen of USA has to pay mandatory income tax on his earnings? To be fair it is a simple enough question.
Ok, a simple answer then.
According to the United States Statutes at Large (published by the United States Government Printing Office) the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, the predecessor to the current 1986 code, was enacted by the Eighty-Third Congress of the United States with the phrase "Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled" and was "approved" (signed into law) at 9:45 A.M., Eastern Daylight Time, on August 16, 1954, and published as volume 68A of the United States Statutes at Large. Section 1(a)(1) of the enactment states: "The provisions of this Act set forth under the heading 'Internal Revenue Title' may be cited as the 'Internal Revenue Code of 1954'. Section 1(d) of the enactment is entitled "Enactment of Internal Revenue Title Into Law", and the text of the Code follows, beginning with the statutory Table of Contents. The enactment ends with the approval (enactment) notation on page 929.
Ok, so in layman's terms, what does that mean? To answer, that the IRS Code of 1954, the 15,00+ page document, is signed into law. And in that document, is contained everything that one needs to know - who is liable to pay tax, what is an allowable deduction, what is a dependant, what your tax is if you make more than $50,001 but less than $55,000, how to figure taxable income, what is gross income, etc.....
As why the govt can't come up with proof, I have no idea. I know for a fact that Russo rejects what I just quoted above, so maybe he's playing word games with his viewers. It has happened before you know....
Quote from riaamaan:
I don't believe I mentioned illegal. My position is that the Federal Reserve system as currently structured is a poor and ultimately destructive entity in the course of American fiscal policy.
As far as reserves go, if reserves are mandated in paper, what's to keep the fed from ordering the treasury to just print more paper to pay for whatever it is they want and to maintain the reserve requirements? It's a scheme. I detest a fiat currency system as there has never been one in the history of the world that has succeeded indefinitely. All have failed at some point.
Obviously, you have researched and understand the structure of the Fed. Let me ask you a simple question. Do you think this country faces larger or smaller economic problems than the 1907 money shortage?
Some tough q's, hard to change someone's mind about this, so I won't try, just give a different view.
Take a dollar bill out of your wallet or purse and look just to the
right of George Washington's head. Printed in small black letters
should be the phrase "This note is legal tender for all debts public
and private." These words, and the guarantee of the United States
Government, are the only things that give the US Dollar weight as a
currency, either domestically or on the international currency markets.
Some 30 years ago, in 1972, this was not the case.Since that
time the United States has operated on a fiat
currency, meaning that the dollar is no longer pegged to the price of
gold nor guaranteed by it. Rather, dollars have value because the
government of the United States says that they have value.
Such a notion is troubling to many as the notion of a government
controlling anything, much less money, through an exercise in self
restraint seems a joke at best and a recipe for financial disaster at
worst. Critics of the fiat system question what motive such a
government has that would compel it not
to simply print money as it sees fit, thus inadvertently destroying
overnight the value of its own currency. Gold or silver, by comparison,
can not be simply produced, and thus acts as a natural check upon this
assumed tendency to expand the money supply without consideration for
the hyper-inflationary pressures such a move would have.
The problem with this argument is not one of its accuracy, but rather a matter of degree. A fiat system is more
prone to governmental expansion of the money supply, but such expansion
is neither unique to it nor a probable course of action for its
economic governors. A gold based system is less prone
to hyper-inflationary tendencies, but by no means immune from them and,
as demonstrated under Bretton Woods, is less able to respond to rapid
changes in the market.
A US gold standard would, by Constitutional mandate, incorporate such a
safeguard as Article I, Section 8 clearly states: [Congress shall have the power] To coin money, *****regulate the value thereof,***** and of foreign coin, and fix the standard of weights and measures. This safeguard and power, however, nullifies the
initial advantages listed for a gold-standard system: namely the
difficulty of devaluation and political stability.
In short, the constraints and limitations placed upon monetary
governance by a gold standard system serve as little more than speed
bumps should government seek to ACTIVELY set about the devaluation of
currency. In actuality, a gold standard offers only ineffectual
protection for the money supply against incompetence and malice while
profoundly limiting the ability of well informed and well meaning
governments to enact substantive and beneficial monetary policy.
So again in layman's terms, what does this mean? It means that even if we were on the gold standard, IF Congress wanted to affect the value of our currency, it could do so rather easily. And the gold standard could serve as a deterrent to enacting beneficial policies IF ( and that's a big if ) you believe that the govt has the economy's best interest in mind in times of crisis.
It's been a great conversation and I've enjoyed your thoughtful responses. I tend to have a cynical view of big government and bankers. They have proven to me that they cannot be trusted to act responsibly. I see them as dishonest and greedy.
I also feel that the founding fathers understood the issues we face even today. I do not think there is a perfect system per se, but I do believe the Constitution is a special doctrine that defines an acceptable median. There are parameters that could be worked within utilizing a commodity based currency and still accommodate economic expansion.
I realize there would still be some inflation. Business cycles will continue, but the overall economic swings should be dampened considerably with sound fiscal policy. I see the current Fed system as an obstacle to this.
I also feel that the founding fathers understood the issues we face even today. I do not think there is a perfect system per se, but I do believe the Constitution is a special doctrine that defines an acceptable median. There are parameters that could be worked within utilizing a commodity based currency and still accommodate economic expansion.
I realize there would still be some inflation. Business cycles will continue, but the overall economic swings should be dampened considerably with sound fiscal policy. I see the current Fed system as an obstacle to this.
The facts are..
1) The president PICKS a board of governors from a list PREPARED by a group of men with big stakes in The Fed..
2) The Fed hasn't and will not stop printing money until it is brought down or our currency is completely worthless
3) No one at the Fed gives a rat ass about anyone in this thread or anyone in the world, for that matter.
The Federal Reserve needs to be abolished for the better of our country and the world.
1) The president PICKS a board of governors from a list PREPARED by a group of men with big stakes in The Fed..
2) The Fed hasn't and will not stop printing money until it is brought down or our currency is completely worthless
3) No one at the Fed gives a rat ass about anyone in this thread or anyone in the world, for that matter.
The Federal Reserve needs to be abolished for the better of our country and the world.
The fact that i need to ask the government's approval just to put a canopy on my back yard show's you how inslaved we are. We don't even own our property, we have to ask them for permission.
Most here are in agreement re the fed, but what are you/we going to do about it?
80-90% of the population doesn't even the realize the fed isn't part of the government. Letting others know the facts is a start. Print something re what the fed really does, make copies, and keep them in your car. When ever the opportunity presents itself hand out a few, put them on wind shields, etc.
Nothing is going to change unless you/we make it happen!
80-90% of the population doesn't even the realize the fed isn't part of the government. Letting others know the facts is a start. Print something re what the fed really does, make copies, and keep them in your car. When ever the opportunity presents itself hand out a few, put them on wind shields, etc.
Nothing is going to change unless you/we make it happen!