Originally Posted by
97Camaro
1)
The 'Federal' Reserve: 100% of the Federal Reserves shareholders are
private banks.
None of its stock is owned by the government.
If
PRIVATE BANKS own all of the shares to the F.R., and
NO shares are held by the government, that means it's
PRIVATELY OWNED.
Ok...obviously I am not going to spend a ton of time on your reply because it doesnt warrant a serious reply. But I will just start right at the top and address the very first one.
What you state above is
mostly true. Some of the details are skewed...but lets just assume its accurate for the most part. Now the problem with your post is that you state this information as if you have just uncovered some grand scheme that has been suppressed all these years? Did you recently discover how the Fed works? You realize that the Fed has been in existance...known to all...since 1913? Just because you recently found out it was a joint effort between the govt and private banks dooesnt mean the rest of us should be in panic.
In addition...shares of the Federal Reserve are apportioned by law and do not operate like stock in typical companies.
The Federal Reserve Banks issue shares of stock to member banks. However, owning Federal Reserve Bank stock is quite different from owning stock in a private company. The Federal Reserve Banks are not operated for profit, and ownership of a certain amount of stock is, by law, a condition of membership in the system. The stock may not be sold or traded or pledged as security for a loan; dividends are, by law, limited to 6 percent per year.
The dividends paid to member banks are considered partial compensation for the lack of interest paid on member banks' required reserves held at the Federal Reserve. By law, banks in the United States must maintain fractional reserves, most of which are kept on account at the Federal Reserve. Historically, the Federal Reserve did not pay interest on these funds. The Federal Reserve now has authority to pay interest on these funds granted by Congress in the EESA of 2008
So I am not sure what your point when you simply state the structure of the Fed when this arrangement is no secret. Now if you dont agree with the Fed...and lay out reasons WHY this arrangement is dangerous or unethical...then I will listen and discuss the pros and cons of a Federal Reserve system as a central bank. But if you do that...I would also expect you to state an arrangement that would be a better option. Make the central bank under FULL govt control? I think not. Let businesses/banks COMPLETELY run our central bank...I think not. The Fed was designed just as out govt is run...to have checks and balances. The Fed, Congress, treasury dept and others all have a hand in the way our central bank operates. No one entity..wether it be Govt...or big banking can have a lock on making monetary policy. IMO the Fed...while a bit cumbersome in places...seems to actually function well most of the time.
Lets just go into one more statements you made
You think the dollar is worth anything? Ever heard of inflation?
Again...I am not sure if you think you are making some new revalation here? A dollars worth is a function of many factors. A certain level of inflation is also built into the system of capitalism with regards to expansion. But there is nothing necessarily sinister about this. The fact that the purchasing power of a dollar has dropped 27% (taking your stat at face value) has what meaning exactly? That some sinister evil hand is keeping you down? Or could it be more of a function of the rise of of the level of competition from places like China, Japan, India. Your logic in the process seems to be simple "dollar value has dropped 27% since 1998...therefore evil government". Unfortunately its a bit more complex than that.
Last one
Fiat currency in America is called bullshit no matter what you call it.
Our income tax IS the backing for the printed currency we call 'dollars' or Federal Reserve Notes.
Obviously this is a reply to me.. correcting you on your earlier erroneous statement that gold backed up our currency...which you now admit was wrong. Well...you are wrong again....our fiat currency is NOT backed up by income taxes. Our fiat currency is backed by the goods and services offered by the citizens of America. If the US had little in the way of goods and services needed and wanted by people inside and outside our borders....our fiat currency would be better off still being backed by a gold standard. If you were a country like Zimbabwe...that had NOTHING to offer the world ..you would be better off having a gold reserve. Unfortunately Zimbabwe has nothing to back its currency and no services or goods of value either. That is why they were so susceptable to hyper inflation. As long as America has "things" to offer that are desirable, wanted, and needed...then the dollars fiat value is secured. That is also why the fiat value of the dollar has dropped since 1998...other countries now have "things" to offer that are desirable, wanted and needed. The strength of a nations fiat currency in many ways is a direct measurement of the fitness of this parameter. And again...the fluctuations in this parameter is affected by many factors that simply are beyond the control of "the illuminati" simply to keep YOU down.
I am not going to address each of your entries... but suffice it to say IMO...the rest are just as far off the mark and seem to be VERY irrational.