Simple question: Why is the US government NOT allowed to print it's own currency?

page: 2
8
<< 1   >>

log in

join

posted on May, 13 2013 @ 06:12 AM
link   
It can be compared to Montesqieu´s separation of powers. Montesquieu described division of political power among a legislature, an executive, and a judiciary.

World has changed a lot since 18th century. The economy is far more fragile and complex nowadays. Every person is dependent on it in one way or another. If the government got too much power over the economy, it can lead to disastrous events.

I am not justifying the actions of the bankers. I do not know details of the Federal Reserve, although the printing of the money should be separated from the other powers, as it has too much power to change the economy and the fictional value of the currency.

Although it should not by done by anyone who takes out the profits. Here the profits of the central bank go directly to the country or are invested in something. No one can take out the profit for themselves. The bank acts separately from the country, although at the same time it belongs to the country, just like the court system.




posted on May, 13 2013 @ 08:26 AM
link   
reply to post by afoolbyanyothername
 


There is no natural law that says that a Government cannot print or mint its own money; there are only human made laws that prohibit such acts, for example the Maastricht Treaty banning any European signatory from creating its own money.
The US Government has, even under its man-made laws, the right to 'mint coin'. In fact in recent years it has been suggested that the Treasury mint USD 1 trillion dollar coins and walk them to the New York Federal Reserve Bank who, by law, must offer up the fiat currency of the day in return for the coins. In fact, there is no reason at all why the US Treasury cannot replace all USD 54 trillion of money supply with said 'minted coins'.

97% of all 'money supply' in the USA today is in fact digital-credit/Debt-Money invented out of thin air by private banks. Most Governments around the world give private banks the right to convert a signed 'promise to repay' (loan document) into the same fiat currency of the day. In practice this means that when you sign a USD 200,000 home loan, the bank has the right to write USD 200,000 into your bank account out of thin air without having to borrow that money from anywhere. This is fact and documented even by the Federal Reserve Board itself. This is a scam set in motion in 1913 by Woodrow Wilson with the signing into law of the Federal Reserve Act. This was not the first, or even the second, attempt to pervert US government monetary policy, it was the third time in the history of the USA. See reference to Andrew Jackson later...

There is a robust alternative to Debt Money, and that is Structural Money. Debt money requires that all money comes into existence with a debt attached at its root. Structural Money can come into existence by the Treasury or a Government owned Central Bank creating the money out of thin air but without any debt attached. The Treasury 'gives' the money to a Government department which in turn would build national infrastructure with it. That infrastructure simply sits on the balance sheet of the Government as a depreciating asset. The money never has to be returned to the department concerned.

That money then sits out in the economy forever unless the Government decides that there is too much money in supply and can remove it, and retire it, by way of taxation. Never again will there be a situation where the government has to claim poverty when it comes to the building of national capital assets.

Todays system requires that 97% of the entire money supply has to be repaid in the form of debts to private banks. If the banks stop or slow their lending, as they have done since 2007, then the money supply diminishes. When the money supply diminishes, so does the size of the economy. Therefore you get recession/depression.

So, enlightened reader, there is every reason why the government should be birthing every single dollar into the economy, and every reason why private banks should simply not exist in any form. Private banks serve no purpose at all other than to create unwanted volatility in the money supply.

I am British, I am not a socialist, in fact given that I own a large factory and employ many people, I should be called a capitalist - but that is certainly not how I see myself. I am just a professional engineer and a manager and see the world through logical eyes. I have opened my eyes, as you have done, and see the world afresh. And what I see is the largest financial SCAM every to have afflicted mankind.

Please contine to blossom your thinking by reading "Modernising Money" by Ben Dyson and Andrew Jackson of the UK organisation Positive Money. Andrew Jackson is an ironic name given that one of the greatest of all US Presidents of the same name was famed to have said on his deathbed - "I killed the banks!"



posted on May, 13 2013 @ 10:20 AM
link   
The real question is why an unelected 4th branch of government is allowed to create an unlimited amount counterfeit money by through debt creation.



posted on May, 13 2013 @ 10:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheGreatestScam
reply to post by afoolbyanyothername
 


There is no natural law that says that a Government cannot print or mint its own money; there are only human made laws that prohibit such acts, for example the Maastricht Treaty banning any European signatory from creating its own money.
The US Government has, even under its man-made laws, the right to 'mint coin'. In fact in recent years it has been suggested that the Treasury mint USD 1 trillion dollar coins and walk them to the New York Federal Reserve Bank who, by law, must offer up the fiat currency of the day in return for the coins. In fact, there is no reason at all why the US Treasury cannot replace all USD 54 trillion of money supply with said 'minted coins'.

97% of all 'money supply' in the USA today is in fact digital-credit/Debt-Money invented out of thin air by private banks. Most Governments around the world give private banks the right to convert a signed 'promise to repay' (loan document) into the same fiat currency of the day. In practice this means that when you sign a USD 200,000 home loan, the bank has the right to write USD 200,000 into your bank account out of thin air without having to borrow that money from anywhere. This is fact and documented even by the Federal Reserve Board itself. This is a scam set in motion in 1913 by Woodrow Wilson with the signing into law of the Federal Reserve Act. This was not the first, or even the second, attempt to pervert US government monetary policy, it was the third time in the history of the USA. See reference to Andrew Jackson later...

There is a robust alternative to Debt Money, and that is Structural Money. Debt money requires that all money comes into existence with a debt attached at its root. Structural Money can come into existence by the Treasury or a Government owned Central Bank creating the money out of thin air but without any debt attached. The Treasury 'gives' the money to a Government department which in turn would build national infrastructure with it. That infrastructure simply sits on the balance sheet of the Government as a depreciating asset. The money never has to be returned to the department concerned.

That money then sits out in the economy forever unless the Government decides that there is too much money in supply and can remove it, and retire it, by way of taxation. Never again will there be a situation where the government has to claim poverty when it comes to the building of national capital assets.

Todays system requires that 97% of the entire money supply has to be repaid in the form of debts to private banks. If the banks stop or slow their lending, as they have done since 2007, then the money supply diminishes. When the money supply diminishes, so does the size of the economy. Therefore you get recession/depression.

So, enlightened reader, there is every reason why the government should be birthing every single dollar into the economy, and every reason why private banks should simply not exist in any form. Private banks serve no purpose at all other than to create unwanted volatility in the money supply.

I am British, I am not a socialist, in fact given that I own a large factory and employ many people, I should be called a capitalist - but that is certainly not how I see myself. I am just a professional engineer and a manager and see the world through logical eyes. I have opened my eyes, as you have done, and see the world afresh. And what I see is the largest financial SCAM every to have afflicted mankind.

Please contine to blossom your thinking by reading "Modernising Money" by Ben Dyson and Andrew Jackson of the UK organisation Positive Money. Andrew Jackson is an ironic name given that one of the greatest of all US Presidents of the same name was famed to have said on his deathbed - "I killed the banks!"


nice first post you have there.. thanks for the information.



posted on May, 13 2013 @ 10:49 AM
link   
Simple answer... The Federal Reserve Act of 1913



posted on May, 13 2013 @ 11:53 AM
link   
The Coinage Act of 1792 specified that a US dollar had to be comprised of 27 grams of standard silver. This was to prevent the US Government from issuing fiat currency. It was supplanted by several Acts after that, notably the Coinage Act of 1873 (some called the Crime of 1873), and the Coinage Act of 1965, which took the silver out of quarters and dimes, and postponed the production of silver dollars for at least 5 years. And, of course, Nixon took us off the gold standard entirely in 1971.

The Federal Reserve created itself and sold itself as an entity that could do something the Federal government couldn't do at the time, print a legal tender fiat currency. Sort of the way the government today will subcontract things to third parties that it would be illegal for the government to do. At the time, most people, including the government, didn't realize the monster that was created. When an entity can create all the money they want out of thin air, there is no one they can't buy, bribe, or kill. Congressmen, Presidents, Supreme Court Judges, no one is immune.

Although the US Government could probably "legally" print fiat currencies today, the Federal Reserve Bank will not relenquish their power. If we had just stuck with the Coinage Act of 1792, we would not have half the problems we have today. We certainly would be able to invade countries at will if it cost us real gold or silver.



posted on May, 13 2013 @ 12:25 PM
link   
reply to post by TheGreatestScam
 


That's one hell of a first post you have there!

From the little research i have had to do it seems like your bang on the money! (pun intended)



posted on May, 13 2013 @ 12:52 PM
link   
So in short no one can give a actual concrete answer?

Edit : Nevermind, page two answered it.
edit on 13-5-2013 by Vandettas because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 13 2013 @ 12:55 PM
link   
reply to post by Vandettas
 


I think this sums things up?!?!

2nd

Edit: Didn't see your edit! Sorry.
edit on 13/5/2013 by waveydavey because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 13 2013 @ 01:11 PM
link   
You can't just print money when you need money, that causes the value of your currency to plummet, lol.

Of course, the fed does it, but it's still a very stupid way to go about things.



posted on May, 13 2013 @ 02:44 PM
link   
If money was still attached to a gold standard then the government would only need to have a bucks worth of gold for every buck it printed with no other restrictions and before 1913 that was the case. Creating the fed and doing away with the gold standard has allowed a private business group "the fed" to bring the value of a dollar down to about a nickel in 100 years time. Since we the people have not been allowed to audit this group we don't even know if the country still has any gold. So for all we know they may have stolen all the country's gold. Physical gold is the only thing with real reliable value and we need to get the gold standard operational again and jail the fed.



posted on May, 13 2013 @ 02:45 PM
link   
reply to post by DestroyDestroyDestroy
 


In any growing economy money needs to be printed. Imagine if we lived in a village with 100 people and 1000 dollars between us, 500 years later when the population is potentially 50x larger or more, would it make sense to still only have 1000 dollars? Especially with the art of saving?

The fed works like; (thousands and thousands of private banks) A private bank wants a large amount of cash in their bank so they can loan, they call the fed, the fed prints this large amount of cash (when they have run out of lending money) and gives this money to them like a bank gives us money (with interest (I think)), and so then the bank has a large supply of cash which it loans out to people for interest... So the thing I dont know is where the money goes that the Fed makes on all that interest? I also dont know what the deal with bail outs are and why those exist...
edit on 13-5-2013 by ImaFungi because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 13 2013 @ 03:20 PM
link   
Simple answer.

A group of rich people met in the early 20th century on Jeckyl island. They told the politicians they could give them a bunch of money to get elected. The only catch is that for them to get the free money they just had to take it from a group of private banks and pay interest.

Thats no problem since they just pay the interest back to these banks with the tax payers dime.

Please feel free to let me know if any of this wrong.



posted on May, 13 2013 @ 04:33 PM
link   
There's no money.

It's all bits and bytes in the computer system somewhere.

The actual coin and printed paper dollars are a tiny fraction of money in use today.

All banks create money. Even corporations create money, by playing with accounting rules.

A person can't create money. That's why, if you want to get really rich, you've got to create a corporation.

Once you have a corporation, you can create money instantly, by massaging a few numbers on the balance sheet.

The reason this is possible, today, is because accounting has moved to something called "mark-to-market" accounting.

The price of any traded product or service has a definite value at the end of the trading day, but the price of something that is not actually traded, must be determined by using an "algorithm" and other products that are traded. And there's no established algorithm for pricing non-traded things. So, by simply changing the algorithm used, or altering the numerical values of parameters in the algorithm, you change the value of the company, and hence it's monetary worth. Because many of the parameters used in these algorithms are "subjective", the amount of money a corporation has is also "subjective". There are lots of opportunities to increase or decrease the amount of money a corporation has or has made, by subjectively modifying these algorithm parameters.

In fact, most corporations keep two sets of books.

One book they show to the I.R.S, describing how little money they have made this year, so that they can pay the least in taxes.

The other book they show to investors, describing how much money they have earned this year, showing how well they are doing, to encourage investors to keep buying the company stock, and push up the stock price.

If there was a definite amount of money in circulation, then nobody could keep two sets of books.

But because money is largely subjective, outside of personal finances, corporations and governments alike, have created multiple books to display their wealth and income position differently to different "viewers".



edit on 13-5-2013 by SQUEALER because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 13 2013 @ 06:52 PM
link   
reply to post by DestroyDestroyDestroy
 


it's very smart for the bankers, who periodically crash the economy of a country in order to buy up the pieces for pennies on the dollar, further consolidating their control--though it seems to be worse than that now that we are arriving at the nwo endgame.

am i on to something, experts?



posted on May, 14 2013 @ 01:55 AM
link   
reply to post by afoolbyanyothername
 


Its basic macro-economics. fiscal and monetary policies.

fiscal policies are the government which includes government spending tax stuff like that

monetary policy is the Fed which deals with money supply and interest rates to value money correlated from money supply. too much money low value, too little money high value. too low value raise interest rate to slow money use. too high value lower interest rate to encourage investment.\

SOO with this information we can conclude that if the government control the money supply they then could control how much money is loaned to them at any desired rate. so we need the seperation. HOWEVER heres the problem again. the government STILL likes to spend money SO they need to be on the FED good side.
Another words the government can be bought...is



posted on May, 16 2013 @ 04:52 AM
link   
In January the idea of making a trillion dollar platinum coin was considered as a way for government to create it's own money, deposit the coin in the bank and withdraw dollars. If we had started making these coins there would be enough money for everyone twice over, we'd all have piles of dollars to spend and spend.

"Legal basis:
The issuance of paper currency is subject to various accounting and quantity restrictions that platinum coinage is not.
Congress has already delegated to Tsy [Treasury] all the seinorage power authority it needs to mint a $1 trillion coin....
Congressman Jerry Nadler endorsed the idea[37] and it was featured in the international press by January 4, 2013"
en.wikipedia.org...





 
8
<< 1   >>

log in

join