First Page
Previous Page
Posted 05/12/2008 02:47 am
Yes, I've heard the "independent within the government" line before. Sounds like the President huh?
And yes, the Congress could repeal the Act, but why would they? Paying for trillion dollar wars, social programs, and pet projects would be just a tad harder without the ease in which the bills of credit float around Washington. And besides, if two canditates run for office and one is pro-FED and one is anti-FED, who do you think 9 times out of ten raised the most campaign funding? The Federal government and the Federal Reserve are simply "in bed together". The system is good for both of them.
As to the legality of the Central Bank, which their website seems to mention quite a few times, any bill/law that is out of whack with the Constitution is void and itself illegal. It does not matter if the law is a good and effective one (which it usually isn't). No act of Congress, order from the President, or decision by the courts can violate the Constitution.
Only the Congress has this power. No one else, an individual or a corporation, can claim this power. The Congress also does not have the power to push this awesome responsibility onto another. It matters not how effective, or ineffective, another might be with the power, Congress alone coins money in these united states.
Booms and busts are created in this system. They bring havoc to the masses but profits to those aware of the scheme.
From 1914-1919 the FED increased the money supply by almost 100%. Loans to smaller banks, and by extension, to the people were common and easy to come by. In 1920 the fed called in a huge number of their loans to the small banks. The small banks then called in their loans to "pay the piper". The result: bank runs, bank closure, and financial run. More than 5000 banks outside the Federal Reserve System collapased.
From 1921-1929 once again the money supply was increased, this time by over 60%. Same as before, loans were being granted left and right. The infamous Margin Loans made their last stand here. Bascially, Margin Loans allow the investor to put down 10% of the cost of a stock with the bank paying the other 90%. The investor had 100% control of the stock. You purchase $1000 worth of stock but only pay $100. Not a bad deal. However....these loans can be called in at anytime for anyreason and had to be paid within 24 hours. No biggie--just sell your stock and pay the loan. Enter the Bankers. They all decide to leave the Stock Market in late summer/early fall 1929. Late October '29, mass amounts of Margin Loans are called in. Panic once again breaks out among the massess--bank runs, stock fire-sales, and collapse...16,000 independent banks go under. THe Rockerfellers and friends then buy up tons of stock (and sometimes entire corportations) at ridiculously low prices. The FED goes on to reduce the money supply further which turned the Panic of 1929 into the Great Depression. Oh, I almost forgot, they then go on to forcibly steal all the gold in the nation, trying to "end" the depression that had purposly caused for their own greedy ends. And don't think they never did it again--things liek this have happened many, many times since...they took out Bear Sterns just a few weeks ago!
But, I suppose we're both right in our own ways. You outline the clean, professional image the Federal Reserve just loves to project. I highlighted just a few of their darkest secerts--there are plenty more I can assure you.
If you truely want to reign in the Congress' spending habits, the Fed must go. Traditionally, the gov't got most of their funding through tariffs, which keep their spending low and waste was nearly unheard of. Nowadays, a bridge-to-no-where here and a steal-from-the-middle-class-give-to-the-lower-class-while-protecting-our-own-butts there and we've got our selves a congress! lol too many -'s I know. The point is, the two feed off each other. One must go before the other can be controlled....and I'd much prefer to see the Congress stick around for at least a few hundred more years
--gary
OH, in the 5th paragraph of my last post I mispoke--it was the Panic of 1907, not 1913, that I was referring to.
And yes, the Congress could repeal the Act, but why would they? Paying for trillion dollar wars, social programs, and pet projects would be just a tad harder without the ease in which the bills of credit float around Washington. And besides, if two canditates run for office and one is pro-FED and one is anti-FED, who do you think 9 times out of ten raised the most campaign funding? The Federal government and the Federal Reserve are simply "in bed together". The system is good for both of them.As to the legality of the Central Bank, which their website seems to mention quite a few times, any bill/law that is out of whack with the Constitution is void and itself illegal. It does not matter if the law is a good and effective one (which it usually isn't). No act of Congress, order from the President, or decision by the courts can violate the Constitution.
Quote:
The Congress shall have power. To coin money, regulate the value thereof, and of foreign coin, and fix the standard of weights and measures.
The Congress shall have power. To coin money, regulate the value thereof, and of foreign coin, and fix the standard of weights and measures.
Only the Congress has this power. No one else, an individual or a corporation, can claim this power. The Congress also does not have the power to push this awesome responsibility onto another. It matters not how effective, or ineffective, another might be with the power, Congress alone coins money in these united states.
Booms and busts are created in this system. They bring havoc to the masses but profits to those aware of the scheme.
From 1914-1919 the FED increased the money supply by almost 100%. Loans to smaller banks, and by extension, to the people were common and easy to come by. In 1920 the fed called in a huge number of their loans to the small banks. The small banks then called in their loans to "pay the piper". The result: bank runs, bank closure, and financial run. More than 5000 banks outside the Federal Reserve System collapased.
From 1921-1929 once again the money supply was increased, this time by over 60%. Same as before, loans were being granted left and right. The infamous Margin Loans made their last stand here. Bascially, Margin Loans allow the investor to put down 10% of the cost of a stock with the bank paying the other 90%. The investor had 100% control of the stock. You purchase $1000 worth of stock but only pay $100. Not a bad deal. However....these loans can be called in at anytime for anyreason and had to be paid within 24 hours. No biggie--just sell your stock and pay the loan. Enter the Bankers. They all decide to leave the Stock Market in late summer/early fall 1929. Late October '29, mass amounts of Margin Loans are called in. Panic once again breaks out among the massess--bank runs, stock fire-sales, and collapse...16,000 independent banks go under. THe Rockerfellers and friends then buy up tons of stock (and sometimes entire corportations) at ridiculously low prices. The FED goes on to reduce the money supply further which turned the Panic of 1929 into the Great Depression. Oh, I almost forgot, they then go on to forcibly steal all the gold in the nation, trying to "end" the depression that had purposly caused for their own greedy ends. And don't think they never did it again--things liek this have happened many, many times since...they took out Bear Sterns just a few weeks ago!
But, I suppose we're both right in our own ways. You outline the clean, professional image the Federal Reserve just loves to project. I highlighted just a few of their darkest secerts--there are plenty more I can assure you.
If you truely want to reign in the Congress' spending habits, the Fed must go. Traditionally, the gov't got most of their funding through tariffs, which keep their spending low and waste was nearly unheard of. Nowadays, a bridge-to-no-where here and a steal-from-the-middle-class-give-to-the-lower-class-while-protecting-our-own-butts there and we've got our selves a congress! lol too many -'s I know. The point is, the two feed off each other. One must go before the other can be controlled....and I'd much prefer to see the Congress stick around for at least a few hundred more years
--gary
OH, in the 5th paragraph of my last post I mispoke--it was the Panic of 1907, not 1913, that I was referring to.
Edited by GFR3
05/12/2008 02:52 am
05/12/2008 02:52 am
Be prepared my friends, and strengthen the things that remain.
