The Federal Reserve
-
Wow, this was there when my post came up. I've never posted exactly the same moment as someone else before. Yeah, to blame the Fed for the depression is a pretty amazing assertion.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
Booms and busts are created by the fed, to extract real wealth from the economy. Its kind of like a big wave washing inland and as it goes back into the ocean it pulls out a lot of material with it.
-
EliottA wrote:
No, you haven't.
Riiight.. :rolleyes: The institution that has complete control over the currency can't create bubbles and steal wealth. My god how ignorant can you be?
How on earth does controlling a currency create a bubble ? Do you even know what a bubble is ?
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
-
How on earth does controlling a currency create a bubble ? Do you even know what a bubble is ?
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
Christian Graus wrote:
How on earth does controlling a currency create a bubble ? Do you even know what a bubble is ?
Are you truly that ignorant or are you just trolling? The fed can create new money out of thin air with the push of a button, then loan that out to other banks and corporations with interest attached.
-
The problem is that since 1864, we've had a debt-based banking system. All our money is based on government debt. We can not extinguish government debt without extinguishing our money supply. That's why talk of paying of the national debt, without reforming our banking system, is an impossibility. That's why the solution does not lay in discussing the size of national debt. Rather it lays in reforming out banking system. We have in this country one of the most corrupt institutions the world has ever known. I refer to the Federal Reserve Board. This evil institution has impoverished the people of the US and has practically bankrupted our Government. It has done this through the corrupt practices of the moneyed vultures who control it. The Federal Reserve really, even though it is not part of the federal government, it is more powerful than the federal government. It's more powerful than the president, the congress and the courts. And a lot of people challenge me on that, but, let me prove my case. The Federal Reserve determines what the average persons car payment is going to be, what their house payment is going to be, and whether they have a job or not. And I submit to you that that's total control. And the Federal Reserve is the largest single creditor of the US government. What does proverbs tell us? That the borrower is servant to the lender.
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
All our money is based on government debt. We can not extinguish government debt
Governments have, from time to time, large projects and contracts to service. Taxation received doesn't come in equal portions. Some of these projects/contracts are larger than some of the taxation receipts consequently to satisfy such large expenditures it is necessary for government to borrow the required funds. This borrowing is done via the services provided by the Federal Reserve. This borrowing of course attracts interest which must be paid when it is contractually obligated so to do, and sometimes the interests is so large that new borrowing becomes necessary to cover such interest payments, again taxation receipts may not large enough. But not always can the capital that was borrowed can be re-payed and with future projects/contracts coming on-stream government debt can rise to alarming levels. So you just cannot extinguish government debt now or in the future. Such projects/contracts do not allow you that privilege. And extinguishing the money supply will also hurt Main Street as well as Wall Street far more than any recession would. If you really want to reform banking practices, you need international consensus. It is not something you can really do in isolation.
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
That the borrower is servant to the lender
Also remember this ... If you borrow from the bank £1000 then it is your problem. But if you borrow from the bank £1M then that becomes the bank's problem. Why? if you go bankrupt, £1M will hurt a damned sight more than £1000. So your proverb is not always a truthful representation of reality.
-
Christian Graus wrote:
How on earth does controlling a currency create a bubble ? Do you even know what a bubble is ?
Are you truly that ignorant or are you just trolling? The fed can create new money out of thin air with the push of a button, then loan that out to other banks and corporations with interest attached.
So what ? Are you dense ? Let me spell it out for you. People buy stuff to invest. They borrow to do that. So long as people borrow, the fed keeps printing the stuff. Now, sometimes people get caught up in paying more for things than they are worth, because of the overall expectation of rising prices. Some people borrow to invest. When a bank decides it's losing money, or the cycle gets out of control, they can tighten who they will lend to, purely to protect themselves. This is how a bubble bursts. Printing money does not create a bubble, incautious buyers and general mania does. Banks do not plan these things, people do, by deciding what they will pay for something, and how wise they will be in the loans they apply for.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
-
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
All our money is based on government debt. We can not extinguish government debt
Governments have, from time to time, large projects and contracts to service. Taxation received doesn't come in equal portions. Some of these projects/contracts are larger than some of the taxation receipts consequently to satisfy such large expenditures it is necessary for government to borrow the required funds. This borrowing is done via the services provided by the Federal Reserve. This borrowing of course attracts interest which must be paid when it is contractually obligated so to do, and sometimes the interests is so large that new borrowing becomes necessary to cover such interest payments, again taxation receipts may not large enough. But not always can the capital that was borrowed can be re-payed and with future projects/contracts coming on-stream government debt can rise to alarming levels. So you just cannot extinguish government debt now or in the future. Such projects/contracts do not allow you that privilege. And extinguishing the money supply will also hurt Main Street as well as Wall Street far more than any recession would. If you really want to reform banking practices, you need international consensus. It is not something you can really do in isolation.
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
That the borrower is servant to the lender
Also remember this ... If you borrow from the bank £1000 then it is your problem. But if you borrow from the bank £1M then that becomes the bank's problem. Why? if you go bankrupt, £1M will hurt a damned sight more than £1000. So your proverb is not always a truthful representation of reality.
Since the creation of the Federal Reserve, middle and working-class Americans have been victimized by a boom-and-bust monetary policy. In addition, most Americans have suffered a steadily eroding purchasing power because of the Federal Reserve's inflationary policies. This represents a real, if hidden, tax imposed on the American people. From the Great Depression, to the stagflation of the seventies, to the current economic crisis caused by the housing bubble, every economic downturn suffered by this country over the past century can be traced to Federal Reserve policy. The Fed has followed a consistent policy of flooding the economy with easy money, leading to a misallocation of resources and an artificial "boom" followed by a recession or depression when the Fed-created bubble bursts. With a stable currency, American exporters will no longer be held hostage to an erratic monetary policy. Stabilizing the currency will also give Americans new incentives to save as they will no longer have to fear inflation eroding their savings. Those members concerned about increasing America's exports or the low rate of savings should be enthusiastic supporters of this legislation. Though the Federal Reserve policy harms the average American, it benefits those in a position to take advantage of the cycles in monetary policy. The main beneficiaries are those who receive access to artificially inflated money and/or credit before the inflationary effects of the policy impact the entire economy. Federal Reserve policies also benefit big spending politicians who use the inflated currency created by the Fed to hide the true costs of the welfare-warfare state. It is time for Congress to put the interests of the American people ahead of special interests and their own appetite for big government. Abolishing the Federal Reserve will allow Congress to reassert its constitutional authority over monetary policy. The United States Constitution grants to Congress the authority to coin money and regulate the value of the currency. The Constitution does not give Congress the authority to delegate control over monetary policy to a central bank. Furthermore, the Constitution certainly does not empower the federal government to erode the American standard of living via an inflationary monetary policy. In fact, Congress' constitutional mandate regarding monetary policy should only permit currency backed by stable commodities such as silver and gold to be used as legal tender. Therefore, abolishing the Federal Reserve and returning t
-
EliottA wrote:
Only in your mind, sir.
Get a grip on reality. I have thoroughly researched the federal reserve and the history of central banks around the world.
have you ever thought of researching both sides of an argument? from what i have read of your post they are always purely onesided, pleaset take a step back take the premise of you of your posts and look at the otherside. a good idea is to take the opposing point of view and try to construct an argumement against your poit of view, if you cannot do this then this is a sign that you ar not objective and you are being a moron (there is ALLWAYS another point of view) then take your argument and see if it has merit it may change your world
Go away and research the subject, analyze the options for and against, understand the problem and them come back when you agree with me.
-
So what ? Are you dense ? Let me spell it out for you. People buy stuff to invest. They borrow to do that. So long as people borrow, the fed keeps printing the stuff. Now, sometimes people get caught up in paying more for things than they are worth, because of the overall expectation of rising prices. Some people borrow to invest. When a bank decides it's losing money, or the cycle gets out of control, they can tighten who they will lend to, purely to protect themselves. This is how a bubble bursts. Printing money does not create a bubble, incautious buyers and general mania does. Banks do not plan these things, people do, by deciding what they will pay for something, and how wise they will be in the loans they apply for.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
-
have you ever thought of researching both sides of an argument? from what i have read of your post they are always purely onesided, pleaset take a step back take the premise of you of your posts and look at the otherside. a good idea is to take the opposing point of view and try to construct an argumement against your poit of view, if you cannot do this then this is a sign that you ar not objective and you are being a moron (there is ALLWAYS another point of view) then take your argument and see if it has merit it may change your world
Go away and research the subject, analyze the options for and against, understand the problem and them come back when you agree with me.
What one has to understand is that from the day the constitution is adopted, right up to today, the folks who profit from privately owned banks, as Madison called them The Money Changers, had fought a running battle for control of who gets to print America's money. Why is who prints the money so important? Think as money is just another commodity. If you have a monopoly on a commodity that everyone needs, everyone wants, and nobody has enough of, there are lot's of ways to make a profit and also excerpt tremendous political influence. That's what this battle is all about. Throughout the history of the United States, the money power has gone back and forward between congress and some sort of privately owned central bank. The Founding Fathers knew the evils of a privately owned central bank. First of all they had seen how the privately owned British central bank, The Bank of England, had run up the British national debt to such an extent that parliament had been forced to place unfair taxes on the American colonies. In fact, as we will see later, Benjamin Franklin claimed that this was the real cause of the American Revolution. Most of the founding fathers realised the potential dangers of banking and feared bankers accumulation of wealth and power. Thomas Jefferson put it this way: "I sincerely believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people to whom it properly belongs." "Thomas Jefferson" That distinct statement of Jefferson is in fact the solution to all our economic problems today. It bears repeating: the issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people to whom it properly belongs. James Madison, the main author of the constitution agreed. Interestingly, he called those behind the central banks scheme, Money Changers. Madison strongly criticised their actions: "History records that The Money Changers used every form of abuse, intrigue, deceit, and violent means possible to maintain their control over governments by controlling money, and its issuance." "James Madison" The battle over who gets to issue our money has been the pivotal issue throughout the history of the United States. Wars are fought over it. Depressions are caused to acquire it. Yet after WWI, this battle was rarely mentioned in the news papers or history books. Why? By WWI, The Money Changers with their dominant wealth had seized control of most of the nations press. Throughout US histor
-
Since the creation of the Federal Reserve, middle and working-class Americans have been victimized by a boom-and-bust monetary policy. In addition, most Americans have suffered a steadily eroding purchasing power because of the Federal Reserve's inflationary policies. This represents a real, if hidden, tax imposed on the American people. From the Great Depression, to the stagflation of the seventies, to the current economic crisis caused by the housing bubble, every economic downturn suffered by this country over the past century can be traced to Federal Reserve policy. The Fed has followed a consistent policy of flooding the economy with easy money, leading to a misallocation of resources and an artificial "boom" followed by a recession or depression when the Fed-created bubble bursts. With a stable currency, American exporters will no longer be held hostage to an erratic monetary policy. Stabilizing the currency will also give Americans new incentives to save as they will no longer have to fear inflation eroding their savings. Those members concerned about increasing America's exports or the low rate of savings should be enthusiastic supporters of this legislation. Though the Federal Reserve policy harms the average American, it benefits those in a position to take advantage of the cycles in monetary policy. The main beneficiaries are those who receive access to artificially inflated money and/or credit before the inflationary effects of the policy impact the entire economy. Federal Reserve policies also benefit big spending politicians who use the inflated currency created by the Fed to hide the true costs of the welfare-warfare state. It is time for Congress to put the interests of the American people ahead of special interests and their own appetite for big government. Abolishing the Federal Reserve will allow Congress to reassert its constitutional authority over monetary policy. The United States Constitution grants to Congress the authority to coin money and regulate the value of the currency. The Constitution does not give Congress the authority to delegate control over monetary policy to a central bank. Furthermore, the Constitution certainly does not empower the federal government to erode the American standard of living via an inflationary monetary policy. In fact, Congress' constitutional mandate regarding monetary policy should only permit currency backed by stable commodities such as silver and gold to be used as legal tender. Therefore, abolishing the Federal Reserve and returning t
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
Since the creation of the Federal Reserve, middle and working-class Americans have been victimized by a boom-and-bust monetary policy. In addition, most Americans have suffered a steadily eroding purchasing power because of the Federal Reserve's inflationary policies. This represents a real, if hidden, tax imposed on the American people.
sorry but wrong, this was happening before the fed existed in fact the fed has by all accounts reduced this
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
With a stable currency, American exporters will no longer be held hostage to an erratic monetary policy. Stabilizing the currency will also give Americans new incentives to save as they will no longer have to fear inflation eroding their savings. Those members concerned about increasing America's exports or the low rate of savings should be enthusiastic supporters of this legislation.
sorry but without a fed and the surrounding infrastructure ther will be no companies able to produce anything for export, and the only way to have a completely stable currency is to be a/ complete world control .. or b/ completely islolated
Go away and research the subject, analyze the options for and against, understand the problem and them come back when you agree with me.
-
What one has to understand is that from the day the constitution is adopted, right up to today, the folks who profit from privately owned banks, as Madison called them The Money Changers, had fought a running battle for control of who gets to print America's money. Why is who prints the money so important? Think as money is just another commodity. If you have a monopoly on a commodity that everyone needs, everyone wants, and nobody has enough of, there are lot's of ways to make a profit and also excerpt tremendous political influence. That's what this battle is all about. Throughout the history of the United States, the money power has gone back and forward between congress and some sort of privately owned central bank. The Founding Fathers knew the evils of a privately owned central bank. First of all they had seen how the privately owned British central bank, The Bank of England, had run up the British national debt to such an extent that parliament had been forced to place unfair taxes on the American colonies. In fact, as we will see later, Benjamin Franklin claimed that this was the real cause of the American Revolution. Most of the founding fathers realised the potential dangers of banking and feared bankers accumulation of wealth and power. Thomas Jefferson put it this way: "I sincerely believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people to whom it properly belongs." "Thomas Jefferson" That distinct statement of Jefferson is in fact the solution to all our economic problems today. It bears repeating: the issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people to whom it properly belongs. James Madison, the main author of the constitution agreed. Interestingly, he called those behind the central banks scheme, Money Changers. Madison strongly criticised their actions: "History records that The Money Changers used every form of abuse, intrigue, deceit, and violent means possible to maintain their control over governments by controlling money, and its issuance." "James Madison" The battle over who gets to issue our money has been the pivotal issue throughout the history of the United States. Wars are fought over it. Depressions are caused to acquire it. Yet after WWI, this battle was rarely mentioned in the news papers or history books. Why? By WWI, The Money Changers with their dominant wealth had seized control of most of the nations press. Throughout US histor
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
First of all they had seen how the privately owned British central bank, The Bank of England, had run up the British national debt to such an extent that parliament had been forced to place unfair taxes on the American colonies. In fact, as we will see later, Benjamin Franklin claimed that this was the real cause of the American Revolution. Most of the founding fathers realised the potential dangers of banking and feared bankers accumulation of wealth and power. Thomas Jefferson put it this way: "I sincerely believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies.
you dont even understand history so what chance have we got, the bank of england didnt run up the debt the WAR against the french did, the british decided that they needed to raise more money, so they raised taxes toughout the empire, the rich US merchants wnated a voice in parliment (something no other colony had) and if you check history 4 seats would have prevented this from becoming an issue -now note this was the MECHANTS wanting a voice, at no point, at this time would the average joe get a say, no it would be the landowner who had your vote and could use it as he wished regardeless of your oppinion. (and dont forget that the other major provication was that britian had stopped expansioninto native american land - and those merchants didnt like that)
Go away and research the subject, analyze the options for and against, understand the problem and them come back when you agree with me.
-
What one has to understand is that from the day the constitution is adopted, right up to today, the folks who profit from privately owned banks, as Madison called them The Money Changers, had fought a running battle for control of who gets to print America's money. Why is who prints the money so important? Think as money is just another commodity. If you have a monopoly on a commodity that everyone needs, everyone wants, and nobody has enough of, there are lot's of ways to make a profit and also excerpt tremendous political influence. That's what this battle is all about. Throughout the history of the United States, the money power has gone back and forward between congress and some sort of privately owned central bank. The Founding Fathers knew the evils of a privately owned central bank. First of all they had seen how the privately owned British central bank, The Bank of England, had run up the British national debt to such an extent that parliament had been forced to place unfair taxes on the American colonies. In fact, as we will see later, Benjamin Franklin claimed that this was the real cause of the American Revolution. Most of the founding fathers realised the potential dangers of banking and feared bankers accumulation of wealth and power. Thomas Jefferson put it this way: "I sincerely believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people to whom it properly belongs." "Thomas Jefferson" That distinct statement of Jefferson is in fact the solution to all our economic problems today. It bears repeating: the issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people to whom it properly belongs. James Madison, the main author of the constitution agreed. Interestingly, he called those behind the central banks scheme, Money Changers. Madison strongly criticised their actions: "History records that The Money Changers used every form of abuse, intrigue, deceit, and violent means possible to maintain their control over governments by controlling money, and its issuance." "James Madison" The battle over who gets to issue our money has been the pivotal issue throughout the history of the United States. Wars are fought over it. Depressions are caused to acquire it. Yet after WWI, this battle was rarely mentioned in the news papers or history books. Why? By WWI, The Money Changers with their dominant wealth had seized control of most of the nations press. Throughout US histor
basically you want an america of the 1830 - backward isolatorary with no status in the world those money lenders you critize are the rock on which your country is based
Go away and research the subject, analyze the options for and against, understand the problem and them come back when you agree with me.
-
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
Since the creation of the Federal Reserve, middle and working-class Americans have been victimized by a boom-and-bust monetary policy. In addition, most Americans have suffered a steadily eroding purchasing power because of the Federal Reserve's inflationary policies. This represents a real, if hidden, tax imposed on the American people.
sorry but wrong, this was happening before the fed existed in fact the fed has by all accounts reduced this
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
With a stable currency, American exporters will no longer be held hostage to an erratic monetary policy. Stabilizing the currency will also give Americans new incentives to save as they will no longer have to fear inflation eroding their savings. Those members concerned about increasing America's exports or the low rate of savings should be enthusiastic supporters of this legislation.
sorry but without a fed and the surrounding infrastructure ther will be no companies able to produce anything for export, and the only way to have a completely stable currency is to be a/ complete world control .. or b/ completely islolated
Go away and research the subject, analyze the options for and against, understand the problem and them come back when you agree with me.
It is no secret that the power to print money and set interest rates constitutes the greatest power anyone can have. “Let me issue and control a nation’s money,” commented international banker Amschel Rothschild, “and I care not who makes the laws.” Henry Kissinger reduced the almighty powers of the Federal Reserve to one line: “Who controls money controls the world.” Former chairman of the Federal Reserve Alan Greenspan, who served for 18+ years in his position, was asked by political talk show host Jim Lehrer: “What should be the proper relationship between a chairman of the Fed and the president of the United States?” “Well, first of all, the Federal Reserve is an independent agency, and that means basically that there is no other agency of government (including the executive office) which can overrule actions that we take,” Greenspan responded matter-of-factly. “So long as that is in place… then, what the relationships are don’t frankly matter.” In light of the above statements, it is safe to say that it is not US Commander-in-Chief Barack Obama who holds the reigns of real power in America, but rather Ben Bernanke, the chairman of the Fed. Indeed, last December’s Newsweek magazine proudly announced that Bernanke was the “fourth most powerful person in the world,” behind Barack Obama, Hu Jintao and Nicolas Sarkozy, but ahead of Gordon Brown, Angela Merkel and Vladimir Putin (fourth, fifth and sixth place in the Newsweek power list went to central bankers, Bernanke, Jean-Claude Trichet (EU) and Masaaki Shirakawa (Japan), as opposed to national leaders)!
-
basically you want an america of the 1830 - backward isolatorary with no status in the world those money lenders you critize are the rock on which your country is based
Go away and research the subject, analyze the options for and against, understand the problem and them come back when you agree with me.
Alex hogarth wrote:
those money lenders you critize are the rock on which your country is based
We fought to get away from the grip of plutocrats.
-
Booms and busts are created by the fed, to extract real wealth from the economy. Its kind of like a big wave washing inland and as it goes back into the ocean it pulls out a lot of material with it.
The analogy is cute, but it does not prove the theory.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
-
It is no secret that the power to print money and set interest rates constitutes the greatest power anyone can have. “Let me issue and control a nation’s money,” commented international banker Amschel Rothschild, “and I care not who makes the laws.” Henry Kissinger reduced the almighty powers of the Federal Reserve to one line: “Who controls money controls the world.” Former chairman of the Federal Reserve Alan Greenspan, who served for 18+ years in his position, was asked by political talk show host Jim Lehrer: “What should be the proper relationship between a chairman of the Fed and the president of the United States?” “Well, first of all, the Federal Reserve is an independent agency, and that means basically that there is no other agency of government (including the executive office) which can overrule actions that we take,” Greenspan responded matter-of-factly. “So long as that is in place… then, what the relationships are don’t frankly matter.” In light of the above statements, it is safe to say that it is not US Commander-in-Chief Barack Obama who holds the reigns of real power in America, but rather Ben Bernanke, the chairman of the Fed. Indeed, last December’s Newsweek magazine proudly announced that Bernanke was the “fourth most powerful person in the world,” behind Barack Obama, Hu Jintao and Nicolas Sarkozy, but ahead of Gordon Brown, Angela Merkel and Vladimir Putin (fourth, fifth and sixth place in the Newsweek power list went to central bankers, Bernanke, Jean-Claude Trichet (EU) and Masaaki Shirakawa (Japan), as opposed to national leaders)!
yes money talks, but thats always been the case, take your history, at what point did those with the money not contol things? the founding fathers? suprisingly they were all from that "moneyed" class at no point in history are th moneyed not in charge - live with it or find true comunist country
Go away and research the subject, analyze the options for and against, understand the problem and them come back when you agree with me.
-
Since the creation of the Federal Reserve, middle and working-class Americans have been victimized by a boom-and-bust monetary policy. Wrong. There have been booms and busts in all economies, and in the USA prior to the Fed. In addition, most Americans have suffered a steadily eroding purchasing power because of the Federal Reserve's inflationary policies. This represents a real, if hidden, tax imposed on the American people. This is also crap. How does the Fed force inflation onto us ? Inflation is what most people rely on for their retirement, or to move to a bigger home. From the Great Depression, to the stagflation of the seventies, to the current economic crisis caused by the housing bubble, every economic downturn suffered by this country over the past century can be traced to Federal Reserve policy. The Fed has followed a consistent policy of flooding the economy with easy money, leading to a misallocation of resources and an artificial "boom" followed by a recession or depression when the Fed-created bubble bursts. All banks do this. The core issue really, is that people borrow money they cannot pay back. With a stable currency, American exporters will no longer be held hostage to an erratic monetary policy. Stabilizing the currency will also give Americans new incentives to save as they will no longer have to fear inflation eroding their savings. Those members concerned about increasing America's exports or the low rate of savings should be enthusiastic supporters of this legislation. What you're asking for is government intervention, and control of the currencies worth. This would make you more of an international pariah, if nothing else. It sure would kill your ability to live high on the hog on cheap imports. I know you copied and pasted this, and I know you'll not really discuss it with me, so I'll stop there.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
-
yes money talks, but thats always been the case, take your history, at what point did those with the money not contol things? the founding fathers? suprisingly they were all from that "moneyed" class at no point in history are th moneyed not in charge - live with it or find true comunist country
Go away and research the subject, analyze the options for and against, understand the problem and them come back when you agree with me.
Alex hogarth wrote:
at what point did those with the money not contol things
Well back when a private group of jackasses couldn't legally counterfeit money we were in a much better position. You eurotrash really crack me up, I thank God we slaughtered a bunch of you peons back in the revolutionary war.
-
Alex hogarth wrote:
those money lenders you critize are the rock on which your country is based
We fought to get away from the grip of plutocrats.
bollocks you fought to put your plurocrats in charge instead of the brits, do you think it changed that much? boy are you misguided, after the war what they did was to put the populus behnd them, eve then the islusion of control ut changed nothing, the guy in the field no change 4 pints of adnams broadside makes my bad spelling even worse than normal :(
Go away and research the subject, analyze the options for and against, understand the problem and them come back when you agree with me.
modified on Thursday, September 17, 2009 7:54 PM
-
Since the creation of the Federal Reserve, middle and working-class Americans have been victimized by a boom-and-bust monetary policy. In addition, most Americans have suffered a steadily eroding purchasing power because of the Federal Reserve's inflationary policies. This represents a real, if hidden, tax imposed on the American people. From the Great Depression, to the stagflation of the seventies, to the current economic crisis caused by the housing bubble, every economic downturn suffered by this country over the past century can be traced to Federal Reserve policy. The Fed has followed a consistent policy of flooding the economy with easy money, leading to a misallocation of resources and an artificial "boom" followed by a recession or depression when the Fed-created bubble bursts. With a stable currency, American exporters will no longer be held hostage to an erratic monetary policy. Stabilizing the currency will also give Americans new incentives to save as they will no longer have to fear inflation eroding their savings. Those members concerned about increasing America's exports or the low rate of savings should be enthusiastic supporters of this legislation. Though the Federal Reserve policy harms the average American, it benefits those in a position to take advantage of the cycles in monetary policy. The main beneficiaries are those who receive access to artificially inflated money and/or credit before the inflationary effects of the policy impact the entire economy. Federal Reserve policies also benefit big spending politicians who use the inflated currency created by the Fed to hide the true costs of the welfare-warfare state. It is time for Congress to put the interests of the American people ahead of special interests and their own appetite for big government. Abolishing the Federal Reserve will allow Congress to reassert its constitutional authority over monetary policy. The United States Constitution grants to Congress the authority to coin money and regulate the value of the currency. The Constitution does not give Congress the authority to delegate control over monetary policy to a central bank. Furthermore, the Constitution certainly does not empower the federal government to erode the American standard of living via an inflationary monetary policy. In fact, Congress' constitutional mandate regarding monetary policy should only permit currency backed by stable commodities such as silver and gold to be used as legal tender. Therefore, abolishing the Federal Reserve and returning t
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
Federal Reserve's inflationary policies
The Fed just like other central banks reacts to situations not cause situations. Example : People want to earn more from their employment, this puts strain on the employer who must raise their prices through to the retailer who increases his prices accordingly. The employees wages are eaten up with increased prices. So more money has to be created to service these requirements. We go around this circle time and time again. This can be a vicious circle. So the Feds need to set limits that impact that circle by moderation.
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
every economic downturn suffered by this country over the past century can be traced to Federal Reserve policy
Economic downturns are caused by people's greed who then cannot service the debt they were only too willing to enter into. And when I say people, include companies as well, their policies do not always take into account the proper concept of RISK. The policies of the Fed are to reduce/restrict the effect of any downturn as well as to take to heat off an over-boiling economy.
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
Federal Reserve policy harms the average American
The stated reason for the Fed's existence is to assist the American people by providing an "elastic" currency to [quote] These objectives include economic growth in line with the economy’s potential to expand; a high level of employment; stable prices (that is, stability in the purchasing power of the dollar); and moderate long-term interest rates. [/quote] quote from "The Federal Reserve System: Purposes and Functions. 9th Edition"
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
abolishing the Federal Reserve
Will create a financial nightmare (a calamity) to government, businesses and individuals right across your country and further afield.