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.

 

Debunk Federal Reserve Conspiracy Debunk

page: 1
2

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 2 2009 @ 03:36 PM
link   
Anyone who can please do so. Tell me it is all a conspiracy. Debunk the debunking of the federal reserve.


BY: Edward Flaherty, Ph.D. Department of Economics College of Charleston, S.C.

Facts: Yes, the Federal Reserve banks are privately owned, but they are controlled by the publically-appointed Board of Governors. The Federal Reserve banks merely execute the monetary policy choices made by the Board. In addition, nearly all the interest the Federal Reserve collects on government bonds is rebated to the Treasury each year, so the government does not pay any net interest to the Fed.

Facts: No foreigners own any part of the Fed. Each Federal Reserve bank is owned exclusively by the participating commercial banks and S&Ls operating within the Federal Reserve bank's district. Individuals and non-bank firms, be they foreign or domestic, are not permitted by law to own any shares of a Federal Reserve bank. Moreover, monetary policy is controlled by the publically-appointed Board of Governors, not by the Federal Reserve banks.

Fact: Independent accounting firms conduct full financial audits of the Federal Reserve banks and the Board of Governors every year. The Fed is also subject to certain types of audits from the Government Accounting Office.

Facts: The Federal Reserve rebates its net earnings to the Treasury every year. Consequently, the interest the Treasury pays to the Fed is returned, so the money borrowed from the Fed has no net interest obligation for the Treasury. The government could print its own currency independent of the Fed, but there would be no effective safeguards against abuse of this power for political gain.

Facts: The Federal Reserve banks have only a small share of the total national debt (about 7%). Therefore, only a small share of the interest on the debt goes to the Fed. Regardless, the Fed rebates that interest to the Treasury every year, so the debt held by the Fed carries no net interest obligation for the government. In addition, it is Congress, not the Federal Reserve, who is responsible for the federal budget and the national debt.

Facts: Kennedy wrote E.O. 11,110 to phase out silver certificate currency, not to issue more of it. Records show Kennedy and the Federal Reserve were almost always in agreement on policy matters. He even signed legislation to give the Fed more authority to issue currency.

Facts: McFadden was incorrect regarding the Fed costing the government money. However, later economic analysis agrees with him that Federal Reserve policy blunders had a substantial role in causing the Depression. However, his implication that this was done deliberately has no basis in fact. Moreover, for a dozen years prior to his rant, McFadden had been the chairman of the House subcommittee that oversaw the Federal Reserve. Why didn't he do anything to reform or abolish the Fed while he had the chance?

Facts: The banking system is indeed able to create money with a mere computer keystroke. However, a bank's ability to create money is tied directly to the amount of reserves customers have deposited there. A bank must pay a competitive interest rate on those deposits to keep them from leaving to other banks. This interest expense alone is a substantial portion of a bank's operating costs and is de facto proof a bank cannot costlessly create money.

Fact: The term 'lawful money' does not refer to gold or silver coin, but to types of money which the government would permit banks to use when tabulating their reserves. These types of money included, but were not limited to, gold and silver coin.


www.geocities.com...


The Aldrich Plan called for a system of fifteen regional central banks, called National Reserve Associations, whose actions would be coordinated by a national board of commercial bankers. The Reserve Association would make emergency loans to member banks, create money to provide an elastic currency that could be exchanged equally for demand deposits, and would act as a fiscal agent for the federal government. Although it was defeated, the Aldrich Plan served as an outline for the bill that eventually was adopted. 5

The problem with the Aldrich Plan was that the regional banks would be controlled individually and nationally by bankers, a prospect that did not sit well with the populist Democratic party or with Wilson. As the debate began to take shape in the spring of 1913, Congressman Arsene Pujo provided good evidence that the nation’s credit markets were under the tight control of a handful of banks – the "money trusts" against which Wilson warned.1 Wilson and the Democrats wanted a reform measure which would decentralize control away from the money trusts.

The legislation that eventually emerged was the Federal Reserve Act, also known at the time as the Currency Bill, or the Owen-Glass Act. The bill called for a system of eight to twelve mostly autonomous regional Reserve Banks that would be owned by the banks in their region and whose actions would be coordinated by a Federal Reserve Board appointed by the President. The Board’s members originally included the Secretary of the Treasury, the Comptroller of the Currency, and other officials appointed by the President to represent public interests. The proposed Federal Reserve System would therefore be privately owned, but publicly controlled. Wilson signed the bill on December 23, 1913 and the Federal Reserve System was born.6



www.geocities.com...

So which one is it? Does the federal reserve regulate against giving control of the banking system to the money trusts, or is the the intent and effect to wrestle control away from them?

Pretty simple question that I don't think will be answered.




posted on Apr, 2 2009 @ 04:14 PM
link   
Each Federal Reserve bank is owned exclusively by the participating commercial banks and S&Ls operating within the Federal Reserve bank's district.

look at who owns these private banks, INDIVIDUALS. accounting calls this something like the arms reach rule. If A is related to B, and B owns X, A owns X by relation.

Fact: Independent accounting firms conduct full financial audits of the Federal Reserve banks and the Board of Governors every year. The Fed is also subject to certain types of audits from the Government Accounting Office. Please show me these audits, I am an accounting, going for my CPA (taking auditing right now, Ill tell you where this money is going and where their cash flows are going to, ASSUMING they arent being cooked, which most audits only test like 1 or 2 % of the transactions).

Facts: The Federal Reserve banks have only a small share of the total national debt (about 7%). -- Doesn't all US currency come from the federal reserve board? I believe so if someone can disprove this go ahead, and not with a geocities site.

Facts: The banking system is indeed able to create money with a mere computer keystroke. However, a bank's ability to create money is tied directly to the amount of reserves customers have deposited there. --- Im blanking on what they are called, but lets call them bank securities for argument's sake. The FR sets a number that each bank has to have with the money they lend out. The rest they can lend (this doesn't sound right if someone wants to correct me go ahead I went out drinking last night im foggy.


central banks suck at the decentralization by nature.



posted on Apr, 2 2009 @ 05:03 PM
link   
If there was no profit or benefit, why would individuals be interested in owning shares of it? Where is GM's stock today? Go ahead and even try to buy stock in the federal reserve. I'm pretty sure it's not even publicly traded.

Furthermore, why are individuals allowed to own such a thing in the first place? Why would a private company want to make a name that appears to be federal, and acts as if it is federal? Why is it called a reserve if it doesn't actually have reserves?

If the US is all these trillions of dollars in debt - to whom is it owed to? Why is there interest on this debt if they just print up more money? Why are they allowed to loan it out if they only printed up more money, which gets all it's value from the purchasing power of the people who use that currency?

The principles behind it are the problem. If a man in debt is but a slave, what does that make a nation in debt with a debt based system?

How in the hell can the "richest" nation on earth be the one with the most debt?



[edit on 2-4-2009 by badmedia]



posted on Apr, 2 2009 @ 05:53 PM
link   
Flaherty is trying (unsuccessfully i might add) to debunk G. Edward Griffin's book: The Creature for Jekyll Island.

Why not let Mr. Griffin defend himself? He does an excellent job here debunking the debunker:

MEET EDWARD FLAHERTY, CONSPIRACY POO-POOIST
A response to a critic of The Creature from Jekyll Island
© 2004 by G. Edward Griffin LINK

It's a good read and decisively rubs the Professor's nose in it.
I can only add that things have gotten many times worse with the Fed recently. But that is another thread.



posted on Apr, 2 2009 @ 07:16 PM
link   
Anyone actually believe that bovine fecal matter?

Why, then, would it be big news that Obama is pushing to AUDIT the fed? Look at the CAFR of the federal government, and see if any money is being "rebated" from the fed to the government.

And lastly, if they are so open, tell me: What is the M3 right now?



posted on Apr, 2 2009 @ 09:27 PM
link   
Smack I think that link you posted will be the best rebuttal to the debunking I posted. I read it and I have to agree with a couple of the author's replies.

In regards to funds being returned to the treasury.


The real bonanza comes, not from money created out of nothing for the government, but from money created out of nothing by the commercial banks for loans to the private sector. That’s where the real action is.


The commercial banks would argue that they have to borrow that money that they loan but that doesn't make up for the fact that is a flawed debt based system of currency imo.


This is the famous slight-of-hand trick. Distract attention with one hand while the coin is retrieved by the other. By focusing on the supposed generosity of the Fed by returning unused interest to the Treasury, we are supposed to overlook the much larger river of gold flowing into the member banks in the form of interest on nothing as a result of consumer and commercial loans.


I can't disagree with that.



The statement that the banks must pay a competitive interest rate on those deposits is humorous when one considers the math. For example, let us assume for the sake of illustration that the bank pays 1.5% interest. Then it turns around and charges, let’s say 6.5% interest. That’s a spread of 5%. Although that’s a pretty good brokerage commission, it doesn’t sound exorbitant. But, here is another of those half-truths. Don’t forget that the bank uses each deposited dollar as a so-called reserve for creating up to an additional nine dollars in loans. It collects interest on these loans as well. Let us assume that the bank is not fully loaned up, as they call it, and has an average of only eight dollars in magic-money loans for every one dollar on deposit. In that case, it will collect 6.5% interest on all eight of those dollars. That means, based on each dollar placed on deposit, the bank will collect 52% in interest. After paying the original depositor the generous “competitive” amount of 1.5%, the bank actually receives a brokerage fee of approximately 50%. When Flaherty says that “This interest expense alone is a substantial portion of a bank’s operating costs and is de facto proof a bank cannot costlessly create money,” one can only wonder what banking system he is describing. It certainly is not the one in the United States.


Fractional reserve banking on top of competive interest rates... ya they're just trying to make a buck, cut them some slack.. I've never heard it put so well. This is legal?



posted on Jan, 22 2011 @ 04:15 PM
link   
sorry Doc but you are full of CRAP! The banks don't need the FED ...they can just create money out of thin air using fractionalized banking practices ........ and I remember that Uncle Art took care of Enrons accounting ....... oh yea millionares just enjoying a profit-free day at the FED? Can I have some of the meds you are on? because they are really good



posted on Jan, 22 2011 @ 04:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by Techsnow
The government could print its own currency independent of the Fed, but there would be no effective safeguards against abuse of this power for political gain.




Giving trillions to foreign banks does not constitute abuse of power?

If the fed was so innocent why would they fight for their life to prevent an audit?



posted on Jan, 22 2011 @ 04:25 PM
link   
No State shall... make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts

article 1 sect 10

Please tell me which amendment revised this rule. I ask because the fed benefits from paper currency and could not print money out of thin air if the constitution was followed and only gold and silver were legal tender.

So even if I assume you are correct that there is no conspiracy I can still show the fed is illegitimate in multiple ways.



posted on Jan, 22 2011 @ 04:27 PM
link   
reply to post by Techsnow
 


"So which one is it? Does the federal reserve regulate against giving control of the banking system to the money trusts, or is the the intent and effect to wrestle control away from them?"

actually this is the wrong question when you should have just stated the truth!

"The Federal Reserve Bank is the "money trust". and does not regulate control but u-surps control by controling the money supply to the banks benefit."



posted on Jan, 22 2011 @ 04:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by Techsnow

nearly all the interest the Federal Reserve collects on government bonds is rebated to the Treasury each year



key word: NEARLY. If I collect trillions of dollars in interest, and give back NEARLY all of it, I'm still making billions of dollars in interest. Can you show me in figures and data how much of "nearly all" interest the fed returns to the treasury? I'm guessing you can't, since no one can, since they do everything possible to prevent themselves from being audited.



posted on Jan, 22 2011 @ 04:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by Techsnow
the interest the Treasury pays to the Fed is returned,



So what's the point of the treasury even paying the fed interest if every penny is returned? Why don't you give me all your money, and I'll return every cent of it. Sound like a reasonable plan? Why not just keep your money and keep me out of it altogether?



posted on Jan, 22 2011 @ 04:32 PM
link   
reply to post by fnpmitchreturns
 


He will not be gettin back to you.. For he is banned.

I will add that The fed is a sham, that is why Ron Paul is trying to get the fed abolished like it has been at least 2 times in the past.. Andrew Jackson, and Kennedy.



posted on Jan, 22 2011 @ 04:36 PM
link   
moving on from the fed and onto your semantics: your thread title is "debunk federal reserve conspiracy debunk."

Allow me to break this down.

A thread titled "Federal reserve conspiracy" would undoubtedly be about the fed being a conspiracy

A thread titled "Federal reserve conspiracy debunk" would be debunking the notion that the fed is a conspiracy

Your thread is called "Debunk federal reserve conspiracy debunk" implying that the thread should be about debunking the debunking of the federal reserve conspiracy theory. Sort of like the book Debunking 9/11 debunking, which is a debunk of the attempt to debunk 9/11 conspiracy theories. Unless what you are implying is you are asking me to debunk your federal conspiracy debunk, which I think I've done adequately.

I'm gonna give this thread a flag just so people can have a good time doing as you ask, debunking your debunking.



posted on Jan, 22 2011 @ 04:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by ThichHeaded
reply to post by fnpmitchreturns
 


He will not be gettin back to you.. For he is banned.

I will add that The fed is a sham, that is why Ron Paul is trying to get the fed abolished like it has been at least 2 times in the past.. Andrew Jackson, and Kennedy.


I just noticed this thread is over a year old. Why did this guy get banned? I was really hoping he'd be able to attempt to address some of my points. Oh well, maybe one of the other atsers could take his place.



new topics

top topics



 
2

log in

join