|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
jaykimf
Joined: 24 Apr 2004
|
 Posted: Wed Aug 26, 2009 11:20 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| visitorq wrote: |
| gakduki wrote: |
| I thought someone on Dave's would have caught on to the fact that he is just another puppet and his decisions are not made in the interest of the average American. He is simply told what to do and he does it. We don't need another scapegoat until someone decides to lynch him. WHERE's the CHANGE OBAMA? |
You have kind of a point. What someone really needs to do is put a few bullets into David the Kingpin Rockefeller. That would be a start.
But as bacasper mentions, we don't even really know who all the shareholders are. Because the Fed has never been audited. We can make pretty good guesses in some cases, but the ownership of the Fed as a private corporation goes back all the way to 1913. For all we know, it's the bloody Rothschilds who own the biggest slice of the pie. The first thing to do is force audit these criminals, so we actually identify them, then bring them down for good.
As for BB, well he's still a criminal, scapegoat or otherwise, and fully deserves to be put in jail for his crimes. |
"The public/private nature of the institution has given rise to the claim that the Fed is a "private corporation." This claim is not correct. Part of the system consists of private corporations. Part is a federal agency.
The Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System is a government agency. Its employees are employees of the federal government, paid in accordance with federal government pay scales, and part of the federal employee retirement system. The premises are federal government property. The seven Board members are appointed by the President with advice and consent of the Senate in the same fashion as other government appointees.
Under the supervision of the Board of Governors are 12 regional Federal Reserve Banks. These are private institutions with certain privileges granted to them, restricted to conducting business specified by the Federal Reserve Act. As private institutions, they are "owned" by their "stockholders," they make their own pay and hiring policies, and pay local property taxes.
For some purposes, however, they are treated as instrumentalities of the federal government. They examine, regulate, and supervise some operations of their member banks: a public sector function. Hence, they are exempt from state and local income taxes. They are also treated as government agencies with respect to certain statutes. But for most other purposes, the 12 regional banks are legally regarded as private. " http://home.hiwaay.net/~becraft/FRS-myth.htm#hd3
"It has been commonly reported that the Federal Reserve is exempt from audits, or that it has never been audited, or that the General Accounting Office (GAO) cannot audit the Fed. This is not true. The Federal Reserve has always had an audit program for the Board of Governors and the regional Federal Reserve Banks, with the arrangements varying, including internal and external examinations. But these have always been independent audits or complete audits. GAO can and indeed does audit many aspects of the Fed's operations; but some of the Fed's activities are off-limits to GAO inspection.
The Board of Governors is required by the Federal Reserve Act to examine the accounts, books, and affairs of the regional Federal Reserve Banks. This is in addition to the Board's oversight and supervision of regional Federal Reserve Bank activities. The operation reviews include open market and international transactions. The Board also examines compliance with approved procedures, policies, and regulations.
From 1914 to 1921, the Board of Governors was audited by the Treasury. From the creation of the GAO in 1921 until 1933, the Board of Governors (but not the regional Federal Reserve Banks and branches) was under the GAO's jurisdiction. In 1933, the Board of Governors was removed from the GAO's jurisdiction. From 1933 to 1952, audit teams from the regional Federal Reserve Banks performed the examination of the Board of Governors' books. A private accounting firm has audited the Board of Governors' balance sheet from 1952 to the present.
In 1978, the Federal Reserve's Office of Inspector General was given authority to conduct audits, operations reviews, and investigations of Board of Governors' programs and operations. In addition, GAO was given authority to audit the Board of Governors and the regional Federal Reserve Banks, branches, and facilities, subject to the limitation that it could not examine the Fed's foreign exchange and open market monetary policy actions.
One of the difficulties in understanding the audit issue is in the different types of audits. Most people think of audits as financial audits. These are principally concerned with whether an institution has spent the money and maintains the funds as it has claimed in its financial statements, and whether it is complying with procedures designed to safeguard it from misappropriation of funds. This is no doubt the kind of audit most people have in mind when expressing their concern over whether the Fed gets audited.
But audits are also designed to review management efficiency and to evaluate the policy of an institution. It is the latter kind of audits that are the reason for the restrictions on GAO's audit authority over the Fed. The concern is that more extensive audits will become policy evaluations second-guessing the Fed's monetary policy, and not examinations of Federal Reserve financial safeguards and procedures. Under current law, policy is reviewed twice annually by the Congress. " http://home.hiwaay.net/~becraft/FRS-myth.htm#hd12
Of course I don't expect you will even bother to read this entire post let alone the source given. Instead you will call me an idiot or some such and parrot your favorite crackpots. You believe what you have chosen to believe and to hell with the facts. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 26, 2009 11:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
It isn't that simple. 6 of 9 governors of each of the regional banks is picked by shareholders, and the other via a public process. 6 of 9 is a majority. though the profits are repatriated, the private shareholders control who controls the actual Fed banks. In effect, the banks monitor/regulate themselves as this regulator responsibility is delegated to the regional FR banks. Is it any wonder the system benefits the banks and not the 'people'? Go take a look at what inflation does to a society, with particular focus on inequality.
It is an extremely complicated system. Extremely. I've read several books about it, both from more marginal and completely mainstream sources and I still couldn't explain the whole process of "money" creation from start to finish with any confidence. I've studied monetary policy at the graduate level. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 26, 2009 11:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
Also, the Fed makes it up as it goes. It only loosely resembles the institution that was created in 1913-14. In fact, it is now paying interest on reserves.
http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2008/04/29/fed-paying-interest-on-reserves-an-old-idea-with-a-new-urgency/
But I'm wondering.. Why will this particular batch of fiat currencies not fall to zero? What has changed? In my mind, the only change is that the propaganda model supporting the perception of value is extremely sophisticated AND the power of those who most benefit is vast, and linked with the propaganda model (see CNBC/GE Capital). This doesn't make me confident that the cash in my pocket will still have any value when I'm looking to retire. The fundamental problem of a government with unlimited wants and an unlimited printing press stands. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Pluto
Joined: 19 Dec 2006
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 26, 2009 11:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
| mises wrote: |
| But I'm wondering.. Why will this particular batch of fiat currencies not fall to zero? What has changed? In my mind, the only change is that the propaganda model supporting the perception of value is extremely sophisticated AND the power of those who most benefit is vast, and linked with the propaganda model (see CNBC/GE Capital). This doesn't make me confident that the cash in my pocket will still have any value when I'm looking to retire. The fundamental problem of a government with unlimited wants and an unlimited printing press stands. |
I've thought about this too. There may be something to green shoots puke that the financial media spew out, but I don't think people are that stupid. Roman emperors inflated the money supply by diminishing the amount of gold and silver placed in each coin, but they (the populace of Rome weren't fooled) continued to demand more coins as the amount of precious metal in each coin diminished. I'm also sure Rome had her propoganda machines as well. So what is different about today? Despite the inflation, despite the inequality caused by the fed and its inflation, despite the continued power grabs by beltway politicians, despite it all, everyone, especially Americans, are richer than at any time in human history. We are living longer with the highest standard of living ever enjoyed... ever. I think that is why the dollar as well as other paper currencies are still used as media of exchange. I say still because I don't believe the fiat charade can last forever; it will end one day. So my hypothisis is basically this: There is a corrolation between how rich a people are and how much people are willing to accept a paper (fiat) medium of exchange. The cause is something I simply don't know, but I would like to see this idea studied more. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 26, 2009 11:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
| ^ I agree. There is a strong relationship between our standard of living and the general faith in the currency. Also, we are trusting not of politicians but of democracy, etc. The End of History (things are as they will be for ever), and all that. However, fiat is freeloading on this. Fiat is not the source of our increased standard of living. Science is. An open society is. Fiat is a means to transfer wealth from us to them, down -- up. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jaykimf
Joined: 24 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 26, 2009 12:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Mises; In many respects, I believe your analysis is often mistaken. However, there are intelligent and plausible arguments that can be made against the structure and policies of the fed (or other economic issues). I think you are smart enough to make intelligent and plausible arguments and generally speaking you do. In fact I do respect your opinion , even when I disagree with your conclusions. Obviously you have studied economics and understand it well enough that you can do more than parrot the crackpots. As you say it is a complicated subject. People like visitorq obviously don't understand how complicated it is. Instead they choose to believe the simplistic finger pointing of the crackpots and can do nothing more than parrot those crackpots, even to the extent that they have to deny easily verifiable facts such as the Fed remits its profits to the U.S. Treasury. Anyway, you, for one, are no idiot. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jaykimf
Joined: 24 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 26, 2009 3:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mises wrote: |
It isn't that simple. 6 of 9 governors of each of the regional banks is picked by shareholders, and the other via a public process. 6 of 9 is a majority. though the profits are repatriated, the private shareholders control who controls the actual Fed banks. In effect, the banks monitor/regulate themselves as this regulator responsibility is delegated to the regional FR banks. Is it any wonder the system benefits the banks and not the 'people'? Go take a look at what inflation does to a society, with particular focus on inequality.
It is an extremely complicated system. Extremely. I've read several books about it, both from more marginal and completely mainstream sources and I still couldn't explain the whole process of "money" creation from start to finish with any confidence. I've studied monetary policy at the graduate level. |
It certainly is debatable to what extent the structure of the fed allows it to pursue policies that are in the best interest of the banks as opposed to the best interests of the public. However, visitorq's contention that we don't know who owns the fed because it has never been audited is absolute nonsense. It is quite clear that the regional fed branches are owned by the banks who are members of the fed. Citibank owns its share as does Bank of America and every other bank that is a member of the fed. Who owns citibank and the rest? For the most part, they are publicly traded corporations. Auditing the fed will tell you nothing about who owns or controls citibank and the rest. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 26, 2009 7:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
True. But the reason to audit the Fed relates to the bailouts, currency swaps and other such stuff. Also, there is not entirely baseless speculation that the Fed runs off balance sheet hedge funds in the Caymans and also trades directly into equity markets to enforce a floor.
The bottom line is that it is too secretive, confusing and frankly has completely failed at what it was built to do.
Some related Fed stuff from my google reader today:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3pwAFohWBL4
http://www.gata.org/node/7708
| Quote: |
We know that MorganChase and the Fed are essentially the same entity because MorganChase was selected by the Fed to take over Bear Stearns for $2 per share with no due diligence and apparently no competitive tender between rival banks. When Bear Stearns shareholders protested the $2 per share offer, it was arbitrarily increased to $10 per share. What normal enterprise could suddenly increase a takeover bid by 400 percent without batting an eye in times of great financial stress?
But if you have a money-printing press, who cares what you pay for Bear Stearns?
If MorganChase has access to unlimited dollars, then the firm can roll its Comex futures indefinitely and never have to deliver and never have to cover. But this does not imply that the firm does not care about the silver price rising. The firm's whole raison d'etre as the big short in Comex silver is to cap the price. I think MorganChase does care if the price of silver rises because the Fed doesn't want that. |
http://www.chrismartenson.com/blog/shell-game-how-federal-reserve-monetizing-debt/25806
^ must read.
Whatever the Fed was intended to do are irrelevant compared to what it has done and is doing. I'm in the camp that humans make the institutions and I believe a better Fed Chair would be a better Fed. Guess we gotta wait 4 years for that. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bacasper
Joined: 26 Mar 2007
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 26, 2009 8:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| jaykimf wrote: |
"The public/private nature of the institution has given rise to the claim that the Fed is a "private corporation." This claim is not correct. Part of the system consists of private corporations. Part is a federal agency.
The Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System is a government agency. Its employees are employees of the federal government, paid in accordance with federal government pay scales, and part of the federal employee retirement system. The premises are federal government property. The seven Board members are appointed by the President with advice and consent of the Senate in the same fashion as other government appointees.
Under the supervision of the Board of Governors are 12 regional Federal Reserve Banks. These are private institutions with certain privileges granted to them, restricted to conducting business specified by the Federal Reserve Act. As private institutions, they are "owned" by their "stockholders," they make their own pay and hiring policies, and pay local property taxes.
For some purposes, however, they are treated as instrumentalities of the federal government. They examine, regulate, and supervise some operations of their member banks: a public sector function. Hence, they are exempt from state and local income taxes. They are also treated as government agencies with respect to certain statutes. But for most other purposes, the 12 regional banks are legally regarded as private. " http://home.hiwaay.net/~becraft/FRS-myth.htm#hd3
"It has been commonly reported that the Federal Reserve is exempt from audits, or that it has never been audited, or that the General Accounting Office (GAO) cannot audit the Fed. This is not true. The Federal Reserve has always had an audit program for the Board of Governors and the regional Federal Reserve Banks, with the arrangements varying, including internal and external examinations. But these have always been independent audits or complete audits. GAO can and indeed does audit many aspects of the Fed's operations; but some of the Fed's activities are off-limits to GAO inspection.
The Board of Governors is required by the Federal Reserve Act to examine the accounts, books, and affairs of the regional Federal Reserve Banks. This is in addition to the Board's oversight and supervision of regional Federal Reserve Bank activities. The operation reviews include open market and international transactions. The Board also examines compliance with approved procedures, policies, and regulations.
From 1914 to 1921, the Board of Governors was audited by the Treasury. From the creation of the GAO in 1921 until 1933, the Board of Governors (but not the regional Federal Reserve Banks and branches) was under the GAO's jurisdiction. In 1933, the Board of Governors was removed from the GAO's jurisdiction. From 1933 to 1952, audit teams from the regional Federal Reserve Banks performed the examination of the Board of Governors' books. A private accounting firm has audited the Board of Governors' balance sheet from 1952 to the present.
In 1978, the Federal Reserve's Office of Inspector General was given authority to conduct audits, operations reviews, and investigations of Board of Governors' programs and operations. In addition, GAO was given authority to audit the Board of Governors and the regional Federal Reserve Banks, branches, and facilities, subject to the limitation that it could not examine the Fed's foreign exchange and open market monetary policy actions.
One of the difficulties in understanding the audit issue is in the different types of audits. Most people think of audits as financial audits. These are principally concerned with whether an institution has spent the money and maintains the funds as it has claimed in its financial statements, and whether it is complying with procedures designed to safeguard it from misappropriation of funds. This is no doubt the kind of audit most people have in mind when expressing their concern over whether the Fed gets audited.
But audits are also designed to review management efficiency and to evaluate the policy of an institution. It is the latter kind of audits that are the reason for the restrictions on GAO's audit authority over the Fed. The concern is that more extensive audits will become policy evaluations second-guessing the Fed's monetary policy, and not examinations of Federal Reserve financial safeguards and procedures. Under current law, policy is reviewed twice annually by the Congress. " http://home.hiwaay.net/~becraft/FRS-myth.htm#hd12
Of course I don't expect you will even bother to read this entire post let alone the source given. Instead you will call me an idiot or some such and parrot your favorite crackpots. You believe what you have chosen to believe and to hell with the facts. |
Your very informative post is diminished by your last paragraph.
Anyway, to see if I understand correctly, which audit have most Congresspeople signed onto for HR1207? That of the Fed's foreign exchange and open market monetary policy? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
visitorq
Joined: 11 Jan 2008
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 27, 2009 1:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
| jaykimf wrote: |
| visitorq wrote: |
| jaykimf wrote: |
| Who cares what professional economists think about Bernanke. What do they know? The consensus of the hagwon monkeys who post at Dave's ESL cafe is that Bernanke is a complete failure. Obviously teaching English at a Hagwon in Korea for a year or two gives insights that just can't be matched by having spent one's entire adult life studying economics. Besides Bernanke isn't even a libertarian and doesn't realize that government is to blame for everything. Furthermore, as someone has noted, he doesn't do drugs but if he did do drugs he might get something right. |
The only failure here is you, the most useless poster on here. And that's not even mentioning your smug arrogance on all things you are wrong about. Seriously, how many logical fallacies can you cram into a single post?
You don't even know what the Fed is. |
This from the self professed economics expert who doesn't even know that the Fed remits its profits to the U.S. Treasury. That is a readily verifiable fact that you simply refuse to believe. Instead you choose to believe the crackpot conspiracy theorists. You have no idea what you are talking about. All you do is parrot the crackpots.
"The Fed owns less than 10% of the government's total debt. The interest earned on the debt created by the Fed is turned over to the Treasury (except for an amount to cover the Fed's operating costs), so that the revenue consequences of having the Fed issue Federal Reserve notes is essentially the same as having its own currency directly." http://home.hiwaay.net/~becraft/FRS-myth.htm#hd0 |
This is an outright lie. The Fed DOES NOT turn the interest over to the treasury. The government pays interest to the Fed. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bacasper
Joined: 26 Mar 2007
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 27, 2009 3:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
| visitorq wrote: |
| jaykimf wrote: |
This from the self professed economics expert who doesn't even know that the Fed remits its profits to the U.S. Treasury. That is a readily verifiable fact that you simply refuse to believe. Instead you choose to believe the crackpot conspiracy theorists. You have no idea what you are talking about. All you do is parrot the crackpots.
"The Fed owns less than 10% of the government's total debt. The interest earned on the debt created by the Fed is turned over to the Treasury (except for an amount to cover the Fed's operating costs), so that the revenue consequences of having the Fed issue Federal Reserve notes is essentially the same as having its own currency directly." http://home.hiwaay.net/~becraft/FRS-myth.htm#hd0 |
This is an outright lie. The Fed DOES NOT turn the interest over to the treasury. The government pays interest to the Fed. |
Visitor, this was my impression as well, and Jaykimf, your link is broken.
Can we get any confirmation or refutation of this? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
visitorq
Joined: 11 Jan 2008
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 27, 2009 3:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
| bacasper wrote: |
| visitorq wrote: |
| jaykimf wrote: |
This from the self professed economics expert who doesn't even know that the Fed remits its profits to the U.S. Treasury. That is a readily verifiable fact that you simply refuse to believe. Instead you choose to believe the crackpot conspiracy theorists. You have no idea what you are talking about. All you do is parrot the crackpots.
"The Fed owns less than 10% of the government's total debt. The interest earned on the debt created by the Fed is turned over to the Treasury (except for an amount to cover the Fed's operating costs), so that the revenue consequences of having the Fed issue Federal Reserve notes is essentially the same as having its own currency directly." http://home.hiwaay.net/~becraft/FRS-myth.htm#hd0 |
This is an outright lie. The Fed DOES NOT turn the interest over to the treasury. The government pays interest to the Fed. |
Visitor, this was my impression as well, and Jaykimf, your link is broken.
Can we get any confirmation or refutation of this? |
It's so obvious - think of it this way: if 100% of US debt is dollar denominated, and 100% created by the Federal Reserve (at interest), then one way or another it is all owed to the Fed (or to put it more practically, it is owed to the banking cartel, which owns the Fed). Same goes for interest owed on all that debt. Period.
Even if the Chinese or Saudis etc. etc. hold treasury bonds, all that money is originally from the Fed banks (there is only one US currency). It is ALL issued as debt. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bacasper
Joined: 26 Mar 2007
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 27, 2009 3:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
| visitorq wrote: |
| bacasper wrote: |
| visitorq wrote: |
| jaykimf wrote: |
This from the self professed economics expert who doesn't even know that the Fed remits its profits to the U.S. Treasury. That is a readily verifiable fact that you simply refuse to believe. Instead you choose to believe the crackpot conspiracy theorists. You have no idea what you are talking about. All you do is parrot the crackpots.
"The Fed owns less than 10% of the government's total debt. The interest earned on the debt created by the Fed is turned over to the Treasury (except for an amount to cover the Fed's operating costs), so that the revenue consequences of having the Fed issue Federal Reserve notes is essentially the same as having its own currency directly." http://home.hiwaay.net/~becraft/FRS-myth.htm#hd0 |
This is an outright lie. The Fed DOES NOT turn the interest over to the treasury. The government pays interest to the Fed. |
Visitor, this was my impression as well, and Jaykimf, your link is broken.
Can we get any confirmation or refutation of this? |
It's so obvious - think of it this way: if 100% of US debt is dollar denominated, and issued by the Federal Reserve (at interest), then one way or another it is all owed to the Fed. Same goes for at least part of the interest owed on all that debt. Period.
Even if the Chinese or Saudis etc. etc. hold treasury bonds, all that money is originally from the Fed. It is ALL issued as debt. |
Jaykimf claims that the Fed is audited already in some but not all ways. I'd like to see a link or other documentation that interest on the money loaned by the Fed to the government to operate is paid to the US Treasury and not the Fed and/or its banks.
Thinking is all well and good, but even the non-psychotic among us have funny ideas at times. So the mentally healthy person will "test reality" by confirming (or disconfirming) his thoughts with some outside source. That's all I'm asking for. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
visitorq
Joined: 11 Jan 2008
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 27, 2009 3:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
| bacasper wrote: |
| visitorq wrote: |
| bacasper wrote: |
| visitorq wrote: |
| jaykimf wrote: |
This from the self professed economics expert who doesn't even know that the Fed remits its profits to the U.S. Treasury. That is a readily verifiable fact that you simply refuse to believe. Instead you choose to believe the crackpot conspiracy theorists. You have no idea what you are talking about. All you do is parrot the crackpots.
"The Fed owns less than 10% of the government's total debt. The interest earned on the debt created by the Fed is turned over to the Treasury (except for an amount to cover the Fed's operating costs), so that the revenue consequences of having the Fed issue Federal Reserve notes is essentially the same as having its own currency directly." http://home.hiwaay.net/~becraft/FRS-myth.htm#hd0 |
This is an outright lie. The Fed DOES NOT turn the interest over to the treasury. The government pays interest to the Fed. |
Visitor, this was my impression as well, and Jaykimf, your link is broken.
Can we get any confirmation or refutation of this? |
It's so obvious - think of it this way: if 100% of US debt is dollar denominated, and issued by the Federal Reserve (at interest), then one way or another it is all owed to the Fed. Same goes for at least part of the interest owed on all that debt. Period.
Even if the Chinese or Saudis etc. etc. hold treasury bonds, all that money is originally from the Fed. It is ALL issued as debt. |
Jaykimf claims that the Fed is audited already in some but not all ways. I'd like to see a link or other documentation that interest on the money loaned by the Fed to the government to operate is paid to the US Treasury and not the Fed and/or its banks. |
Yeah, he's just spinning more of his BS. Who cares if the Fed was "audited" privately under tight secrecy. We need a public audit. Anything else is worthless.
| Quote: |
Thinking is all well and good, but even the non-psychotic among us have funny ideas at times. So the mentally healthy person will "test reality" by confirming (or disconfirming) his thoughts with some outside source. That's all I'm asking for. |
Well, I should probably take a step back and not pretend to be an expert here. But none of the sources I've ever read have ever mentioned the Fed handing over all its interest to the Treasury. In fact, I've only read the opposite.
When you think about it, why would the Fed even charge interest in the first place, if only to hand it all back? Makes zero sense. Also, that extra $450 billion dollars per year would surely be common knowledge (the gov't would surely propagandize it). I'm guessing there's no way in hell its true. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ubermenzch
Joined: 09 Jun 2008
Location: bundang, south korea
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 27, 2009 3:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
| bacasper wrote: |
| visitorq wrote: |
| jaykimf wrote: |
This from the self professed economics expert who doesn't even know that the Fed remits its profits to the U.S. Treasury. That is a readily verifiable fact that you simply refuse to believe. Instead you choose to believe the crackpot conspiracy theorists. You have no idea what you are talking about. All you do is parrot the crackpots.
"The Fed owns less than 10% of the government's total debt. The interest earned on the debt created by the Fed is turned over to the Treasury (except for an amount to cover the Fed's operating costs), so that the revenue consequences of having the Fed issue Federal Reserve notes is essentially the same as having its own currency directly." http://home.hiwaay.net/~becraft/FRS-myth.htm#hd0 |
This is an outright lie. The Fed DOES NOT turn the interest over to the treasury. The government pays interest to the Fed. |
Visitor, this was my impression as well, and Jaykimf, your link is broken.
Can we get any confirmation or refutation of this? |
The link seems to be working fine now. Whether it confirms or refutes anything I leave to you to judge. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
