Fed refuses to disclose recipients of $2 trillion in loans.

Page 4 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

First

Lifer
Jun 3, 2002
10,518
271
136
Originally posted by: bamacre
Originally posted by: Evan
Originally posted by: bamacre
Wow. I have pointed it out. I don't know how clear I could be. :confused:

Really, you pointed out something specific? Where?

Why not simply be specific? Having trouble? Yup.

The only one having trouble here is you.

As usual, failing to debate when you know you can't. At least you're aware of your limitations.
 

bamacre

Lifer
Jul 1, 2004
21,030
2
61
Originally posted by: Evan
Originally posted by: bamacre
Originally posted by: Evan
Originally posted by: bamacre
Wow. I have pointed it out. I don't know how clear I could be. :confused:

Really, you pointed out something specific? Where?

Why not simply be specific? Having trouble? Yup.

The only one having trouble here is you.

As usual, failing to debate when you know you can't. At least you're aware of your limitations.

I have limitations when it comes to arguing with people like you. I pointed out exactly WTF I was talking about. You have failed, too many times now, to address it. No sense in continuing. Anyone else here who is interested has all the info they need, and likely, more than half a brain, too.
 

First

Lifer
Jun 3, 2002
10,518
271
136
Originally posted by: bamacre
Originally posted by: Evan
Originally posted by: bamacre
Originally posted by: Evan
Originally posted by: bamacre
Wow. I have pointed it out. I don't know how clear I could be. :confused:

Really, you pointed out something specific? Where?

Why not simply be specific? Having trouble? Yup.

The only one having trouble here is you.

As usual, failing to debate when you know you can't. At least you're aware of your limitations.

I have limitations when it comes to arguing with people like you. I pointed out exactly WTF I was talking about. You have failed, too many times now, to address it. No sense in continuing. Anyone else here who is interested has all the info they need, and likely, more than half a brain, too.

You said nothing specific but point to a YouTube link (per usual since you can't come up with your own explanations). I've explained those links before many times in detail, and they had to be reposted here because you're so incredibly dense. But I'm glad you're aware of just what you're capable of saying and what you're not. I'm well aware Paul said something about a recession, I'm just waiting for you to say exactly what he said, because your interpretation (as bunk as it is) is what colors your view of the world after all.
 

Aharami

Lifer
Aug 31, 2001
21,294
148
106
Originally posted by: Jhhnn
Unfortunately, the transparency mentioned would likely have exactly the opposite of the desired effect, which is to maintain liquidity and solvency for banks w/ illiquid assets. It'd be like painting a target on their backs so that the vultures of Wall Street could short them into the dirt.

Which would turn the whole thing into a giveaway to the most ruthless traders... Kiss your money goodbye if they even get a whiff of it...

Which is not to say that I'm a big fan of the whole loan/ bailout scenario, at all, but if it's going to work, it has to be the way it is.

yea, although i'm for transparency, i think if it is mandated in this case, all those institutions getting money from the fed will be shorted to all hell. Also the institutions not taking fed money might be looked upon as not strong enough to worth bailing out and might also be shorted to hell. Who knows. lose lose either way
 

Nemesis 1

Lifer
Dec 30, 2006
11,366
2
0
Originally posted by: manowar821
What happened after the Roman Empire fell?


When exactly did it fall. I wasn't aware it has . The HRCC looks healthy to me. Sickly healthy that is. Find out when it was at it zenieth. Than look who is in control.
 

Mr. Lennon

Diamond Member
Jul 2, 2004
3,492
1
81
Originally posted by: LegendKiller
Originally posted by: Zeppelin2282
Evan you fucking tool.

ARTICLE 1, SECTION 8 OF THE CONSTITUTION STATES THAT CONGRESS SHALL HAVE THE POWER TO COIN (CREATE) MONEY AND REGULATE THE VALUE THEREOF.

IN 1935 THE SUPREME COURT RULED THAT CONGRESS CANNOT CONSTITUTIONALLY DELEGATE ITS POWER TO ANOTHER GROUP. (Reference 22, P. 168)


The Federal Reserve is PRIVATELY OWNED. It is fucking illegal according to our constitution!!!!

The bail out plan is going to make the situation even worse because the reserve is printing money out of thin air! Mark my words, you will see the value of the dollar collapse within the next 10 years.


Man I'm laughing at you with bamacre now too. Ron Paul's great thoughts about a gold standard must of just flew over your head.


Copied that directly from the MoneyMaker website eh? They're about as stupid as your average monkey, but here, I'll help you out.


http://www.publiceye.org/consp...erty/flaherty3.html#10

Finally, and perhaps most importantly, Congress has the right to make any law that is 'necessary and proper' for the execution of its enumerated powers (Art. I, Sec. 8, Cl. 18). A law creating a Bureau of the Mint, for example, is necessary and proper for the Congress to exercise its right to coin money. A similar argument may justify a central bank. It facilitates the expansion and contraction of the money supply and it serves as means to regulate the banking industry.


U.S. v. Wangrund, 533 F.2d 495; C.A.Cal. 1976
The statute establishing Federal Reserve Notes as legal tender for all debts, public and private, including taxes, is within the constitutional authority of Congress; thus the defendant could not overturn his conviction on two counts of wilful failure to make an income tax return on the theory that he did not receive money since checks he received as compensation for his services could be cashed only for Federal Reserve Notes which were not redeemable in specie. 26 USCA §61, §7203; USCA Const. art. 1, §8; Coinage Act of 1965, §102; 31 USCA §392.

The Fed is a quasi-government entity that exists only because of Congress. It is beholden to Congress at every step and must testify in front of Congress when called. It issued financials to Congress.

The rescue plan raises money through the issuance of debt, which is a far cry from "printing money out of thin air". That concept is laughable and is only thrown about by people who have no fucking clue what's going on, as evidenced by your post.

You can say whatever you want to defend the Federal Reserve, but nothing will change the fact that it is privately owned. We would know where that 2 trillion dollars went if it was government owned.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h9-tBGxVU6o
 

LegendKiller

Lifer
Mar 5, 2001
18,256
68
86
Originally posted by: Zeppelin2282

You can say whatever you want to defend the Federal Reserve, but nothing will change the fact that it is privately owned. We would know where that 2 trillion dollars went if it was government owned.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h9-tBGxVU6o

The Fed isn't really "privately owned". It is owned by every Fed affiliated bank in the country (National Associations), through a share-based system. Those shares cannot be traded and must be held. It is in the country's best interest to have a bank of banks held by the banks, they all have a vested interest. Most of the NA's are either publicly owned or are Credit Unions or some other form of bank. Furthermore, it exists only at the gratuity of Congress, unlike most other entities. Thus, it isn't really "private" in the sense of a privately run corporation with independent governors. It is a hybrid entity that is effectively controlled by Congress.

Even before the Fed the country's Fed was effectively JP Morgan, who saved the country's ass several times.

Despite your bullshit FUD it is quite easy to find this information. Only those who have no clue how corporations run, or how the Fed is run, have a problem with this. YouTube videos aren't peer-reviewed and well researched learning materials. Perhaps you should spend more time in a library than on your computer.
 

bamacre

Lifer
Jul 1, 2004
21,030
2
61
Originally posted by: Zeppelin2282
You can say whatever you want to defend the Federal Reserve, but nothing will change the fact that it is privately owned. We would know where that 2 trillion dollars went if it was government owned.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h9-tBGxVU6o

It isn't exactly private, simply because Congress can get rid of it whenever they want. The problem is the vast majority of Congress don't understand wtf the Fed actually does.
 

LegendKiller

Lifer
Mar 5, 2001
18,256
68
86
Originally posted by: bamacre
Originally posted by: Zeppelin2282
You can say whatever you want to defend the Federal Reserve, but nothing will change the fact that it is privately owned. We would know where that 2 trillion dollars went if it was government owned.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h9-tBGxVU6o

It isn't exactly private, simply because Congress can get rid of it whenever they want. The problem is the vast majority of Congress don't understand wtf the Fed actually does.

Same thing with the vast majority of people on here.
 

LegendKiller

Lifer
Mar 5, 2001
18,256
68
86
Originally posted by: bamacre
Originally posted by: LegendKiller
It is in the country's best interest to have a bank of banks held by the banks

That is a matter of opinion. ;)

Yeah, because having the government manage it would prove so much more effective.

Ohhh wait, having a chaotic system with massive inefficiencies is the right course, it'll spur investment because *everybody* wants to invest in chaos! Yeah, that's the ticket!
 

Drift3r

Guest
Jun 3, 2003
3,572
0
0
Originally posted by: bamacre
Originally posted by: techs
Originally posted by: bamacre
Originally posted by: Evan
Originally posted by: bamacre
The abortion thread has 5 times more replies than this one. How pathetic is this country?

It's pretty smart considering you're scraping the bottom of the IQ barrel.

Oh look, here is Federal Reserve Lover #2 chiming in telling us how dumb we are to question the financial geniuses government has appointed for us.

You wouldn't be referring to my new sig, would you?

Greenspan made a mistake alright, he left his ideas of getting rid of the Fed and instead, took it over and helped create the biggest financial crisis ever.

What better way to get rid of something you hate then to infiltrate it and destroy it from within. Once it has collapsed or starts to collapse you then go ahead and point out how you were right after all. :)
 

First

Lifer
Jun 3, 2002
10,518
271
136
Originally posted by: Drift3r
Originally posted by: bamacre
Originally posted by: techs
Originally posted by: bamacre
Originally posted by: Evan
Originally posted by: bamacre
The abortion thread has 5 times more replies than this one. How pathetic is this country?

It's pretty smart considering you're scraping the bottom of the IQ barrel.

Oh look, here is Federal Reserve Lover #2 chiming in telling us how dumb we are to question the financial geniuses government has appointed for us.

You wouldn't be referring to my new sig, would you?

Greenspan made a mistake alright, he left his ideas of getting rid of the Fed and instead, took it over and helped create the biggest financial crisis ever.

What better way to get rid of something you hate then to infiltrate it and destroy it from within. Once it has collapsed or starts to collapse you then go ahead and point out how you were right after all? :)

Well, he is one of those loony conspiracy theory dudes.
 

bamacre

Lifer
Jul 1, 2004
21,030
2
61
Originally posted by: LegendKiller
Originally posted by: bamacre
Originally posted by: LegendKiller
It is in the country's best interest to have a bank of banks held by the banks

That is a matter of opinion. ;)

Yeah, because having the government manage it would prove so much more effective.

Ohhh wait, having a chaotic system with massive inefficiencies is the right course, it'll spur investment because *everybody* wants to invest in chaos! Yeah, that's the ticket!

Oh, the irony. ;)
 

cKGunslinger

Lifer
Nov 29, 1999
16,408
57
91
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Originally posted by: vhx
$2 trillion taken already and we don't even know where it is going. Sadly, not even surprised anymore.

When will we as Americans not take this bullshit anymore? (rhetorical: never)

Actually when you have enough people so negatively affected they can't take it anymore you will see a Revolution.

You can take that to the bank.

If people routinely took your advice and wisdom "to the bank," it would collapse our banking system and put us into a depression-like financial cris.. OH SHIT!
 

NoStateofMind

Diamond Member
Oct 14, 2005
9,711
6
76
Originally posted by: bamacre
Originally posted by: LegendKiller
Originally posted by: bamacre
Originally posted by: LegendKiller
It is in the country's best interest to have a bank of banks held by the banks

That is a matter of opinion. ;)

Yeah, because having the government manage it would prove so much more effective.

Ohhh wait, having a chaotic system with massive inefficiencies is the right course, it'll spur investment because *everybody* wants to invest in chaos! Yeah, that's the ticket!

Oh, the irony. ;)

Oh thats just perfect! :laugh: