Printable View
I would like to say that I appreciate your bringing these things up. The problem is that, once you start looking into the way things are actually structured and reinterpreting past historical events in the light of who actually benefited, you are forced to Henry Ford's conclusion that "history is bunk," and you are left with a lot of opinions that can't be expressed in polite company because they are illegal.Quote:
Originally Posted by denmason
That is not exactly true either. The Federal Reserve is very different from Federal Express! Last time I checked the governors of the federal reserve were appointed by the President of the United States. It is a hybrid between private and public, where the private banks advise the public officials and can influence the policy this way, but the notion that the private bankers run the government is just false. The government officials regulate the banking system.Quote:
Originally Posted by denmason
And even in democratic countries with a very centralized banking system politicians don't have a total control of the banking sector. I knew a banker back in my country who just told the prime minister that what he requested is not going to happen because it's impossible. Also within few months of that the banking system collapsed (most banks went bankrupt) and the government fell as well. Ever since the government has had very limited power on what they can do as the country entered a currency board - not so much different from what you describe.
This only works if the government freezes the prices of every possible product, service or labor involved. Otherwise it would only lead to more inflation. In fact, this is the whole idea behind a central guided economy, such as installed in the former USSR, China, and Cuba. It actually works for a while, till the black market kicks in and takes over half or more of the economy. Unless the government takes draconian measures to prevent that. A practice that usually only leads to major corruption.Quote:
Originally Posted by denmason
It strikes me as very ironical, that Hitler, the great protector against Communism, made use of communistic principles to give the German economy a much needed boost.
Personally, I like "benefit based economics". It's sad that the "profit based economies" have always responded with fear and hostility to any experiments in that direction. For the same reason the contents of the original post in this thread is carefully kept out of schools history books.
Bart.
Yes it's probably true, America is in true financial trouble. The $ is weak and heading in one direction as the populus riddle themselves with debt and think that is the way to go. Loosing your house certainly focuses the mind, but there's still the credit card to get you bye.
It's also true that Hitler is not really a person to whom I would look to for guidance on... well.... anything.
I can remember maybe around the early 80's (1980) that the Russians used
barter to trade. Barter means things like, I'll give you 10 ton of corn for 1 ton of copper. They would barter for major supply contracts.
How much would you give Microsoft for a computer operating system for example. Would you give them anything if it didn't work? (sorry I digress):thinking:
In England there are communities that barter because they don't trust money or banks. You know, things like, I'll cut your hair if you fit a new plug socket for me. But it gets a lot more complicated with people earning credits that can be used to buy goods and services, just like money. Whole communities are using the process. No taxes, and true value for money.
The banks don't recognise these people. Mind you many people (the majority) don't trust banks or any of the financial institutions. From Insurance to banking to the stock market to the value of the £ all is no longer believed to be secure.
But in 2008, the real issue is how the world is being pulled apart for oil. The money supply is being squeezed because the cost of transport and power is putting pressure on peoples incomes. It has already increased food prices to a level were the really poor are already dead and millions are lining up to join them.
Whose fault is it. Well it is in part the greed of the owners of the power supplies and one significant supply is oil. But Russia is cashing in as well on it gas. It is also the consumers fault for becoming dependent.
What's the answer?
Well in the West, we have the expertise in terms of ".knowledge" to kill the oil industry outside of Western control... overnight. Stop supplies, stop education of foreigners, stop sharing expertise and bring home nationals working abroad. The oil industry outside of Western powers would stop in months.
Nothing to do with chasing Bin Laden. Just stop the greedy *******s who are holding us to ransom for oil until they come begging for food and water,
and they will. In reality, it's not as if they have anything other than oil.
But you will have to go cold in winter and do without your cars for a while to regain control.
Don't believe me, well ask Hitler.
I'm having too much fun here. What or who do you suppose influences the President in who he appoints as governors to the Fed? I would guess that there is some bit of leverage used to make sure he sees the light. I just want to throw down a few quotes:Quote:
Originally Posted by gugi
Charles A. Lindbergh, Sr. 1913 "When the President signs this bill, the invisible government of the monetary power will be legalized....the worst legislative crime of the ages is perpetrated by this banking and currency bill."
"Whoever controls the volume of money in any country is absolute master of all industry and commerce."(Paul Warburg, drafter of the Federal Reserve Act)
"Permit me to issue and control the money of a nation and I care not who makes its laws."(Mayer Amschel Rothschild)
That's just a few, there are many places to read more about the Fed. Wiki is not one of them. I'll reach out and pick one...Federal Reserve ~ The Enemy Of America It's not the only one, there are many. Have a read.
I do find all this interesting. I would have liked to see Ron Paul as President, especially if he would straighten out our monetary system. But I don't think that's going happen as things are.
Uhm, I'm having trouble following you - you seem to be advocating a stronger political influence on the currency management. How does that change who influences whom? Or do you suppose that in countries where the currency management is a responsibility of a purely governmental entity there is less influence from the private sector?Quote:
Originally Posted by denmason
Could you instead point out what you think are the main problems with the current system and how they will be solved by converting the federal reserve to a purely governmental agency. And how would you deal with the potential negatives of the new system?
How exactly is Ron Paul going to straighten out the monetary system? He can't go to the gold standard and I have no idea why would somebody want put rigid equivalence between the size of an economy and commodities.Quote:
Originally Posted by denmason
You are arguing that under the current system the government is making bad decisions (because they are influenced by the market), so how do you ensure that under any other system the governments remain always perfect and make no bad decisions whatsoever?
As it was pointed out earlier for the few cases when a totalitarian government has brought an economic success, there are at least ten other cases where a totalitarian government as botched things down in the worst way possible. Plenty of historical experiments, none successful in the long term.
Think of the Federal reserve as similar to the Postal Service. Not a direct part of the government but the directors appointed by the pres. Supposedly independent making their own business decisions but ultimately having to answer to congress if things go very wrong.
Perhaps a better representation would be Blackwater or Haliburton. The Federal Reserve, as I understand, is controlled by the government to a point, but in reality is technically a private corporation(?).Quote:
Originally Posted by thebigspendur
Much like the housing lenders they are trying to bail out, but different. (The housing lenders ARE controlled by the government).
I don't know, it's confusing. Personally I think we'd be better off going back to the actual prescribed standard dollar (which is a measure of silver) and doing away completely with the Federal reserve note, which is only some variation based in principle on the same. It'd suck for awhile, but in the end it would be a much more stable currency I think.
Of course I've been wrong before.
John P.
The cause of many social ills is the Fed’s inflationary policy. All great Empires of the past experienced social decline and unrest with debasement of their currency. Ron Paul (correctly, in my opinion) blames racism, xenophobia, and other reactionary attitudes on the discontent sown by the Fed. As government is the negation of liberty and the Fed is the financier of big government, then the connection is easy to make. Inflation and the welfare state that’s supported by it turn people against one another and make them look for scapegoats. Just look at the hyper-inflationary pre-Nazi Germany. There is a lot of misinformation out there about the Fed and what it does — put out by people who are supposed to be on our side! I’d say the two best and most succinct sources for understanding the Fed and monetary policy are these short books written by Murray Rothbard and Ron Paul; the Case Against the Fed and Gold, Peace and Prosperity. They are available for free from the Mises Institute.
http://mises.org/books/fed.pdf
http://mises.org/books/goldpeace.pdf
I don’t think there can be separation of social issues from monetary policy. Theft from the working people is most certainly a social issue, in my opinion!
I must go to bed now, 3am come around fast. Grab the pdf's and have a read.
I would like to point out that correlation is very different from causality.
Just a hypothetical scenario - suppose all exchange in the economy is converted to gold, silver, platinum and diamonds. What happens when somebody discovers a gold vein and opens a mine - does that automatically cause inflation? Or what if the natural resources become prohibitively hard to exploit further - does that put a cap on the economy, or you continue to grow it by exchanging your bread for 1/2 oz of gold instead of the 1oz from the year before.
I looked quickly over the pdfs, and find them extremely superficial. Somehow conversion to gold backed money is viewed as a cure for inflation. Just consider the hypothetical scenario above. If the federal reserve banks can currently get together to steal people's money through inflation, you would think that once they have gold backed money they will be unable to influence the availability of gold? And just don't tell me that the good government will make sure bad things won't happen.
I also think living in Utopia is great. The only problem is that it doesn't work.