|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Investing In Inflation | |||||||||||||||||||||||
subbie Member (Idle past 1285 days) Posts: 3509 Joined: |
quote: After most of whom had left what?
quote: Oh, this will be good. Pray tell, what provision of the Constitution did the Federal Reserve Act violate? Those who would sacrifice an essential liberty for a temporary security will lose both, and deserve neither. -- Benjamin Franklin We see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
subbie Member (Idle past 1285 days) Posts: 3509 Joined: |
You really don't have any critical thinking skills, do you?
This is from Wiki:
After months of hearings, debates, votes and amendments, the proposed legislation, with 30 sections, was enacted as the Federal Reserve Act. The House, on December 22, 1913, agreed to the conference report on the Federal Reserve Act by a vote of 298 yeas to 60 nays with 76 not voting. The Senate, on December 23, 1913, agreed to it by a vote of 43 yeas to 25 nays with 27 not voting. The record shows that there were no Democrats voting "nay" in the Senate and only two in the House. The record also shows that almost all of those not voting on the bill had previously declared their intentions and were paired with members of opposite intentions (See v. 51 Cong. Record, pages 1464, 1487-88) Given that Wiki cites the Congressional Record as a source, and the nutjob who writes Elliot Lake News cites no source, I'm inclined to put more credence in Wiki on this one. Thus, you were simply wrong when you said "most" had left. In addition, the claim that the Act was rammed through Congress is inconsistent with the facts, and the claim from Elliot Lake News that "many" had left is shown to be irrelevant to the passage of the Act. I notice that you ignored my question about what makes you think the Federal Reserve Act is unconstitutional. I'll take a second to response to some of the other tinfoil hat nonsense in your excerpt. From How Stuff Works:
How does the Fed support itself? My emphasis. In order to remain independent of the U.S. government, the Federal Reserve totally supports itself. It generates its income for the most part from interest. This interest comes from many sources, including: * Government securities that it acquires through open market operations* Foreign currency investments * Bank/depository institution loans that the Fed makes using the discount rate The Fed is also paid fees for services it provides such as funds transfers (Fedwire), check processing, and automated clearinghouse (ACH) operations. (ACH options are electronic alternatives to the paper-based check system. Examples include automatic payroll deposits and electronic bill paying.) Any money the Fed has left over after it pays all of its expenses are sent to the U.S. Treasury. Since the Federal Reserve System began in 1914, about 95 percent of the Reserve Banks' net earnings have ended up being paid into the Treasury. Information about the income and expenses of the Federal Reserve Board can be found in the Board of Governor's Annual Report. Thus, the suggestion that the Fed is scamming the country and making millions, billions or trillions of dollars from it is wrong. In addition, I've been unable to locate any credible source for the quote from Wilson. It certainly doesn't sound like anything that any former President would say, so I'm skeptical, but can't rule out the possibility that he did say it. Those who would sacrifice an essential liberty for a temporary security will lose both, and deserve neither. -- Benjamin Franklin We see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
subbie Member (Idle past 1285 days) Posts: 3509 Joined: |
Well, I already explained to you that the Federal Reserve doesn't make any profit on the money it makes. If you can't understand that, I'm not going to beat my head against the wall repeating it. If you disagree, please present some evidence, something other than tinfoil hat ravings.
quote: Sorry, I'm not enlightened. I've read this kind of crapola before. I know it's nonsense. In the future, if you wish to "enlighten" me by cutting and pasting tinfoil hat logorrhea, I suggest you at least choose one that cites to sources. I'm confident that you will ignore this suggestion, but at least I've tried.
quote: Nope. Sorry, wrong. Let's look at Art I, Sec 8. It says, in part:
The Congress shall have power...To coin money, regulate the value thereof, and of foreign coin, and fix the standard of weights and measures;.... This is the part of the Constitution that tinfoil hats rely on in arguing that the Fed is unconstitutional If they would only bother to read the entire Section, they'd get to the part that says that Congress has the power
To make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this Constitution in the government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof. Congress, in passing the Federal Reserve Act, concluded that creation of the Federal Reserve system was "necessary and proper for carrying into execution" the power to "coin money, [and] regulate the value thereof." It's not unconstitutional. Still having problems with critical thinking skills, eh Buzzy? Those who would sacrifice an essential liberty for a temporary security will lose both, and deserve neither. -- Benjamin Franklin We see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
subbie Member (Idle past 1285 days) Posts: 3509 Joined: |
quote: Let's take this bit by bit, shall we? What's your source for your claim that it was a "surprise" vote? Please, something other than a tinfoil hat blog. What's your source for your claim that it would not have passed the Senate if the other Senators had been present? Again, something other than a tinfoil hat blog.
quote: Well, I provided the numbers in the post you're responding to. Maybe that's why they sound familiar. What's your source for your claim that "half of the naysayers were absent for the holidays?" Again, no tinfoil hat blogs.
quote: How wonderful for you. Do you have any actual facts, with actual support, to dispute Wiki, or is this just a "nuh uh!" retort?
quote: Any actual figures to back up your claim, with supporting evidence?
quote: Fantastic! Why don't you go there and find some evidence to support what you're saying?
quote: Sorry. At the moment I'm not interested in killing a few brain cells listening to some drooling, semi-functional idiot, even for 10 minutes. Does he actually give a source for the quote that someone can look up, or does he simply mention the quote in passing, while polishing his tinfoil hat? Those who would sacrifice an essential liberty for a temporary security will lose both, and deserve neither. -- Benjamin Franklin We see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
subbie Member (Idle past 1285 days) Posts: 3509 Joined: |
quote: Why? All you're going to do is ignore it all, just like you have throughout this thread. Just like you ignored all the questions I asked in my last two posts.
quote: No you haven't. You've presented tinfoil hat ravings, completely unsupported by any real evidence.
quote: You apparently are unable or refuse to understand the point. Regardless of what the percentage is, it's not profit. It's operating expenses. Here the 1999 Combined Statements of Income of the Federal Reserve Banks (in millions)
Interest income Interest on U.S. government securities........$28,216Interest on foreign securities....................225 Interest on loans to depository institutions.......11 Other income......................................688 ------- Total operating income.........................29,140 Operating expensesSalaries and benefits.................................1,446 Occupancy expense.......................................189 Assessments by Board of Governors.........................699 Equipment expense.......................................242 Other...........................................302 ------- Total operating expenses......................2,878 Net Income Prior to Distribution.................$26,262 Distribution of Net Income Dividends paid to member banks.......................374Transferred to surplus.................................479 Payments to U.S. Treasury............................25,409 ------- Total distribution.............................26,262 The closest thing to profit in this statement is the $374,000,000 paid in dividends to member banks. Now, before you get your panties in a wad over the fact that $374,000,000 is paid in dividends, keep in mind that that money is paid out to some 2500 banks. A little math will show us that this works out to an average of about $150,000 per bank.
quote: Of course I didn't refute that point, it's accurate. But what I did to was show how it's irrelevant. Congress passed the Federal Reserve Act pursuant to Article I, Sec. 8, Cl 18. Those who would sacrifice an essential liberty for a temporary security will lose both, and deserve neither. -- Benjamin Franklin We see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
subbie Member (Idle past 1285 days) Posts: 3509 Joined: |
quote: Mind if I ask how long you're intending to ignore the facts I presented showing that the banks keep a very minimal amount of money, and that the vast majority of their income goes right back into the Treasury? Those who would sacrifice an essential liberty for a temporary security will lose both, and deserve neither. -- Benjamin Franklin We see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
subbie Member (Idle past 1285 days) Posts: 3509 Joined: |
quote: I'm still waiting for you to tell me how the Federal Reserve is unconstitutional. Please quote the Article, Section and Clause that you believe Congress violated when it created the Fed. It would also be helpful if, in the course of your analysis, you kept Article I, Section 8, Clause 18 in mind, which gives Congress the power
To make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this Constitution in the government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof. quote: Ah, the old moving the goalposts, eh? How refreshing. It seems to me that whoever does the job that the Fed does would have the same opportunity for profit, so what difference does it make? BTW, I'm still waiting for your answers to the half dozen or so questions I asked in Message 33 above. Are you ignoring those as well, or are you working on a reply? Just curious. Those who would sacrifice an essential liberty for a temporary security will lose both, and deserve neither. -- Benjamin Franklin We see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
subbie Member (Idle past 1285 days) Posts: 3509 Joined: |
Ignoring Clause 18 will not make it go away.
Oh, by the way, the Fed has nothing to do with coining money, that's the Bureau of Printing and Engraving, just in case you're confused about that as well. Those who would sacrifice an essential liberty for a temporary security will lose both, and deserve neither. -- Benjamin Franklin We see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
subbie Member (Idle past 1285 days) Posts: 3509 Joined: |
quote: Congress created the Federal Reserve Banks when it passed the Federal Reserve Act. Congress has the power to pass all laws necessary and proper to carrying out its powers under Article I, Section 8. By simply repeating that the Constitution confers upon Congress the power to coin and regulate the value of money, but ignoring my response that Congress properly delegated that power through legislation, you are not advancing this argument or your position. Try to say something new and interesting, okay? Those who would sacrifice an essential liberty for a temporary security will lose both, and deserve neither. -- Benjamin Franklin We see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
subbie Member (Idle past 1285 days) Posts: 3509 Joined: |
quote: There's been no discussion. You've vomited tin foil hat rantings, I've questioned you about what you said (Message 33 above), and you've ignored my questions. Very curious definition of discussion you use. Those who would sacrifice an essential liberty for a temporary security will lose both, and deserve neither. -- Benjamin Franklin We see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
subbie Member (Idle past 1285 days) Posts: 3509 Joined: |
quote: More important things to do than answer questions you've never answered. Sounds like a concession to me. Thanks. Those who would sacrifice an essential liberty for a temporary security will lose both, and deserve neither. -- Benjamin Franklin We see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
subbie Member (Idle past 1285 days) Posts: 3509 Joined: |
quote: I'd ask you for evidence to support this, but since you've ignored all my other requests for evidence, it would seem pointless. Those who would sacrifice an essential liberty for a temporary security will lose both, and deserve neither. -- Benjamin Franklin We see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
subbie Member (Idle past 1285 days) Posts: 3509 Joined: |
quote: (bold mine) What the highlighted portion means is that each person who was going to vote against it was matched with a person who was going to vote for it. As a result, even if everyone absent had been present and voting, it would have passed by the exact same margin. Those who would sacrifice an essential liberty for a temporary security will lose both, and deserve neither. -- Benjamin Franklin We see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
subbie Member (Idle past 1285 days) Posts: 3509 Joined: |
More tin foil hat ramblings, distortions and deceptions.
Seems to me I earlier suggested that you use sources that cite their sources. Seems to me I also predicted that you'd ignore that suggestion. Seems I was right. The only source that Melvin cites is a book, and he neglects to tell us what part of what he wrote came from where in the book, so it's virtually worthless. Thus, the only way to evaluate what he wrote is his own personal credibility. Here are a couple of other things old Melvin has written:
Beware of Harry Potter! A sneaky way to promote the occult A Satanic Plot for a One World GovernmentThe World Conspirators: the Illuminati Don't believe something you read just because you agree with it. Find out what sources the author is relying on, and check the credibility of those sources. Just because you find something on teh intrawebs that agrees with your position, that doesn't mean your position is stronger. Those who would sacrifice an essential liberty for a temporary security will lose both, and deserve neither. -- Benjamin Franklin We see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
subbie Member (Idle past 1285 days) Posts: 3509 Joined: |
quote: Here are a few, just from the excerpt you quoted. There are more in the rest of his ravings.
This new law completely removed from the Congress the right to create money or to have any control over its creation, Wrong. Congress oversees the Fed.
Federal Reserve Notes, used as money in the country, cannot be considered as being constitutional money. Why, you ask? Because the Congress went against the Constitution of the United States when it passed this Federal Reserve Act, Wrong. Previously debunked in this thread.
Money is very cheap to make, and whoever has the legal right to create the money in a nation can make a tremendous profit. Wrong. Previously debunked in this thread.
And, to top it all, on this $1 billion that the Federal Reserve received in bonds from this transaction, it is legally allowed to create another $15 billion in new credit to lend to states, municipalities, businesses, and individuals. Wrong. The Fed doesn't lend to states, municipalities, businesses or individuals. A fair portion of what you quoted is so incomprehensible that I can't begin to understand what he's saying. Those who would sacrifice an essential liberty for a temporary security will lose both, and deserve neither. -- Benjamin Franklin We see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024