Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

An economics professor just destroyed the End the Fed crap at the Occupy Kansas City rally

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU
 
proud2BlibKansan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-09-11 07:28 PM
Original message
An economics professor just destroyed the End the Fed crap at the Occupy Kansas City rally
It was beautiful. I wish I had taped it. He explained that ending the fed won't solve anything and the private corporations - the 1% - would just create their own fed without government regulations.

The libertarians in the audience are speechless.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Pharaoh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-09-11 07:32 PM
Response to Original message
1. So you think we should
leave the Fed in the hands of private bankers and pay the interest on the money they print for us?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
proud2BlibKansan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-09-11 07:34 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. We need to watch what they do
His point was ending it won't really end it. It will be recreated.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pharaoh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-09-11 08:15 PM
Response to Reply #3
18. Why don't we just print our own money?
JFK was about to do that. We know what happened to him.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Odin2005 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-09-11 08:31 PM
Response to Reply #18
23. LOL, wut?
Gotta source for that nonsense> :rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tama Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-09-11 11:21 PM
Response to Reply #23
38. Quick search, first hit:
On June 4, 1963, a virtually unknown Presidential decree, Executive Order 11110, was signed with the authority to basically strip the Bank of its power to loan money to the United States Federal Government at interest. With the stroke of a pen, President Kennedy declared that the privately owned Federal Reserve Bank would soon be out of business. The Christian Law Fellowship has exhaustively researched this matter through the Federal Register and Library of Congress. We can now safely conclude that this Executive Order has never been repealed, amended, or superceded by any subsequent Executive Order. In simple terms, it is still valid.

When President John Fitzgerald Kennedy - the author of Profiles in Courage -signed this Order, it returned to the federal government, specifically the Treasury Department, the Constitutional power to create and issue currency -money - without going through the privately owned Federal Reserve Bank. President Kennedy's Executive Order 11110 gave the Treasury Department the explicit authority: "to issue silver certificates against any silver bullion, silver, or standard silver dollars in the Treasury." This means that for every ounce of silver in the U.S. Treasury's vault, the government could introduce new money into circulation based on the silver bullion physically held there. As a result, more than $4 billion in United States Notes were brought into circulation in $2 and $5 denominations. $10 and $20 United States Notes were never circulated but were being printed by the Treasury Department when Kennedy was assassinated. It appears obvious that President Kennedy knew the Federal Reserve Notes being used as the purported legal currency were contrary to the Constitution of the United States of America.

"United States Notes" were issued as an interest-free and debt-free currency backed by silver reserves in the U.S. Treasury. We compared a "Federal Reserve Note" issued from the private central bank of the United States (the Federal Reserve Bank a/k/a Federal Reserve System), with a "United States Note" from the U.S. Treasury issued by President Kennedy's Executive Order. They almost look alike, except one says "Federal Reserve Note" on the top while the other says "United States Note". Also, the Federal Reserve Note has a green seal and serial number while the United States Note has a red seal and serial number.

President Kennedy was assassinated on November 22, 1963 and the United States Notes he had issued were immediately taken out of circulation. Federal Reserve Notes continued to serve as the legal currency of the nation. According to the United States Secret Service, 99% of all U.S. paper "currency" circulating in 1999 are Federal Reserve Notes.

More: http://www.john-f-kennedy.net/thefederalreserve.htm


*Executive Order 11110

AMENDMENT OF EXECUTIVE ORDER NO. 10289 AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE PERFORMANCE OF CERTAIN FUNCTIONS AFFECTING THE DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY. By virtue of the authority vested in me by section 301 of title 3 of the United States Code, it is ordered as follows:

SECTION 1. Executive Order No. 10289 of September 19, 1951, as amended, is hereby further amended - (a) By adding at the end of paragraph 1 thereof the following subparagraph (j): "(j) The authority vested in the President by paragraph (b) of section 43 of the Act of May 12, 1933, as amended (31 U.S.C. 821 (b)), to issue silver certificates against any silver bullion, silver, or standard silver dollars in the Treasury not then held for redemption of any outstanding silver certificates, to prescribe the denominations of such silver certificates, and to coin standard silver dollars and subsidiary silver currency for their redemption," and (b) By revoking subparagraphs (b) and (c) of paragraph 2 thereof. SECTION 2. The amendment made by this Order shall not affect any act done, or any right accruing or accrued or any suit or proceeding had or commenced in any civil or criminal cause prior to the date of this Order but all such liabilities shall continue and may be enforced as if said amendments had not been made.

JOHN F. KENNEDY THE WHITE HOUSE, June 4, 1963
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dixiegrrrrl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-09-11 09:49 PM
Response to Reply #18
32. You might be interested in a basic history of how banking developed in the USA
for therein lies the key to the problem.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Bank_of_the_United_S...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Reserve
go down to the "history" section..very enlightening
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Scuba Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-10-11 07:58 AM
Response to Reply #32
52. Thank you. My vast universe of ignorance is now a tiny bit smaller. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
StarsInHerHair Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-09-11 08:48 PM
Response to Reply #3
24. we DO need Public Owned Banks though, the private Banking Cartels are NOT
there for the Public's interests
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PETRUS Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-09-11 07:35 PM
Response to Reply #1
4. Speaking only for myself.
I think we should consider making the Fed totally transparent, and insist that all the governors are appointed by democratically accountable people. Right now, the Fed is not required to disclose much of what it does and a substantial portion of the governors are appointed by (private) bankers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AverageJoe90 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-09-11 07:36 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. The private bankers have hijacked the Fed, true.
You're right, let's take it all back.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hippo_Tron Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-09-11 11:55 PM
Response to Reply #4
42. The board of governors is entirely appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate
The Open Market Committee consists of some regional bank Presidents, who are nominated from the boards of directors of the member banks, but must also be approved by the board of governors.

There was also a substantial piece of legislation in the last congress to disclose much of the fed's activities. And once they were disclosed, they went pretty much unnoticed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
banned from Kos Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-09-11 07:57 PM
Response to Reply #1
12. The Fed pays the Treasury interest - $78 billion last year
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/money_co/2011/01/federa...

I can't believe how many people buy the Ron Paul bullshit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Odin2005 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-09-11 08:30 PM
Response to Reply #1
22. The fed is run by a commitee apointed by Congress, not "private bankers".
That is the lie about the nature of the Fed. I mentioned to the OP.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pa28 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-09-11 09:45 PM
Response to Reply #22
31. That's true of the board of governors but not regional FR banks.
Take a look at the powerful New York Fed and it's board of directors.

http://www.ny.frb.org/aboutthefed/org_nydirectors.html

Two thirds of it's members are elected directly by member banks. Remember, the New York Fed initiated massive banker bailout measures such as AIG/Goldman and the maiden lane programs on their own with public equity as the final backstop. Like Bernie Sanders I agree there is a massive conflict of interest that should be publicly exposed and reformed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hippo_Tron Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-09-11 11:59 PM
Response to Reply #31
43. That's actually a very legitimate concern about the Fed
Unfortunately it's not going to get much notice, because this thread will just be filled with people arguing about Ron Paul's bullshit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FarLeftFist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-09-11 07:32 PM
Response to Original message
2. The Ron Paul crowd reeks of desperation.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
midnight Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-09-11 07:54 PM
Response to Reply #2
11. Many without jobs and food are desperate...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
proud2BlibKansan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-09-11 08:11 PM
Response to Reply #2
15. Desperation and simple platitudes
Drives me nuts.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Odin2005 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-09-11 08:28 PM
Response to Reply #2
20. No, just angry people whiped up into anger at the wrong thing.
Edited on Sun Oct-09-11 08:29 PM by Odin2005
Many of them are not even Libertarians, they are just furious at the financial system as are we, but they are going after the wrong target.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rucky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-09-11 07:37 PM
Response to Original message
6. Isn't that sort of how it already works.
Our cause should be "Own the Fed"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xchrom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-09-11 07:45 PM
Response to Original message
7. Problems w/ the Fed are simple - 1) regulate & 2) enforce. Nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PotatoChip Donating Member (481 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-09-11 07:45 PM
Response to Original message
8. Did you get his name?
Maybe he's got some material online. I'd like to find some talking points to use on a rabid Ron Paul "End -the-Fed" acquaintance, if they are not too complicated to explain. I need reasonably short and to-the-point facts w/this guy. You know the type probably...

How was the rally? Were there a lot of people there?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
proud2BlibKansan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-09-11 08:13 PM
Response to Reply #8
17. Yes. I'll post a link when I get home.
I've heard him speak several times before. He's wonderful.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xmas74 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-09-11 08:30 PM
Response to Reply #17
21. I'd love to know who it is too.
I'll keep an eye out for any public lectures, if I can ever afford a babysitter for a few hours.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
proud2BlibKansan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-09-11 09:19 PM
Response to Reply #8
25. Here
Frederic Lee, M.A. Advisor, Professor
Post Keynesian Production Models, History of Economics in the 20th Century, and Market Governance.
leefs@umkc.edu
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lasher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-09-11 11:30 PM
Response to Reply #25
40. Frederic S. Lee, Professor of Economics @ UMKC
Edited on Sun Oct-09-11 11:32 PM by Lasher


http://cas.umkc.edu/econ/economics/faculty/Lee /

I wish I could have been there with you to hear his speech.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IndyPragmatist Donating Member (556 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-10-11 07:48 AM
Response to Reply #25
50. A Keynesian would love the Federal Reserve
From my experience, the Keynesians in university settings are whackos. In my undergraduate and graduate economics degrees, very few would come out and endorse a specific economic policy. They may say they lean one direction, but a very small minority claimed to be a Keynesian or Austrian.

Saying that, those that did claim to be one or the other (or another view) were terrible. These were the professors that advisers told you to avoid. They are so stuck in their ideology that they learned decades ago that they fail to see the fallacies of their ideology in modern economics. It's most likely that he isn't a true Keynesian anyways. There are very few of them, because Keynes believed in a strict set of guidelines that went with the ideology, and very few follow these; instead they just pick and choose which theories they like and run with that.

Looking at his bio, he claimed to be a "Post-Keynesian". IMO, that is even worse. These type of people claim some of Keynesian theory doesn't work, but they still agree with other theory that is interlinked with the theory they don't believe in. It doesn't make any sense at all. I never had a Post-Keynesian in any of my studies, and I am glad I didn't. This guy sounds nuts from his bio.

http://cas.umkc.edu/econ/economics/faculty/Lee/docs/Bio...


From Pasinetti, Keynes and the Multiplier by ANDREW B. TRIGG & FREDERIC S. LEE
"That is, the paper shows that a scalar multiplier can legitimately be applied in a multisector economy."

About every economist I know would disagree with that statement, as would I. If you have 20 minutes to spare, read this paper http://cas.umkc.edu/econ/economics/faculty/Lee/courses/... . The arguements in this paper are very flimsy, but it gives a decent idea of how people who believe in things like a 1.75 multiplier come to their conclusions.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ichingcarpenter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-10-11 07:55 AM
Response to Reply #50
51. Thank you for your input and links
I think JFK had good reasons to want to get rid of the Feds.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WillyT Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-09-11 07:46 PM
Response to Original message
9. K & R !!!
:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
midnight Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-09-11 07:53 PM
Response to Original message
10. The Fed is a private bank and already operates independently of the U.S. Government..



The economist I would recommend everyone listen to who be Alan Grayson. http://dailybail.com/home/there-are-no-words-to-describ...


Alan Grayson (High Quality Version): Is Anyone Minding the Store at the Federal Reserve? http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=... ! In this video Grayson exposes the off balance sheets that seem to hide all the lending practices... And unless these criminals are held accountable... Shutting down the Fed Reserve could be the safest thing to do....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
chill_wind Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-09-11 09:31 PM
Response to Reply #10
27. Something Greenwald wrote at the time
about the overwhelming House passage of the bipartisan Paul-Grayson Audit The Fed amendment, and the larger point around the politics of it seems truer than ever right now.



(1) Our leading media outlets are capable of understanding political debates only by stuffing them into melodramatic, trite and often distracting right v. left storylines. While some debates fit comfortably into that framework, many do not. Anger over the Wall Street bailouts, the control by the banking industry of Congress, and the impenetrable secrecy with which the Fed conducts itself resonates across the political spectrum, as the truly bipartisan and trans-ideological vote yesterday reflects. Populist anger over elite-favoring economic policies has long been brewing on both the Right and Left (and in between), but neither political party can capitalize on it because theyre both dependent upon and subservient to the same elite interests which benefit from those policies.

For that reason, many of the most consequential political conflicts are shaped far more by an insider v. outsider dichotomy than by a GOP v. Democrat or Left v. Right split. The pillaging of Americas economic security by financial elites, with the eager assistance of the government officials who they own and who serve them, is the prime example of such a conflict. The political system as a whole both parties leadership is owned and controlled by a handful of key industry interests, and anger over the fact is found across the political spectrum. Yesterdays vote is a very rare example where the true nature of political power was expressed and the petty distractions and artificial fault lines overcome.

(2) As Grim expertly describes, the effort to defeat the Paul/Grayson amendment came from all of the typical Washington power centers using all of the establishments typical manipulative tools:




Nov 20, 2009
http://politics.salon.com/2009/11/20/transparency_4/sin...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hatchling Donating Member (968 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-09-11 08:08 PM
Response to Original message
13. How about nationalize the Fed? nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
banned from Kos Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-09-11 08:10 PM
Response to Reply #13
14. the Fed is an independent branch of goverment like the Supreme Court
but the Ron Paul propaganda is strong even here - few believe it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ThomWV Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-09-11 09:25 PM
Response to Reply #14
26. Really? Which Article of the Constitution mentions it? The Supreme Court is in there, Article III.
What on earth do you mean its a branch of Government "like the Supreme Court? The court is a Constitutionally mandated branch of Government and the Fed is not only not like that - its absolutely nothing like that. It exists under no Constitutional authority what so ever.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
banned from Kos Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-09-11 10:00 PM
Response to Reply #26
33. Same for the EPA and DOE then, right?
There are plenty of branches of government not mentioned in the Constitution. That means nothing. Congress formed the Fed in 1913 just like the EPA in - 1970ish.


And - its like the SCOTUS in that its decisions are independent of Congress and the President. The President appoints the Fed Board/SCOTUS and Congress confirms each Governor/Judge.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WinkyDink Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-09-11 09:41 PM
Response to Reply #14
29. Except not.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Selatius Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-09-11 10:15 PM
Response to Reply #14
35. Yes and no.
It was created by a law passed by Congress, but it isn't specified at all in the US Constitution. Only the US Treasury was established under the auspices of the Constitution with the ability to create money. The Board of Governors at the Fed is appointed by the president, with the consent of the Senate, but the regional branches of the Federal Reserve are chaired and operated by regional banks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EdMaven Donating Member (290 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-09-11 08:12 PM
Response to Original message
16. Certainly. Before the Fed was the robber baron era -- concentrated wealth, bank failures,
ten-year depressions, etc.

Things were little different.

The only thing the Fed changed (my guess) is to channel higher-up control over the banking sector into fewer hands.

Banking used to be more of a free-for-all before the Fed. If you had the capital you could start a bank; best way to make bank is to own one.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Odin2005 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-09-11 08:27 PM
Response to Original message
19. A lot of folks here on DU believe that same ignorant nonsense about the Fed.
It's not just a Libertarian thing, it's widespread among fellow Progressives because of the constant repitition of the lie that the Fed is somehow a private corporation, it isn't. It's a national bank run by a committee appointed by the federal government.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WinkyDink Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-09-11 09:44 PM
Response to Reply #19
30. Now, which part of the following do you think are the operative words?
The Federal Reserve System has both private and public components, and was designed to serve the interests of both the general public and private bankers.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Reserve_System
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
banned from Kos Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-09-11 10:07 PM
Response to Reply #30
34. RESERVE is the operative word - By law the private bankers must
place a certain % of their deposits on reserve with the Fed (currently $1.6 trillion). This is to protect the public from bank runs where depositors lose all their money (common in the 1840-1913 time period). The final piece of the puzzle was the FDIC in 1932.

So, there is PRIVATE money in the PUBLIC Reserve.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
provis99 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-10-11 12:53 AM
Response to Reply #19
46. the regional feds have the power, not the national committee.
You're the one guilty of believing nonsense, not those you accuse.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WinkyDink Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-09-11 09:41 PM
Response to Original message
28. The Federal Reserve IS private.
Edited on Sun Oct-09-11 09:46 PM by WinkyDink
n Lewis v. United States,<3> the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit stated that: "The Reserve Banks are not federal instrumentalities for purposes of the FTCA , but are independent, privately owned and locally controlled corporations."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Reserve_Bank#Banks
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
krabigirl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-10-11 12:00 AM
Response to Reply #28
44. Yep.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RegieRocker Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-09-11 10:18 PM
Response to Original message
36. Yea right. The corporations are going to print the money?
LOL yea they would all agree on that one I bet. The federal reserve needs to be taken back by the government to it's status before 1917. I guess he thinks that the fed didn't work back then.

Woodrow Wilson
A great industrial nation is controlled by its system of credit. Our system of credit is privately concentrated. The growth of the nation, therefore, and all our activities are in the hands of a few men ... e have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled and dominated, governments in the civilized worldno longer a government by free opinion, no longer a government by conviction and the vote of the majority, but a government by the opinion and the duress of small groups of dominant men.
http://www.archive.org/details/NationalEconomyAndTheBan...

John Adams, one of our founding fathers: "All of the perplexities, confusion, and distress in America arises, not from the defects of the Constitution or Confederation, not from want of honor or virtue, so much as from DOWNRIGHT IGNORANCE OF THE NATURE OR COIN, CREDIT, AND CIRCULATION.'"*** Sounds like this professor is ignorant of the fed and money or he has ulterior motives.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tama Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-09-11 11:28 PM
Response to Reply #36
39. Not professor of economics
in the true sense of the word, just a professor of money interests.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
quaker bill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-10-11 06:06 AM
Response to Reply #36
47. They used to print "script".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Xolodno Donating Member (310 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-09-11 11:08 PM
Response to Original message
37. The problem is this....
...weather you like it or not, "banking" has evolved into a fourth branch of government due to advancing of economies. Kill the Fed and banks will print their own money...who wants to trust that? No one and we'll go back to trading gems, gold, silver and other useless minerals. Not to mention, create a run on strip mining. Right now the Fed is a pseudo-government entity. Yes it needs to be void of political influence, but at the same time, it can't be excluded of public oversight. I don't believe anyone, including Thomas Jefferson knew what the banks would become, that being an evil but unfortunate neccesary evil. What we need is a system that includes lifetime appointments to avoid the political flavor of the day...but at the same time have oversight to make sure they are not following pure ideaology and are adjusting to economic changes. Easier said than done sadly.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tama Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-09-11 11:30 PM
Response to Reply #37
41. Kill the Fed
Edited on Sun Oct-09-11 11:31 PM by tama
And order Treasury to print money. Preferably created as citizens salary, if you ask me, not as debt and interest.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RegieRocker Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-10-11 06:36 AM
Response to Reply #41
48. Yes that is the problem "Money as debt". If most only had some clue
as to w what had is going on.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
krabigirl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-10-11 12:02 AM
Response to Original message
45. they've already done that. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rgbecker Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-10-11 06:50 AM
Response to Original message
49. Could Bitcoin be the answer?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tama Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-10-11 08:13 AM
Response to Reply #49
54. Partial answer, yes.
The technology works and proves functioning monetary community can be created by grass roots activism and participation - but IMHO Bitcoin "first come first" launching strategy still lacks in issue of social justice. Very valuable example of how new global/local socially just and sustainable monetary systems can be created, but leaves the social justice part still to be evolved. Citizen's salary is my best answer to the social justice question of money creation.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bucky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-10-11 08:05 AM
Response to Original message
53. Interesting. The Fed was invented by Progressives to control Gilded Age boom/bust cycles
To a certain extent, it's been co-opted by large financial institutions. They tried to hijack it back in the 1910s when the Fed was cooked up by populist Dems. But it still performs a necessary function in controlling monetary supply. Getting rid of it is more Libertarian lunacy. Such a cure is akin to fixing an alignment problem by removing your axel.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
banned from Kos Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-10-11 08:16 AM
Response to Reply #53
55. Exactly - many so called progressives here parrot the Ron Paul 'End the Fed' nuttery
and want a return to "sound money" - a code for a gold standard where banks printed their own paper currency like in the 19th century.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ichingcarpenter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-10-11 10:34 AM
Response to Reply #55
63. And some people just post nuttery
without backing up their claims.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tama Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-10-11 08:20 AM
Response to Reply #53
56. Obviously
Edited on Mon Oct-10-11 08:27 AM by tama
Fed has failed in controlling boom/bust cycles, just created the hugest most humongous debt balloon boom ever that has been bursting and busting big way since 2008. So there goes that justification...

If monetary economics is real science and not dogmatic ideology/Mammon religion, the empirical experiment of Fed has been falsified by empirical data. (Told ya so, Marxist etc. economy would say and said, but... not very polite or constructive to remind that "told ya so" when youre standing in your own puddle after your monetary diaper failed and leaked and need someone to help wipe your mess)

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
banned from Kos Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-10-11 08:26 AM
Response to Reply #56
57. one simple graph to prove you are wrong


(And its over $60 trillion today)

Now the fact that wealth is distributed poorly is a political matter that needs correction.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-10-11 08:36 AM
Response to Reply #57
58. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
dd2003 Donating Member (198 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-10-11 09:20 AM
Response to Original message
59. The fed has been so helpful
They have printed tons and tons of money so that the dollar has been completely devalued. They give billions in secret loans to their banker friends in Europe. They pound the table and give more QE when banker friends are at threat of losing their bonus's and Americans are scraping the grounds for scraps. Tell me what value does the Fed give?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
proud2BlibKansan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-10-11 09:36 AM
Response to Reply #59
60. That's not the point
The point is ending it would just be worse. It won't go away. At least in its present form there is some oversight. Perhaps not enough but better than none.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yella_dawg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-10-11 09:42 AM
Response to Original message
61. Interesting idea there
Two distinct economies. One for corporate terrorists, and one for ordinary folk. Tight government controls on the interface between the two. Congress controls the money supply as intended by the constitution and the wealthy little boys can play to their heart's content.


Glass-Steagall indeed.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lib2DaBone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-10-11 10:30 AM
Response to Original message
62. The problem with the FED is that it's a PRIVATE bank. Nationalize the Fed.
Edited on Mon Oct-10-11 10:31 AM by lib2DaBone
Nationalize the Fed Banks. Bring control of our money back to the American people.


Woodrow Wilson said after creating the Federal Reserve...



I am a most unhappy man. I have unwittingly ruined my country. A great industrial nation is controlled by its system of credit. Our system of credit is concentrated. The growth of the nation, therefore, and all our activities are in the hands of a few men. We have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled and dominated governments in the civilized world. No longer a government by free opinion, no longer a government by conviction and the vote of the majority, but a government by the opinion and duress of a small group of dominant men.
~ Woodrow Wilson


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Sep 16th 2014, 05:55 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC