Who wants to be a banker?? **UPDATED POLL**

[Michael]

gigapet - banks are not lending money they "don't have".

Michael

 

[gigapet]

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: gigapet

So when are you going to end the rant and propose a replacement for banks?

I already did.......I said banks arent the problem. Banks being allowed to issue money they dont have and charge interest on it is the problem. THe US government reliance on the privatized banks to Issue currency and then put the interest fees from the created fiat money, on the backs of the people in the form of increasing taxes is the problem.

Ok, So if banks dont charge interest, how do they make money?

gonna say it one more time.......charging interest on money they dont have should not be allowed. If the bank has 1000 of there own money by all means loan it out and charge interest on it. I cant loan out money thats not mine so why should they be able to. They shouldnt but it works so people ignore it and the bankers get richer as the interest paying suckers become poorer.

 

[gigapet]

Originally posted by: Michael
gigapet - banks are not lending money they "don't have".

Michael

Yeah they are......I deposit 20000.......they loan out 18000 of taht.....that person keeps 10000 of that loan in the bank....the bank then loans out 8000 of that 10000........the reciver of the loan keeps 5000 in the bank.......the bank then loans out 4000 of that........and what do u have .......32000 dollars of money (created out of air) loaned from the original 20000 deposit. Thats how it works. If you dont grasp that you never will and I give up.


FDIC perpetuates this because they back up each account 100,000 and the banks just get slapped with fines I suppose if they screw up and issue too many loans and dont have enough money to supply people when they come by asking for there cash back. (not exactly sure what the penalties are for lending more than what the fed says they are allowed to but often times they avoid the fed by making deals with other banks to cover their mistakes)

 

[Michael]

gigapet - you don't grasp basic double entry accounting nor do you seem to grasp basic math.

The transactions you mentioned are a zero sum game.

There is no creation of money by the banks and the depositors.

The Federal Reserve Bank is the only place where money is "created" and we've already discussed the fact that it really should be viewed as a reflection of the increase in the nation's wealth.

Michael

ps - please do a google search on "relfe". Here's a choice book by her: The Mars Records: Biofeedback Meter Sessions Where a Man Regained Hidden Memories of Military Service on Mars

 

[gigapet]

Originally posted by: Michael
gigapet - you don't grasp basic double entry accounting nor do you seem to grasp basic math.

The transactions you mentioned are a zero sum game.

There is no creation of money by the banks and the depositors.

The Federal Reserve Bank is the only place where money is "created" and we've already discussed the fact that it really should be viewed as a reflection of the increase in the nation's wealth.

Michael

How can there be any increase in wealth when we are debt(7.2 trillion approx)? How can there be an increase in wealth when the money being issued by the fed we have to pay interest on ? The only people gaining wealth in this scheme is clearly the boys on top of the banks, and other big money industries. Its a complex pyramid scheme thats all it is. Pull the wull back from over your eyes for a hot second. Its not legitimate at all......the pyramid on the back of the dollar is beginning to have more and more meaning to me.

Accounting or no accounting .........loaning out 32000 dollars from a 20000 deposit doesnot work out no matter how much fancy accounting manipulation you do.


EDIT:

p.s. Relf or whatever, I never claimed to be some great resource of official information. The story is a simplified explanation of the scam being pulled on americans. We have a right to issue our own currency and we should do away with the fed and exercise our right. Leave the banks alone if you insist but at least give us our right as a sovereign nation to issue our own currency. We need to take back our currency and take back our government from corporate america and the only way to do so is to return the economy and country to the hands of the citizens and not the greedy hands of the banking elite. When we dont control our money we dont control our country cuz money = power. To be continued tommorow morning if necessary.

 

[Mill]

Give up Michael. He is dealing with opinion and you are dealing with fact. There will be no way to convince him. BTW, good to see you around.

 

[Zebo]

Good read from the Federal Reserve site:

Who owns the Federal Reserve?
The Federal Reserve System is not "owned" by anyone and is not a private, profit-making institution. Instead, it is an independent entity within the government, having both public purposes and private aspects.

As the nation's central bank, the Federal Reserve derives its authority from the U.S. Congress. It is considered an independent central bank because its decisions do not have to be ratified by the President or anyone else in the executive or legislative branch of government, it does not receive funding appropriated by the Congress, and the terms of the members of the Board of Governors span multiple presidential and congressional terms. However, the Federal Reserve is subject to oversight by the Congress, which periodically reviews its activities and can alter its responsibilities by statute. Also, the Federal Reserve must work within the framework of the overall objectives of economic and financial policy established by the government. Therefore, the Federal Reserve can be more accurately described as "independent within the government."

The twelve regional Federal Reserve Banks, which were established by the Congress as the operating arms of the nation's central banking system, are organized much like private corporations--possibly leading to some confusion about "ownership." For example, the Reserve Banks issue shares of stock to member banks. However, owning Reserve Bank stock is quite different from owning stock in a private company. The 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, 6 percent per year.

The earnings of the Federal Reserve System come primarily from interest received on the Reserve Banks' holdings of U.S. government securities (which are used in the conduct of monetary policy) and from fees they charge depository institutions for providing services (such as processing and clearing checks). The expenses of the System are paid from these earnings. Any net earnings are paid yearly to the U.S. Treasury. For 2001, the payment was $27.14 billion.

 

[Zebo]

Another good site I just found Gigapit.

<a target=new class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Senate/3616/FedReserveFacts.html">Debunking the Federal Reserve Conspiracy Theories (and other financial myths) BY: Edward Flaherty, Ph.D. Department of Economics College of Charleston, S.C.

</a>

 

[Michael]

gigapet - When Carbonyl is debunking you (and he has far out of the mainstream views on insurance and other typical financial instruments), you know that you're in trouble. Your link and ideas are laughable. Do us all a favor and stop promoting trash.

Michael

 

[LunarRay]

What happens if I borrow 100 chickens and eat five lend the remaining 95 to the orange picker down the road and he and family eats all of them up? No more chickens. But, wait I saw the chicken lender over at the pig store... hmmm lets see... Mr orange picker agreed to repay me either 98 chickens or enough oranges to go to another city and trade oranges for 101 chickens guaranteed.. ok... I'll go with all these oranges get me the 101 chickens come back repay chicken lender his 100 chickens and have one left in the bargin...plus I got to eat the five in the beginning. Now how the heck did I do that. Not even here in Ioweway can you do that, can ya?
Wait... I spent all that time lugging oranges around not to mention flocking chickens so I should be able to eat the five in payment for my effort on behalf of Orange Picker. Ok. I get it.
I'm in the business of brokering chickens for oranges using OPC (other people's chickens). Ya gotta love it. Only in America..

 

[Zebo]

Originally posted by: Michael
gigapet - When Carbonyl is debunking you (and he has far out of the mainstream views on insurance and other typical financial instruments), you know that you're in trouble. Your link and ideas are laughable. Do us all a favor and stop promoting trash.

Michael

I do? Examples?

Hehe Just searching some old posts, seems you agreed with me on the insurance being a scam oh unconventional one you.

 

[LunarRay]

The chimp looks at the gorilla and says, "even the orang is smarter then you and every one in the jungle knows how dumb the orang is" Gorilla warfare can be messy.... the chimp seeks to steal both the gorilla and the orang's bananas.

I feel a bit moon struck at the moment.

 

[gigapet]

Originally posted by: Carbonyl

Originally posted by: Michael
gigapet - When Carbonyl is debunking you (and he has far out of the mainstream views on insurance and other typical financial instruments), you know that you're in trouble. Your link and ideas are laughable. Do us all a favor and stop promoting trash.

Michael

I do? Examples?

Hehe Just searching some old posts, seems you agreed with me on the insurance being a scam oh unconventional one you.

Your counter example is no more reputable than the website i provided. what you choose to believe is obviously your choice but your boy Edward Flaherty, Ph.D. Department of Economics College of Charleston, S.C. returned zero results aside from those writings with his name on it. I'd think such an expert on economics woulld have more of web presence.


Goto the college of charleston website , there is nobody on there staff with last name of flaherty..............

 

[gigapet]

http://www.monetary-reform.on.ca/main.shtml

ABRAHAM LINCOLN?S MONETARY POLICY

[This is a reprint of SENATE DOCUMENT NO. 23 - NATIONAL ECONOMY AND THE
BANKING SYSTEM OF THE UNITED STATES - (with bolding added by the Editor) ]
Money is the creature of law and the creation of the original issue of money should be maintained as an exclusive monopoly of National Government. Money possesses no value to the State other than that given to it by circulation. Capital has its proper place and is entitled to every protection. The wages of men should be recognized in the structure of and in the social order as more important than the wages of money. No duty is more imperative on the Government than the duty it owes the people to furnish them with a sound and uniform currency, and of regulating the circulation of the medium of exchange so that labor will be protected from a vicious currency, and commerce will be facilitated by cheap and safe exchanges. The available supply of gold and silver being wholly inadequate to permit the issuance of coins of intrinsic value or paper currency convertible into coin in the volume required to serve the needs of the people, some other basis for the issue of currency must be developed, and some means other than that of convertibility into coin must be developed to prevent undue fluctuations in the value of paper currency or any other substitute for money of intrinsic value that may come into use.

The monetary needs of increasing numbers of people advancing toward higher standards of living can and should be met by the Government. Such needs can be served by the issue of national currency and credit through the operation of a national banking system. The circulation of a medium of exchange issued and backed by the Government can be properly regulated and redundancy of issue avoided by withdrawing from circulation such amounts as may be necessary by taxation, redeposit, and otherwise. Government has the power to regulate the currency and credit of the Nation. Government should stand behind its currency and credit and the bank deposits of the Nation. No individual should suffer a loss of money through depreciated or inflated currency or bank bankruptcy. Government possessing the power to create and issue currency and credit as money and enjoying the right to withdraw both currency and credit from circulation by taxation and otherwise, need not and should not borrow capital at interest as the means of financing governmental work and public enterprise.

The Government should create, issue, and circulate all the currency and credit needed to satisfy the spending power of the Government and the buying power of consumers. The privilege of creating and issuing money is not only the supreme prerogative of Government, but it is the Government?s greatest creative opportunity. By adoption of these principles, the long-felt want for a uniform medium will be satisfied. The taxpayers will be saved immense sums of interest, discounts, and exchanges. The financing of all public enterprise, the maintenance of stable government and ordered progress, and the conduct of the Treasury will become matters of practical administration. The people can and will be furnished with a currency as safe as their own Government. Money will cease to be master and become servant of humanity. Democracy will rise superior to the money power.

Here is your chance I want you to prove you have greater knowledge, intelligence and are a better thinker than Abraham Lincoln(greatest president we ever had but thats just my opinion). I think abe lincoln is a more reputable source than this no name internet PHD guy.

 

[dpm]

Originally posted by: gigapet

Originally posted by: Carbonyl

Originally posted by: Michael gigapet - When Carbonyl is debunking you (and he has far out of the mainstream views on insurance and other typical financial instruments), you know that you're in trouble. Your link and ideas are laughable. Do us all a favor and stop promoting trash. Michael

I do? Examples? Hehe Just searching some old posts, seems you agreed with me on the insurance being a scam oh unconventional one you.

Your counter example is no more reputable than the website i provided. what you choose to believe is obviously your choice but your boy Edward Flaherty, Ph.D. Department of Economics College of Charleston, S.C. returned zero results aside from those writings with his name on it. I'd think such an expert on economics woulld have more of web presence. Goto the college of charleston website , there is nobody on there staff with last name of flaherty..............

That might be because he doesn't work there anymore.

 

[Michael]

gigapet - What Abe Lincoln proposed is basically the system we have now. Right up to the government protecting banks and making sure they don't go under and take all their money with them (FDIC and the S&L buyouts, for example)). Again, go peddle your trash and paranoia somewhere else.

I'm done discussing this with you as you're obviously a fanatic who does not listen to facts.

Carbonyl - I don't agree with your end conclusions on insurance (it isn't a "scam"). I don't argue that it can be inefficient and people often overinsure or get less than the level of service they should from insurance companies and/or brokers.

I have life insurance, insurance on my car, insurance on my house, and general insurance (plus medical insurance through work).

Michael

 

[gigapet]

Originally posted by: Michael
gigapet - What Abe Lincoln proposed is basically the system we have now. Right up to the government protecting banks and making sure they don't go under and take all their money with them (FDIC and the S&L buyouts, for example)). Again, go peddle your trash and paranoia somewhere else.

I'm done discussing this with you as you're obviously a fanatic who does not listen to facts.

Carbonyl - I don't agree with your end conclusions on insurance (it isn't a "scam"). I don't argue that it can be inefficient and people often overinsure or get less than the level of service they should from insurance companies and/or brokers.

I have life insurance, insurance on my car, insurance on my house, and general insurance (plus medical insurance through work).

Michael

I feel like we arent even reading the same things(yes some of the essentials are the same but the most important points are very different). Either you're delusional or I feel like I'm taking crazy pills.

Edit:

note this part is particularly important......hopefully it is on your reading level......

The Government should create, issue, and circulate all the currency and credit needed to satisfy the spending power of the Government and the buying power of consumers. The privilege of creating and issuing money is not only the supreme prerogative of Government, but it is the Government?s greatest creative opportunity. By adoption of these principles, the long-felt want for a uniform medium will be satisfied. The taxpayers will be saved immense sums of interest, discounts, and exchanges. The financing of all public enterprise, the maintenance of stable government and ordered progress, and the conduct of the Treasury will become matters of practical administration. The people can and will be furnished with a currency as safe as their own Government. Money will cease to be master and become servant of humanity. Democracy will rise superior to the money power

 

[jjones]

It looks as if Honest Abe was advocating away from the Gold Standard, in favor of the Federal Reserve, in favor of FDIC, and in favor of a balanced Federal budget. What is so different in his monetary policy as to what we have today?

 

[gigapet]

Originally posted by: jjones
It looks as if Honest Abe was advocating away from the Gold Standard, in favor of the Federal Reserve, in favor of FDIC, and in favor of a balanced Federal budget. What is so different in his monetary policy as to what we have today?

If you read more carefully abe was advocating the use of bills based on the gold and silver standard because minting and carry around actual gold and silver money would be impractical at that time and especially down the road. He advocated supporting centralized banks which in essence would be government operated not privatized like they currently are. He also emphasized strongly the importance of the government being the only entity in control of issuing the currency which is contrary to how the system currently is. If you read my carefully the differences become clear and the necessity of those differences becomes even clearer.

 

[Michael]

gigapet - your stupidity is drawing me to post like a moth to the flame.

Lincoln specifically says that there isn't enough gold and silver in place to support a currency. He specifically says that the currency should be backed by the government and that is enough.

The current Federal Reserve system does almost exactly what the piece you quoted asks for. One of the prime functions is to control inflation and deflation to protect the value of the currency.

We're not the people with reading comprehension problems. You are.

Michael

 

[gigapet]

Originally posted by: Michael
gigapet - your stupidity is drawing me to post like a moth to the flame.

Lincoln specifically says that there isn't enough gold and silver in place to support a currency. He specifically says that the currency should be backed by the government and that is enough.

The current Federal Reserve system does almost exactly what the piece you quoted asks for. One of the prime functions is to control inflation and deflation to protect the value of the currency.

We're not the people with reading comprehension problems. You are.

Michael

well then if you agree its the same thing then you shouldnt have a problem with withdrawing the current currency and replacing with government issued notes. you also shouldnt have a problem with disolving the fed and replacing it with a government owned and operated replacement. Keep your interest rates and other banking practices if you must but certainly there cannot be an objection to the above.

 

[jjones]

Originally posted by: gigapet

Originally posted by: jjones
It looks as if Honest Abe was advocating away from the Gold Standard, in favor of the Federal Reserve, in favor of FDIC, and in favor of a balanced Federal budget. What is so different in his monetary policy as to what we have today?

If you read more carefully abe was advocating the use of bills based on the gold and silver standard because minting and carry around actual gold and silver money would be impractical at that time and especially down the road. He advocated supporting centralized banks which in essence would be government operated not privatized like they currently are. He also emphasized strongly the importance of the government being the only entity in control of issuing the currency which is contrary to how the system currently is. If you read my carefully the differences become clear and the necessity of those differences becomes even clearer.

You are reading things that are not there.

The available supply of gold and silver being wholly inadequate to permit the issuance of coins of intrinsic value or paper currency convertible into coin in the volume required to serve the needs of the people,

This means there is not enough gold or silver to accommodate the needs of the people; it does not mean people don't want to carry around gold or silver. There is not sufficient gold and silver available to mint as a means to support our economic transactions.

And the Fed is the only entity capable or authorized to issue currency. Name another I don't know about.

 

[Michael]

The "government" already issues the notes. Read the links that Carbonyl already provided. There's even a discussion on the difference between the Treasury directly issueing the notes vs. the Federal Reserve Bank - basically, there is no difference.

Like I said, you're the one with the reading comprehension problem.

Michael

 

[gigapet]

Originally posted by: jjones

Originally posted by: gigapet

Originally posted by: jjones
It looks as if Honest Abe was advocating away from the Gold Standard, in favor of the Federal Reserve, in favor of FDIC, and in favor of a balanced Federal budget. What is so different in his monetary policy as to what we have today?

If you read more carefully abe was advocating the use of bills based on the gold and silver standard because minting and carry around actual gold and silver money would be impractical at that time and especially down the road. He advocated supporting centralized banks which in essence would be government operated not privatized like they currently are. He also emphasized strongly the importance of the government being the only entity in control of issuing the currency which is contrary to how the system currently is. If you read my carefully the differences become clear and the necessity of those differences becomes even clearer.

You are reading things that are not there.

The available supply of gold and silver being wholly inadequate to permit the issuance of coins of intrinsic value or paper currency convertible into coin in the volume required to serve the needs of the people,

This means there is not enough gold or silver to accommodate the needs of the people; it does not mean people don't want to carry around gold or silver. There is not sufficient gold and silver available to mint as a means to support our economic transactions.

And the Fed is the only entity capable or authorized to issue currency. Name another I don't know about.

I grasp the concept that isnt enough gold or silver.

Government possessing the power to create and issue currency and credit as money and enjoying the right to withdraw both currency and credit from circulation by taxation and otherwise, need not and should not borrow capital at interest as the means of financing governmental work and public enterprise.

The Government should create, issue, and circulate all the currency and credit needed to satisfy the spending power of the Government and the buying power of consumers. . The privilege of creating and issuing money is not only the supreme prerogative of Government, but it is the Government?s greatest creative opportunity.

howm uch clearer do u need it. I've reduced it to three sentences.

 

[gigapet]

Originally posted by: Michael
The "government" already issues the notes. Read the links that Carbonyl already provided. There's even a discussion on the difference between the Treasury directly issueing the notes vs. the Federal Reserve Bank - basically, there is no difference.

Like I said, you're the one with the reading comprehension problem.

Michael

IF THERE ISNT A DIFFERENCE WHY WAS LINCOLN SO STRONGLY AGAINST IT?

IF THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE THEN WHAT IS THE PROBLEM WITH CHANGING IT?