It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Gold Standard Returns!!!--Indiana State Senator Files Gold Money Bill!

page: 4
39
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 17 2009 @ 02:30 AM
link   
reply to post by OBE1
 


I'll try to find the article I read about the relation of COMEX gold and the London vaults of HSBC. Your appear to be right about HSBC holding the loot. Good eye.

Though not common, one can take possession of gold though often don't since they would then have to pay taxes on it and transport fees. Cheaper to leave with HSBC if you can trust them.

I'm running out of trust with banks holding onto anything these days. My bank doesn't even insure the contents of one's safe deposit box held at the bank. A disgruntled bank mgr. or employee could just as well walk off with ones loot and the depositor would be out of luck. Not sure about the rest of the banks though my bank, of which I only have a checking account for convenience, is one of the largest. As far as one's cash deposits, not sure how financially stable FDIC and SIPC are these days if there ever is a 'systemic' run on the banking system.


1. Can you take physical possession of the gold?
The Trustee, Bank of New York, does not deal directly with the public. The trust handles creation and redemption orders for the shares with Authorized Participants, who deal in blocks of 100,000 shares. An individual investor wishing to exchange shares for physical gold would have to come to the appropriate arrangements with his or her broker.

SPDR Gold shares link



[edit on 17-1-2009 by Perseus Apex]




posted on Jan, 17 2009 @ 02:38 AM
link   
reply to post by Alpha_Magnum
 


I hear your concerns loud and clear. Besides gold or any other investment, it's much more important in my opinion to own a farm with good water and fertile soil far away from the big cities. I chose a country in Central America though has been difficult at times to manage while in the States many months out of the year. A good, honest caretaker can be hard to find. Been through 2 in two years to date.



posted on Jan, 17 2009 @ 02:53 AM
link   
reply to post by Alpha_Magnum
 


Yikers!

Fail or not A_M, we have a state senator that is trying to make a difference here.

By all means, avoid Gold...avoid Silver. Don't even think about them...stay in dollars, or which ever currency you choose.

It all may end tomorrow, but whatever one's situation...we can all learn to savor the moment...the h-e-r-e - n-o-w...become a walking blessing......

or not


GLTY



posted on Jan, 17 2009 @ 02:54 AM
link   
reply to post by tjeffersonsghost
 


Biggest stumbling block to this whole idea is that in the same portion of the Constitution that they use it also states:

No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or grant any Title of Nobility.; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or grant any Title of Nobility.


Not to mention that the portion "make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts" was in reference to paying it's Federal Debt, not the individual debts of the citizens, exactly the same as the "Bills of Credit" portion before it.

These politicians are severely lacking in the proper education required for the offices they hold, this is becoming painfully more apparent each and every passing day.



posted on Jan, 17 2009 @ 03:03 AM
link   
reply to post by Perseus Apex
 


The details can be found here PA...the GLD Prospectus.


"The redemption procedures allow Authorized Participants to redeem Baskets and do not entitle an individual Shareholder to redeem any Shares in an amount less than a Basket, or to redeem Baskets other than through an Authorized Participant."

"A redemption of some or all of a Shareholder’s Shares in exchange for the underlying gold represented by the
Shares redeemed generally will not be a taxable event to the Shareholder. The Shareholder’s tax basis for the
gold received in the redemption generally will be the same as the Shareholder’s tax basis for the portion of its
pro rata share of the gold held in the Trust immediately prior to the redemption that is attributable to the
Shares redeemed. The Shareholder’s holding period with respect to the gold received should include the period
during which the Shareholder held the Shares redeemed. A subsequent sale of the gold received by the
Shareholder will be a taxable event."


I'm not advocating the purchase of GLD, either as an investment, or as a trading vehicle. Just trying to dispel a few common misunderstandings.

Thanks for your reply.....

GL



posted on Jan, 17 2009 @ 03:53 AM
link   
reply to post by OBE1
 


I couldn't find the article I was referring to though the links below discuss the issue at hand:

COMEX failure to deliver on gold?

COMEX gold delivery?

Is the COMEX doing fractional reserve delivery of Gold



posted on Jan, 17 2009 @ 08:28 AM
link   
reply to post by OBE1
 




First, what happened to the public Gold stock between Dec '32' and March '33' ? A whopping 35.5% of circulating Gold simply vanished...just ahead of the Roosevelt confiscation!

Milton Friedman/Anna Schwartz: We therefore concluded that in Jan. 1934 the bulk of the [13.9 million ounces] was retained illegally in private hands. I previously understood that there was only one conviction, but Mr Thomson adds a few details....

Citizens were required by Executive Order (April 5, 1933), to surrender all of their Gold coin by May 1, 1933. In January of '34', after Roosevelt had devalued the dollar, there still remained 13.9MM ounces of Gold coin in 'circulation'. In other words, only 21.9% was ever surrendered.



I prefer the term “inflated the dollar” to “devalued the dollar. . . “ which would apply to the gold. And “in circulation” is misleading at best. Post 1933 Gold was possessed but not circulated.

I think this demonstrates the difference between an ideologue and a practical person. Both FDR and the refuse-nik holders of gold got their wish. As time has proved, it mattered not that all the gold was not turned in. Gold for numismatic collections was exempted.

In modern governments, there must be but one source of exchange or money. The US was a late arrival, 1913. The single entity most closely connected to the whole population is the Federal government. Ispo facto, the Federal Reserve System.

Yet, Americans did not want a state owned central bank. Our solution - I do not know how other countries solved that problem and many may not regard it to be a problem - but our solution was Private ownership of the Fed by its member banks, but Public control of its operations by putting the PIC - people in charge - as presidential appointees with approval by the Senate. The best of both worlds and Proved by serving us well for 96 years through every conceivable variation of challenges.

[edit on 1/17/2009 by donwhite]



posted on Jan, 17 2009 @ 08:54 AM
link   
what you guys fail to realize that it was gold back currency that was the downfall of the roman empire and it was gold backed currency during the great depression.I urge you to take a look at colonial scrip and greenbacks.they were govt issued fiat interest free money.
why not gold standard cuz never before in the history gold is outside
US and never before in the history most of the gold is owned by the private banks aka IMF and central banks(2\3).

gold is easily horded,manipulated and he who has the gold is rich and who doesnt is poor.
I request you to watch money masters and money as debt.



posted on Jan, 17 2009 @ 10:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by ANNED
The big problem is there is not enough gold in the vaults in the US to back the deal.

Great idea as it would need the mining of a lot of new gold.

This would put a lot of my friends back to work.

Since we have only mined 1/10 0f one % of the recoverable gold in the US this would also put a lot of people back to work mining gold.

It would also raise the price of gold to more then $2000 a ounce.


www.origsix.com...

this will also drive the treehuggers nuts trying to stop the mining.

[edit on 15-1-2009 by ANNED]


Get ready for the PUSH made by Obama when he becomes President, to snatch all the Gold. Do not be surprised to have to forfeit it to the government. yes, Gold standard is a good thing, but its going to hurt a lot of people getting us back on track.



posted on Jan, 17 2009 @ 10:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by OBE1
reply to post by Alpha_Magnum
 


Yikers!

Fail or not A_M, we have a state senator that is trying to make a difference here.

By all means, avoid Gold...avoid Silver. Don't even think about them...stay in dollars, or which ever currency you choose.

It all may end tomorrow, but whatever one's situation...we can all learn to savor the moment...the h-e-r-e - n-o-w...become a walking blessing......

or not


GLTY


If you or I choose to buy gold, silver or platinum (my fav) then these are called personal holdings. So. if the government chooses to seize personal holdings of precious metals and the like (they will) you may be able to retain it but the problem will be in attempting to use it as a replacement for cash. The same seizure operates the same from the other point of view. A store will only accept whatever the FIAT script is.

I have personal holdings of the three metals I listed and I would not have it any other way. Here in this thread the idea that the entire country should go back to a gold standard is the "question at hand" not individual holdings. The fact is there is simply not enough gold and mines will be able to dictate the value of gold. It is strictly impractical and the problems we see today are due to the USA loss of hegemony and declining resources.

So this matter is simply a waste of time. Frankly a better money would be wampum since it looks pretty.



Abe Lincoln issued the "Green Back" and this was also in the spirit of the US Constitution. Even then the bankers were a big problem...

See if you can fins a video on line called "The Money Masters" and watch it.



posted on Jan, 17 2009 @ 10:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by arcnaver
Get ready for the PUSH made by Obama when he becomes President, to snatch all the Gold. Do not be surprised to have to forfeit it to the government. yes, Gold standard is a good thing, but its going to hurt a lot of people getting us back on track.


You can't eat gold or drink it or keep warm by it. There are simply not enough resources to go around and until more resources become available (land, water, energy & food) or demand is cut (death) this situation will not change. This is why all of those carriers are in the Gulf. This is why Saddam was hunted down like a dog. This is why Regan had the CIA guys take down the USSR in Afghanistan and why we are now in Afghanistan. This is why we want Iran.

Our way of life requires more energy than we are able to get our greedy little hands on. The dollar is now KAPUT since it was the global PETRO-DOLLAR. The USA for years had DOLLAR hegemony since our notes were the only ones to be used any time oil was bought and sold. Saddam started a DOLLAR mutiny among the OPEC's by changing his holdings to the EURO.

That is why we went over there to Iraq to force them back to the BUCK. Not 9-11 that was a revenge excuse but RESOURCE CONTROL. Like Ron Paul says, "This is the blow back!"



posted on Jan, 17 2009 @ 12:31 PM
link   
most, if not all, of the fort Knox gold is in Saudi arabia to pay for all that oil the USA imported.



posted on Jan, 17 2009 @ 01:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by donwhite
I prefer the term “inflated the dollar” to “devalued the dollar. . .
I think this demonstrates the difference between an ideologue and a practical person.


Mom prefers revalued the dollar...she's a Methodist


Been a while Don; I'd forgotten your views on the utility of the FRS...and I think I'll just tiptoe around this one.

Hey...an ideologue, a Methodist, and a practicle person were sitting on a park bench one day........

GLDW



posted on Jan, 17 2009 @ 07:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by donwhite

I prefer the term “inflated the dollar” to “devalued the dollar. . . “ which would apply to the gold. And “in circulation” is misleading at best. Post 1933 Gold was possessed but not circulated.

I think this demonstrates the difference between an ideologue and a practical person. Both FDR and the refuse-nik holders of gold got their wish. As time has proved, it mattered not that all the gold was not turned in. Gold for numismatic collections was exempted.

In modern governments, there must be but one source of exchange or money. The US was a late arrival, 1913. The single entity most closely connected to the whole population is the Federal government. Ispo facto, the Federal Reserve System.

Yet, Americans did not want a state owned central bank. Our solution - I do not know how other countries solved that problem and many may not regard it to be a problem - but our solution was Private ownership of the Fed by its member banks, but Public control of its operations by putting the PIC - people in charge - as presidential appointees with approval by the Senate. The best of both worlds and Proved by serving us well for 96 years through every conceivable variation of challenges.


Why, Don White Im your Huckleberry. Playing for blood is just my game.
Now without reverting to an old battle of you and I as seen here
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Ill try to comment on your opinion.

First thing is first Devalue the dollar seems like a very reasonable statement. You can call a person an Ideologue but I call it calling a spade a spade.

Now to the heart of the matter. The argument you make is the argument Alexander Hamilton made in reference to "modern governments" needing a central banking system. I agree with you there but the question is who is to control this system and what is our currency to be issued by this bank.

Before I delve into that I want to just address this and in addressing this I will address my question listed above...




Yet, Americans did not want a state owned central bank. Our solution - I do not know how other countries solved that problem and many may not regard it to be a problem - but our solution was Private ownership of the Fed by its member banks, but Public control of its operations by putting the PIC - people in charge - as presidential appointees with approval by the Senate. The best of both worlds and Proved by serving us well for 96 years through every conceivable variation of challenges.



I disagree with the whole serving us well for 96 years. We have gained nothing. Lender of last resort? Uh Uh. As we see in this current situation the taxpayers are always the lender of last resort. Yes every dollar we spend is borrowed whether from China or even our local Federal Reserve. Why should we pay interest to a entity that is supposed to be the peoples? I know your probably going to say well the FED gives all the interest to the treasury at the end of the year minus their expenses. When is the last time the FED has been audited on their expenses?

All the issues we had before which we supposed to be prevented with the institution of the FED still happen. Also if you think the FED is controlled by the people then I have a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you. First off the appointed where do you think that list of options come from? You think the government chooses who they want? No they get a list to choose from. The FED is 100% controlled by the private sector and I am a private sector guy, but I also feel there are jobs for the government and having control of the currency is one of them. I think most of the founding fathers would agree with me on this. Our government should control our currency but a fiat currency does not work which I will get to now.

No that we have debated who should control the FED and why we will go to the type of currency. As we see Fiat currency is just a method to rob the people via inflation. If the currency is not tied to anything then that gives the government permission to spend as they choose. This is why we need a gold and or silver standard. This limits what the government can spend when printing money. This would restrain them from the big government that has led mostly to our current situation. On top of the killing us devaluing the dollar we have to pay taxes on top of it. Then they tax the hell out of ya for saving which makes sense because our system the way it is set up has to discourage savings. You dont have to carry gold in a shoebox you can issue paper redeemable in gold with monthly audits from the government on gold reserves. Listen if gold is not good enough then tie it to another commodity but when its tied to something that requires labor that gives it intrinsic value which is more than I can say for our debt based system.

So I question your version of practicality for we have gained nothing from the FED the way it is set up as of now. We need to get it out of the hands of a select few and put it in the power of our elected government per the constitution. We need to have a gold and or silver standard. We need to have currency with value to it instead of this debt based theft currency we have now.



posted on Jan, 17 2009 @ 07:25 PM
link   
reply to post by autowrench
 


It just goes to show that the NWO is really working to set the action-reaction-solution through the inflated economic crisis. Really does make sense.



posted on Jan, 17 2009 @ 09:13 PM
link   
reply to post by mrsdudara
 


www.econ.upf.edu...

This is a good paper on perishable mediums of exchange. Oil could be used, but it looks like all global reserves will be depleted within the next 40 years anyway. Might we consider hydrogen fuel cells, once the technology is sufficiently developed? It is the most likely candidate for the fuel, which will drive the economies of the next few centuries. Of course, its volatility as a gas might engender some fear as to the safety of its storage... Then again, if the technology is sufficiently developed, such fears should be irrelevant.

[edit on 17-1-2009 by cognoscente]



posted on Jan, 17 2009 @ 09:33 PM
link   
Whoever owns Gold sure stands to make a killing by returning to the Gold Standard.

I think we shoud keep things as they are and see who goes broke on this bet.



posted on Jan, 18 2009 @ 09:45 AM
link   
reply to post by mybigunit
 




Why, Don White I’m your Huckleberry. Ill try to comment on your opinion.

First thing is first. Devalue the dollar seems like a very reasonable statement. You can call a person an Ideologue but I call it calling a spade a spade.



To clarify, when I said “ideologue” I did not have OBE1 in mind. As you should recall I not only defend the Fed Reserve System as both useful but more, as inevitable, I am likewise quick to defend FDR. “Devalue” has a pejorative tone whereas “inflate” is our way of life.

In a classroom setting the official “value” of a currency is, as they say, academic. The sheer size of China's economy may keep the YUAN out of this category? But as runaway inflation ruined the Weimar Republic in the 1920s thereby giving the world Adolph Hitler, so also is runaway inflation ruining Zimbabwe and giving the world Robert Mogabe.

The terms fiat currency and fiat money
relate to types of currency or money whose usefulness results not from any intrinsic value or guarantee that it can be converted into gold or another currency, but instead from a government's order (fiat) that it must be accepted as a means of payment. en.wikipedia.org...

In the current economic spiral downward, America is at risk too, because the temptation to “print” more money is great. Surely wiser heads will prevail and that not be allowed to happen.

I think there is a “safe” level of adding money to our economy. I’m pretty sure it correlates very closely with the rise in productivity. OTOH, when productively declines - as it is doing now - perhaps the amount of money in circulation should be reduced also? To counter what might be called “virtual” inflation?

Mr M/B/U, I have already written that I believe there is $650 billion in US currency, divided $400 b. outside and $250 b. inside the US. This might be 10 times the amount of US currency in 1945 as WW2 ended?




I disagree with the whole [claim the Fed is] serving us well for 96 years. We have gained nothing. Lender of last resort? Uh Uh. As we see in this current situation the taxpayers are always the lender of last resort.



Background. I’d offer the US was 95% agricultural, 5% industrial, in 1790. By 1910, I’d suggest the divide was 50% to 50%. By 1950, I’d say it was 15% agricultural, 85% industrial. Today, it is 5% agricultural and 95% industrio-service, if you don’t count the food we import. I’m explaining why I assert the Fed has served us well over the years.

Despite all the growth in population and in real wealth, the US has managed to keep inflation to say, 1000% between 1950 and 2008. A ten-fold price increase. Our highest rate of inflation came in the 1978-1982 period of stagflation. The lowest rate was the 100 months in the 1960-1968 period. (All the above by memory). I contend the Fed was crucial to this unequaled period of economic growth. 1950-2008.

MORE. The reason we have the Fed system at all is to ISOLATE and to INSULATE those who make fundamental monetary policy from the political arena.

Republicans favor TIGHT money while Democrats favor LOOSE money. This the very same dispute that brought forth the historical “Cross of Gold” speech by W. J. Bryan. See Note 1. Bryan made three runs on the presidency losing in 1896 and 1900 to William McKinley and in 1908 to W. H. Taft. Those campaigns served well to educate the public of the important consequences of monetary policy. I suggest Bryan, while losing the high office he so often sought, nevertheless helped set up the circumstances in which the Fed was born. 1913.




You think the government chooses who they want? No they get a list to choose from. The FED is 100% controlled by the private sector and I am a private sector guy, but I also feel there are jobs for the government and having control of the currency is one of them.



Exactly! You said it and you said It right! The Fed is controlled by bankers. As much as I dislike them - class warfare - we peons also need them. You cannot survive (live) in 2009 without a good currency. As I have written elsewhere, the major difference in America and Germany in 1929-1933 was this: The Germans had TOO much money, the Americans had TOO little money. But what money WE had was worth something and what money the Germans had was worth nothing! It’s bad enough to be broke, but it’s even worse to have money that is worthless.




Yes every dollar we spend is borrowed whether from China or even our local Federal Reserve. Why should we pay interest to a entity that is supposed to be the peoples? I know your probably going to say well the FED gives all the interest to the treasury at the end of the year minus their expenses. When is the last time the FED has been audited on their expenses?



1) The “entity” - the Fed - is owned by its member banks. But this is Shakespearean, “much ado about nothing.” en.wikipedia.org... The Fed is not a for-profit entity or corporation. Maybe it’s just slight of hand but that it has worked you cannot deny. How well it has worked you can argue.

2) To my best knowledge the US Treasury does not pay interest to the Federal Reserve System. The Fed is funded by assessments on its member banks, keeping it independent of the Congress and the White House. The Treasury does pay interest on the public held portion of the National Debt. It keeps the accounts of the private portion of the National Debt. Say Trust Funds. But I’m sure without knowing that the Treasury does not pay anything to the Fed.

3) I suppose the Fed is audited every year. But money on hand in vaults is of no value to the Fed (or to anyone). In that sense stacks of fiat money is of no more practical use than a pile of gold bars.




I think most of the founding fathers would agree with me on this. Our government should control our currency but a fiat currency does not work which I will get to now.

No that we have debated who should control the FED and why we will go to the type of currency. As we see Fiat currency is just a method to rob the people via inflation. If the currency is not tied to anything then that gives the government permission to spend as they choose.

So I question your version of practicality for we have gained nothing from the FED the way it is set up as of now. We need to get it out of the hands of a select few and put it in the power of our elected government per the constitution. We need to have a gold and or silver standard. We need to have currency with value to it instead of this debt based theft currency we have now.



1) I prefer to leave the Founding Fathers undisturbed in our civic pantheon of gods. Don’t forget we have been compelled to amend their work 25 times! (Not counting the 2 on-off prohibition amendments). We still struggle today with the half dozen PRO slavery compromises they made, most notable being the Electoral College.

I admit the never ending danger of printing too much money and thereby debasing its value, is very real! There is no perfect solution.

2) Look here, in ‘06 the public voted NO on the Bush43 policies in Iraq. The Dems learned quickly that Congress cannot stop the president whoever he is. To get the people’s will carried out, the public voted November 4, ‘08 to change the president. Even as I write this has not been carried into action! 87 days delay!

Under a parliamentary system the government changes hands THE NEXT DAY. We know how, but do we want our FIXED terms as in Ben Franklin’s apocryphal answer, “We give you a republic if you can keep it.” We have kept it.

Do we want to keep what was remarkable in 1787 but shamefully slow in 2009? Can we afford this built in period of impotency? Mr. Obama shows his respect for the Constitution and its built in delays. He is frequently called on to remind us there is but "one president at a time." Suppose for a minute it was Huey Long who had been elected and not Barack Obama?


Note 1.
"Having behind us the producing masses of this nation and the world, supported by the commercial interests, the laboring interests and the toilers everywhere, we will answer their demand for a gold standard by saying to them: You shall not press down upon the brow of labor this crown of thorns, you shall not crucify mankind upon a cross of gold."
en.wikipedia.org...
www.youtube.com...]

[edit on 1/18/2009 by donwhite]



posted on Jan, 18 2009 @ 12:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by donwhite

To clarify, when I said “ideologue” I did not have OBE1 in mind. As you should recall I not only defend the Fed Reserve System as both useful but more, as inevitable, I am likewise quick to defend FDR. “Devalue” has a pejorative tone whereas “inflate” is our way of life.

In a classroom setting the official “value” of a currency is, as they say, academic. The sheer size of China's economy may keep the YUAN out of this category? But as runaway inflation ruined the Weimar Republic in the 1920s thereby giving the world Adolph Hitler, so also is runaway inflation ruining Zimbabwe and giving the world Robert Mogabe.

The terms fiat currency and fiat money
relate to types of currency or money whose usefulness results not from any intrinsic value or guarantee that it can be converted into gold or another currency, but instead from a government's order (fiat) that it must be accepted as a means of payment. en.wikipedia.org...


Im quite aware of your stance on the FED and FDR but that is why I am here. Im here to offer that counter balance to your views. Now in regards to China and the Yuan what keeps them out of inflation is the fact that China unlike the US actually produces products and exports them. They are also a creditor nation and not a debtor nation. The US used to be this kind of nation which is why we were able to get out of these positions before. We are now a debtor nation that runs a service sector and consumption economy. On top of this we are adding deficit after deficit from the crime family in Washington. BTW Im quite aware of what a fiat currency is.






Background. I’d offer the US was 95% agricultural, 5% industrial, in 1790. By 1910, I’d suggest the divide was 50% to 50%. By 1950, I’d say it was 15% agricultural, 85% industrial. Today, it is 5% agricultural and 95% industrio-service, if you don’t count the food we import. I’m explaining why I assert the Fed has served us well over the years.

I contend the Fed was crucial to this unequaled period of economic growth. 1950-2008.

MORE. The reason we have the Fed system at all is to ISOLATE and to INSULATE those who make fundamental monetary policy from the political arena.

Republicans favor TIGHT money while Democrats favor LOOSE money. This the very same dispute that brought forth the historical “Cross of Gold” speech by W. J. Bryan. See Note 1. Bryan made three runs on the presidency losing in 1896 and 1900 to William McKinley and in 1908 to W. H. Taft. Those campaigns served well to educate the public of the important consequences of monetary policy. I suggest Bryan, while losing the high office he so often sought, nevertheless helped set up the circumstances in which the Fed was born. 1913.


Ok on this you can take industrial out of there. We dont make anything anymore. Our industrial capacity has been traded in for buying and selling paper via bank created ie Federal Reserve created products that we peddle on the planet. This needs to change if we are to become a viable nation again.

As far as the market growth let me ask you this...WHAT market growth have we seen in lets say the past 30 years since Regan came into office? Answer:There has been none. Our market growth would be like saying I went out and put a flat screen TV on a credit card and now Im wealthy. Or I can refinance my house and buy cars and remodel my house with it so Im wealthy. This is NOT true and we are now reaping the crap because of this mentality. Thats what our growth has been based on ...Debt.
www.lafn.org...

Bankers love debt because they get paid interest and the more debt the more in interest they get.

The FED doesnt need to isolate the government from how to spend money the government needs to do that on their own. Thats what they were elected to do. I think the FED needs to be put under government control and we need to go back to the gold standard. The FED has failed. Putting back in control of the government puts it back into the hands of the people instead of the interests of a special few. The gold standard limits what the government can do or spend.

Last as far as this Republicans tight money and Democrats loose money, that is a farce. They both are for loose money the only difference is democrats tax you up front for it lessening the blow of inflation and the Republicans just say F it and let the deficits rise....





Exactly! You said it and you said It right! The Fed is controlled by bankers. As much as I dislike them - class warfare - we peons also need them. You cannot survive (live) in 2009 without a good currency. As I have written elsewhere, the major difference in America and Germany in 1929-1933 was this: The Germans had TOO much money, the Americans had TOO little money. But what money WE had was worth something and what money the Germans had was worth nothing! It’s bad enough to be broke, but it’s even worse to have money that is worthless.


The FED has NOT given us a good currency I dont know where u get this from. People are using EUROS here in the US now. I mean what does that say about our currency if people are accepting Euros now? I agree with you on the Germany and US in the 30s. However we are now following down the path of Germany with the spigots wide open. This is not good.





I admit the never ending danger of printing too much money and thereby debasing its value, is very real! There is no perfect solution.

Under a parliamentary system the government changes hands THE NEXT DAY. We know how, but do we want our FIXED terms as in Ben Franklin’s apocryphal answer, “We give you a republic if you can keep it.” We have kept it.




There is a perfect solution for the money problems...let the free market work. The FED has been trying to manipulate money and now the chickens are coming home to roost and they are trying to solve it by the same tactics that got us into this mess in the first place. Let businesses fail and liquidate the debt. Let the smarter businesses buy their stuff up or let it be liquidated. You cant choose winners and losers.

As far as Ben Franklin when the lady asking him "What have you given us" as he walked out of the constitutional convention and him responding "I have given you a republic, if you can keep it." I disagree with you. Our Republic ended with the civil war. The individual states have no rights anymore. We are all just one piece under a central government which as of now is new a dictatorship status. If you want proof of that why should my tax dollars I pay go to save save states like California? The government is about to use my money to bailout out welfare states. Why? Why should people in Montana pay for hurricane cleanup in places like Florida (where I live) and Louisiana. Why do these states not charge a tax for cleanup efforts and put it into a fund? Our Republic is indeed dead my friend.



posted on Jan, 18 2009 @ 12:28 PM
link   

Quote originally posted by mybigunit
They are also a creditor nation and not a debtor nation. The US used to be this kind of nation which is why we were able to get out of these positions before. We are now a debtor nation that runs a service sector and consumption economy.


...whose currency happens to be the international reserve standard. I'm thinking the FED can operate as long as this is true, and especially in recessions such as these. Do you think the integrity of the dollar has anything to do with the U.S. as a supreme military power? I'm not saying any significant proportion, but could that also contribute? The world, it seems, is holding onto the currency with reluctance, but they're purchasing up as many U.S. treasury bills as they can. If the international community were to drop the dollar, they can clearly see how that would affect their futures for the worse.

[edit on 18-1-2009 by cognoscente]



new topics

top topics



 
39
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join