Tryagain
 
  1  
Reply Wed 12 Sep, 2007 04:51 pm
The math is very simple:


The federal government buys a dollar for .97 cents.

It sells it for a dollar; so it should make 3 cents.

However, it auctions the bonds for ?

Pays an agreed rate of interest, for a set period of time.

Then borrows the money to buy them back.

That is called the: National Debt.


As you rightly said, "More stupidity from the nut cases.."



I rest my case!
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Wed 12 Sep, 2007 08:39 pm
Your math doesn't add up Try.

There is no way it adds up to the Fed making .97 in profit on every dollar.

Please post the equation that would possibly prove that silly claim?
0 Replies
 
Richard Saunders
 
  1  
Reply Wed 12 Sep, 2007 08:48 pm
parados wrote:
Your math doesn't add up Try.

There is no way it adds up to the Fed making .97 in profit on every dollar.

Please post the equation that would possibly prove that silly claim?


I think its safe to say they make alot more than just 97 cents on every dollar. The government is on an interest-only payment plan with these guys. For every dollar they issue the government is paying interest on a loan. Oneof the ways they profit comes during times of whipsaw swings like the current mortgage debacle.... When they shell out - I mean create $130 billion in new money to buy old notes and mortgages, they seem to be acquiring real property for almost no expense. In fact the 'expense' gets passed onto all of us as inflation.

These guys are even worse manipulators than the specialists on the stock exchange.
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Wed 12 Sep, 2007 09:06 pm
Sure Richard.. and what kind of math are you using?
0 Replies
 
Richard Saunders
 
  1  
Reply Wed 12 Sep, 2007 11:23 pm
parados wrote:
Sure Richard.. and what kind of math are you using?

Think about it Par, its not JUST the principal but the interest as well. If you figure for arguments sake the country gets to borrow money at 5% and youve got a $100 bill in your pocket, then the country is paying $5 every year for having that $100 Bill float around in the money supply.

If that $100 Bill is from 1987 then the country has already paid $100 in interest on top of the fact that it still has $100 in principal to still pay back.
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Thu 13 Sep, 2007 07:33 am
Richard Saunders wrote:
parados wrote:
Sure Richard.. and what kind of math are you using?

Think about it Par, its not JUST the principal but the interest as well. If you figure for arguments sake the country gets to borrow money at 5% and youve got a $100 bill in your pocket, then the country is paying $5 every year for having that $100 Bill float around in the money supply.

If that $100 Bill is from 1987 then the country has already paid $100 in interest on top of the fact that it still has $100 in principal to still pay back.

uh uh Richard.. And how many dollars are floating around vs how many bonds the Fed holds? Your math is still not very accurate. The majority of Federal spending still comes from tax revenues.

If the Fed sells $1000 to the US government but only holds $100 in bonds then it doesn't charge interest of 5% on that $1000. It only charges interest on the $100.

As of 2000 there were 571 TRILLION dollars in circulation.
As of 2007 the US TOTAL debt was $9 trillion. Of that 4.9 Trillion was held by the public. That means the Fed only holds about 4.1 trillion of the debt. Your math is off by at least a factor of 100.

Meanwhile you haven't even come close to showing how the Fed makes a profit of .97 on every dollar it sells to the US government. That would mean the Fed would have assets worth more than 50 times the US economy. If only a few people own the Fed why are they not listed as the richest people in the world? Bill Gates is still listed and he doesn't even come close to 1% of the US economy in assets.
0 Replies
 
Richard Saunders
 
  1  
Reply Thu 13 Sep, 2007 10:05 am
parados wrote:
Richard Saunders wrote:
parados wrote:
Sure Richard.. and what kind of math are you using?

Think about it Par, its not JUST the principal but the interest as well. If you figure for arguments sake the country gets to borrow money at 5% and youve got a $100 bill in your pocket, then the country is paying $5 every year for having that $100 Bill float around in the money supply.

If that $100 Bill is from 1987 then the country has already paid $100 in interest on top of the fact that it still has $100 in principal to still pay back.

uh uh Richard.. And how many dollars are floating around vs how many bonds the Fed holds? Your math is still not very accurate. The majority of Federal spending still comes from tax revenues.

If the Fed sells $1000 to the US government but only holds $100 in bonds then it doesn't charge interest of 5% on that $1000. It only charges interest on the $100.

As of 2000 there were 571 TRILLION dollars in circulation.
As of 2007 the US TOTAL debt was $9 trillion. Of that 4.9 Trillion was held by the public. That means the Fed only holds about 4.1 trillion of the debt. Your math is off by at least a factor of 100.

Meanwhile you haven't even come close to showing how the Fed makes a profit of .97 on every dollar it sells to the US government. That would mean the Fed would have assets worth more than 50 times the US economy. If only a few people own the Fed why are they not listed as the richest people in the world? Bill Gates is still listed and he doesn't even come close to 1% of the US economy in assets.


I think your figures are incorrect. You have figures listed of 571 trillion dollars in ciculation for the year 2000, but I dont think that can be right.

And
IF the Fed sells $1000 to the US Gov't but only holds $100 in bonds, it only charges interest on the $100 that is true. However it depends on who it sells it to. It can sell them to a neutral 3rd party and take their cash or It can transfer the bonds to member banks in which case it still charges interest to the govt and this interest is not remitted back to the treasury.

The truth is nobody can ever have exact numbers on the fed because nobody audits them. They can modify the value of their assets by bookkeeping. They can shift assets back and forth from member banks. Because they create the money in this country they can pretty much do what they please. But the mere fact that they can trade money they create out of thin air for any asset they want gives them an unlimited ability to profit.

Believe me, if Bill Gates every had the chance to swap ownership of Microsoft for the fed, he would do so in a minute. He could replace his lost wealth (and then some) in one simple banking transaction.
0 Replies
 
Tryagain
 
  1  
Reply Thu 13 Sep, 2007 12:02 pm
Benjamin Franklin:


"That is simple. In the Colonies we issue our own money. It is called Colonial Scrip. We issue it in proper proportion to the demands of trade and industry to make the products pass easily from the producers to the consumers. In this manner, creating for ourselves our own paper money, we control its purchasing power, and we have no interest to pay no one."

- Franklin was explaining this to the Bank of England in 1763


If you agree; clap your hands.
0 Replies
 
Richard Saunders
 
  1  
Reply Thu 13 Sep, 2007 02:24 pm
Tryagain wrote:
Benjamin Franklin:


"That is simple. In the Colonies we issue our own money. It is called Colonial Scrip. We issue it in proper proportion to the demands of trade and industry to make the products pass easily from the producers to the consumers. In this manner, creating for ourselves our own paper money, we control its purchasing power, and we have no interest to pay no one."

- Franklin was explaining this to the Bank of England in 1763


If you agree; clap your hands.


Oh I agree, but Im a little prejudiced of course being related to Ben and all. And while that quote may be true; I'll tell you that I cannot find a written source from Ben on either that or the quote that the currency acts were the prime cause of the rebellion in the colonies.

But there is some corrabatory evidence from individual's writings and from one of the declarations of the stamp act congress.

The only sources for those quotes come from a 1940s radio address from Congressman Binderup.. However I can get no written text from Ben. It has been attributed to one of his autobiographies, but it is not in the original edition that I have; though it may be in a later variant made from John Bigelow in the 1800s who did more research into it.

If I could authenticate these quotes from Frankin it would totally cement the notion of the foreign banking houses using their coercive influence to control not only America but most of the world.

Unfortunately, Ben Franklin's journal (where this quote was supposedly originally from) was stolen from the libaray of Congress quite ironically so was General George Patton's Diary.

Shrug.. what to do?
0 Replies
 
Tryagain
 
  1  
Reply Thu 13 Sep, 2007 04:44 pm
Richard, that is amazing; do they not have a copy?


Try a search: Benjamin Franklin +Bank of England 1763


There are a number of links.



Andrew Jackson: To delegation of bankers discussing the Bank Renewal Bill, 1832

"You are a den of vipers and thieves. I intend to rout you out, and by the eternal God, I will rout you out."

Un fortunately he failed!
0 Replies
 
Richard Saunders
 
  1  
Reply Thu 13 Sep, 2007 05:20 pm
Tryagain wrote:
Richard, that is amazing; do they not have a copy?


Try a search: Benjamin Franklin +Bank of England 1763


There are a number of links.



Andrew Jackson: To delegation of bankers discussing the Bank Renewal Bill, 1832

"You are a den of vipers and thieves. I intend to rout you out, and by the eternal God, I will rout you out."

Un fortunately he failed!


Well, Ill disagree with you on Jackson.. He did kill the bank..but we stupidly and naively didnt follow his forewarnings...

One of my favorite incidents from that era was when Nicholas Biddle was deliberately contracting the money supply to put the big hurt on the people. When people would come to President Jackson for relief he would say, "Go to Nicholas Biddle, he is the one responsible."

It worked great.

If Ron Paul gets into office youd be sure the central bank would throw the fractional reserve money gears in reverse and start a major contraction of the money supply as well to discredit the him. I would imagine a President Paul would say the same thing "Go to Ben Bernanke."
0 Replies
 
Richard Saunders
 
  1  
Reply Thu 13 Sep, 2007 05:21 pm
Tryagain wrote:
Richard, that is amazing; do they not have a copy?


Try a search: Benjamin Franklin +Bank of England 1763


There are a number of links.



Andrew Jackson: To delegation of bankers discussing the Bank Renewal Bill, 1832

"You are a den of vipers and thieves. I intend to rout you out, and by the eternal God, I will rout you out."

Un fortunately he failed!


Oh, and Ill try the search path you suggest and let you know
0 Replies
 
Tryagain
 
  1  
Reply Mon 17 Sep, 2007 01:32 pm
Senator Carter Glass:
Author of the Banking Act of 1933

"Is there any reason why the American people should be taxed to guarantee the debts of banks, any more than they should be taxed to guarantee the debts of other institutions, including merchants, the industries, and the mills of the country?"
0 Replies
 
Richard Saunders
 
  1  
Reply Tue 18 Sep, 2007 01:14 pm
Tryagain wrote:
Senator Carter Glass:
Author of the Banking Act of 1933

"Is there any reason why the American people should be taxed to guarantee the debts of banks, any more than they should be taxed to guarantee the debts of other institutions, including merchants, the industries, and the mills of the country?"


I stumbled upon this video today, and thought it was rather good. Some guy Andy Gause.. never heard of him before but I like what he says.

US NOTE VS FEDERAL RESERVE NOTE
0 Replies
 
Tryagain
 
  1  
Reply Tue 18 Sep, 2007 04:30 pm
Richard, the word is getting around; we have said it, the founding fathers have said it; even the Supreme Court has agreed it. In fact just about everybody except Parados!



John Adams, letter to Thomas Jefferson

"All the perplexities, confusion and distresses in America arise not from defects in the constitution or confederation, nor from want of honor or virtue, as much from downright ignorance of the nature of coin, credit, and circulation."


-Thomas Jefferson

"If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation then by deflation, the banks and the corporations will grow up around them, will deprive the people of all property until their children wake up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered. The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it properly belongs."

"I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies."




U.S. Supreme Court,
Craig v. Missouri,
4 Peters 410.


"Emitting bills of credit, or the creation of money by private corporations, is what is expressly forbidden by Article 1, Section 10 of the U.S. Constitution."

Article One, Section Ten,
United States Constitution

"No state shall emit bills of credit, make anything but gold and silver coin a tender in payment of debts, coin money---."
0 Replies
 
Tryagain
 
  1  
Reply Wed 26 Sep, 2007 03:39 pm
"I sincerely believe ... that banking establishments are more dangerous than standing armies, and that the principle of spending money to be paid by posterity under the name of funding is but swindling futurity on a large scale."

~Thomas Jefferson to John Taylor, 1816





WHY THE FED SHOULD BE ABOLISHED

1. The US Congress has the option to buy back the FED at $450 million (per Congressional Records). When the Congress does this, it will own back the billions of US Government Bonds held by the FED. The US Government will actually PROFIT by buying back the FED! Also, the US government no longer has to pay interest to the FED owners on those bonds.

2. Through their ownerships in the FED, FOREIGN POWERS CAN and WILL influence the US economy. By controlling our interest rates and money supply, they can actually create economic disaster in the US, should the US disagree with them.

3. Although the FED directors must be confirmed by the Senate, the awesome lobbying power of the FED owners makes this process meaningless. The owners of the FED can and will put whoever they wish in the position.

4. Abolishing the FED will lead to lower inflation. At this moment, the FED prints as much money as needed to buy the US Government Bonds. Since the FED prints this MONEY out of THIN AIR, this leads to an INCREASE of MONEY SUPPLY, WITHOUT increase in GOODS/SERVICES. This, as all of us know, leads to INFLATION.

If the general public bought those bonds with money that they EARNED by providing GOODS/SERVICES, the money supply level is constant in relation to the goods/services level. Thus, there is no inflationary pressure from selling these bonds.

5. Abolishing the FED will reduce the national debt level. By buying back the FED at $450 million, the US Government will buy back the billions of dollars of bonds held by the FED. Thus, the net effect is a reduction in national debt. After buying back the FED, the US Government does not have to pay interest on those bonds it buys back, further reducing the national debt.

6. Abolishing the FED will lead to eventual balance budget. Today, even if the US Economy only grows by a merger 2%/yr, the US Government should be able to put 2% of US-GDP dollars into circulation WITHOUT INFLATION.

Consider, if the goods/services grow by 2% and the money supply grows by 2%, the ratio of goods/services vs. money supply remains constant. Thus, no inflation is created.

The government can use this extra money supply to fund its project without raising taxes, as any sane person can plainly see!
0 Replies
 
Tryagain
 
  1  
Reply Wed 3 Oct, 2007 05:31 pm
President Kennedy said:

"As long as the government does not print more money than the goods and services available in the US, there will be no inflationary pressures."

This had in fact been done with Executive Order 11110 of President Kennedy. Kennedy ordered the Treasury Dept. to print a US GOVERNMENT NOTES (vs. FEDERAL RESERVE NOTES). In effect, Kennedy bypassed the FED by making the Treasury Department printed REAL US MONEY, instead of selling bonds to the FED for almost free.

The sad fact is the US Government does not do this anymoreÂ…Why; who stopped it?

Instead, the US Government sell bonds to the FED, which buys those bonds using money they don't earn. Thus, the US Government must now pay interest on the money that it "borrows" from the FED.

The US Government can actually reduce taxes on everybody since it has more interest free money to spend in the amount equal to the growth of the US GDP. KEEP IN MIND, THIS MONEY WILL NOT CAUSE INFLATION, since the money is printed along with the growth of the goods and services.


The FED should either be abolishedÂ…..How!


THREE WAYS TO ABOLISH THE FED AND ISSUE MONEY PER THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION, ARTICLE 1, SECTION 8:

* Buy back the FED and have the U.S. Government collect all profits.

* Abolish the FED by printing real U.S. dollars as President Kennedy attempted (Executive Order 11.110, 1963).

* Request your county/state to use their Constitutional powers to abolish the FED. This is the BEST SOLUTION. Nearly half the states are attempting or considering this action. Congress has had 80 years to follow the Constitution, and has refused to abolish the illegal FED. The state/county effort is working faster than any other method.

THE WRONG SOLUTION THAT HAS FAILED FOR 80 YEARS

Congress and the media may want to require the FED to return the required profits into the U.S. Treasury (per the Federal Reserve Act, 1913). The problem is that with "creative accounting" techniques, profit can be easily masked as expense. The FED has expensed items illegally to lower profit.

The following states will pass or introduce legislation calling for an end to the FED: Arizona, Washington, Arkansas, Idaho, Oregon, Indiana, and Texas. Many other states are considering such action due to petitions. These states and a few honest Congresspeople are powerless until all Americans become informed and demand change.
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Wed 3 Oct, 2007 06:59 pm
Quote:
This had in fact been done with Executive Order 11110 of President Kennedy. Kennedy ordered the Treasury Dept. to print a US GOVERNMENT NOTES (vs. FEDERAL RESERVE NOTES). In effect, Kennedy bypassed the FED by making the Treasury Department printed REAL US MONEY, instead of selling bonds to the FED for almost free.

That's an interesting take on EO 11110..


Executive Order 10289 as amended by EO 11110 and subsequent EOs
Quote:
Executive Order 10289--Providing for the performance of certain functions of the President by the Secretary of the Treasury

Source: The provisions of Executive Order 10289 of Sept. 17, 1951, appear at 16 FR 9499, 3 CFR, 1949-1953 Comp., p. 787, unless otherwise noted.

By virtue of the authority vested in me by section 1 of the act of August 8, 1950, 64 Stat. 419 (Public Law 673, 81st Congress), and as President of the United States, it is ordered as follows:

1. The Secretary of the Treasury is hereby designated and empowered to perform the following-described functions of the President without the approval, ratification, or other action of the President:
(a) The authority vested in the President by section 1 of the act of August 1, 1914, c. 223, 38 Stat. 609, 623, as amended (19 U.S.C. 2), (1) to rearrange, by consolidation or otherwise, the several customs-collection districts, (2) to discontinue ports of entry by abolishing the same and establishing others in their stead, and (3) to change from time to time the location of the headquarters in any customs-collection district as the needs of the service may require.
(b) The authority vested in the President by section 1 of the Anti-Smuggling Act of August 5, 1935, c. 438, 49 Stat. 517 (19 U.S.C. 1701), (1) to find and declare that at any place or within any area on the high seas adjacent to but outside customs waters any vessel or vessels hover or are being kept off the coast of the United States and that, by virtue of the presence of any such vessel or vessels at such place or within such area, the unlawful introduction or removal into or from the United States of any merchandise or person is being, or may be, occasioned, promoted, or threatened, (2) to find and declare that certain waters on the high seas are in such proximity to such vessel or vessels that such unlawful introduction or removal of merchandise or persons may be carried on by or to or from such vessel or vessels, and (3) to find and declare that, within any customs-enforcement area, the circumstances no longer exist which gave rise to the declaration of such area as a customs-enforcement area.
(c) The authority vested in the President by section 1 of the Act of August 26, 1985, Public Law 98-89, 97 Stat. 510 (46 U.S.C. 3101); to suspend the provisions of law requiring the inspection of foreign-built vessels admitted to American registry.
(d) The authority vested in the President by section 5 of the act of May 28, 1908, c. 212, 35 Stat. 425, as amended (46 U.S.C. Appendix 104), to determine (as a prerequisite to the extension of reciprocal privileges by the Commissioner of Customs) that yachts used and employed exclusively as pleasure vessels and belonging to any resident of the United States are allowed to arrive at and depart from any foreign port and to cruise in the waters of such port without entering or clearing at the custom-house thereof and without the payment of any charges for entering or clearing, dues, duty per ton, tonnage taxes, or charges for cruising licenses.
(e) The authority vested in the President by section 2 of the act of March 24, 1908, c. 96, 35 Stat. 46 (46 U.S.C. Appendix 134), to name the hospital ships to which section 1 of the said act shall apply to indicate the time when the exemptions thereby provided for shall begin and end.
(f) The authority vested in the President by section 4223 of the Revised Statutes, as amended (46 U.S.C. Appendix 141), (1) to declare that--upon satisfactory proof being given by the government of any foreign nation that no discriminating duties of tonnage or imposts are imposed or levied in the ports of such nation upon vessels wholly belonging to citizens of the United States, or upon the produce, manufactures, or merchandise imported in the same from the United States or from any foreign country--the foreign discriminating duties of tonnage and impost within the United States are suspended and discontinued, so far as respects the vessels of such foreign nation, and the produce, manufactures, or merchandise imported into the United States from such foreign nation, or from any other foreign country, and (2) to suspend in part the operation of section 4219 of the Revised Statutes, as amended (46 U.S.C. Appendix 121), and section IV, J, subsection 1 of the act of October 3, 1913, c. 16, 38 Stat. 195, as amended (46 U.S.C. Appendix 146), so that foreign vessels from a country imposing partial discriminating tonnage duties upon American vessels, or partial discriminating import duties upon American merchandise, may enjoy in our ports the identical privileges which the same class of American vessels and merchandise may enjoy in such country: Provided, that prior to the issuance of an order of the Secretary of the Treasury suspending and discontinuing (wholly or in part) discriminating tonnage duties, imposts, and import duties within the United States, the Department of State shall obtain and furnish to the Secretary of the Treasury the proof required by the said section 4228, as amended as the basis for that order.
(g) The authority vested in the President by section 3650 of the Internal Revenue Code (26 U.S.C. 3650) to establish convenient collection districts (for the purpose of assessing, levying, and collecting the taxes provided by the internal revenue laws), and from time to time to alter such districts.
(h) The authority which is now vested in the President by section 2564 (b) of the Internal Revenue Code (26 U.S.C. 2564 (b)), and which on and after January 1, 1955, will be vested in the President by section 4735 (b) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, to issue, in accordance with the provisions of the said section 2564 (b) or 4735 (b), as the case may be, orders providing for the registration and the imposition of a special tax upon all persons in the Canal Zone who produce, import compound, deal in, dispense, sell, distribute, or give away narcotic drugs.
(i) The authority vested in the President by Section 5318 of the Revised Statutes, as amended (19 U.S.C. 540), to employ suitable vessels other than Coast Guard cutters in the execution of laws providing for the collection of duties on imports and tonnage;

[Para. 1 amended by EO 10583 of Dec. 18, 1954, 19 FR 8725, 3 CFR, 1954-1958 Comp., p. 232; EO 10882 of July 18, 1960, 25 FR 6869, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 413; EO 11110 of June 4, 1963, 28 FR 5605, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 770; EO 12608 of Sept. 9, 1987, 52 FR 34617, 3 CFR, 1987 Comp., p. 245]

2. The Secretary of the Treasury is hereby designated and empowered to perform without the approval, ratification, or other action of the President the following functions which have heretofore, under the respective provisions of law cited, required the approval of the President in connection with their performance by the Secretary of the Treasury:
(a) The authority vested in the Secretary of the Treasury by section 6 of the act of July 8, 1937, c. 444, 50 Stat. 480 (5 U.S.C. 134c), to make rules and regulations necessary for the execution of the functions vested in the Secretary of the Treasury by the said act, as amended.
(b) [Revoked]
(c) [Revoked]
(d) [Revoked]
(e) The authority vested in the Secretary of the Treasury by section 1 of Title II of the act of June 15, 1917, c. 30, 40 Stat. 220 (50 U.S.C. 191), to make rules and regulations governing the anchorage and movement of any vessel, foreign or domestic, in the territorial waters of the United States.
(f) [Revoked]

[Para. 2 amended by EO 11110 of June 4, 1963, 28 FR 5605, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 770; EO 11825 of Dec. 31, 1974, 40 FR 1003, 3 CFR, 1971-1975 Comp., p. 929; EO 12608 of Sept. 9, 1987, 52 FR 34617, 3 CFR, 1987 Comp., p. 245]

3. (a) The Secretary of the Treasury and the Postmaster General are hereby designated and empowered jointly to prescribe without the approval of the President regulations, under section 1 of the act of July 8, 1937, c. 444, 50 Stat. 479 (5 U.S.C. 134), governing the shipment of valuables by the executive departments, independent establishments, agencies, wholly-owned corporations, officers, and employees of the United States.
(b) The Postmaster General is hereby designated and empowered to exercise without the approval, ratification, or other action of the President the authority vested in the President by section 504 (b) of title 18 of the United States Code to approve regulations issued by the Secretary of the Treasury under the authority of the said section 504 (b) (relating to the printing, publishing, or importation, or the making or importation of the necessary plates for such printing or publishing, of postage stamps for philatelic purposes), and to approve any amendment or repeal of any of such regulations by the Secretary of the Treasury.

[Para. 3 amended by EO 10583 of Dec. 18, 1954, 19 FR 8725, 3 CFR, 1954-1958 Comp., p. 232]

4. As used in this order, the term "functions" embraces duties, powers, responsibilities, authority, or discretion, and the term "perform" may be construed to mean "exercise".

5. All actions heretofore taken by the President in respect of the matters affected by this order and in force at the time of the issuance of this order, including regulations prescribed by the President in respect of such matters, shall, except as they may be inconsistent with the provisions of this order, remain in effect until amended, modified, or revoked pursuant to the authority conferred by this order.



This is 11110 as written

Quote:
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



All 11110 did was give the Sec of the Treasury the power to issue money without the President's personal approval.
0 Replies
 
Richard Saunders
 
  1  
Reply Thu 4 Oct, 2007 08:06 am
parados wrote:
Quote:

All 11110 did was give the Sec of the Treasury the power to issue money without the President's personal approval.


Thats correct. Power to issue money backed by silver.

This is a major competition to the federal reserve. The federal reserve has the power to issue money without the president's personal approval as well.

If you could choose either dollars backed by paper or dollars backed by silver, which would you choose for payment? You would choose the dollars backed by silver... So would everybody else.

I find it interesting that they took the silver out of money after 1964. Perhaps the fed didnt want to allow another person to attempt this sort of competition?
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Thu 4 Oct, 2007 08:26 am
Richard Saunders wrote:
parados wrote:
Quote:

All 11110 did was give the Sec of the Treasury the power to issue money without the President's personal approval.


Thats correct. Power to issue money backed by silver.

This is a major competition to the federal reserve. The federal reserve has the power to issue money without the president's personal approval as well.

If you could choose either dollars backed by paper or dollars backed by silver, which would you choose for payment? You would choose the dollars backed by silver... So would everybody else.

I find it interesting that they took the silver out of money after 1964. Perhaps the fed didnt want to allow another person to attempt this sort of competition?

LOL.. the treasury has the power to have the FED issue money.

The President used to have to sign off on all FED issued money but now the Sec of the Treasury can do it without a Presidential signature.

But just in case you didn't know it.. the LAST silver backed dollars were printed in 1957. Kennedy didn't print any in 1963. I will bet you all the silver certificates printed in 1963 that you can't find one.

The way you two try to change history is just amazing..
Find me an instance of a single silver backed dollar being printed in 1963.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

HAPPY ANNIVERSARY, EVERYONE! - Discussion by OmSigDAVID
WIND AND WATER - Discussion by Setanta
Who ordered the construction of the Berlin Wall? - Discussion by Walter Hinteler
True version of Vlad Dracula, 15'th century - Discussion by gungasnake
ONE SMALL STEP . . . - Discussion by Setanta
History of Gun Control - Discussion by gungasnake
Where did our notion of a 'scholar' come from? - Discussion by TuringEquivalent
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 06/30/2024 at 12:37:45