Calling The Federal Reserve

[PolyNewbie]

Charles Anthony:

I will cut to the chase: What power do you want the government to have with respect to banking? why?

Do you believe the government should tax individuals?

Do you believe the government should regulate the economy?

Do you believe the government should stabilize the economy?

Do you believe the government should redistribute wealth?

The government should collect the seigniorage on the money and regulate banking. This is to remove power from the bankers over our economy. They should earn money based on their value added to the monetary system and not get to print money for nothing.

Government should tax people to control the money supply - prevent hyper inflation when necessary under a system where gov collects seigniorage on money. This is the only reason for taxes. This is how gov stabilizes the economy.

Under such a system the economy fixes itself and you don't have these massive concentrations of wealth - people actually earn their money.

Education & medacine go back into the hands of the people rather than being controlled by endowments sponsored by bankers.

[PolyNewbie]

whitedoors: It is obvious you have very little clue about economincs. Banks don't make money from the money they print, they make money from the difference in the interest rates they pay out to savers and the rate they charge to lenders.

This is how you expose yourself as a fool. You clearly have no idea what you are talking about and are putting forth your own opinion as fact. No one would ever say that because its not true. You even learn that in eco 101. Clearly is YOU who knows nothing about economics.

[M.Dancer]

White Doors: An economics 101 course would be all that was needed to quash this kindergarten argument.

Really ? Lets hear it !!

This movie is available free on Google. Read the comments about what some people say who studied economics wrt this movie. http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3286459385978771924

I agree with it and i have had a few courses in economics + read a few books about it on my own.

I really want to call you on this bluff. Can you be called on this ?

It is obvious you have very little clue about economincs. Banks don't make money from the money they print, they make money from the difference in the interest rates they pay out to savers and the rate they charge to lenders. They cannot just simply keep printing money and that's it.

True...but banks make huge sums from: 1)Service charges to schmucks like us 2) fees earned through merchant banking services to listed companies.....like when a company launches an IPO....the fees in these cases can be in the millions.....

[PolyNewbie]

True...but banks make huge sums from: 1)Service charges to schmucks like us 2) fees earned through merchant banking services to listed companies.....like when a company launches an IPO....the fees in these cases can be in the millions.....

This is not how banks make money primarily. When you borrow $10,000 the bank becomes well over $9000.00 richer - the figure is about 299/300 * 10,000.00. That is the primary source of income. That is not including the interest.

They are so profitable from this that it is about control. Your education, the TV you watch, books you read and medacine you get are all controlled by bankers such as Rockefeller.

You do not live in a "democracy" - its an illusion.

Banking is a science filled with smoke and mirrors and its hard to learn the actual operation of banks - impossible from mainstream sources.

Here are some quotes:

"It is well that the people of the nation do not understand our banking and monetary system, for if they did, I believe there would be a revolution before tomorrow morning"-Henry Ford "You are a den of vipers. I intend to rout you out and by eternal God I will rout you out. If the people only understood the rank injustice of our money and banking system, there would be a revolution before morning"-Andrew Jackson "Should government refrain from regulation [taxation], the worthlessness of the money becomes apparent and the fraud can no longer be concealed"-John Maynard Keynes "banking was conceived in inequality and was born in sin. The Bankers own the earth..If you wish to remain slaves of bankers and pay the cost of your own slavery, let them continue to create deposits"-Sir Josiah Stamp

"We are grateful to the Washington Post, The New York Times, Time Magazine, and other great publications whose members have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion over forty years. It would have been impossible for us to develop a plan for the world if we had been subject to the bright lights of publicity during those years. But the work now is much more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government. The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national auto determination practised in past centuries"- David Rockefeller, founder of the Trilateral Commission, at the Trilteral commission in June 1991.

"The drive of the Rockefellers and their allies is to create a one-world government combining supercapitalism and Communism under the same tent, all under their control.... Do I mean conspiracy? Yes I do. I am convinced there is such a plot, international in scope, generations old in planning, and incredibly evil in intent." Congressman Larry P. McDonald, 1976, killed in the Korean Airlines 747 that was shot down by the Soviets.

"The individual is handicapped by coming face-to-face with a conspiracy so monstrous he cannot believe it exists." J. Edgar Hoover

The only reason anyone ever found out about all this is because of the internet. Hence Internet 2 is around the corner

[M.Dancer]

tINFOIL FUTURES REMAIN STEADY.......

[M.Dancer]

This is not how banks make money primarily. When you borrow $10,000 the bank becomes well over $9000.00 richer - the figure is about 299/300 * 10,000.00. That is the primary source of income. That is not including the interest.

I take it from your financial acumen you work in a hardware?

[PolyNewbie]

M.Dancer:I take it from your financial acumen you work in a hardware?

No, I work in software. Why don't you stop making empty insults and dazzle us with some intelligent statements ?

[M.Dancer]

I can only work with the material you give me.........

so by software, do you mean organic foods? Cause clearly from your loan earnings post, you don't have a clue whaty you are talking about....unless of course you are privy to the secret knowledge that the secret decodewr ring gives you..........

[PolyNewbie]

M Dancer:I can only work with the material you give me.........

Thats too bad.

so by software, do you mean organic foods? Cause clearly from your loan earnings post, you don't have a clue whaty you are talking about....unless of course you are privy to the secret knowledge that the secret decodewr ring gives you..........

So tell me where I am wrong. Do you know what a reserve ratio is ? Have you ever in your life taken a course on economics or read a book on it ?

[Charles Anthony]

The government should collect the seigniorage on the money and regulate banking. This is to remove power from the bankers over our economy. They should earn money based on their value added to the monetary system and not get to print money for nothing.

I disagree with these goals. The video to which you referred in post #98 does not recommend those goals either. You have things mixed up.

That video was produced by the Von Mises Institute and it quotes Lew Rockwell and Murray Rothbard.

Government should tax people to control the money supply - prevent hyper inflation when necessary under a system where gov collects seigniorage on money. This is the only reason for taxes. This is how gov stabilizes the economy.

All I can say, PNoob, is that I encourage you to continue learning from the above references but they will never support your goals.

Under such a system the economy fixes itself and you don't have these massive concentrations of wealth - people actually earn their money.

I am not afraid of concentrations of wealth and I do not believe a government should use monetary policy to redistribute wealth.

Furthermore, I do not trust a central bank to balance wealth in any way.

Education & medacine go back into the hands of the people rather than being controlled by endowments sponsored by bankers.

I give up.

[PolyNewbie]

Charles Anthony: The video to which you referred in post #98 does not recommend those goals either.

Did I say it did ? That video endorses a gold standard.

Charles Anthony: All I can say, PNoob, is that I encourage you to continue learning from the above references but they will never support your goals.

I encourage you to learn something about the subject about which you are speaking. You clearly have no idea what you are talking about and assume your own opinion to be fact. That is just foolish arrogance.

I encourage you to develop intelligent arguements rather than just say "thats not the way it works".

[PolyNewbie]

Charles Anthony: I am not afraid of concentrations of wealth

OK so you haven't read anything about politics or history either. What do you hope to contribute to these discussions ?

[Charles Anthony]

What do you hope to contribute to these discussions ?

A sober second thought.

from

Wooo Hooo!, Dems win

what kind of conspiracy is involved that connects the lack of monetary reform with voting machines?

It is not a conspiracy but rather fact: our money is backed by nothing and is created/destroyed by typing into a computer. Just like electronic voting, it can be easily fudged.

[PolyNewbie]

This stuff is not easy to face. When I put it togather I was depressed for two weeks. Its like finding out you have terminal cancer.

The easy thing to do is just to ignore it. Ignoring the truth doesn't protect you from it and Batman and Superman are not real. No one on a white horse is going to ride in and save the day for us.

[Canadian Blue]

This stuff is not easy to face. When I put it togather I was depressed for two weeks. Its like finding out you have terminal cancer.

Now you know how Timothy McViegh felt.

[White Doors]

White Doors: An economics 101 course would be all that was needed to quash this kindergarten argument.

Really ? Lets hear it !!

This movie is available free on Google. Read the comments about what some people say who studied economics wrt this movie. http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3286459385978771924

I agree with it and i have had a few courses in economics + read a few books about it on my own.

I really want to call you on this bluff. Can you be called on this ?

It is obvious you have very little clue about economincs. Banks don't make money from the money they print, they make money from the difference in the interest rates they pay out to savers and the rate they charge to lenders. They cannot just simply keep printing money and that's it.

True...but banks make huge sums from: 1)Service charges to schmucks like us 2) fees earned through merchant banking services to listed companies.....like when a company launches an IPO....the fees in these cases can be in the millions.....

You bet, I was trying to dumb it down

[PolyNewbie]

Me: What do you hope to add to this discussion?

Charles Anthony: A sober second thought.

You just want to justify your own taking the easy way out. Everything I have stated is fact. You just do not like these facts.

[Riverwind]

You just want to justify your own taking the easy way out. Everything I have stated is fact. You just do not like these facts.

PHN I stopped arging with you because you refuse to address counter arguments with your own word and simply post links to other sites that may or not address the points brought up.

If you want anyone to take you seriously then try addressing these points with your own words:

1) Every action has a consequence. Suggesting that the gov't could pay for all gov't services by printing money sounds too good to be true. What are the downsides? What are the risks? If you cannot explain the disadvantages of having BOC fund gov't services then you do not really understand what you are talking about because everything has a downside.

2) Bank rates on loans go up when the BOC raises rates. Why? If banks could just print money they should be happy to offer low interest rates on loans to bring in business. Banks do not do this this. A rational person would conclude that banks cannot offer better interest rates than the BOC because they only make money on the difference between BOC rates and what they charge. I do not know exactly how the BOC controls what the banks charge for interest rates but I know the BOC is able to do it because I see the results in the marketplace. Your theories about banks printing money for free are bogus unless you can provide an alternate explaination for why banks always charge more than the BOC.

[PolyNewbie]

Riverwind:1) Every action has a consequence. Suggesting that the gov't could pay for all gov't services by printing money sounds too good to be true. What are the downsides? What are the risks? If you cannot explain the disadvantages of having BOC fund gov't services then you do not really understand what you are talking about because everything has a downside.

2) Bank rates on loans go up when the BOC raises rates. Why? If banks could just print money they should be happy to offer low interest rates on loans to bring in business. Banks do not do this this. A rational person would conclude that banks cannot offer better interest rates than the BOC because they only make money on the difference between BOC rates and what they charge. I do not know exactly how the BOC controls what the banks charge for interest rates but I know the BOC is able to do it because I see the results in the marketplace. Your theories about banks printing money for free are bogus unless you can provide an alternate explaination for why banks always charge more than the BOC.

(1) The downside of this is that we have to find people responsible for implementing this correctly. Other countries must join us. There is no advantage in having private bankers print money from nothing and lend it to us at face value.

(2) Banks have to manage economic policy in their interest and part of that interest is not letting the system crash else we get change.

Your theories about banks printing money for free are bogus unless you can provide an alternate explaination for why banks always charge more than the BOC

Its fact that banks print money for nothing - its not opinion and therefore I don't have to back it up with anything.

[Riverwind]

The downside of this is that we have to find people responsible for implementing this correctly. Other countries must join us. There is no advantage in having private bankers print money from nothing and lend it to us at face value.

You are evading the question. What is the catch? What price do we have to pay, as a society, for this infinite supply of money for social programs? There is is price. If there wasn't then we would have the economic equivalent of a perpetual motion machine. Such things cannot exist in physics and cannot exist in economics either. If you don't know what the downside is then you don't really understand what you are saying.

Its fact that banks print money for nothing - its not opinion and therefore I don't have to back it up with anything.

You are not presenting the complete story. At one level banks do create money for nothing but their ability to do this is limited by interest rates. This is also fact. If you cannot explain why banks always charge more than the BOC then you cannot claim that you understand the economics of banking.

Bottom line: my questions are extremely reasonable and your inability to answer them demonstrates that your claims of economic knowledge are a tad exaggerated.

[PolyNewbie]

Riverwind:You are evading the question. What is the catch?

There is no catch. What is the catch to tieing your shoe laces before you run down a set of stairs ?

You are not presenting the complete story

No I am not. I have provided very good links for you to get the story. I'm not going to re write what would amount to a book on here.

You can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink.

For you the drinks are free and I have provided the links.

[Riverwind]

Riverwind:You are evading the question. What is the catch?

There is no catch. What is the catch to tieing your shoe laces before you run down a set of stairs ?

You might lose your balance and fall down the stairs? It is a law of nature: you can never get something for nothing. There is always a cost. The only question is who pays the cost. I can answer the question that for you: hyper inflation is the cost of using the BOC to fund gov't services. This is a fact, every country that tried to do this ended up with hyperinflation and all of the problems that come with it. Deny it if you like but that is the fact.

No I am not. I have provided very good links for you to get the story. I'm not going to re write what would amount to a book on here.

I asked you a simple question. Why should I go fishing through mounds of tripe to find and answer that I know is not there? If you think there is an answer to my question then you find it and post it in your own words.

Enough of this 'i posted a link therefore I answered your question crap'. If you want people to take you seriously then try to actually present an argument for once.

[Charles Anthony]

Enough of this 'i posted a link therefore I answered your question crap'. If you want people to take you seriously then try to actually present an argument for once.

I agree with that and I think it should be a formal rule throughout the forum. I hate wild goose-chases. If a counter-argument does not contain a brief quote or summary, I am tired of surfing through links or watching long-winded videos!

(1) The downside of this is that we have to find people responsible for implementing this correctly. Other countries must join us.

Actually, the Bank of Canada has a very good track record recently for fighting inflation -- without the help of other countries -- and it is a fiat currency. [i am not saying I support either one but it counters your paranoia.] How is that possible?

There is no advantage in having private bankers print money from nothing and lend it to us at face value.

Then YOU have to answer: why do ordinary people use private banks???

Its fact that banks print money for nothing - its not opinion and therefore I don't have to back it up with anything.

Your are still getting things mixed up.

The central bank issues money which is backed by nothing. Correct.

The central bank truly can issue as much or as little as it wants. Correct.

The commercial banks lend us more money than they actually have in reserves. Correct.

However, the law places limits on how much commercial banks can lend beyond their reserves. Therefore, the commercial banks can not keep lending out money forever. They are limited by deposits from both us and the central bank.

The ultimate solution is:

If you do not trust the commercial banks, do not use them.

If you do not trust the Canadian currency, do not use it.

I realize that there are not many alternate choices but such is life. You can not avoid taxation either. Central banking is an alternate form of taxation. If you believe taxation is right, it makes no sense to argue central banking is wrong. If you believe governments should redistribute wealth, it makes no sense to argue central banking is wrong. If you believe governments should stabilize economies, central banking is actually the best way to do it. Furthermore, central banking AND fiat currency is a good combination to maintain such power. [i still do not support either, but that is neither here nor there at this point.]

PNoob, since you support currency backed 100% by gold like me, I have a question for you:

Imagine a private Canadian miner discovers a brand new gold mine somewhere else in the world and brings his new wealth back to Canada. The private miner is now a multi-billionaire. Now back in Canada, he starts buying everything he needs to live and makes investments in Canada. The Canadian gold-backed currency money supply is now doubled and he get inflation throughout Canada. Should the Canadian government intervene to stabilize the economy? If so, what should the government do?

I think the "government" should leave the economy alone and let the chips fall as they may. What about you?

[PolyNewbie]

Riverwind:If you want people to take you seriously then try to actually present an argument for once.

I have posted links, direct quotes from past presidents and other thinkers on the subject. I have linked free videos. What more do you want ? A 15 minute video on the Canadian Action Party site explains the basic operation of banking - its called "Money As Debt"

Riverwind: hyper inflation is the cost of using the BOC to fund gov't services. This is a fact, every country that tried to do this ended up with hyperinflation and all of the problems that come with it. Deny it if you like but that is the fact.

Thats is true - banking never really worked until the Federal Reserve took over - banks were closing all the time. I suggest that the gov just does whatever the Federal Reserve is doing now. The Fed can print money for nothing and there isn't hyper inflation, why can't we do it ?

Its hard to discuss banking in Canada - its easier to talk about the USA and expect that 95% of what is true dowen there is true up here. There are many books on the Fed but not so many on BOC.

Charles Anthony:They are limited by deposits from both us and the central bank.

Right. Reserve ratios are now about 300 to 1. Even the reserve money is OPM. The point is that they add no useful output to the economy yet make enourmous profits. The danger is not in printing money for nothing and the profits but the awesome power this gives them in directing our society. This is what scares me. These bankers sit on the CFR and are in the Builderbergs. These groups have awesome power and answer to no one.

Charles Anthony:PNoob, since you support currency backed 100% by gold like me, I have a question for you:

I'm not sure that I support the gold standard. Banking is very complex and I don't pretend to completely understand it, what I do understand is that the private banks have more control than anyone and they determine what we learn and the direction of medical research through foundations. Rockefeller bought all the cancer clinics in the 30's and we have no cure for it. I know from reading Perkins "Confessions Of An Economic Hit Man" how the banks take control of countries and ruin their economies and convert the people to slave labour. I can see that process happening around us with the destruction of manufactering and its replacement by a service economy. I know the banks do not answer to governments - its the other way around.

My idea on banking policy is that governments should control banking and policy should be determined by intellectuals working for governments.

[Charles Anthony]

Thats is true - banking never really worked until the Federal Reserve took over - banks were closing all the time. I suggest that the gov just does whatever the Federal Reserve is doing now. The Fed can print money for nothing and there isn't hyper inflation, why can't we do it ?

Are you kidding?? Again, you have things all mixed up!

The Bank of Canada is far better than The Fed for controlling inflation.

Its hard to discuss banking in Canada - its easier to talk about the USA and expect that 95% of what is true dowen there is true up here. There are many books on the Fed but not so many on BOC.

This is ridiculous! It is hard to discuss banking in Canada with people who do not know how central banking works.

You know why there are no books on the Bank of Canada? because the policy at the bank of Canada is clear (control inflation) and they do not waver like The Fed does. Why would you write a book with only two words?

The danger is not in printing money for nothing and the profits but the awesome power this gives them in directing our society. This is what scares me. These bankers sit on the CFR and are in the Builderbergs. These groups have awesome power and answer to no one.

I actually agree with you (on principle; in the same way that I object to taxation) that the government should not have that control. However, I do not think that your fear of Builderbergs or CFR (whatever that is?!?) is warranted in Canada. It is to everybody's advantage in Canada to have minimal inflation.

I'm not sure that I support the gold standard.

That is it!

You send me on a wild-goose chase:

- you referred to a 40 minute video

- I watched your 40 minute video

- the video did NOT support your argument (although it was a good video)

- you said your reference to the video was ONLY to support the gold standard

- after I ask you to defend the inherent instability of the gold standard

- you now say you do not support the gold standard

Banking is very complex and I don't pretend to completely understand it,

Actually, yes, you do pretend to completely understand it.

what I do understand is that the private banks have more control than anyone and they determine what we learn and the direction of medical research through foundations.

I do not care.

Your argument is like saying Bill Gates controls the type of computer operating systems that are most popular.

or

Elvis Presley (or Michael Jackson) controls the standard by which we judge good Rock And Roll (Or Pop) music.

or

The teachers' unions control how much of our youth is wasted staring at blackboards and taking things for granted and becoming submissive fools.

or

The person walking down the street and buying a poutine from the chip-wagon controls the livelihood of the fry-guy.

Big deal! Rich people do rich things and that includes sponsoring research. Of course they have biases and they want to make more money.

Rockefeller bought all the cancer clinics in the 30's and we have no cure for it.

Nobody owes you a cure.

My idea on banking policy is that governments should control banking and policy should be determined by intellectuals working for governments.

Why? If somebody wants to deposit their money in a fractional reserve bank, why not let them?

By the way, did you get that from the Von Mises Institute, by any chance?