The Fed Just Acknowledged Its Too Big To Jail Policy

a reply to: bitsforbytes

I think one of the causes of inflation is the injection of new money on the market

Inflation is necessary for economic growth. You can't have one without the other. The secret is to keep inflation low through good macroeconomic management — if you can.

One may argue that economic growth is itself a bad thing, though it's hard to sustain that argument as long as the human population also keeps growing. Population growth without economic growth means increasing poverty.

Yes, I agree that bankers should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law.

Not necessarily prison or execution, I would favor having the convicted persons be put into stocks in the town square every Saturday and Sunday, allowing citizens to throw rotten vegetables at them. 5 o'clock and they get out to go home for the night.

YES.....They should be criminally charged and imprisoned if found guilty by a JURY !!! I honestly have more respect for 'real' criminals, who at least assume some risk in their dirty dealings. It's interesting that the structure of gangs is modeled after the structure of financial institutions in many ways. Robbery, Fraud and Extortion are crimes, PERIOD !!!

Unless your living completely off the grid, it's nearly impossible to live without having a bank account, lol....try paying your bills, home loans, car loans, etc. in cash, not to mention cashing your paychecks ! In fact in more and more cases if you have a large amount of cash not in a bank, it can be seized because it's 'suspicious' and MIGHT have been gotten by doing something illegal...kinda ironic huh?

What really bugs me a lot these days is hearing people whine about issues such as this, not only about the bankers but also the regulators (government appointees) and the government itself.

They seem to forget that WE are the ones ultimately who allow the government to get away with this every time. The government works for us (put aside the reality for a moment) and so do those they appoint to regulate. If one or both are failing and hurting the people and the economy, then we have every right to demand they all step down and be replaced. Not at the next election cycle, where we just get more of the same, but right now.

It's the general apathy and inability, or social conditioning, that makes people think they have no power to change things until the next election cycle, when they realistically have every right to throw the criminals out of office and prosecute them all for failure to protect the country's assets, and collusion in organised crime.

a reply to: Astyanax

Yes, but the growth is really dept. There is nothing to back up the US dollar. Money was based on finite ressorces and now it is based on nothing. Also, The banks can lend more than they actually hold. So that is why creating new money to lend WITH interest will fail.

It leads to a never ending dept. See the Canadian, US, etc national dept. Canada's public dept has only grown since 1975 and we are a first world country. If i would runmy personal finances like the Canadian gouv does i would be in jail.

Secondly, God said that usury = fail so far looks like he is right. You cant get more then what something is worth, nothing can be created or destroyed the same should apply to money.

Lybia was lending money with no interest and Khadafi was going to base his currency on gold. Look at what is happening now, Khadafi is dead.

On paper the system works. On paper... this is reality. People don't understand whom they are supporting and serving.

a reply to: Astyanax

Take a look at this video from the Crash Course (Peakprosperity.com).

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: StoutBroux

I entered this discussion because of the claim that interest bearing loans are somehow immoral. Do you agree with that sentiment?

Well, if we have had proven wrongdoing in the banking system and these wrongdoers are not being prosecuted, therefore have no reason to do anything any different. To become complicit with this system and watch it as it goes along in an obviously broken manner, allows for someone to say "well I'm getting screwed, but maybe I'll take advantage of a way to screw someone else" sounds really moral to me .

Obviously we need banks and loans at this point in civilization, but the practices we have been keeping literally do not allow us to get our feet under our out of control downhill sprint. Yeah we're covering quite a bit of ground at a high pace, but what happens when we hit the bottom and break our ankle (healthcare in this metaphor), will it be left to fend for itself or will the body work together to fix the situation?

IMHO I see cooperation and mutual benefits for all Americans being something of a legend or myth, because we are so far from that today that I really do feel we will fail as a nation if it came to an issue such as a crash.

a reply to: bitsforbytes

Yes, but the growth is really dept.

The growth comes from production funded by credit, the profits from which repay the debt and leave some money left over.

There is nothing to back up the US dollar.

Are you one of those people who believes that money has to be tied to some object of physical value? And how then is the object valued? Scarcity? Labour input? The only source of value is human perception, modulated by the laws of supply and demand. Money is no more 'real' because it is tied to gold or some other material standard of value. The value of money resides in the value we place on it — and that is all the value it needs.

The banks can lend more than they actually hold.

What of it? Central banks and government guarantees exist to deal with this issue.

So that is why creating new money to lend WITH interest will fail.

I really don't know what you mean by this. Perhaps you should make it a little clearer.

Canadian, US, etc national dept. Canada's public dept has only grown since 1975 and we are a first world country.

Meanwhile, countries which actually do the work of production, like China, rack up massive trade surpluses. This has nothing to do with finance and everything to do with trade. Your precious 'first world countries' are like aristocratic debtors who order suit after suit from their tailors but never pay for them, they just rack up the bills and leave their debts to their heirs to pay. There is nothing wrong with the system, it's just that some people can't keep themselves from abusing it. That's their look-out — and their descendants', of course.

God said that usury = fail so far looks like he is right.

Which god would that be? Most pantheons have a god of wealth, such as Lakshmi or Kuvera or Pluto.

Lybia was lending money with no interest and Khadafi was going to base his currency on gold. Look at what is happening now, Khadafi is dead.

If your economy is in a deflationary phase, you can lend at 0% interest and still make money. I don't know if Libya did that but Japan did for quite a long time. Islamic finance is not zero-interest, by the way, it's simply a procedural fiction that hides the interest as a 'percentage of profit' the borrower derives from the loan.

On paper the system works.

No, on paper is where it looks dodgy. In reality it works fine.

*

a reply to TheBandit795
I'm sorry, I have no time to watch videos, particular videos I suspect to be full of misinformation. If you have a point to make, please make it in text, and we will debate it.

a reply to: Astyanax

I am one of those people who think that money should tied to a physical finite resource.

Fiat currency, in case you didn't know what it was called, this fake money has failed time and time again throughout History. As usual each generation thinks it is the pioneer of great new ventures when we have the same cons played over and over.

If you don't see a problem its because you dont want too.

a reply to: bitsforbytes

I am one of those people who think that money should tied to a physical finite resource.

In other words, you want to limit the available supply of money, doubtless because you think this will control inflation and prevent the appearance of speculative bubbles. It doesn't actually do either, you know; history shows this plainly. All it does is limit productive capacity, or promote deflation, which is much worse than inflation.

Fiat currency, in case you didn't know what it was called

I am aware of the term, but it is so popular with cranks that one recoils from using it.

this fake money has failed time and time again throughout History.

So has the other kind (representative currency, in case you didn't know what it was called). All it takes is a war, or a sudden new source of gold (or whatever substance is being used at the reserve), and you get hyperinflation. See Spain during the sixteenth century, the US during the California Gold Rush, etc.

If you don't see a problem its because you dont want too.

Or possibly because I'm a little broader-minded in my economic views than the average ATS true believer.

In a survey of economists, zero supported a gold standard. There are many reasons for this. The main advantage or problem (depending on your point of view) of the gold standard is that is severely constrains the actions of the government. It cannot use monetary policy to influence the economy. A common response to recession is to print money which a gold standard prevents a government from doing. This means it must use fiscal measures, but a gold standard limits these as well. This means a government cannot do much to combat a recession no matter how severe it is. Instead it must stand idly by and let the recession take its course. While some hardcore free marketers would agree with this, most economists recognise that if the government doesn’t intervene the recession gets worse. Source

a reply to: Astyanax

But you have the same amount of time to post on ATS... smh...

Let me put it simple for you. When there is too much money in circulation for the amount of value/work done and/or products out there, the value of that money will drop. That's the main reason there is inflation.

a reply to: Astyanax

Deflation is actually a good thing.

Deflation is actually a good thing, because in a deflation prices drop and money becomes more valuable, so deflation encourages people to save money. Deflation rewards the prudent saver and punishes the profligate borrower. The way a society, like an individual, becomes wealthy is by producing more than it consumes. In other words, by saving, not borrowing. And during a deflation, when money becomes more valuable, everybody wants money. They want to save. Whereas during an inflation, you want to get rid of the money. You want to consume. You want to spend. But you don’t become wealthy by spending and consuming; you become wealthy by producing and saving.

Is anyone surprised? If we can't tax them like citizens, what makes us think Corporations and their Dear Leaders will ever be prosecuted like anyone else under the same laws? There is the judicial system we have, and the one we want to work the way it should on paper. Refer to Ferguson threads.... Not much surprise there either. I know I wasn't. Why else drag your heels but to foment the media spectacle and public speculation further? When he got off, I didn't feel shock, but pity and sympathy for the family and people there. Pretty sure I would've won the bet there, just not much money... Another day in the Life on Wall St. When the Federal Reserve owns you, hard to turn down the dance...

a reply to: Britguy

They seem to forget that WE are the ones ultimately who allow the government to get away with this every time. The government works for us (put aside the reality for a moment) and so do those they appoint to regulate. If one or both are failing and hurting the people and the economy, then we have every right to demand they all step down and be replaced. Not at the next election cycle, where we just get more of the same, but right now.

I can only speak from my experience in the US, but I suspect it may be similar in the UK.

The American people can't get together on anything. It's partially because of the government's divide-and-conquer methodology. It prevents enough of the populace from coming together to effect any change.

The old saying applies: "All politics is local." Americans dislike every branch of the federal government, even more so than they dislike a poison ivy rash. But when the time comes to make a change, at every election cycle, the same thieves keep getting re-elected. The same people that hate the US government actually like their local representatives. So no change occurs.

So goes the old joke: A city-slicker was lost and asked an old farmer for directions. After pondering the question for a while, he replied: "You can't get there from here. You got to go somewhere else and start."

Nothing will change until the system resets.


dex

How does one eat an elephant? By one bite at a time. It's time to eat some elephant ass. Namaste.

The Fed's weak oversight is one reason we got in a mess, the Federal Government's interference into the home mortgage market is another. We cleaned out Enron and survived. We prosecute insider trading and no one bats an eye. There is no reason bankers can't be held accountable for gross violations of the law. Are celebrities like Martha Stewart supposed to be an example to the professionals ? Financial wrongdoing by the big boys causes far more damage then the sleaze artists who swipe some credit card numbers, yet guess who usually goes to jail? a reply to: AlaskanDad

a reply to: TheBandit795

But you have the same amount of time to post on ATS.

I have time to do things I find useful or entertaining. Videos peddling dodgy economic theories are, in my view, neither.

When there is too much money in circulation for the amount of value/work done and/or products out there, the value of that money will drop.

This is kindergarten stuff. Furthermore, it is just a definition of what inflation is; it does not address the actual causes of inflation at all. Did you seriously mean to make me watch a whole video just to tell me something any high schooler knows?

Might as well reply your second post here too.

Deflation is actually a good thing.

Says Jon Matonis, one of the founders of Bitcoin, a pseudocurrency that has suffered from deflation problems for quite a long time now. Hardly a disinterested commentator, I would have thought.

For more about Bitcoin and deflation, read this. It also, incidentally, debunks the idea that real economists view deflation as anything but a menace.

a reply to: Britguy

There is some truth to what you say, no doubt. Citizenship has its responsibilities and duties.

That said, here in the US (and I suspect in Britain too) there is ample evidence that our elected officials have taken overt actions to assault our liberties and constitution.

Just a few examples: The Patriot Act, the NDAA amendment of 2012, the Military Commissions Act.

No citizens agitated for those bills, not one. They originated in Congress, and in the case of the Patriot Act, were passed in the dead of night as the elected officials were scared silly about anthrax.

So, yes we have a role in the damage done, but so does the government.

originally posted by: Astyanax
a reply to: TheBandit795

But you have the same amount of time to post on ATS.

I have time to do things I find useful or entertaining. Videos peddling dodgy economic theories are, in my view, neither.

Then I'm not wasting any time to watch any links dodgy economic theories you post. Simple. This discussion will obviously go nowhere.

And as for the cause. It's two things: The Central banks having the right to purchase securities with money they can legally create out of nothing. All QE is nothing more than these loans, bonds etc.. bought with money that didn't exist the day before. That's the first cause of monetary expansion.

The second cause is banks having a requirement to hold just a fraction of money in their accounts and being able to loan out the rest. Being able to lend out money that they don't have.

Here is a calculator that shows what happens with fractional reserve lending. $100 deposit in the bank grows to $999 created out of thin air in the example of there being a 10% reserve requirement.

www.themoneyjar.co.uk...

Anyway guys, here's another link that shows central bankers are immune to prosecution. This is on the BIS website.

PDF File

Article 3
Inviolability
1. The buildings or parts of buildings and surrounding land
which, whoever may be the owner thereof, are used for the
purposes of the Bank shall be inviolable. No agent of the
Swiss public authorities may enter therein without the express
consent of the Bank. Only the President,2 the General
Manager of the Bank, or their duly authorised representative
shall be competent to waive such inviolability.
2. The archives of the Bank and, in general, all documents
and any data media belonging to the Bank or in its
possession, shall be inviolable at all times and in all places.
3. The Bank shall exercise supervision of and police power
over its premises.

Article 4
Immunity from jurisdiction and execution
1. The Bank shall enjoy immunity from jurisdiction, save:
(a) to the extent that such immunity is formally waived in
individual cases by the President,2 the General Manager
of the Bank, or their duly authorised representatives;
(b) in civil or commercial suits, arising from banking or
financial transactions, initiated by contractual
counterparties of the Bank, except in those cases in
which provision for arbitration has been or shall have
been made;
(c) in the case of any civil action against the Bank for
damage caused by any vehicle belonging to or operated
on behalf of the Bank.

Article 12
Status of the members of the Board of Directors and of
the representatives of the Bank’s member central banks
The members of the Board of Directors of the Bank, together
with the representatives of those central banks which are
members of the Bank, shall enjoy while carrying out their
duties in Switzerland and throughout their journey to or from
the place where a meeting is held, the following privileges and
immunities:
(a) immunity from arrest or imprisonment and immunity
from seizure of their personal baggage, save in flagrant
cases of criminal offence;
(b) inviolability of all papers and documents;
(c) immunity from jurisdiction, even after their mission has
been accomplished, for acts carried out in the discharge
of their duties, including words spoken and writings;