Welcome, Guest

 or  Register
NewsFeed

U.S. Treasury Set to Borrow $1 Trillion for a Second Year to Finance the Deficit
#21
(02-04-2019, 01:38 PM)Treebeard Wrote: @Luvapottamus

The relationship you've described as "optimal" still provides for the Fed banks to get inside the operating procedures of the government, and that is not only totally unnecessary, but collusive and corruptive.

Concerning the conservative approach to inflation and money supply, that is how the Fed worked for over half its century. Acting somewhat innocuously, the deleterious aspects of private bank control were not yet worldwide, then as progressive Fed Chairmen took over the reigns, money supply was grossly inflated, machinations in the private investment (Wall Street) sector were multiplied, those ties were knotted and Glass-Steagall was overturned, after the money supply had already been multipied, going forward under GWB with Goldman Sachs penetration into the Treasury (continuing to this day) and a total absolvement of transparency, including no insight on M7 money supply so the Fed doesn't even inform Congress of the depth to its debasement of our currency.

Old books reveal the Fed money supply from the 1950s-1960s was only 10-20 Billion dollars in circulation.
Today nobody knows how much is in circulation or where it goes. Corruption is raft. Easy money at the Fed discount window has landed in the hands of global oligarchs who buy monopolies.

The Fed must be disbanded, Congressional duties as proscribed by the Constitution resumed and the growth/inflation relationship broken. How and if that works with precious metals is up for debate and experiment, as it is irrelevant without shutting down the Fed as an institution.

I was surprised to discover it was actually the FED that enforced Glass-Steagall.

It was actually the merger of Traveler's and Citygroup, and their respective whores in congress that led to the repeal.

So they could stay merged instead of being broken up.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aftermath_...eagall_Act

It's all the same club of banksters, but the point I was making is you can retain the system, you need a hierarchical banking system, but you have to Flip the script on the leadership structure.

Treasury needs to be top of that pyramid.

But you run into the same issues: if Treasury is top, you still have revolving door in that institution, and you still have the problem with congress, that the FED was sold as the solution to.

You still have to have responsible spending in congress.

It all ends up being the same kind of mess, because where money is involved there is always corruption.
sivil, TheOrderOfChaos  likes this!
Reply Share
#22
(02-05-2019, 11:20 AM)Luvapottamus Wrote:
(02-04-2019, 01:38 PM)Treebeard Wrote: @Luvapottamus

The relationship you've described as "optimal" still provides for the Fed banks to get inside the operating procedures of the government, and that is not only totally unnecessary, but collusive and corruptive.

Concerning the conservative approach to inflation and money supply, that is how the Fed worked for over half its century. Acting somewhat innocuously, the deleterious aspects of private bank control were not yet worldwide, then as progressive Fed Chairmen took over the reigns, money supply was grossly inflated, machinations in the private investment (Wall Street) sector were multiplied, those ties were knotted and Glass-Steagall was overturned, after the money supply had already been multipied, going forward under GWB with Goldman Sachs penetration into the Treasury (continuing to this day) and a total absolvement of transparency, including no insight on M7 money supply so the Fed doesn't even inform Congress of the depth to its debasement of our currency.

Old books reveal the Fed money supply from the 1950s-1960s was only 10-20 Billion dollars in circulation.
Today nobody knows how much is in circulation or where it goes. Corruption is raft. Easy money at the Fed discount window has landed in the hands of global oligarchs who buy monopolies.

The Fed must be disbanded, Congressional duties as proscribed by the Constitution resumed and the growth/inflation relationship broken. How and if that works with precious metals is up for debate and experiment, as it is irrelevant without shutting down the Fed as an institution.

I was surprised to discover it was actually the FED that enforced Glass-Steagall.

It was actually the merger of Traveler's and Citygroup, and their respective whores in congress that led to the repeal.

So they could stay merged instead of being broken up.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aftermath_...eagall_Act

It's all the same club of banksters, but the point I was making is you can retain the system, you need a hierarchical banking system, but you have to Flip the script on the leadership structure.

Treasury needs to be top of that pyramid.

But you run into the same issues: if Treasury is top, you still have revolving door in that institution, and you still have the problem with congress, that the FED was sold as the solution to.

You still have to have responsible spending in congress.

It all ends up being the same kind of mess, because where money is involved there is always corruption.

I think you need to read the Constitution.

CONGRESS, not the Treasury.

The Treasury is supposed to be no more than a financial collection and enforcement agency for the Federal government, in Executive Branch. The United States Mint and the Bureau of Engraving and Printing handle production, and the Treasury oversees production but it makes NO DECISIONS regarding value and amount, or anything else. Only CONGRESS has this power. That is why CONGRESS can overturn the Federal Reserve anytime it votes to do so, even without Presidential involvement. It is also why only CONGRESS is responsible for outsourcing their Constitutional duty to the Bank of England, which owns the Federal Reserve. The Bank of England is not responsible to the government of the United Kingdom either.
Parliament gave them total contol over the country's finances just like the Fed here. SAME PEOPLE OWN BOTH.
Again, however, like CONGRESS in the US, the BoE can be shut down or changed in ownership by the Crown, but the Crown is not interested in doing so. https://www.intriguing-history.com/bank-...d-history/
sivil, TheOrderOfChaos  likes this!
Reply Share
#23
(02-05-2019, 11:31 AM)Treebeard Wrote:
(02-05-2019, 11:20 AM)Luvapottamus Wrote:
(02-04-2019, 01:38 PM)Treebeard Wrote: @Luvapottamus

The relationship you've described as "optimal" still provides for the Fed banks to get inside the operating procedures of the government, and that is not only totally unnecessary, but collusive and corruptive.

Concerning the conservative approach to inflation and money supply, that is how the Fed worked for over half its century. Acting somewhat innocuously, the deleterious aspects of private bank control were not yet worldwide, then as progressive Fed Chairmen took over the reigns, money supply was grossly inflated, machinations in the private investment (Wall Street) sector were multiplied, those ties were knotted and Glass-Steagall was overturned, after the money supply had already been multipied, going forward under GWB with Goldman Sachs penetration into the Treasury (continuing to this day) and a total absolvement of transparency, including no insight on M7 money supply so the Fed doesn't even inform Congress of the depth to its debasement of our currency.

Old books reveal the Fed money supply from the 1950s-1960s was only 10-20 Billion dollars in circulation.
Today nobody knows how much is in circulation or where it goes. Corruption is raft. Easy money at the Fed discount window has landed in the hands of global oligarchs who buy monopolies.

The Fed must be disbanded, Congressional duties as proscribed by the Constitution resumed and the growth/inflation relationship broken. How and if that works with precious metals is up for debate and experiment, as it is irrelevant without shutting down the Fed as an institution.

I was surprised to discover it was actually the FED that enforced Glass-Steagall.

It was actually the merger of Traveler's and Citygroup, and their respective whores in congress that led to the repeal.

So they could stay merged instead of being broken up.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aftermath_...eagall_Act

It's all the same club of banksters, but the point I was making is you can retain the system, you need a hierarchical banking system, but you have to Flip the script on the leadership structure.

Treasury needs to be top of that pyramid.

But you run into the same issues: if Treasury is top, you still have revolving door in that institution, and you still have the problem with congress, that the FED was sold as the solution to.

You still have to have responsible spending in congress.

It all ends up being the same kind of mess, because where money is involved there is always corruption.

I think you need to read the Constitution.

CONGRESS, not the Treasury.

The Treasury is supposed to be no more than a financial collection and enforcement agency for the Federal government, in Executive Branch. The United States Mint and the Bureau of Engraving and Printing handle production,  and the Treasury oversees production but it makes NO DECISIONS regarding value and amount, or anything else. Only CONGRESS has this power. That is why CONGRESS can overturn the Federal Reserve anytime it votes to do so, even without Presidential involvement. It is also why only CONGRESS is responsible for outsourcing their Constitutional duty to the Bank of England, which owns the Federal Reserve.

No I understand it.

Congress dictates monetary policy and treasury simply has the responsibility to administer it.

But then under that you also have a private banking system....

It needs to be restructured so the private banking is regulated not the regulator.

But you still have the problem with congress acting like a bunch of drunken sailors on shore leave.

THe point about you don't have to abolish the fed is it's part of the private banking system, and as long as you don't empower it with more duties and responsibilities than that, it's a necessary type of structure.

That the smaller banks utilize to do what they do.

If you get rid of it entirely, you'll end up recreating it.

Which would be okay too, but it's extra work, and it'd be too disruptive.

Fed does a lot more than set interest rates.
sivil  likes this!
Reply Share
#24
(02-05-2019, 11:43 AM)Luvapottamus Wrote: If you get rid of it entirely, you'll end up recreating it.

That is not true. The Fed did not exist until the end of 1913 and did not extend powers by worming its way into the Presidency and Congress in the late 60s/early70s - that is when the Fed truly became a power greater than the US government, as it is greater than the UK government also.
There is no reason to reconstitute the Fed. Branch banks are not the Fed. Remember the primary issues... not only the power of the Fed to create money that is Unconsitutional, but the OWNERSHIP of the Fed that is foreign and entirely problematic.
sivil  likes this!
Reply Share
#25
I looked into this and the American Governement is 71 trillion dollars in debt counting unfunded liabilities (like Pension). The American people are also into credit card, loans and mortgages to the tune of trillions of dollars as well. When I was looking at this, it looked like America can't even pay the debt, 1.1 trillion rolls over every year onto the debt. This is debt financing America could not pay.
WNC  likes this!
Reply Share
#26
(02-05-2019, 11:55 AM)Treebeard Wrote:
(02-05-2019, 11:43 AM)Luvapottamus Wrote: If you get rid of it entirely, you'll end up recreating it.

That is not true. The Fed did not exist until the end of 1913 and did not extend powers by worming its way into the Presidency and Congress in the late 60s/early70s - that is when the Fed truly became a power greater than the US government, as it is greater than the UK government also.
There is no reason to reconstitute the Fed. Branch banks are not the Fed. Remember the primary issues... not only the power of the Fed to create money that is Unconsitutional, but the OWNERSHIP of the Fed that is foreign and entirely problematic.

We had a central bank before the fed, and getting rid of it disrupted the economy.

One of the things the fed does is it's a central clearinghouse for checks.

It also makes inter-bank loans.

Those functions are necessary and good.

That's my point.

They also collect and analyze useful data.

Unfortunately they quit publishing M3(monetary velocity) before Bush's bailout.

That's really useful statistic.
sivil  likes this!
Reply Share
#27
(02-05-2019, 12:29 PM)Luvapottamus Wrote: We had a central bank before the fed

Neither the First nor Second Banks of the US were anything like the Fed.
It's like comparing the Continental Army to the Pentagon.
sivil  likes this!
Reply Share
#28
(02-05-2019, 12:50 PM)Treebeard Wrote:
(02-05-2019, 12:29 PM)Luvapottamus Wrote: We had a central bank before the fed

Neither the First nor Second Banks of the US were anything like the Fed.
It's like comparing the Continental Army to the Pentagon.

Sure but the point is there are salvageable parts of fed functions worth retaining.

I don't care if you start all over with it, but if you end the fed you need a replacement for the useful functions up and running already at the instant you flip the switch.

But then you still have the drunken sailors in congress...

Hard to fix..

Chuckle
sivil  likes this!
Reply Share
#29
(02-05-2019, 01:13 PM)Luvapottamus Wrote:
(02-05-2019, 12:50 PM)Treebeard Wrote:
(02-05-2019, 12:29 PM)Luvapottamus Wrote: We had a central bank before the fed

Neither the First nor Second Banks of the US were anything like the Fed.
It's like comparing the Continental Army to the Pentagon.

Sure but the point is there are salvageable parts of fed functions worth retaining.
Hard to fix..

Nothing is salvageable about the Fed. It did not invent banking, so you shouldn't just say banking on a national scale is somehow salvaging the Fed. Current Fed banks will be replaced by State or District banks. They can keep the same offices, it doesn't matter.
Here's the fix:
1) Rescind Federal Reserve Charter. All FRN's are now USN's.
2) Exchange United States Notes for Federal Reserve Notes as processed
3) Debts thereby paid by Congressional Committee and legal debtors.
4) All banks in the US must abide by Congressional laws
5) Bipartisan Congressional Committee on Banking executes Constitutional mandate

If I can think of this why the hell can't all the fancy lawyers and think tanks in America?
Because I am not a mental whore, that's why.
Reply Share
#30
(01-29-2019, 05:38 PM)Treebeard Wrote: [Image: 760x-1.png]

(Bloomberg) -- The U.S. Treasury Department is set to maintain elevated sales of long-term debt to finance the government’s widening budget deficit, with new issuance projected to top $1 trillion for a second-straight year.

Read more at: https://www.bloombergquint.com/politics/...s.16ydVaKr
Copyright © BloombergQuint

*You may NOT use another credit card to pay your bill
(unless you are the U.S. Government)

borrow 1 Trillion per year of fresh debt just to pay interest on old debt
winning?

its the Monster....what are we supposed to do...

just create the interest free currency and make em open the fort Knox can of worms....

what else could force the lies to be exposed

Grapes of Wrath Steinbeck
sivil  likes this!
Reply Share

Post Thread  Back To Forum
[-]
Quick Reply
Message
Type your reply to this message here.

Please select the number: 2
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10