It is time to seperate fact from fiction.
I have only provided case information on how the Fed is regulated not only by Congress, which is constitutionally correct, but the GOA as well. This
has occurred for the last 30 years. In order to find answers and show progress, one must look to the past to not make the same mistakes. I wanted to
first show that the FED is legal as Mr Paul want you to think otherwise along with many anti-government institutions and thinkers.
One reason that it should not be abolished is that it is currently held in balance with the separation of this entity from the US government. If the
US government was in control of the monetary policy there would be no oversight. They would have complete control as you would have with a gold
standard. In the case of the Fed, this is delegated by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System who appointed by the sitting president.
The term is 14 years and they can only serve one term. This shows that there can be no political or bipartisan control as most representatives span
the era of many presidents and work independently after appointment.
Wikipedia is a good resource, but look a little deeper and you will see the truth to the secret dealings that go on ‘behind closed doors’. Many
meetings are held in private and this is a fact. The minutes are not released for five years, and this is also a fact. The FED did refuse previous
attempts in the 70’s, but that was 40 years ago. Currently they are obligated to turn over the minutes within the span directed and comply. Many
industry analysts, including the current chairman Ben Bernanke, state that the release of these materials or speculation on “Fed speak” as it is
called is not good for the economy as a whole. Investors and banks can react to misinformation and cause financial worries for the common banker.
Monetary policy is set in place to be a detriment to inflation, not to cause inflation. In fact, take a moment and read the minutes of the FOMC from,
gasp, last year.
Where is the conspiracy? Here, these were released not within 5 years but five weeks of the meeting last year.
There is nothing to hide. It is all there in black and white. The days of the Rockefellers and their boys deciding the fate of a pre WW2 era United
States behind closed doors is no longer an issue. The internet is fascinating. One cannot judge an entity only on past performance, but can use that
knowledge to make it better. This is the current role of the FED. In his “The Great Moderation” speech, current chairman Bernanke stated that
“Whether the dominant cause of the Great Moderation is structural change, improved monetary policy, or simply good luck” it is ” This conclusion
on my part makes me optimistic for the future, because I am confident that monetary policymakers will not forget the lessons of the 1970s.” They
have learned and they are working to make sure that the financial worries of the past do not once again come to light.
Two financial institutions at different times actually came to the same conclusion about the gold standard as related to the Great Depression and the
change in the global economy shifting from the gold standard. It seemed that the longer that a country remained committed to gold, the deeper its
depression and the later its recovery. This led many countries who held onto the gold standard to take longer to recover post WW1 and into the
1930’s. The finding that leaving the gold standard was a key to recovery from the Great Depression was confirmed by the U.S. President Roosevelt
eliminated the U.S. monetary policy created by the gold standard, first by allowing the dollar to float and then by resetting its value at a
significantly lower level. He called what was known as a ‘bank holiday’ in which no bank could reopen without meeting FED standards that it was a
sound financial institution. With the gold standard constraint removed and the banking system stabilized, the money supply and the price level began
to rise. Between Roosevelt's coming to power in 1933 and the recession of 1937-38, the economy grew strongly. That fancy linen paper bought out
country back faster and stronger than those who tried to remain with the gold standard. This proves that it would be non-advisable to return to a
standard that has proven no merit in modern society for banking.
Now I ask, would removing the institution of the Federal Reserve be beneficial when history has proven otherwise? You would restrict growth and
increase unemployment which has been shown to occur when the monetary policy is not adjusted for inflation. This was proven in the 70’s as
previously mentioned. My question is, who would regulate the exchange and value of gold? The government? An appointed body? Whether it is fancy linen
banknotes or gold bars, someone has to assess the value. Is it global? Local? National?
Guidance is needed to point the economy in a direction for growth, and that is the monetary policy. The average man is not poor because of closed door
dealings, but because of consumer demand and greed. The government is not fleecing you with the prime rate, Citigroup is with your 21% interest rate.
The FED is not telling you to put that 42 inch HDTV on your Best Buy card at 17%, you are making that decision. The federal reserve does not need to
(This post violated the 5500 character limit and has been trimmed from the end.)
[edit on 10-8-2007 by The Vagabond]