Fed vows to extend 85 Billion a month...

page: 2
9
<< 1   >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 27 2013 @ 10:22 PM
link   
reply to post by JuniorBeauchamp
 

cyanide?
oh noe!
oh well, if you must might I suggest you drink it from the punchbole at goldman sach's christmas party
take as many of them with you as you can when you go




posted on Jan, 27 2013 @ 10:35 PM
link   
reply to post by JuniorBeauchamp
 


Future debt can be cancelled with no consequences, at least not to the credit. It is not guaranteed. Past debt is guaranteed, and must be paid. The rules can't be changed.



posted on Jan, 27 2013 @ 10:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by OccamsRazor04

Originally posted by marg6043
reply to post by OccamsRazor04
 


Yeah, it only takes a littler bit of "of mathematics to see what is going on and why Americas hard working tax payer will never get out of the economic hole'' but rest assure that somebody is reaping profits out of the debt that now lies on the backs of the unborn for generations to come.



As of right now 5% of ALL taxes goes to pay interest. In 4 years it will be 7%. 4 more years most likely 10%. At that point it becomes near impossible to EVER repay our debt, as we will be borrowing hundreds of billions a year, increasing the debt, just to repay interest. It is a multiplicative effect. Obama's 8 years is going to set this country back 30 or 40 years.


This has been in the works since 1933 when the govt ran out of money and the Fed reserve decided that they didn't need a gold backed currency. US citizens became slaves to the federal reserve.



posted on Jan, 27 2013 @ 10:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by OccamsRazor04
reply to post by JuniorBeauchamp
 


Future debt can be cancelled with no consequences, at least not to the credit. It is not guaranteed. Past debt is guaranteed, and must be paid. The rules can't be changed.


Another scenario is issuing a "new currency", like the N. American "Amero".

The Weirmarr republic did it several times when inflation reached astronomical levels.



posted on Jan, 27 2013 @ 11:20 PM
link   
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 


I'm not sorry I asked.

You didn't answer my question. Yes the federal reserve is not a government entity and holds no dues to anyone. Congress oversee the operation but at the end of the day, hold no governance over it. Anytime you see legislature about a Fed audit, just laugh. It's a long running joke.

Now about money creation. The big elephant in the room is inflation. At first, people will panic. At the end of the day, daily sustinance is a little bread and a little water. Both are abundant in America.

So my question, what do the banks have to gain by putting the people in debt? There is no way the population can cover the insane amount of debt that's placed on us by the federal reserve.

If they kick the farmers off their property, who's going to provide their food?

How will they take care of the masses that are hungry?

Do they not think people will find their bread and make there way to the wealthiest neighborhoods in Washington to pay their dues?

I don't understand the logic behind debasing the currency at the rate they are doing. I don't see any profit in this scenario.



posted on Jan, 27 2013 @ 11:34 PM
link   
You have 3 options now 'Murica.

Either you go the austere "Germany-mode".
Produce something of real value. Generate real growth again. ... then spend less than you generate.
Producing real value will generate revenue.
A proper industrial base can produce real value.
A well trained workforce is real value.
Engineers can create tech that is real value.
Everything else is a baloon.

Or you go the hardcore "Iceland-mode".
Icelands President Olafur Ragnar Grimsson knows how:



Really good video by the way and I don't think it has been posted on ATS before.
I thought about making a thread about this, but I don't have the time due to being in full "Germany-mode".

I'd suggest a healthy mix of those 2 options.

Least, you can always go the pitiful "Africa-mode" (no offense, Africa).
.
.
.
Need I say more?
edit on 27-1-2013 by ColCurious because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 28 2013 @ 12:03 AM
link   
reply to post by litterbaux
 

To be entirely honest, I don't think there is any real profit to the banks and I don't believe they intended it ever get to this point. Now I'm talking about banks like Citi and BofA. They don't benefit when they crash along side everyone else. As you note, Hyperinflation is a bad place to go. In their case?

I think they believed they could play the system to their benefit and it would never cross the lines of no return. I really believe the private banks thought it could work that way.

Errrr...... That's been a rather hard lesson for us all and it's far from over.

The Worst Hyperinflation Situations of All Time

The only ones who can possible survive hyperinflation with any kind of comfort IS Government. The rest of us will have a hard hard time until it runs it's course.

Why would the Fed be all hip for this to happen? Well..I've been confused myself until recently and rumors of treasury policy started coming out as more than just wild and crazy fantasy. It's SCARY if true because to an economic fool, it DOES make enough sense for them to actually DO. To someone with intelligence? It's insanity on a stick.

What may be happening here is DELIBERATELY running the system into hyperinflation and "near" collapse as a way to pay off the debt. I mean it's a grade school level of thinking .....but then, so is 85 billion a month and thinking it's anything but a path to a crash, right?

I put "near" in quotes because of the arrogance here. I think it's entirely possible they think they really CAN keep the tiger by the tail and never lose control. Other Governments have thought that and NONE actually MEANT to crash on the link above. All did though, for various reasons.

There but for the grace go we, and grace has almost run out I think.

(Not sure what you're asking if that wasn't it..and of course, I'm still learning all this with everyone else.)

Hope that helps?
edit on 28-1-2013 by Wrabbit2000 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 28 2013 @ 08:01 AM
link   
reply to post by OccamsRazor04
 


Actually I am no fan of Obama but he tried to push one on the fed in the last few weeks (kind of surprised me) as the last presidents that try that didn't went well for them as you know what happen to presidents that wants to go against the Federal Reserve and Walls street mobsters.


There is one organization that is considered to be so sacred in Washington D.C. that Obama will not dare utter a single negative word against it. That organization is the Federal Reserve. Even though he has shown that he is unafraid to pick a fight with just about everyone else in Washington, Obama flat out refuses to criticize the Fed and he even reappointed Ben Bernanke for another term as Fed Chairman even though Bernanke has a track record of failure that would make the Chicago Cubs look good. Perhaps Obama is aware of what has happened to other presidents that have chosen to tangle with the Fed.


It seems that President Obama is not tha stupid, he knows that he can not fix anything with the economy as long as the Federal Reserve controls the money printing.

So he came out with one solution that the fed could not control government from doing, (unless they tell the president that he will be "dealt with" if he goes against them) the Trillion dollar coin.

This is how it works.


There’s a loophole in current law that permits the Treasury Department to mint as many coins of platinum as it wants and assign them any value. So the Obama administration could simply order the U.S. Mint to produce two platinum coins at a value of $1 trillion each. This new “money” would then be deposited with the Federal Reserve as payment for past debt, reducing the amount the government owes to $14.4 trillion overnight. Just like that, the debt limit is no longer a problem for another 18 months or so – at which point, presumably, two more $1 trillion platinum coins could be produced.


Read more at www.wnd.com...

The problems? this will end the Fed monopoly on the Federal government Government and the tax payers and that is unacceptable.


the Federal Reserve killed that idea, and we shouldn't be surprised by that because under no circumstances will the Fed ever accept a threat to their monopoly over money creation in the United States. If the Federal Reserve had allowed Obama to print up a debt-free trillion dollar coin, that would have set a very dangerous precedent for the Fed. The American people would have realized that the federal government can actually create debt-free money whenever it wants and that it does not actually have to borrow money from anyone.


See the American Federal Government can order debt Free money to be "created" under mint coins but the Federal Reserve that controls the government will not have it

The danger to Aemrica is not the Government but Walls Street and the Federal Reserve.


edit on 28-1-2013 by marg6043 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 28 2013 @ 09:55 AM
link   
by my calculations we should see an increase in the amount of dollars being "printed" for QE by mid Feb to late Mar. I dont know what the dollar increase will be but it will be more then $85 billion a month. if I had to take a guess, i would say the purchasing increase (QE) will reach $120 billion a month. My guess is based off the theory of diminishing returns.

If this comes to be, we will see HUGE, life changing, economic Turmoil by mid july 2013.
edit on 28-1-2013 by camaro68ss because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 28 2013 @ 12:15 PM
link   
..."can you say the biggest scam in the history of the United States." G. Edward Griffin - at the Ron Paul rally in 08 summarizing his book 'the Creature of Jekyll Island'.
this is pure bunk - even bernake must have to wake up drunk to believe himself.



posted on Jan, 28 2013 @ 01:18 PM
link   
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 


Effectively Quantitative Easing is akin to printing money. It is a route of "Monetizing Debt"...and frankly the only difference is that it is announced, which can spur economic activity in the markets before a dime is spent. There is a risk of inflation, but thus far nothing has moved that needle.

Bernanke was appointed in 06 by Pres. GWB, was the first to try QE in the USA, I think Japan has done it before. Likely Bernanke is looking to ride out the recovery before being replaced either by Pres. Obama in a couple of years...if the economy continues to recover...maybe sooner if it doesn't.

Meh...When you are trying to get out of ditch, you step on the gas. You just want to be sure you don't stomp on the gas so hard that when you fly out of the ditch you lose control and smack a tree. (Inflation...damage to pensions etc.)



posted on Jan, 28 2013 @ 09:24 PM
link   
reply to post by marg6043
 

I have a hard time crediting this President with anything positive when we're talking about the Federal Reserve Bank. After all, this is now as much or more his baby as Bush's. It's true Bush hired Bernanke by way of appointment. However, Obama didn't need to RE-appointment him and see him confirmed for a second term. That's a little hard to defend. Then again, he carried George Bush's Defense Secretary in the position for nearly two years into his own term too....


President Obama nominated Ben S. Bernanke for a second term as Federal Reserve chairman Tuesday, giving the nation's top economic policymaker the chance to finish what he started and shape his own legacy as one of the most consequential central bankers in U.S. history.
Source

I have to say "consequential" is a good choice of terms too. It's neutral enough and nice sounding...given the sheer damage caused by the decision and what this man thinks is best for the country in Fed policy.

It's getting amusing to watch folks keep talking as if measurable difference exists between past and present policies. Same people, same policies....larger versions by far.

. . . and the band plays on.

@ Camaro

July sounds about right for direct effects to be felt. Just in time for another looong hooot summer to boil the nation right over since last summer didn't quite hit the right temp, eh? Close, but not quite boiling over.



posted on Jan, 28 2013 @ 09:42 PM
link   
reply to post by Indigo5
 


Bernanke was appointed again by Obama, as he can not be replaced right now, as per Wall Street "command".

Now as Japan they have played the QE already eight or nine times and how well is has worked for them?, well lets said that the entire EU is been balancing their economic mess with also their alternative of QEs, what that tells you.






new topics

top topics



 
9
<< 1   >>

log in

join