It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


It's Back !- HR 6550 Legislation To End The Federal Reserve is back in committee now as HR2990

page: 2
<< 1   >>

log in


posted on May, 6 2012 @ 04:46 PM

Originally posted by sicksonezer0
reply to post by Ahabstar

Hah, I don't think spitting in Chucks face is even possible, just thinking about doing something like that would be instant death. But everything else you said, I 100% agree.

I think this is going to be a disaster. Oddly enough, I really dont think there is any possibility of saving this system. We have reached the point of no return long ago, people just dont see it. Because of the financial system we live in, DEBT, it just sllllowwws the approach to the bottom falling out, but when it happens, it will happen fast.

edit on 6-5-2012 by sicksonezer0 because: (no reason given)

Why would this be a disaster? Maybe they should let the us people use a form of fractional reserve banking to pay there debt down. Really don't see how anything could be worse than the current system. It benefits only the banks. Interest free loans to state and local goverment is how it should be.

posted on May, 6 2012 @ 05:57 PM
This was planned in 1913,both the creation and demise of the Federal Reserve.December 23rd this year it is gone!.Anyone credited with the ending of Fed is a player and a insider.The Fed is gone regardless.Wake up no champion's here!

posted on May, 6 2012 @ 06:02 PM
I hate the fed. it may be the end of the global economy


lending (see printing money) through the discount window saved us from a (global) depression and possible the collpase of the entire financial system

you live by it, you die by it

at this stage of the game, I don't see how you can force banks to lend only based on what is on their ledgers without going to the fed

it would mean the end of lending to a degree, and the entire system is based on credit and lending

what I would like to see is no more secret loans, and total tranparency and an audit

posted on May, 6 2012 @ 10:20 PM
Sounds great, unfortunately govtrack says:

This bill has a 0% chance of being enacted. The following factors were considered:

This bill was a re-introduction of H.R. 6550 (111th) from the previous session of Congress. (-3%)

The sponsor is a member of the minority party. (-2%)

Just 4% of all House bills in 2009–2010 were enacted.


We have to keep trying.

posted on May, 6 2012 @ 10:47 PM
reply to post by kn0wh0w

The 100 yr. charter is up in 2013 and congress can renew it. Or not, if that would happen it would open one big can of worms. I would like instead to get 5yr renewals. Bring in a little more oversight and control.

posted on May, 6 2012 @ 10:57 PM
reply to post by mikeprodigy

I believe it's on 20 year renewal terms now.

I thought the 100 year thing too but when I checked I found it got changed.

posted on May, 7 2012 @ 01:02 AM

Originally posted by mikeprodigy
reply to post by kn0wh0w

The 100 yr. charter is up in 2013 and congress can renew it. Or not, if that would happen it would open one big can of worms. I would like instead to get 5yr renewals. Bring in a little more oversight and control.

The fact is, there never was any 100 year charter in the original Act or any subsequent amendments.

If there is, please cite the language.

Congress does have the power to revoke however.

Fed Reserve Act

That's not to say there never was some kind of long term plan.

posted on May, 7 2012 @ 01:36 AM
reply to post by ukWolf

The only thing that is going to remove the federal reserve is an armed revolution.

IMO of course.

posted on May, 7 2012 @ 06:29 PM
reply to post by IndieA

Can you tell me where you found that info.

posted on May, 7 2012 @ 06:59 PM
reply to post by mikeprodigy

I thought I had found it on Wikipedia right here but I can't seem to find it now.

I guess it doesn't matter much when these guys have so much influence in law making.

You could check out this thread about it.
It looks like the 100 year charter story came from GLP.
edit on 7-5-2012 by IndieA because: addtion

posted on May, 8 2012 @ 01:54 AM
According to this there never was a 99 year charter. There was a 20 year charter originally to the original 12 regional banks that are still in operation. But there are quite a few smaller Federal Reserve Banks under the big 12.

Actually by the language of the creation, their charter can be revoked at any time if they do an illegal act or cause havoc on the economy. Of course, this would again take an act of Congress and since we are well over 1000 days since having an actual budget (one of the few tasks that Congress has not pawned off on to another entity) I would not expect Congress to revoke any time soon.

Add to that, I don't think anyone in Congress thinks much further than their own personal space or pocket. So understanding how to fix the current system or replace it would be outside their realm of abilities. Much like walking and chewing gum is outside their individual abilities.

As for what it would take in order to have enough tangible currency without flooding the system into absolute total inflation. Your guess is as good as mine. Though it would take the hoarding of currency to keep tabs on perceived value. Much like there are far more Kennedy Half Dollars still in circulation than there are 1976 issued 2 Dollar Notes. The Kennedy's have a higher ratio of value over face value...which is all based on perception than anything else.

Among my collected bills is a Red Seal 1953 Two Dollar bill which is not a FRN. It is actually United States Note which was printed and back by the US Treasury and not the Fed. The reverse is an nice image of Montecello instead of the signing of the Declaration of Independence on the FRN's. The other difference between the two is that just like all coins, no interest was due to the Fed for producing, backing and entering into circulation of that note. Speculation on my part is that the Fed would give me two dollars worth of currency, but I don't think they are allowed to destroy or remove it from circulation since it is not their currency/property.

And that is the other side of the coin here, if you will pardon the pun. The Fed owns all FRN. They only allow us to use them. They could remove any amount of notes from circulation that they think is needed be it for replacement or reduce inflation.

posted on May, 8 2012 @ 02:33 AM

Originally posted by Monsatan
Well fractional reserve banking does need to go, but in the end it would be nice to have money that was worth more than the paper it's printed on, or, once it hits the stock market, the paper it's not printed on

This would be a step in the right direction I think. I would be afraid of tptb riding the current wave of end the fedders to slip something past that's even more diabolical. I can't put it past the jackasses
edit on 6-5-2012 by Monsatan because: (no reason given)

Dude, you didn't read my thread about the horrors of this bill? This bill guarantees hyper inflation and back door taxation. They plan on "putting the inflation to good use" to finance Social Security, Medicare, ObamaCare and other social programs.

And not only that, the board of the new momentary authority would be held less accountable then the Federal Reserve is today. Also IT NATIONALIZES THE FEDERAL RESERVES DEBT that was incurred when the Federal Reserve stole America's credit card and gave Europe trillions in illegal loans via the cash holding policy!

For those who missed the memo.

new topics

top topics

<< 1   >>

log in