comment please on this thought - Federal Reserve Bank 100 year Charter

I find Ron Paul very convienant - his End the Fed and other attacks on the bank. but he never goes for the Juggular Vein - you know he knows - he could ask questions that the Fed could not answer without causing a massive bank run.
If this is all staged - then the events would be something like a play - a script - and from time to time that is what we call conspiracies here on ATS, but in the larger context of a overall script - I came to the conclusion that the old monitary system is kaput - America is to loose her Reserve Status - which in reality it has nothing in reserve and it is not federal - so how could it be backed by the full weight of the United States Credit - when credit is numbers and those numbers have no value > ?
therefore, I summized the federal reserve bank is on a 100 year charter and that charter is now expiring causing this Global Meltdown.
I also, figured out that China has two currencies - one for domestic use and one for international trade... how convienant - that it goes up in worth as our goes down in worth. I hope everyone speaks Manderine --- oh, you will if you dont, just 20 years ago - who cared what China did is the value I refer too.

reply to post by 1BornPatriot


There is no charter timeframe for the Federal Reserve. Give me a minute and I can give you some sources.


***

US Code Title 12 › Chapter 3 › Subchapter IX › § 341

www.law.cornell.edu...

Second. To have succession after February 25, 1927, until dissolved by Act of Congress or until forfeiture of franchise for violation of law.

I found this answer long ago when this rumor first started spreading in the comments here.

Also, that's the way currency works.. The USD will strengthen or depreciate versus any given currency. Measuring global markets and specifically currencies is measuring a series of sliding scales against one another.

Don't let them hype you up into hating China. That would be a bad thing. China is beginning to reinvest in the United States by bringing manufacturing jobs and deposit banks to the US.

When you say that China has two currencies are you talking about the Chinese Yuan and the Hong Kong Dollar? There's a reason for that too.. Hong Kong was under British rule for a whole bunch of decades.. It already had it's own economy and currency. I'm guessing here but I bet that has a lot to do with why Honk Kong uses a different currency.

If you were talking about something else let me know, it's something I have no idea about.

I have a bunch of Hong Kong dollars, they're still worthless versus the USD. =(

reply to post by TinkerHaus


Yuen and the Remnin B (are the Chinese Currencies) one is for internal use RemninB, and Yeun is used for international trade I believe, I could be wrong - but Hong Kong is where I got my education - each bank issues it own currency - hong kong dollars value is based on all of those banks values - but in hong kong there is like 4 currencies issued by individual banks - I dont know how it works, but in China their internal currency is worthless outside of china. (this based on my own knowledge and I'm sure I can find sources if contested). I have been there.

Oh...They are the same thing.

The primary unit of renminbi is the yuán (元). One yuan is subdivided into 10 jiǎo (角), which in turn is subdivided into 10 fēn (分). Renminbi banknotes are available in denominations from 1 jiao to 100 yuan (¥0.1–100) and coins have denominations from 1 fen to 1 yuan (¥0.01–1). Thus, some denominations exist in coins and banknotes, but they are usually used in coins if under ¥1. Coins under ¥0.1 are used infrequently.

en.wikipedia.org...


They are just telling you the different smaller currencies within what we would call the dollar. Quarters, nickels, dimes, etc. The fractional values are different in relation to one another, but it's the same concept.

I stand corrected - they are one in the same - just smaller denominations are not acceptable outside of China -

reply to post by TinkerHaus


I recall - the other Central banks having a charter, which gives them the authority to do what they do like a license.... if they dont then what do they operate under > ? - if the other two banks had a charter, why not this Federal Reserve Bank >?

reply to post by 1BornPatriot


The other banks absolutely did have a charter. Typically 20 years, I believe - but if you look at the history of the US, from inception until the current day, it tells a story of a fight for control of the money supply. Every president who has tried to return the power to print money to Congress has been shot. (See Lincoln, Kennedy) eve Garfield wanted to change the way banking was done. Guess what happened to him?

The FRB fought hard to revoke the time limit on their charter because they knew if it expired the people would want that power returned to Congress. It's easier to stay in power when an act of Congress is required to change a law than it is if that law or charter automatically expires.

They fought for it, they killed for it, and now we suffer for it.. And sadly the ONLY politician who talks about these issues has been fighting a non stop uphill battle for decades - the deck is stacked against him and the American people. We are truly enslaved by our economic system in this country, and until we start talking about this publicly and people learn the history of this country we are doomed to remain under their thumb.