Richard Saunders
 
  1  
Reply Sun 28 Oct, 2007 08:15 pm
parados wrote:
Richard Saunders wrote:


What do you think an executive order is?

An EO is NOT law. It is a presidential directive as allowed by law. Ever read an EO? Let me quote a couple for you..

Quote:
By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.) (IEEPA), the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1601 et seq.), the Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act of 2003 (Public Law 108-61, as amended, 50 U.S.C. 1701 note), and section 301 of title 3, United States Code,


Quote:
By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the
laws of the United States of America, and in furtherance of purposes of
the National Trails System Act of 1968, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1241-1251),
the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (Public Law 105-178),
and other pertinent statutes,

Many laws give the President the power to decide specifics about how to implement a law. The President can then issue an EO based on that power given to him under the law.

If you had read the constitution or was even half way familiar with it you would know that an EO is not a law. It may have the power of law since it was issued under the law but the EO itself is NOT law.

This is another topic Id rather not waste my time getting involved in.
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Sun 28 Oct, 2007 08:52 pm
Richard Saunders wrote:
parados wrote:
Richard Saunders wrote:
parados wrote:
Amazing isn't it? The Federal government owes interest to private individuals as well as the Fed but somehow Richard thinks only the Fed gets paid interest.


Why do you persist in talking out of your ass?

Only the Fed gets paid to make money for the government. And again, since they get to create all the money out of thin air, they can make all the money they want for themselves should they want to buy any assets from anybody they want. They could write you a check to buy your car or house if they wanted to, from money that doesnt even exist.

Who is talking out of their ass?

Which of the following are false?

There are only about 800 billion in Fed notes in circulation.
Fed notes replaced the US notes that were retired.
The present debt held by the public is about $5 trillion
The present debt held by government trust funds is about $4 trillion
The Fed uses an actual accounting system.
The Fed REPORTS its assets and debits to Congress.
The Fed returns any excess profits to the Treasury. http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Senate/3616/flaherty7.html


The only ones talking out of their ass are those that claim the Fed is making hundreds of billions to trillions off the sale of Fed notes to the US government.

Flaherty talks out of his ass the most. That guy surely knows how to talk alot but say little. To hinge any defense on any of his arguments shows that you dont understand the issue. Again, the issue is not which bonds the fed currently holds and remits interest on. The issue is seignorage and the fact there is any debt created in the first place. Since nobody knows whats going on in the fed, other than the fed, they do whatever they want. So they hold a billion in bonds one minute where they dont 'profit' because they rebate interest on it to the treasury, but the next minute they can sell that bond to another party or allocate it to a member bank and then the interest is NOT given back to the treasury.

Perhaps Parados our difference of opinion rests on our trust of the government to do the right thing. I would conjecture that you are being openly trustful of the govt, while I am being openly skeptical of the govt. I think this is why we are never going to come to an agreement on this topic.

So, let me get this straight. You don't trust the Fed when it reveals the number of T-bonds it holds. You don't trust the Fed when they reveal the amount of money the recieved from the US government in interest.

Then you don't trust the US government when they publish the number of T-bonds held by the Fed. And you don't trus the US government when they reveal the amount of money they paid in interest. Then you don't trust the US government when it publishes the amount of money it takes in and the source.

So basically you are saying you have NO evidence to support your claim. You are just paranoid beyond belief.

You claimed the Fed makes all this money on interest from the bonds but now you state what they give back in interest doesn't matter. Did the Fed make $320 in interest on the 1963 $100 note or not? If they gave it back then they obviously didn't make that much in interest on it. If they didn't give it back then everyone is lying but those people that claim something without any evidence.

This is the consolidated statement of the assets and liabilites of the Fed Reserve. Tell us which numbers you think are false.
http://www.federalreserve.gov/releases/h41/20071011/

The Fed is required to hold in T-notes the amount of Federal Resere notes in circulation. Asset/Liability is a pretty standard accounting practice.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sun 28 Oct, 2007 09:19 pm
parados, Something is drastically wrong with that chart; it's missing a whole bunch of zeros.
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Mon 29 Oct, 2007 06:05 am
cicerone imposter wrote:
parados, Something is drastically wrong with that chart; it's missing a whole bunch of zeros.


You may have missed this

Quote:
Millions of dollars
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Mon 29 Oct, 2007 10:15 am
parados wrote:
cicerone imposter wrote:
parados, Something is drastically wrong with that chart; it's missing a whole bunch of zeros.


You may have missed this

Quote:
Millions of dollars



Still looks too small.
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Mon 29 Oct, 2007 10:24 am
Only about 800 billion in Federal Reserve Notes in circulation.

When you compare that to the Federal debt (9 trillion total, 5 trillion public) and the economy (13 trillion) it makes the argument that the Fed is earning interest on the US currency seem like a mountain out of a molehill. The Fed holds less than 10% of the US debt.
0 Replies
 
Richard Saunders
 
  1  
Reply Mon 29 Oct, 2007 07:55 pm
cicerone imposter wrote:
parados, Something is drastically wrong with that chart; it's missing a whole bunch of zeros.


Nah, to a banker there is nothing amiss with that report at all. Wink
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Mon 29 Oct, 2007 08:47 pm
It just doesn't jive with this chart that's a few years old.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v97/imposter222/banksrichest.gif
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Mon 29 Oct, 2007 09:26 pm
Why do you think it doesn't jive?

The Fed Reserve is NOT the largest bank. It wasn't in 1999 and it isn't today. You have to remember that the Federal Reserve is actually made up of 12 Fed Banks. Each bank keeps its own records and publishes them. The Consolidated report is all 12 banks combined.
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Mon 29 Oct, 2007 09:28 pm
Richard Saunders wrote:
cicerone imposter wrote:
parados, Something is drastically wrong with that chart; it's missing a whole bunch of zeros.


Nah, to a banker there is nothing amiss with that report at all. Wink


Your snarky comment aside, I notice you haven't been able to point out anything amiss. But we have noticed things amiss in your claims, haven't we.
0 Replies
 
Richard Saunders
 
  1  
Reply Mon 29 Oct, 2007 09:45 pm
parados wrote:
Richard Saunders wrote:
cicerone imposter wrote:
parados, Something is drastically wrong with that chart; it's missing a whole bunch of zeros.


Nah, to a banker there is nothing amiss with that report at all. Wink


Your snarky comment aside, I notice you haven't been able to point out anything amiss. But we have noticed things amiss in your claims, haven't we.


Yep, I cant point out anything amiss with the federal reserves balance sheets.. Yep, theyre a generous non profit company that would never dream of making a profit off the country.
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Mon 29 Oct, 2007 09:47 pm
Oh, so you must be a "banker" then since you can't find anything amiss. Rolling Eyes
0 Replies
 
Richard Saunders
 
  1  
Reply Mon 29 Oct, 2007 09:48 pm
parados wrote:
Oh, so you must be a "banker" then since you can't find anything amiss. Rolling Eyes


Yeah Im a banker, you got me.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Mon 29 Oct, 2007 09:55 pm
I met a guy who works for the federal reserve in Minneapolis last year on a tour of Costa Rica; he calls Bernanke, "Ben." I asked him some questions about interest rates and other matters of the federal reserve, but he was rather non-committal.
0 Replies
 
Tryagain
 
  1  
Reply Tue 30 Oct, 2007 01:11 pm
CI; what he didn't say - says it all!



THE CFR WANTS TO ABOLISH THE CONSTITUTION.

In a letter to Thomas Jefferson, John Adams wrote:

"All the perplexities, confusions, and distresses in America arise, not from defects in the Constitution or confederation, not from want of honor or virtue, as much as from downright ignorance of the nature of coin, credit, and circulation".

"Â…and that the principle of spending money to be paid by prosperity, under the same name of funding is swindling futurity on a large scale."

British bankers have stated "Those that create and issue money and credit direct the policies of government and hold in their hands the destiny of the people".

Adams, Jefferson, and Lincoln believed that banker capitalism was more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. In a republic, banks would lend money but could not create or manufacture it.

Later, Jefferson used stronger language and denounced the institution as "one of the most deadly hostilities against the principles and form of our Constitution."

Some have said that Jefferson did not favor a strong central bank. What he did not favor was the delivery of our monetary system into private hands to be run for private profit.

President James A. Garfield said: "Whoever controls the money in any country is absolute master of industry [legislation] and commerce".

By controlling our own money, Thomas Jefferson expected that the government would incur no debt, as had occurred in the European system. European banks are like the FED. And they are ALL in debt; all have inflation, and yet there are still seemingly rational people who support such a system, against what Adams, Jefferson, Lincoln and Kennedy knew.


BTW:

What's today's exchange rate against the British pound: $2.06 that's what - a 26 year HIGH.

Before long I will have to mortgage the property just to buy lunch in London!
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Tue 30 Oct, 2007 01:19 pm
Tryagain, One of the reasons I refuse to visit London, one of my favorite destinations, is not only the currency exchange rate, but for us to buy a cup of coffee and donut, we end up paying about US$10. It was bad enough when I was paying US$6, but I refuse to pay $10 for something I can get at home for less than $2.

What I can't understand more than anything is that the per capita income in the UK is less than $35,000, but between the usury exchange rate and taxes, why we must pay $10 for a cup of coffee and one donut?
0 Replies
 
Tryagain
 
  1  
Reply Tue 30 Oct, 2007 05:31 pm
cicerone imposter wrote:
Tryagain, One of the reasons I refuse to visit London, one of my favorite destinations, is not only the currency exchange rate, but for us to buy a cup of coffee and donut, we end up paying about US$10. It was bad enough when I was paying US$6, but I refuse to pay $10 for something I can get at home for less than $2.





Good for you; and don't get me started on the hotel charges! For the last American Cup yacht race, I saved a bundle by renting a whole house for the summer.


"What I can't understand more than anything is that the per capita income in the UK is less than $35,000, but between the usury exchange rate and taxes, why we must pay $10 for a cup of coffee and one donut?"

Interest rates:
US = 4.50 (and due a cut to prevent a slump caused by the housing crisis)
UK = 5.75

Where would you rather invest?
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Tue 30 Oct, 2007 06:03 pm
You can share the rent on a whole house, but practically impossible to share a cup of coffee and one donut. LOL
0 Replies
 
Tryagain
 
  1  
Reply Wed 31 Oct, 2007 04:46 pm
CI, you live too high on the hog! Laughing



The FED system is the death of our Constitution.

THE PLAN TO REDUCE PERSONAL INCOME TAX BY 75% AND BALANCE THE BUDGET BY ABOLISHING THE FED CAN BE PROVEN BY AMERICAN HISTORY.

THE FACTS

* England lost the Revolutionary War.

* England nearly destroyed the Colonies by creating fake Colonial money and hyper-inflation.

* Rothschilds who control the Bank of England (Like our FED) said that by controlling the issue of money (printing it) you can control the government.

* The authors of the Constitution understood private banks" control over governments. The Constitution gives only Congress the right to print money.

* From the beginning of the United States to present there have been two ways to issue new currency:

The first way is to have the government print the money, debt and interest- free, and circulate it through the economy for use as a medium of exchange. There is no tax levied to pay interest on the currency in circulation because it is debt and interest-free. This is the system Lincoln used with his "greenbacks", a system Kennedy desired, and Jefferson demanded.

The second method is: The Citizens allow the bank to print $500 billion in currency (cash). The bank pays for printing costs, ink, and paper. The Citizens do not charge the bank any interest for use of the $500 billion in printed currency. The bank uses the $500 billion cash to buy a $500 billion government bond which pays the bankers interest. The bank keeps some of the bonds and sells, for a fee (10%), some of the bonds to the public. The bank can buy back the bonds from the public simply by printing more money.

The bankers can create inflation and depressions by manipulating the amount of currency in circulation. The FED operates exactly like this today. It also prints money (through the U.S. Treasury) and uses this printed money to buy loans from other banks. This money has created our inflation. We give the bank cash interest-free, and then they charge us interest on our own currency.

Take a look at our history in view of the two banking systems:

BEN FRANKLIN - THE TWO BANKING SYSTEMS

From the autobiography of Ben Franklin as reported by Gertrude Coogan in Money Creators:

...the inability of the colonists to get the power to issue their own money permanently out of the hands of George III and the international bankers was the PRIME reason for the Revolutionary War.

Ben Franklin answering a question about the booming economy of the young colonies: "That is simple. In the colonies we issue our own money. It is called Colonial Scrip. We issue it in proper proportions to the demands of trade and industry." (Colonial Scrip had no debt or interest attached.)

BANK OF AMERICA

International bankers saw that interest-free scrip would keep America free of their influence, so by 1781 banker-backed Alexander Hamilton succeeded in starting the Bank of America. After a few years of "bank money", the prosperity of "Colonial Scrip" was gone. Benjamin Franklin said, "Conditions were so reversed that the era of prosperity had ended and a depression set in to such an extent that the streets of the Colonies were filled with the unemployed!" Bank money was like our FED money.

It had debt and interest attached. By 1790 Hamilton and his bankers had created a privately owned central bank and converted the public debt (interest-free) into interest bearing bonds, payable to the bankers. When Hamilton's bank charter expired in 1811, the international bankers started the war of 1812. By 1816, another privately-owned U.S. bank was started with $35 million in assets - only $7 million of that was owned by the government. This bank lasted for 20 years. U.S. history shows that currency with debt and interest attached created a depression.
0 Replies
 
Tryagain
 
  1  
Reply Sun 4 Nov, 2007 01:40 pm
ANDREW JACKSON - A GREAT PRESIDENT!

When the 1816 charter expired in 1836, Andrew Jackson vetoed its renewal. It was then that he made two famous statements:

"The Bank is trying to kill me - but I will kill it!"

Later he said:

"If the American people only understood the rank injustice of our money and banking system - there would be a revolution before morning..."



ABRAHAM LINCOLN - ANOTHER GREAT PRESIDENT!

President Lincoln needed money to finance the Civil War, and the international bankers offered him loans at 24-36% interest. Lincoln balked at their demands because he didn't want to plunge the nation into such a huge debt. Lincoln approached Congress about passing a law to authorize the printing of U.S. Treasury Notes. Lincoln said:

"We gave the people of this Republic the greatest blessing they ever had - their own paper money to pay their debts..."

Lincoln printed over 400 million "Greenbacks" (debt and interest-free) and paid the soldiers, U.S. government employees, and bought war supplies. The international bankers didn't like it and wanted Lincoln to borrow the money from them so that the American people would owe tremendous interest on the loan. Lincoln's solution made this seem ridiculous.

Shortly after Lincoln's death, the government revoked the Greenback law which ended Lincoln's debt-free, interest-free money. A new national banking act was enacted and all money became interest bearing again.




In an effort to enlighten and enrich Parados; I have found this answer to his question...


The late Thomas A Edison explained the matter of issuing currency this way:

"If our nation can issue a dollar bond (interest bearing) it can issue a dollar bill (interest-free). The element that makes the bond good makes a bill good also. The difference between the bond and the bill is that the bond lets money brokers collect twice the amount of the bond and an additional 20 percent, whereas the currency pays nobody but those who contribute directly in some useful way.

It is absurd to say that our country can issue $30 million in bonds and not $30 million in currency. Both are promises to pay: But one promise fattens the usurers (interest collectors) and the other helps the people."



Do I hear any dissenters?
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 05/10/2024 at 07:21:50