Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,427 Year: 3,684/9,624 Month: 555/974 Week: 168/276 Day: 8/34 Hour: 1/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Investing In Inflation
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 61 of 85 (486622)
10-23-2008 8:38 AM
Reply to: Message 58 by subbie
10-23-2008 7:53 AM


Re: Central Banks
subbie writes:
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.
Essentially the way it works is that the Bureau of Printing works for the Federal Reserve. It's not the bureau that determines the amount coined/printed.
The Constitution relegates the amount of coinage and the power to regulate the value of it to Congress. The privately owned banks of the Federal Reserve do that since 1913 when the Federal Reserve System was created.

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 58 by subbie, posted 10-23-2008 7:53 AM subbie has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 63 by subbie, posted 10-23-2008 8:49 AM Buzsaw has replied

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 62 of 85 (486627)
10-23-2008 8:47 AM
Reply to: Message 57 by kuresu
10-23-2008 7:46 AM


Re: Central Banks
kuresu writes:
Congress decided that a federal reserve system would be appropriate for regulating our currency.
Yah, we've discussed that and it appears the Senate ratified the bill on Christmas Eve after a sufficient number of the Senate were home for Christmas.

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 57 by kuresu, posted 10-23-2008 7:46 AM kuresu has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 64 by subbie, posted 10-23-2008 8:52 AM Buzsaw has replied

  
subbie
Member (Idle past 1276 days)
Posts: 3509
Joined: 02-26-2006


Message 63 of 85 (486628)
10-23-2008 8:49 AM
Reply to: Message 61 by Buzsaw
10-23-2008 8:38 AM


Re: Central Banks
quote:
The privately owned banks of the Federal Reserve do that since 1913 when the Federal Reserve System was created.
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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 61 by Buzsaw, posted 10-23-2008 8:38 AM Buzsaw has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 68 by Buzsaw, posted 10-25-2008 4:11 PM subbie has replied

  
subbie
Member (Idle past 1276 days)
Posts: 3509
Joined: 02-26-2006


Message 64 of 85 (486629)
10-23-2008 8:52 AM
Reply to: Message 62 by Buzsaw
10-23-2008 8:47 AM


Re: Central Banks
quote:
Yah, we've discussed that....
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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 62 by Buzsaw, posted 10-23-2008 8:47 AM Buzsaw has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 65 by Buzsaw, posted 10-23-2008 9:52 AM subbie has replied

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 65 of 85 (486638)
10-23-2008 9:52 AM
Reply to: Message 64 by subbie
10-23-2008 8:52 AM


Re: Central Banks
Subbie, as usual, as your argument weakens your meanspirtited attitude intensifies I've got other more important things to do.

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 64 by subbie, posted 10-23-2008 8:52 AM subbie has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 67 by subbie, posted 10-23-2008 3:22 PM Buzsaw has not replied

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 66 of 85 (486640)
10-23-2008 10:08 AM


Gold's Lack Of Luster
With gold at over $300 per oz below it's recent high, if I had money to invest I would begin accumulating it. For folks who have deep cash pockets and a lot in cash securities, imo, it's a grand opportunity to hedge the $$ with gold and silver. The $$ is relatively high now against world currencies, but as the dust settles likely the $$ will resume it's decline and the metals will rise in value.
The reasons for the gold decline is that it almost always declines when the $$ rises. Also due to the monetary crunch, a number of the fund institutions, banks and speculators have been forced to sell gold reserves and cover/liquidate their long positions on the metals.
There is no guarantee that gold's decline is over but imo, unlikely. That's why I would accumulate gold
positions if I were awash in cash (which I'm not). It's got to bottom and likely soon if this is not it. The fundamentals are for a declining $$ as all of the new money recently created filters into circulation.

  
subbie
Member (Idle past 1276 days)
Posts: 3509
Joined: 02-26-2006


Message 67 of 85 (486677)
10-23-2008 3:22 PM
Reply to: Message 65 by Buzsaw
10-23-2008 9:52 AM


Re: Central Banks
quote:
I've got other more important things to do.
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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 65 by Buzsaw, posted 10-23-2008 9:52 AM Buzsaw has not replied

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 68 of 85 (486919)
10-25-2008 4:11 PM
Reply to: Message 63 by subbie
10-23-2008 8:49 AM


Re: Central Banks
subbie writes:
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.
Evidently dissenting members of Congress and members of the Senate who dissented and who had already gone home for the holidays agreed with my position that the reserve act was not consistent with the Article 8 provision which relegated the powers to determine the amount and value of coinage to Congress.

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 63 by subbie, posted 10-23-2008 8:49 AM subbie has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 69 by subbie, posted 10-25-2008 4:15 PM Buzsaw has not replied

  
subbie
Member (Idle past 1276 days)
Posts: 3509
Joined: 02-26-2006


Message 69 of 85 (486920)
10-25-2008 4:15 PM
Reply to: Message 68 by Buzsaw
10-25-2008 4:11 PM


Re: Central Banks
quote:
Evidently dissenting members of Congress and members of the Senate who dissented and who had already gone home for the holidays agreed with my position that the reserve act was not consistent with the Article 8 provision which relegated the powers to determine the amount and value of coinage to Congress.
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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 68 by Buzsaw, posted 10-25-2008 4:11 PM Buzsaw has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 70 by PaulK, posted 10-25-2008 4:34 PM subbie has replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17825
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 70 of 85 (486924)
10-25-2008 4:34 PM
Reply to: Message 69 by subbie
10-25-2008 4:15 PM


Re: Central Banks
Wikipedia says:
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).
(bold mine)
So anyone who wants to know for sure needs to check the Congressional Record.
Edited by PaulK, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 69 by subbie, posted 10-25-2008 4:15 PM subbie has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 71 by subbie, posted 10-25-2008 4:37 PM PaulK has not replied

  
subbie
Member (Idle past 1276 days)
Posts: 3509
Joined: 02-26-2006


Message 71 of 85 (486925)
10-25-2008 4:37 PM
Reply to: Message 70 by PaulK
10-25-2008 4:34 PM


Re: Central Banks
quote:
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).]
(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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 70 by PaulK, posted 10-25-2008 4:34 PM PaulK has not replied

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 72 of 85 (486935)
10-25-2008 6:29 PM


Moving On To What Is More Significant
Perhaps the bill would have passed regardless of whether the absentees were present. I'm not sure whether the paired nays would have affected a required majority but it appears that they would not have at this point, given the number of yeas.
Likely had the bill not been rammed through at Christmas Eve when everyone wanted to go home to their families, sufficient debate would have ensued so as for the opposition to make their case against it's passage.
As noted, even Democrat Wilson, before he died acknowledged the damage he had done to the republic by signing the bill.
But this is not as important as why it was a very bad decision for America, how the Central bankers became the world's richest and most powerful people and how it impoverished the citizens of the nations utilizing central banks. I've found a link which explains in terminology which is easily understood why this act enriches and empowers the bankers at the expense of the folks and diminishing of the representative powers of Congressional members who are accountable to the folks.
Below is a significant segment of the link but I suggest you read the whole thing which goes on to explain how the central banks fund both sides of nearly all wars, and a lot more pertinent info relative to this.
This new law completely removed from the Congress the right to create money or to have any control over its creation, and gave this function over to the Federal Reserve Corporation. The Fed printed “Federal Reserve Notes”, which are still accepted today as money among the citizens of the country.
But we have to understand that these 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, for it specifically states that Congress, and only Congress shall have the power to coin and regulate the money of the country.
Some might ask: “What does it matter if Congress or private Bankers create the money? It is accepted by the people just the same as a medium of exchange with which to perform business transactions”.
Yes, the Federal Reserve Notes are accepted as a medium of exchange by the people of the United States. But this is a debt-money, being interest is charged on every dollar that is created, but the interest is not created!, Let me give an example to illustrate this point.
To obtain the money
Let us say that the Federal Government needs $1,000,000,000 ($1 billion) more, after it collects the taxes, to continue financing its projects. Since it does not have the money, and Congress has given away its authority to create it, the Government must go to the Federal Reserve, which is now in charge of creating the money for the country. But the Federal Reserve does not just give its money away! The Bankers are willing to deliver $1 billion in money or credit to the Federal Government only in exchange for the Government's agreement to pay it back ” with interest! The Congress then authorizes the Treasury Department to print $1 billion in U.S. bonds, which are then delivered to the Federal Reserve Bankers.
The Federal Reserve then pays the cost of printing the $1 billion (about $1,000), and makes the exchange. The Government then used the money to pay its obligations.
Now, what are the results of this transaction! The $1 billion in Government bills is paid, but the Government has now indebted the people to the Bankers for $1 billion, on which the people must pay interest! And, of course, the interest is not created!
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. Added to the original $1 billion, they could have $16 billion of created credit out in loans paying them interest, with their only cost being the $1,000 they spent for printing the original $1 billion lent to the Government. Is it diabolical? You bet it is!
“Creating” money
We should probably clarify the term “create”. When we use this term, we refer to the process used to bring money into existence. The Bankers create money out of nothing, simply by writing numbers in their ledger books, and then giving loans to the American people with this money, allowing them to write checks on the numbers written in their accounts, and then requiring payment with interest. Money is nothing but numbers, be it numbers in a ledger book, on checks, or on dollar bills. Using this process, most banks are legally allowed to lend out up to 50 times of what they have on deposit, creating the money out of nothing and then charging interest on it. You have to admit that it is quite a racket!.
And the Federal Reserve prints the paper money we use in circulation, the Federal Reserve Notes, by having numbers printed on pieces of paper of little value, since a few cents will print a $1 bill or a $10,000 bill (at the same cost). Money is very cheap to make, and whoever has the legal right to create the money in a nation can make a tremendous profit.

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.

Replies to this message:
 Message 73 by subbie, posted 10-25-2008 7:04 PM Buzsaw has replied

  
subbie
Member (Idle past 1276 days)
Posts: 3509
Joined: 02-26-2006


Message 73 of 85 (486936)
10-25-2008 7:04 PM
Reply to: Message 72 by Buzsaw
10-25-2008 6:29 PM


Re: Moving On To What Is More Significant
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 Government
The 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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 72 by Buzsaw, posted 10-25-2008 6:29 PM Buzsaw has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 74 by Buzsaw, posted 10-25-2008 10:21 PM subbie has replied

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 74 of 85 (486944)
10-25-2008 10:21 PM
Reply to: Message 73 by subbie
10-25-2008 7:04 PM


Re: Moving On To What Is More Significant
More tin foil hat ramblings, distortions and deceptions.
Your examples of distortions and deceptions in the link are?

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 73 by subbie, posted 10-25-2008 7:04 PM subbie has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 75 by subbie, posted 10-26-2008 11:13 AM Buzsaw has replied

  
subbie
Member (Idle past 1276 days)
Posts: 3509
Joined: 02-26-2006


Message 75 of 85 (486968)
10-26-2008 11:13 AM
Reply to: Message 74 by Buzsaw
10-25-2008 10:21 PM


Re: Moving On To What Is More Significant
quote:
Your examples of distortions and deceptions in the link are?
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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 74 by Buzsaw, posted 10-25-2008 10:21 PM Buzsaw has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 76 by Buzsaw, posted 10-26-2008 11:38 PM subbie has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024