Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Sorry Wrong. The Federal Reserve Bank a PRIVATELY-OWNED BANK. Who owns the Fed?
Look at the chart. Do you see JP Morgan? of the recent Bear Sterns JP Morgan deal?
Sorry. Wrong. The Federal Reserve System is not "owned" by anyone and is not a private, profit-making institution. Instead, it is an independent entity within the government, having both public purposes and private aspects.
As the nation's central bank, the Federal Reserve derives its authority from the U.S. Congress. It is considered an independent central bank because its decisions do not have to be ratified by the President or anyone else in the executive or legislative branch of government, it does not receive funding appropriated by Congress, and the terms of the members of the Board of Governors span multiple presidential and congressional terms. However, the Federal Reserve is subject to oversight by Congress, which periodically reviews its activities and can alter its responsibilities by statute. Also, the Federal Reserve must work within the framework of the overall objectives of economic and financial policy established by the government. Therefore, the Federal Reserve can be more accurately described as "independent within the government."
The twelve regional Federal Reserve Banks, which were established by Congress as the operating arms of the nation's central banking system, are organized much like private corporations--possibly leading to some confusion about "ownership." For example, the Reserve Banks issue shares of stock to member banks. However, owning Reserve Bank stock is quite different from owning stock in a private company. The Reserve Banks are not operated for profit, and ownership of a certain amount of stock is, by law, a condition of membership in the System. The stock may not be sold, traded, or pledged as security for a loan; dividends are, by law, 6 percent per year.
And by the way, the sentence should read, "The Federal Reserve is a privately-owned bank." But even with the grammer corrected it is still an incorrect statement.
Sorry. Wrong. The Federal Reserve System is not "owned" by anyone and is not a private, profit-making institution. Instead, it is an independent entity within the government, having both public purposes and private aspects.
As the nation's central bank, the Federal Reserve derives its authority from the U.S. Congress. It is considered an independent central bank because its decisions do not have to be ratified by the President or anyone else in the executive or legislative branch of government, it does not receive funding appropriated by Congress, and the terms of the members of the Board of Governors span multiple presidential and congressional terms. However, the Federal Reserve is subject to oversight by Congress, which periodically reviews its activities and can alter its responsibilities by statute. Also, the Federal Reserve must work within the framework of the overall objectives of economic and financial policy established by the government. Therefore, the Federal Reserve can be more accurately described as "independent within the government."
The twelve regional Federal Reserve Banks, which were established by Congress as the operating arms of the nation's central banking system, are organized much like private corporations--possibly leading to some confusion about "ownership." For example, the Reserve Banks issue shares of stock to member banks. However, owning Reserve Bank stock is quite different from owning stock in a private company. The Reserve Banks are not operated for profit, and ownership of a certain amount of stock is, by law, a condition of membership in the System. The stock may not be sold, traded, or pledged as security for a loan; dividends are, by law, 6 percent per year.
And by the way, the sentence should read, "The Federal Reserve is a privately-owned bank." But even with the grammer corrected it is still an incorrect statement.
Sorry about the incorrect grammar. Sometimes I do err when putting thought to paper. This brings up the point of original thought.
Your post is almost verbatim "cut and paste" from FRB: FAQs: Federal Reserve System (http://federalreserve.gov/generalinfo/faq/faqfrs.htm - broken link)
the official site of the Federal Reserve.
When I quote another's work, I remember to credit the source. This gives the reader an opportunity to check out my sources.
And Oh BTW "grammer" in incorrectly spelled in your post.
I hope this is helpful. grammer
Wow. It sounds like you don't believe people should take out a mortgage unless they have enough money the bank to cover it. Don't you think there is a difference between irresponsibility and unforeseen circumstances?
I've previously stated more than once that yes, there are people who genuinely suffer some sort of catastrophic financial setback that is out of their control (such as a major medical emergency).
Sorry about the incorrect grammar. Sometimes I do err when putting thought to paper. This brings up the point of original thought.
Your post is almost verbatim "cut and paste" from FRB: FAQs: Federal Reserve System (http://federalreserve.gov/generalinfo/faq/faqfrs.htm - broken link)
the official site of the Federal Reserve.
When I quote another's work, I remember to credit the source. This gives the reader an opportunity to check out my sources.
And Oh BTW "grammer" in incorrectly spelled in your post.
I hope this is helpful. grammer
It seems you did not need the reference spelled out as you so readily found the source of my material. Either way, it does prove that you were, in fact, incorrect about your assumption. Sorry about the misspelled word. This thing doesn't have spellcheck!
It seems you did not need the reference spelled out as you so readily found the source of my material. Either way, it does prove that you were, in fact, incorrect about your assumption. Sorry about the misspelled word. This thing doesn't have spellcheck!
It does indeed have "spellcheck".
I did not need the reference but it is common to quote sources when you "quote" them since it saves time in searching the internet. I have been to that site on many occasions and have independently studied the Federal Reserve System and it's origin.
I don't want to get into a "He said-She said" match on this subject since it is straying too far from the thread IMO.
I still stand by my original statement and If you forgive me, I'll leave it at that.
Sorry about the incorrect grammar. Sometimes I do err when putting thought to paper. This brings up the point of original thought.
Your post is almost verbatim "cut and paste" from FRB: FAQs: Federal Reserve System (http://federalreserve.gov/generalinfo/faq/faqfrs.htm - broken link)
the official site of the Federal Reserve.
When I quote another's work, I remember to credit the source. This gives the reader an opportunity to check out my sources.
And Oh BTW "grammer" in incorrectly spelled in your post.
I hope this is helpful. grammer
He refuted your point. You respond with a non sequitur.
An interesting article appeared in the NYTimes yesterday (3/20/08). http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/20/bu...2&ref=business
A tidbit of information appeared in the final paragraph that, if true should provide a seed and start to unravel the mortgage bubble and level the playing field.
....... (emphasis mine)
Mr. Geller said he had heard of just one loan balance reduction won by a borrower.
That borrower, a real estate consultant in California who did not want to be identified because he feared angering his lender, said he used his understanding of state law to negotiate the refinancing. He bought a condominium two years ago for $450,000 and invested another $50,000 for improvements. His ARM had a 5.5 percent initial rate that was soon resetting to 7.25 percent. But his condo is now worth only about $350,000.
His lender agreed to give him a 6 percent fixed-rate mortgage and, he said, to knock $135,000 off the principal. The agreement came only after he stopped paying his mortgage for two months.
Remarkable. The borrower essentially had to play "chicken" with the lender by stopping payments to give evidence that he was prepared to go the distance. The terms and the discount seem extraordinarily large to me. I can only guess that the additional cost to the lender must be very high to offer such a large discount. California is a non-recourse state so the lender would be left hanging if the default proceeded to the logical end. As in all stories such as this "Your mileage may vary"
We don't know the whole story and I certainly wouldn't proceed down this path without sound legal advice. I'm sure there were many variables in this case. I would have loved to be a fly on the wall during discussions on this deal.
It looks as though the situation is heating up. I'm seeing more websites and advertizments for companies that "show" you how to "Walk Away". The Administration shake their finger and say "Shame on you Borrowers for not paying up" and Bernanke is telling the lenders "to cut a deal"
Does any one on this thread know of any other deals such as this? I've heard of one other but the game has not played out fully as of yet.
I'm about to "walk away" from the two loans - HOA and mortgage - co-owned with my aunt. We are in the process of finalizing a settlement wherein she returns my investments in full, I quit claim all interests to the property to her and drop the partition. My attorney told me that the loans as they are now are cash loans, that if either or both are defaulted only my credit is damaged. My aunt will be fully responsible for making sure that doesn't happen. Should it happen, she gets hurt more than I do (financially speaking). She used me as a co-signer to purchase a property for her own profit, and went out of hand by purchasing 6 other properties on her own. She has also lied and withheld information regarding our property, including not collecting rent from tenants. I want to move on and move out of state. She once told me not to trust strangers because they lie and cheat. Ironically, the one who's been lying and cheating is my own aunt.
Last edited by jobless; 04-22-2008 at 10:25 AM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Sorry Wrong Again
