TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Political Discussion / Debate
-- The Secret Criminal Society of the Federal Reserve (Part II)
Pages (12): « 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 »
| quote: |
| Originally posted by jerZ07002 that's actually not true. credit is the thing provided by the lender. Debt is what a person/entity owes to the lender. you don't owe credit, and you don't provide debt. Make sense? |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by {b.s.e.} Could you source that please? |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Shakka Assuming you're dumb enough to use a card that has an annual fee!  |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Groundhog Boy I've gotten to credit levels where I agree with this. I've never understood AmEx's model, maybe because I've never had to use the perks. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Krypton I was wrong. You are right. Still ShoalinZ believes in a debt free utopia, and cites Adam Smith as a premise. I wholeheartedly disagree with his conclusion. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Krypton I was wrong. You are right. Still ShoalinZ believes in a debt free utopia, and cites Adam Smith as a premise. I wholeheartedly disagree with his conclusion. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by shaolin_Z All I was saying was that capitalism...doesn't have anything to do with out current monetary system or banking system. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by shaolin_Z Nice misrepresentation of my point, unless you missed this one as well. All I was saying was that capitalism, in theory, which bears little resemblance to what is called capitalism today, doesn't have anything to do with out current monetary system or banking system. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by jerZ07002 how could capitalism be effective without our current monetary system and banking? Our current banking system allows capital to flow to producers and our fiat monetary system allows the money supply to expand with the growth in the economy. Without increasing money supply, the value of dollar would severely out pace production and ultimately limit the growth of the economy. It all goes hand-in-hand. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by jerZ07002 EDIT: also, Shakka, you know that corporations pay substantial fees simply to maintain an open line of credit with a bank. I wasn't just talking about personal credit cards. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by jerZ07002 amex makes a killing on its corporate accounts. Amex lets a company link the charges into the company's expense system to directly charge clients. i'm pretty sure that amex couldn't survive without the corporate accounts, otherwise no merchant would accept the card with the 5% fee. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by occrider It's much less than you would think. Amex is pretty well diversified across all lending/charge types, but the biggest chunks of business are in the consumer and small business markets. |
. Did you make the move out of the country yet? Guess what, I picked up Economics as a second major, hopefully you'll be around later for some interesting discussions and debates.
| quote: |
| Originally posted by occrider It's much less than you would think. Amex is pretty well diversified across all lending/charge types, but the biggest chunks of business are in the consumer and small business markets. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by shaolin_Z Welcome back resident PDD sea life loving economist . Did you make the move out of the country yet? Guess what, I picked up Economics as a second major, hopefully you'll be around later for some interesting discussions and debates.Peace. |
. JK.| quote: |
i would have thought much of amex's success in the consumer and small business areas feeds off of the corporate division's success. Since amex's fees are much higher than visa and mastercard fees, many merchants wouldn't accept amex if it wasn't for the corporate accounts. while i may be overstating the effect that the corporate business has on the consumer division, i still think the link is real. |
| quote: |
| America's Forgotten War Against the Central Banks By Mike Hewitt "Let me issue and control a nation's money supply, and I care not who makes its laws." (Mayer Amschel Rothschild, Founder of Rothschild Banking Dynasty) Many prominent Americans such as Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, and Andrew Jackson have argued and fought against the central banking polices used throughout Europe. A note issued by a central bank, such as the Federal Reserve Note, is bank currency. These notes are given to the government in exchange for an interest-bearing government bond. The primary means to pay for the interest on these bonds is to borrow more bank notes, thus beginning a vicious cycle that ultimately ends with the complete destruction of the currency and bankruptcy of the nation. History is replete with such occurrences. (For a list of countries that have experienced hyperinflation click here). This begs the question as to why such a doomed system would exist? The reason is that during the course of the arrangement, which can last for centuries, the central bankers who issue the money amass great fortunes from the large sums of interest collected. In essence it is a transfer of wealth from the many to the elite few. Government leaders prefer such a system because it does not require budgets to be balanced. It is far more politically expedient to borrow, then to directly tax the citizens. The effects of currency debasement and debt accumulation are not obvious and in the words attributed to Vladimir Lenin by John Maynard Keynes, "By a continuing process of inflation, governments can confiscate, secretly and unobserved, an important part of the wealth of their citizens...There is no subtler, no surer means of overturning the existing basis of society than to debauch the currency. The process engages all the hidden forces of economic law on the side of destruction, and does it in a manner which not one man in a million is able to diagnose." (John Maynard Keynes) Throughout the history of the United States there has been a struggle between central bankers and their interest-bearing money and those who oppose them. In fact, the United States was created as a direct result of that struggle. << CONTINUED >> |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by shaolin_Z EDIT: Note, Keynes was a British Economist, attempting to explain a crisis in the US, which makes it highly unlikely he had access to all the relevant information for starters. The late 1800's / early 1900's weren't exactly the information age you know . |
Yeah, imagine wanting to create a political and economic system of equal opportunity, environmental consideration, and tear down ruling class ideology. The workers of the world don't deserve a say in how things are run! Those socialists are so fucking evil! 
| quote: |
| Intro to Web of Debt: The Shocking Truth About Our Money System The Sleight of Hand That Has Trapped Us in Debt and How We Can Break Free (Paperback) by Ellen Hodgson Brown Introduction CAPTURED BY THE DEBT SPIDER President Andrew Jackson called the banking cartel a "hydra-headed monster eating the flesh of the common man." New York Mayor John Hylan, writing in the 1920s, called it a "giant octopus" that "seizes in its long and powerful tentacles our executive officers, our legislative bodies, our schools, our courts, our newspapers, and every agency created for the public protection." The debt spider has devoured farms, homes and whole countries that have become trapped in its web. In a February 2005 article called "The Death of Banking," financial commentator Hans Schicht wrote:
Schicht writes that he had an opportunity in his career to observe the wizards of finance as an insider at close range. The game has gotten so centralized and concentrated, he says, that the greater part of U.S. banking and enterprise is now under the control of a small inner circle of men. He calls the game "spider webbing." Its rules include:
The late Dr. Carroll Quigley was a writer and professor of history at Georgetown University, where he was President Bill Clinton's mentor. Dr. Quigley wrote from personal knowledge of an elite clique of global financiers bent on controlling the world. Their aim, he said, was "nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole." This system was "to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements."2 He called this clique simply the "international bankers." Their essence was not race, religion or nationality but was just a passion for control over other humans. The key to their success was that they would control and manipulate the money system of a nation while letting it appear to be controlled by the government. The international bankers have succeeded in doing more than just controlling the money supply. Today they actually create the money supply, while making it appear to be created by the government. This devious scheme was revealed by Sir Josiah Stamp, director of the Bank of England and the second richest man in Britain in the 1920s. Speaking at the University of Texas in 1927, he dropped this bombshell:
Professor Henry C. K. Liu is an economist who graduated from Harvard and chaired a graduate department at UCLA before becoming an investment adviser for developing countries. He calls the current monetary scheme a "cruel hoax." When we wake up to that fact, he says, our entire economic world view will need to be reordered, "just as physics was subject to reordering when man's world view changed with the realization that the earth is not stationary nor is it the center of the universe."4 The hoax is that there is virtually no "real" money in the system, only debts. Except for coins, which are issued by the government and make up only about one one-thousandth of the money supply, the entire U.S. money supply now consists of debt to private banks, for money they created with accounting entries on their books. It is all done by sleight of hand; and like a magician's trick, we have to see it many times before we realize what is going on. But when we do, it changes everything. All of history has to be rewritten. The following chapters track the web of deceit that has engulfed us in debt, and present a simple solution that could make the country solvent once again. It is not a new solution but dates back to the Constitution: the power to create money needs to be returned to the government and the people it represents. The federal debt could be paid, income taxes could be eliminated, and social programs could be expanded; and this could all be done without imposing austerity measures on the people or sparking runaway inflation. Utopian as that may sound, it represents the thinking of some of America's brightest and best, historical and contemporary, including Abraham Lincoln, Thomas Jefferson and Benjamin Franklin. Among other arresting facts explored in this book are that:
The bankers' Federal Reserve Notes and the government's coins represent two separate money systems that have been competing for dominance throughout recorded history. At one time, the right to issue money was the sovereign right of the king; but that right got usurped by private moneylenders. Today the sovereigns are the people, and the coins that make up less than one one-thousandth of the money supply are all that are left of our sovereign money. Many nations have successfully issued their own money, at least for a time; but the bankers' debt-money has generally infiltrated the system and taken over in the end. These concepts are so foreign to what we have been taught that it can be hard to wrap our minds around them, but the facts have been substantiated by many reliable authorities. To cite a few � Robert H. Hemphill, Credit Manager of the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta, wrote in 1934:
Graham Towers, Governor of the Bank of Canada from 1935 to 1955, acknowledged:
Robert B. Anderson, Secretary of the Treasury under Eisenhower, said in an interview reported in the August 31, 1959 issue of U.S. News and World Report:
Michel Chossudovsky, Professor of Economics at the University of Ottawa, wrote during the Asian currency crisis of 1998:
Today, Federal Reserve Notes and U.S. dollar loans dominate the economy of the world; but this international currency is not money issued by the American people or their government. It is money created and lent by a private cartel of international bankers, and this cartel has the United States itself hopelessly entangled in a web of debt. By 2006, combined personal, corporate and federal debt in the United States had reached a staggering 44 trillion dollars � four times the collective national income, or $147,312 for every man, woman and child in the country.8 The United States is legally bankrupt, defined in the dictionary as being unable to pay one's debts, being insolvent, or having liabilities in excess of a reasonable market value of assets held. By October 2006, the debt of the U.S. government had hit a breath-taking $8.5 trillion. Local, state and national governments are all so heavily in debt that they have been forced to sell off public assets to satisfy creditors. Crowded schools, crowded roads, and cutbacks in public transportation are eroding the quality of American life. A 2005 report by the American Society of Civil Engineers gave the nation's infrastructure an overall grade of D, including its roads, bridges, drinking water systems and other public works. "Americans are spending more time stuck in traffic and less time at home with their families," said the group's president. "We need to establish a comprehensive, long-term infrastructure plan."9 We need to but we can't, because government at every level is broke. Money in the Land of Oz If governments everywhere are in debt, who are they in debt to? The answer is that they are in debt to private banks. The "cruel hoax" is that governments are in debt for money created on a computer screen, money they could have created themselves. The vast power acquired through this sleight of hand by a small clique of men pulling the strings of government behind the scenes evokes images from The Wizard of Oz, a classic American fairytale that has become a rich source of imagery for financial commentators. Editorialist Christopher Mark wrote in a series called "The Grand Deception":
The late Murray Rothbard, an economist of the classical Austrian School, wrote:
In a 2002 article titled "Who Controls the Federal Reserve System?", Victor Thorn wrote:
James Galbraith wrote in The New American Prospect:
The analogies to The Wizard of Oz work for a reason. According to later commentators, the tale was actually written as a monetary allegory, at a time when the "money question" was a key issue in American politics. In the 1890s, politicians were still hotly debating who should create the nation's money and what it should consist of. Should it be created by the government, with full accountability to the people? Or should it be created by private banks behind closed doors, for the banks' own private ends? William Jennings Bryan, the Populist candidate for President in 1896 and again in 1900, mounted the last serious challenge to the right of private bankers to create the national money supply. According to the commentators, Bryan was represented in Frank Baum's 1900 book The Wonderful Wizard of Oz by the Cowardly Lion. The Lion finally proved he was the King of Beasts by decapitating a giant spider that was terrorizing everyone in the forest. The giant spider Bryan challenged at the turn of the twentieth century was the Morgan/Rockefeller banking cartel, which was bent on usurping the power to create the nation's money from the people and their representative government. Before World War I, two opposing systems of political economy competed for dominance in the United States. One operated out of Wall Street, the New York financial district that came to be the symbol of American finance. Its most important address was 23 Wall Street, known as the "House of Morgan." J. P. Morgan was an agent of powerful British banking interests. The Wizards of Wall Street and the Old World bankers pulling their strings sought to establish a national currency that was based on the "gold standard," one created privately by the financial elite who controlled the gold. The other system dated back to Benjamin Franklin and operated out of Philadelphia, the country's first capital, where the Constitutional Convention was held and Franklin's "Society for Political Inquiries" planned the industrialization and public works that would free the new republic from economic slavery to England.14 The Philadelphia faction favored a bank on the model established in provincial Pennsylvania, where a state loan office issued and lent money, collected the interest, and returned it to the provincial government to be used in place of taxes. President Abraham Lincoln returned to the colonial system of government-issued money during the Civil War; but he was assassinated, and the bankers reclaimed control of the money machine. The silent coup of the Wall Street faction culminated with the passage of the Federal Reserve Act in 1913, something they achieved by misleading Bryan and other wary Congressmen into thinking the Federal Reserve was actually federal. Today the debate over who should create the national money supply is rarely heard, mainly because few people even realize it is an issue. Politicians and economists, along with everybody else, simply assume that money is created by the government, and that the "inflation" everybody complains about is caused by an out-of-control government running the dollar printing presses. The puppeteers working the money machine were more visible in the 1890s than they are today, largely because they had not yet succeeded in buying up the media and cornering public opinion. Economics is a dry and forbidding subject that has been made intentionally complex by banking interests intent on concealing what is really going on. It is a subject that sorely needs lightening up, with imagery, metaphors, characters and a plot; so before we get into the ponderous details of the modern system of money-based-on-debt, we'll take an excursion back to a simpler time, when the money issues were more obvious and were still a burning topic of discussion. The plot line for The Wizard of Oz has been traced to the first-ever march on Washington, led by an obscure Ohio businessman who sought to persuade Congress to return to Lincoln's system of government-issued money in 1894. Besides sparking a century of protest marches and the country's most famous fairytale, this little-known visionary and the band of unemployed men he led may actually have had the solution to the whole money problem, then and now . . . . SOURCE http://www.amazon.com/Web-Debt-Shoc...6300250-9814238 |
Who here has the time to read all of that?
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Krypton Who here has the time to read all of that? |
| quote: |
| i skimmed it. most of it was the same lies and distortions we're used to seeing from trancer, and most of his sources come from 70 odd years ago. ooooh, compelling! |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by culorut Judging from how fast you troll threads and reply with the same bullshit over and over again it is clear you have never read or even attempted to watch jack shit. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by culorut Judging from how fast you troll threads and reply with the same bullshit over and over again it is clear you have never read or even attempted to watch jack shit. |
Point out the lies then...everyone is waiting.
Trolling does not make you right.
which lies do you want?
-the fed charges interest to the government
-the national debt is created by the fed
-the fed is a private corporation
-the fed was created to enslave the people to the banks
-the fed has never been audited
-the fed is a for-profit organisation
all untrue.
Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.