Quote:
Originally Posted by las vegas drunk
The USA used to issue money debt free from the treasury before 1913.
|
Not true.
6.5%
Want to know what that is?
That is the interest rate on a 10-year US Treasury Bond....
....in 1840
BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
You just got slam dunked.
Quote:
Originally Posted by las vegas drunk
Then the Federal Reserve was instituted in 1913 that now loaned new money AT INTEREST and used the 16th amendment to institute an income tax on the public to now PAY for the interest. Do you seriously think that is black helicopter stuff?  It is simple economics, so I do not know why you do not get it? |
That is propaganda and disinformation.
Let me explain the facts to you so you don't continue to look stupid.
Let's start with a very simple question: Who issued currency in the US?
Not the US Government.
Oooops.
I do so love how you know-it-alls know nothing.
If the US Government did not issue currency, then who did?
Banks.
Banks were State-chartered. Every State-chartered bank issued currency, yeah, bank-notes. That was a real problem. How much was a $1 bank-note worth? Well, that all depended. A $1 bank-note might be worth only $0.72 or it could be worth $0.18 or it could be worth $0.95 or it could very well be worth $1.
So, you come to me with $10 in bank-notes from Fred's Bank in central Indianar and you want me to do what, exactly? Give you $10? Go to hell. I'll give you $0.50 on the dollar for them. If you don't like it, too freaking bad, take your silly Fred's Bank bank-notes and go somewhere else.
What a great banking system, eh?
Bank-notes were easily forged and many of the banks, well, they were either out of business or insolvent. How are you supposed to know?
Look it up in a magazine. Every month, a number of groups published a magazine showing drawings of what the various bank-notes looked like, or they provided a written description of what it was supposed to look like, and then they published the value of the bank-note and provide other information, like a list of banks that no longer existed and then another list of banks that were in financial trouble.
So here you are, the Merchant of Chicago, and square heads from Minnesota and Wisconsin are coming into to town, along with people from Ohio, Indiana and Michigan, plus you're own State of Illinois with all of these various bank-notes and you don't know anything about them, unless you look them up in your handy-dandy magazine.
And how do you redeem a bank-note? You have to go to the bank that issued it.
Yeah, what a really cool banking system.
So how do we remedy this? We enact the National Banking Acts of 1863 and 1864.
Now we have two more additional chartered banks: National Chartered Banks, and Federally Chartered Banks.
The nationally chartered banks could issue bank-notes if they put money on deposit with the Comptroller of the Currency (in the US Treasury Department).
Those bank-notes
were printed by the US Government, and the amount a bank could issue was dependent on the amount of the deposits with the Comptroller. Now you have bank-notes consisting of a uniform design. That's definitely an improvement.
Additionally, a tax was imposed on bank-notes issued by State-chartered banks. Guess what that did? It put an end to the existence of State-chartered bank-notes and all of the hassles and problems they created.
So now what, you gonna say Greenbacks were debt-free?
That's funny. Let's have a little truth here. First, Lincoln never issued Greenbacks, that was Congress in 1862, and again in 1863, and the reason was to pay for the Civil War by inflating away their debt.
Greenbacks caused Real Inflation in excess of 70% on top of already existing Real Inflation and Cost Inflation, so inflation as a whole (both Real and Cost Inflation) was running at times in excess of 100%.
It was Lincoln who pushed the National Banking Acts of 1863 and 1864 to get rid of the Greenbacks.
Lincoln was pretty smart. He's the one who came up with the 10% tax on State-chartered bank-notes to get rid of them and to also force State-chartered banks to convert to nationally-chartered banks, and then in order to issue bank-notes you had to put money on deposit with the Comptroller.
Did I mention that to put money on deposit you had to buy US Treasury Bonds? Ooops.
So, this "debt-free" nonsense is just that, total nonsense.
Quote:
Originally Posted by las vegas drunk
The former head of the Federal Reserve would rebuke that:
|
I ain't watching no video, but then I don't have to since he doesn't address the comment I made.
Again, there is nothing, absolutely nothing that the Federal Reserve can do that Congress cannot undo, negate or neutralize.
If the Federal Reserves lowers interest rates, Congress can negate that by raising taxes. Or by cutting spending. Or both. Or by taking money out of the money supply.
If the Federal Reserve raises interest rates, Congress can cut taxes, increase spending, add money to the money supply or any combination.
And that is just the short list.
It is Congress who regulates banking, and if Congress wanted to do so, Congress can set the capital requirements for banks, thereby undoing or negating whatever requirements the Federal Reserve has set.
As a point of fact, Congress has set the capital reserve requirements many times throughout history since 1863.
If your Congress does not act, then that is totally your fault, because you aren't working the phones, faxes and e-mails and blogging and twitting to get your representatives to do your bidding.
Economically...
Mircea
Quote:
Originally Posted by AONE
It indeed does need to be removed from our system once and for all.
|
To be replaced by what, Congress?
Would that be the Congress that spent every single penny in the OASI Trust Fund, the OADI Trust Fund and the HI Trust and is preparing to tax you twice to pay for the fact that they recklessly spent all of the money in those three Trust Funds?
Or would that be the Congress who has run up damn near $16 TRILLION in debt?
Or would that be the Congress who cannot even do something as simple as balancing a budget?
Or would that be the Congress who never even blinked when shrimp were running on treadmills and federal employees were having tax-payer funded Jell-O parties?
Or would that be the Congress who constantly votes themselves raises and a generous health and retirement pension plan?
Or would that be the Congress that is owned by Unions, PACs, Think-Tanks, Corporations, Special Interest Groups and any other moistened bimbo waving money around?
Oh, that's just freaking brilliant. Thanks, I feel so much better knowing that Congress will be in charge.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AONE
Ron Paul has a simplify platform that includes elimination of the Fed.
|
To our Planet, Welcome!
Since this is your first hour on Planet in Earth in the territory of the United States, I will explain to you the facts of life:
Doctor Ron Paul and say any-freaking-thing he wants to say, but as President, he has no freaking power to do squat.
Paul will eliminate "the Fed" if and ony if Congress introduces and passes a bill that says exaclty that, and since Ron Paul has only managed to get one out of 432 pieces of legislation passed, I'd say Paul's change of gettinga bill to end the Federal Reserve passed are about 0.23%.
Constitutionally...
Mircea
Quote:
Originally Posted by monkeywrenching
because they dont want to end up like JFK did, face up on a slab in the coroners office.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoCalCroozer
|
That has been repeatedly debunked. You all might want to actually read what it says instead of sucking David Icke or some other idiot.
Debunking...
Mircea
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.
