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 »

The Secret Criminal Society of the Federal Reserve (Part II)

I was going to add a few things to The Secret Criminal Society of the Federal Reserve thread but it looks like the thought police struck again!!
(either that or just more controlled opposition)

Anyway, I loved the way Bernie Sanders went off on Greenspan in this first video

I wish that we had more people like him and Ron Paul in government,
that it wasn't just a vocal minority speaking on behalf of the people.

quote:

Abolish the Fed by Rep. Ron Paul, MD In the House of Representatives, September 10, 2002 Mr. Speaker, I rise to introduce legislation to restore financial stability to America's economy by abolishing the Federal Reserve. I also ask unanimous consent to insert the attached article by Lew Rockwell, president of the Ludwig Von Mises Institute, which explains the benefits of abolishing the Fed and restoring the gold standard, into the record. Since the creation of the Federal Reserve, middle and working-class Americans have been victimized by a boom-and-bust monetary policy. In addition, most Americans have suffered a steadily eroding purchasing power because of the Federal Reserve's inflationary policies. This represents a real, if hidden, tax imposed on the American people. From the Great Depression, to the stagflation of the seventies, to the burst of the dotcom bubble last year, every economic downturn suffered by the country over the last 80 years can be traced to Federal Reserve policy. The Fed has followed a consistent policy of flooding the economy with easy money, leading to a misallocation of resources and an artificial "boom" followed by a recession or depression when the Fed-created bubble bursts. With a stable currency, American exporters will no longer be held hostage to an erratic monetary policy. Stabilizing the currency will also give Americans new incentives to save as they will no longer have to fear inflation eroding their savings. Those members concerned about increasing America's exports or the low rate of savings should be enthusiastic supporters of this legislation. Though the Federal Reserve policy harms the average American, it benefits those in a position to take advantage of the cycles in monetary policy. The main beneficiaries are those who receive access to artificially inflated money and/or credit before the inflationary effects of the policy impact the entire economy. Federal Reserve policies also benefit big spending politicians who use the inflated currency created by the Fed to hide the true costs of the welfare-warfare state. It is time for Congress to put the interests of the American people ahead of the special interests and their own appetite for big government. Abolishing the Federal Reserve will allow Congress to reassert its constitutional authority over monetary policy. The United States Constitution grants to Congress the authority to coin money and regulate the value of the currency. The Constitution does not give Congress the authority to delegate control over monetary policy to a central bank. Furthermore, the Constitution certainly does not empower the federal government to erode the American standard of living via an inflationary monetary policy. In fact, Congress' constitutional mandate regarding monetary policy should only permit currency backed by stable commodities such as silver and gold to be used as legal tender. Therefore, abolishing the Federal Reserve and returning to a constitutional system will enable America to return to the type of monetary system envisioned by our nation's founders: one where the value of money is consistent because it is tied to a commodity such as gold. Such a monetary system is the basis of a true free-market economy. In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to stand up for working Americans by putting an end to the manipulation of the money supply which erodes Americans' standard of living, enlarges big government, and enriches well-connected elites, by cosponsoring my legislation to abolish the Federal Reserve. http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul53.html

quote:

Remarks by Rep. Louis T. McFadden Congressional Record, House pages 1295 and 1296 on June 10, 1932: Mr. Chairman, we have in this country one of the most corrupt institutions the world has ever known. I refer to the Federal Reserve Board and the Federal reserve banks. The Federal Reserve Board, a Government Board, has cheated the Government of the United States and he people of the United States out of enough money to pay the national debt. The depredations and the iniquities of the Federal Reserve Board and the Federal reserve banks acting together have cost this country enough money to pay the national debt several times over. This evil institution has impoverished and ruined the people of the United States; has bankrupted itself, and has practically bankrupted our Government. It has done this through the maladministration of that law by which the Federal Reserve Board, and through the corrupt practices of the moneyed vultures who control it. Some people think the Federal Reserve Banks are United States Government institutions. They are not Government institutions, departments, or agencies. They are private credit monopolies, which prey upon the people of the United States for the benefit of themselves and their foreign customers. Those 12 private credit monopolies were deceitfully placed upon this country by bankers who came here from Europe and who repaid us for our hospitality by undermining our American institutions.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iYZM58dulPE

Thomas Jefferson and Andrew Jackson understood "The Monster". But to most Americans today, Federal Reserve is just a name on the dollar bill. They have no idea of what the central bank does to the economy, or to their own economic lives; of how and why it was founded and operates; or of the sound money and banking that could end the statism, inflation, and business cycles that the Fed generates.

Dedicated to Murray N. Rothbard, steeped in American history and Austrian economics, and featuring Ron Paul, Joseph Salerno, Hans Hoppe, and Lew Rockwell, this extraordinary new film is the clearest, most compelling explanation ever offered of the Fed, and why curbing it must be our first priority.

Alan Greenspan is not, we're told, happy about this 42-minute blockbuster. Watch it, and you'll understand why. This is economics and history as they are meant to be: fascinating, informative, and motivating.

quote:

"In the united States we have, in effect, two governments. We have the duly constituted Government. Then we have an independent, uncontrolled and uncoordinated government in the Federal Reserve System, operating the money powers which are reserved to Congress by the Constitution." - Congressman Wright Patman, Chairman of the House Banking & Currency Committee (From a speech on the House floor, 1967)

I am the thought police. Don't run when you hear the knock on the door.

quote:

Originally posted by Krypton I am the thought police. Don't run when you hear the knock on the door.

I've been digging an escape tunnel so don't worry.

It's going to come out at your mom's house

Oops, did I just say that? lol

You know that I'm kidding. Or am I?

G. Edward Griffin says it all right here.

If you give them the power to create money out of nothing they always abuse it.


[[ LINK REMOVED ]]

Re: The Secret Criminal Society of the Federal Reserve (Part II)

quote:

Originally posted by Trancer-X But to most Americans today, Federal Reserve is just a name on the dollar bill. They have no idea of what the central bank does to the economy, or to their own economic lives; of how and why it was founded and operates; or of the sound money and banking that could end the statism, inflation, and business cycles that the Fed generates.

trancer-x and ron paul are two americans that dont understand how the federal reserve works.

quote:

Originally posted by Trancer-X I've been digging an escape tunnel so don't worry. It's going to come out at your mom's house Oops, did I just say that? lol You know that I'm kidding. Or am I?

*Knock Knock*

i also like the way that krypton used to be a slave to the federal reserve conspiracy nonsense, but actually learned something in the debates and decided to close his thread because he realised it was full of lies. but of course, to others, this means he's part of the 'thought police'. it must be rather scary for some people to find others that are willing to change their minds about ideas and concepts when presented with the right evidence/argument.

krypton, i respect the fact you read and actually understood all the valuable information provided by occrider re the federal reserve which freed you from the ignorance. unfortunately, not everyone is as lucky and honest as you.

You guys are such frauds that I don't know how you could even live with yourselves.

quote:

Originally posted by Trancer-X You guys are such frauds that I don't know how you could even live with yourselves.

sounds really funny coming from the biggest liar on this forum. occrider went to great lengths in this thread, as well as the original federal reserve thread started by krypton to explain to one and all how these institutions work.

but since this flies in the face of your pre-conceived notions you just choose to ignore it all and start yet another nonsensical thread full of ron paul's ignorant understanding of economics. because that's how you work: ignore rational explanations and continue to post your ill-conceived tripe because it would be really terrible if something in reality existed without a hidden meaning/understanding to it. nothing is as it seems in trancer land!

you're a very bright boy with absolutely no experience in the real world and no credentials with which to elevate yourself to the throne of ultimate arbiter (which is your attitude on TA).

go and get a fucking economics degree (and stop relying on youtube to explain it all for you) if you want to be taken seriously

My non-nuclear family member works at a credit card company, so I know all about the complex financial system in this country!!! Why should I trust someone who works in the financial sector??

When Benjamin Franklin was Ambassador to the Court of Saint James, he was asked, 'Why is that you Colonists are prospering? Since you are all misfits and outcasts of society, how is it that you are all getting along so well and prospering?' At the time there was 100% employment in the Colonies and in response Ben Franklin replied, 'Because we issue currency according to the needs of the people, we spent our money into circulation, none of it is borrowed!' Shortly thereafter the Rothschild Bank of England promised King George III three-percent of all English Pounds with his picture on them if he would force the American Colonies to use Bank of England Notes! Within a year, there was 30% unemployment and a 'tax' on everything to pay the interest/ usury to the Bank of England! The rest is history leading up to the first Act of the new Congress, the Banking Act of 1792 to issue interest free currency in the Colonies!

Then came the demand from Alexander Hamilton to permit 'private banking', connected to the Bank of England, to co-exist with the United States Treasury Bank ~ so a twenty-year charter was issued that expired in 1812. When it was not renewed, the British attacked, burned & sacked Washington, D.C., and after four years, America agreed to another twenty-year charter that expired in 1836. Andrew Jackson hated the private banks, refused to renew their charter, had several attempts on his life, yet managed to survive. When New England cotton industrialists agitated against slavery to block southern cotton growers from establishing their own cotton industries in Mississippi, the South threatened succession. To block succession, Abraham Lincoln tried to raise an army but the Bank of England wanted 24% interest/usury, and another charter, but Lincoln's Secretary of the Treasury noted that 'Nations are Sovereign, not Banks', so $400 Million in 'U.S. Notes' were printed, interest-free, which later became the 'Lincoln Greenbacks', now called 'Silver Certificates', and these existed as 'interest-free' currency until taken out of circulation by Lyndon Baines Johnson as his first 'executive order' in 1963! John F. Kennedy attempted the same as Lincoln, i.e., print 'U.S. Notes', interest-free, to the tune of $5 Billion in two-dollar bills to 'buy-back' the Federal Reserve Bank from the Bank of England ~ but he too met the same fate as that of Lincoln ~ a hail of bullets and death! And the 'Kennedy U.S. Notes' also expired in the same 'executive order' on the same day in 1963! No more interest-free currency!

http://www.reformpartyusa-ag.org/To...sues_hq_004.htm

quote:

Originally posted by Trancer-X You guys are such frauds that I don't know how you could even live with yourselves.

i'll be able to live with myself the day i make you a prisoner in one of my internment camps here in east Texas.

quote:

Originally posted by Q5echo i'll be able to live with myself the day i make you a prisoner in one of my internment camps here in east Texas.

Yeah, that sounds like something a fascist would say.

You wouldn't happen to be related to John Yoo, would you?

quote:

Originally posted by Trancer-X My uncle was a top level executive at MBNA who got picked up by a Limo every morning for work and yet when I've asked him, he said that he has no clue about the Fed and you think I'm going to listen to Occ when all he did was go to their web page and repeat to us what it said?

that's the dumbest thing ive read from you in a long time. almost as good as your "i have 17,000 myspace friends" argument.

in any case, if youre not going to listen to someone like occrider, then why on earth are you here? just for the soapbox privileges? at least youre honest though- you have no intention of learning anything from anyone here and your only goal is to post long-winded diatribes from other people.

quote:

Originally posted by Trancer-X I'm not worried about an economics degree. I prefer to use my brain for intellectual rather than material pursuits

hey look everyone, its the cop out! "I don't need a degree in economics to understand economics, because i've watched youtube!"

this is why you present nothing but other people's work (other than your typical empty rhetoric about how smart you are and everyone else is sheep) and respond to direct questions with more long-winded posts that nobody ever bothers to read.

quote:

Originally posted by Trancer-X I'm sorry if that's so hard for you to understand, troll boy.

i understand it perfectly. you are incapable of real, academic discourse and the necessity to listen to other people is just a foreign concept for you.

youre too afraid of people calling you out on your BS to actually challenge yourself at any school. the whole reason your "intellectual pursuit" of economics is full of mistakes is because you didn't go to school. if you think that makes you even more intellectual than economists like occrider that attended university, then that's a pretty one-sided position.

we should all save money by getting you to service our cars, perform our surgical operations, invest our money, run our businesses etc because your intellectual pursuit has made you a real jack of all trades thanks to youtube.

FRAUD.

In truth though, if Trancer-X watches misleading youtube videos, he is still probably more qualified to be Vice President than Sarah Palin.

My how high the bar is set in this country.

quote:

Originally posted by Trancer-X Yeah, that sounds like something a fascist would say. You wouldn't happen to be related to John Yoo, would you?

laugh now but eventually i will cornhole on a bunk bed after lights out and make my distant cousin John Yoo video tape it.

Is it just me or do these clowns always attack the messenger rather than the message?

quote:

Originally posted by Trancer-X Is it just me or do these clowns always attack the messenger rather than the message?

is it just me or does henny penny not realise that the message has been thoroughly debunked over, and over and over again and that posting the same drivel repeatedly does not display someone committed to "intellectual pursuits", but rather someone that has a broken record nobody wants to hear.

because, when you DO happen to listen to and attack the message, this is the result:

quote:

Originally posted by Trancer-X My uncle was a top level executive at MBNA who got picked up by a Limo every morning for work and yet when I've asked him, he said that he has no clue about the Fed and you think I'm going to listen to Occ when all he did was go to their web page and repeat to us what it said?

quote:

Originally posted by Q5echo laugh now but eventually i will cornhole on a bunk bed after lights out and make my distant cousin John Yoo video tape it.

Nice mind you have going there, Q.

quote:

Originally posted by Krypton How about Chapter 1, section 6? It talks about the secret meeting of international bankers on Jekyll Island. Specifically, they wanted to create the Federal Reserve so that they could control the issuance of money. The initial goal was to get support from Congress to enact that power for them. And Senator Aldrich was the man to bring all the right people together to get that job done. Unfortunately for them, the constitution gives only Congress the power to issue currency and coin. So why does Congress cede this power, and thus cede checks and balances, to a private bank? Additionally, all this was done in secret! Why the secrecy? My answer is because they knew it was unconstitutional, but did not care. They have never cared. As Napoleon Bonaparte reflected on his relationship with financiers, "The hand that gives is above the hand that takes. Money has no motherland; financiers are without patriotism and without decency: their sole object is gain." I have had the liberty to experience the same greed that all bankers have. That greed is the profit motive. But unlike these powerful men, I have my ethical limits, and I seek not to usurp the constitution with my profit motives. -------------------------------------------------------------- Federal Reserve proposal was unconstitutional from its inception, because the Federal Reserve System was to be a bank of issue. Article 1, Sec. 8, Par. 5 of the Constitution expressly charges Congress with "the power to coin money and regulate the value thereof.". Warburg�s plan would deprive Congress of its sovereignty, and the systems of checks and balances of power set up by Thomas Jefferson in the Constitution would now be destroyed. Administrators of the proposed system would control the nation�s money and credit, and would themselves be approved by the executive department of the government. The judicial department (the Supreme Court, etc.) was already virtually controlled by the executive department through presidential appointment to the bench. Paul Warburg later wrote a massive exposition of his plan, The Federal Reserve System, Its Origin and Growth7 of some 1750 pages, but the name "Jekyll Island" appears nowhere in this text. He does state (Vol. 1, p. 58): "But then the conference closed, after a week of earnest deliberation, the rough draft of what later became the Aldrich Bill had been agreed upon, and a plan had been outlined which provided for a �National Reserve Association,� meaning a central reserve organization with an elastic note issue based on gold and commercial paper." On page 60, Warburg writes, "The results of the conference were entirely confidential. Even the fact there had been a meeting was not permitted to become public." He adds in a footnote, "Though eighteen [sic] years have since gone by, I do not feel free to give a description of this most interesting conference concerning which Senator Aldrich pledged all participants to secrecy." ----------------------------------------------------------

---> http://www.tranceaddict.com/forums/...66&pagenumber=8 <----




Sure ...

On the Georgian resort hideaway of Jekyll Island (which has some excellent golf courses, by the way), there once met a coalition of Wall Street bankers and U.S. senators. This secret 1910 meeting had a sinister purpose, the conspiracy theorists say. The bankers wanted to establish a new central bank under the direct control of New York's financial elite. Such a plan would give the Wall Street bankers near total control of the financial system and allow them to manipulate it for their personal gain.
G. Edward Griffin lays out this conspiratorial version of history in his book The Creature from Jekyll Island. His amateurish take on history is highly suspect, however. Gerry Rough, in a series of well- researched essays on U.S. banking history, reveals many historical inaccuracies, inconsistencies, and even contradictions in Griffin's book and others of its genre. Instead of reproducing Rough's work here, I offer the reader a substantially more accurate view of the events leading up to the creation of the Federal Reserve System in 1913. To get a proper historical perspective, the story of begins just prior to the Civil War...

The National Banking Acts of 1863 & 1864

Prior to the Civil war there were thousands of banks in operation throughout the Union, all of them chartered, that is, licensed by the state governments. Banking regulations were virtually nonexistent. The federal government had no meaningful controls on banking practices, and state regulations were spotty and poorly enforced at best. Economic historians call the era leading up to the Civil War as the 'state banking era' or the 'free banking era.'

The problems with state banking were numerous, but three were conspicuous. First, the nation had no unified currency. State banks issued their own bank notes as currency, a system which at worst invited severe bouts of counterfeiting and at best introduced additional uncertainty in the task of determining the relative value of each bank note. Second, with no mitigating influence on the issuance of bank notes, the money supply and the price level were highly unstable, introducing and perhaps causing additional volatility in the business cycle. This was due in part to the fact that bank note issuance was frequently tied to the market value of the bank's bond portfolio which they were required to have by law. Third, frequent bank runs resulted in substantial depositor losses and severe crises of confidence in the payments system.5

The National Banking Acts of 1863 and 1864 were attempts to assert some degree of federal control over the banking system without the formation of another central bank. The Act had three primary purposes: (1) create a system of national banks, (2) to create a uniform national currency, and (3) to create an active secondary market for Treasury securities to help finance the Civil War (for the Union�s side).5

The first provision of the Acts was to allow for the incorporation of national banks. These banks were essentially the same as state banks, except national banks received their charter from the federal government and not a state government. This arrangement gave the federal government regulatory jurisdiction over the national banks it created, whereas it asserted no control over state-chartered banks. National banks had higher capital requirements and higher reserve requirements than their state bank counterparts. To improve liquidity and safety they were restricted from making real estate loans and could not lend to any single person an amount exceeding ten percent of the bank's capital. The National Banking Acts also created under the Treasury Department the office of Comptroller of the Currency. The duties of the office were to inspect the books of the national banks to insure compliance with the above regulations, to hold Treasury securities deposited there by national banks, and, via the Bureau of Engraving, to design and print all national banknotes.5

The second goal of the National Banking Acts was to create a uniform national currency. Rather than have several hundred, or several thousand, forms of currency circulating in the states, conducting transactions could be greatly simplified if there were a uniform currency. To achieve this all national banks were required to accept at par the bank notes of other national banks. This insured that national bank notes would not suffer from the same discounting problem with which state bank notes were afflicted. In addition, all national bank notes were printed by the Comptroller of the Currency on behalf of the national banks to guarantee standardization in appearance and quality. This reduced the possibility of counterfeiting, an understandable wartime concern.5

The third goal of the Acts was to help finance the Civil War. The volume of notes which a national bank issued was based on the market value of the U.S. Treasury securities the bank held. A national bank was required to keep on deposit with the Comptroller of the Currency a sizable volume of Treasury securities. In exchange the bank received bank notes worth 90 percent, and later 100 percent, of the market value of the deposited bonds. If the bank wished to extend additional loans to generate more profits, then the bank had to increase its holdings of Treasury bonds. This provision had its roots in the Michigan Act, and it was designed to create a more active secondary market for Treasury bonds and thus lower the cost of borrowing for the federal government.5

It was the hope of Secretary of the Treasury Chase that national banks would replace state banks, and that this would create the uniform currency he desired and ease the financing of the Civil War. By 1865 there were 1,500 national banks, about 800 of which had converted from state banking charters. The remainder were new banks. However, this still meant that state bank notes were dominating the currency because most of them were discounted. Accordingly, the public hoarded the national bank notes. To reduced the proliferation of state banking and the notes it generated, Congress imposed a ten percent tax on all outstanding state bank notes. There was no corresponding tax of national bank notes. Many state banks decided to convert to national bank charters because the tax made state banking unprofitable. By 1870 there were 1,638 national banks and only 325 state banks.5

While the tax eventually eliminated the circulation of state bank notes, it did not entirely kill state banking because state banks began to use checking accounts as a substitute for bank notes. Checking accounts became so popular that by 1890 the Comptroller of the Currency estimated that only ten percent of the nation's money supply was in the form of currency. Combined with lower capital and reserve requirements, as well as the ease with which states issued banking charters, state banks again became the dominant banking form by the late 1880�s. Consequently, the improvements to safety that the national banking system offered were mitigated somewhat by the return of state banking.5

There were two major defects remaining in the banking system in the post Civil War era despite the mild success of the National Banking Acts. The first was the inelastic currency problem. The amount of currency which a national bank could have circulating was based on the market value of the Treasury securities it had deposited with the Comptroller of the Currency, not the par value of the bonds. If prices in the Treasury bond market declined substantially, then the national banks had to reduce the amount of currency they had in circulation. This could be done be refusing new loans or, in a more draconian way, by calling-in loans already outstanding. In either case, the effect on the money supply is a restrictive one. Consequently, the size of the money supply was tied more closely to the performance of the bond market rather than needs of the economy.5

Another closely related defect was the liquidity problem. Small rural banks often kept deposits at larger urban banks. The liquidity needs of the rural banks were driven by the liquidity demands of its primary customer, the farmers. In the planting season the was a high demand for currency by farmers so they could make their purchases of farming implements, whereas in harvest season there was an increase in cash deposits as farmers sold their crops. Consequently, the rural banks would take deposits from the urban banks in the spring to meet farmers� withdrawal demands and deposit the additional liquidity in the autumn. Larger urban banks could anticipate this seasonal demand and prepare for it most of the time. However, in 1873, 1884, 1893, and 1907 this reserve pyramid precipitated a financial crisis.5

When national banks experienced a drain on their reserves as rural banks made deposit withdrawals, new reserves had to be acquired in accordance with the federal law. A national bank could do this by selling bonds and stocks, by borrowing from a clearinghouse, or by calling-in a few loans. As long as only a few national banks at a time tried to do this, liquidity was easily supplied to the needy banks. However, an attempt en masse to sell bonds or stocks caused a market crash, which in turn forced national banks to call in loans to comply with Treasury regulations. Many businesses, farmers, or households who had these loans were unable to pay on demand and were forced into bankruptcy. The recessionary vortex became apparent. Frightened by the specter of losing their deposits, in each episode the public stormed any bank rumored, true or not, to be in financial straights. Anyone unable to withdraw their deposits before the bank�s till ran dry lost their savings or later received only pennies on the dollar. Private deposit insurance was scant and unreliable. Federal deposit insurance was non-existent.5

The 1907 Banking Panic

The 1907 crisis, also called the Wall Street Panic, was especially severe. The Panic caused what was at that time the worst economic depression in the country�s history. It appears to have begun with a stock market crash brought about by a combination of a modest speculative bubble, the liquidity problem, and reserve pyramiding. Centered on New York City, the scale of the crisis reached a proportion so great that banks across the country nearly suspended all withdrawals -- a kind of self-imposed bank holiday. Several long-standing New York banks fell. The unemployment rate reached 20 percent at the peak of the crisis. Millions lost their deposits as thousands of banks collapsed. The crisis was terminated when J.P. Morgan, a man of sometimes suspicious business tactics and phenomenal wealth, personally made temporary loans to key New York banks and other financial institutions to help them weather the storm. He also made an appeal to the clergy of New York to employ their Sunday sermons to calm the public�s fears.

Morgan�s emergency injection of liquidity into the banking system undoubtedly prevented an already bad situation from getting still worse. Although private clearinghouses were able to supply adequate temporary liquidity for their members, only a small portion of banks were members of such organizations. What would happen if there were no J.P. Morgan around during the next financial crisis? Just how bad could things really get? There began to emerge both on Wall Street and in Washington a consensus for a kind of institutionalized J.P. Morgan, that is, a public institution that could provide emergency liquidity to the banking system to prevent such panics from starting. The final result of the Panic of 1907 would be the Federal Reserve Act of 1913.

The Federal Reserve Act of 1913

Following the near catastrophic financial disaster of 1907, the movement for banking reform picked up steam among Wall Street bankers, Republicans, and eastern Democrats. However, much of the country was still distrustful of bankers and of banking in general, especially after 1907. After two decades of minority status, Democrats regained control of Congress in 1910 and were able to block several Republican attempts at reform, even though they recognized the need for some kind of currency and banking changes. In 1912 Woodrow Wilson won the Democratic party�s nomination for President, and in his populist-friendly acceptance speech he warned against the "money trusts," and advised that "a concentration of the control of credit ... may at any time become infinitely dangerous to free enterprise."3

Also in 1910, Senator Nelson Aldrich, Frank Vanderlip of National City (today know as Citibank), Henry Davison of Morgan Bank, and Paul Warburg of the Kuhn, Loeb Investment House met secretly at Jeckyll Island, a resort island off the coast of Georgia, to discuss and formulate banking reform, including plans for a form of central banking. The meeting was held in secret because the participants knew that any plan they generated would be rejected automatically in the House of Representatives if it were associated with Wall Street. Because it was secret and because it involved Wall Street, the Jekyll Island affair has always been a favorite source of conspiracy theories. However, the movement toward significant banking and monetary reform was well-known.3 It is hardly surprising that given the real possibility of substantial reform, the banking industry would want some sort of input into the nature of the reforms. The Aldrich Plan which the secret meeting produced was even defeated in the House, so even if the Jekyll Island affair was a genuine conspiracy, it clearly failed.

The Aldrich Plan called for a system of fifteen regional central banks, called National Reserve Associations, whose actions would be coordinated by a national board of commercial bankers. The Reserve Association would make emergency loans to member banks, create money to provide an elastic currency that could be exchanged equally for demand deposits, and would act as a fiscal agent for the federal government. Although it was defeated, the Aldrich Plan served as an outline for the bill that eventually was adopted. 5

The problem with the Aldrich Plan was that the regional banks would be controlled individually and nationally by bankers, a prospect that did not sit well with the populist Democratic party or with Wilson. As the debate began to take shape in the spring of 1913, Congressman Arsene Pujo provided good evidence that the nation�s credit markets were under the tight control of a handful of banks � the "money trusts" against which Wilson warned.1 Wilson and the Democrats wanted a reform measure which would decentralize control away from the money trusts.

The legislation that eventually emerged was the Federal Reserve Act, also known at the time as the Currency Bill, or the Owen-Glass Act. The bill called for a system of eight to twelve mostly autonomous regional Reserve Banks that would be owned by the banks in their region and whose actions would be coordinated by a Federal Reserve Board appointed by the President. The Board�s members originally included the Secretary of the Treasury, the Comptroller of the Currency, and other officials appointed by the President to represent public interests. The proposed Federal Reserve System would therefore be privately owned, but publicly controlled. Wilson signed the bill on December 23, 1913 and the Federal Reserve System was born.6

Conspiracy theorists have long viewed the Federal Reserve Act as a means of giving control of the banking system to the money trusts, when in reality the intent and effect was to wrestle control away from them. History clearly demonstrates that in the decades prior to the Federal Reserve Act the decisions of a few large New York banks had, at times, enormous repercussions for banks throughout the country and the economy in general. Following the return to central banking, at least some measure of control was removed from them and placed with the Federal Reserve.

References:

1. Davidson, James West, Mark A. Lytle, et al, (1998), Nation of Nations, New York: McGraw-Hill.

2. Galbraith, John K. (1995), Money: Whence it Came, Where it Went, Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

3. Greider, William (1987), Secrets of the Temple, New York: Simon & Schuster.

4. Griffin, G. Edward (1995), The Creature from Jekyll Island, Appleton: American Opinion Publishing, Inc.

5. Kidwell, David S. and Richard Peterson (1997), Financial Institutions, Markets, and Money, 6th edition, Fort Worth: Dryden Press.

6. "Wilson Signs the Currency Bill," New York Times, pages 1-2, December 24, 1913.

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN i also like the way that krypton used to be a slave to the federal reserve conspiracy nonsense, but actually learned something in the debates and decided to close his thread because he realised it was full of lies. but of course, to others, this means he's part of the 'thought police'. it must be rather scary for some people to find others that are willing to change their minds about ideas and concepts when presented with the right evidence/argument. krypton, i respect the fact you read and actually understood all the valuable information provided by occrider re the federal reserve which freed you from the ignorance. unfortunately, not everyone is as lucky and honest as you.

No one can say I'm close-minded. I've gone from loyal Republican conservative, to conspiracy-theorist libertarian, to left-leaning Democrat...

I'de rather call myself a left-leaning libertarian who currently agrees much more with the Democrats than Republicans.



I had no choice but to close it. There was no longer any debate. It became Trancer's conspiracy thread...look at the last page...do you see ANY debate going on?

I think the more dangerous apparatus operating within our government is the military-industrial complex which is very strong here. Billions go out to "defense contractors" every year, and their profits rely on a state of continual war and making sure we always have an enemy. I call it the state within a state, the National Security Government, which operates in secret, and is active on a massive global scale. Since the 1950's, how many countries have had their governments taken down or directly threatened by the CIA? Iran, Nicaragua, Cuba (8 assassination attempts on Castro & the Bay of Pigs), Brazil, Chile, Egypt, Guatemala...There have been tens of thousands of covert operations over the decades, operations which we the people, will never know about, but yet, they are carried out in our name, in the name of our national security. I challenge any of you authoritarian followers to tell me Iran's nationalization of their oil sector threatened our national security. Or that Guatemala's attempted nationalization of its resources was also a threat to our national security...I'm all ears...

and then you followed that with this, among other things:

Rep. Charles Lindbergh Sr., the most vocal opponent of the bill, who on the day before the Federal Reserve Act was passed told Congress:

"This is the Aldrich bill in disguise�The worst legislative crime of the ages is perpetrated by this banking bill�The banks have been granted the special privilege of distributing the money, and they charge as much as they wish�This is the strangest, most dangerous advantage ever placed in the hands of a special privilege class by any Government that ever existed. The system is private...There should be no legal tender other than that issued by the government�The People are the Government. Therefore the Government should, as the Constitution provides, regulate the value of money." (Congressional Record, 12/22/1913)

http://www.tranceaddict.com/forums/...#postid=8239112


So why the backpedaling all of a sudden? Flip-flop much?

and here's a little of what I personally found:

quote:

Originally posted by Krypton No one can say I'm close-minded. I've gone from loyal Republican conservative, to conspiracy-theorist libertarian, to left-leaning Democrat... I'de rather call myself a left-leaning libertarian who currently agrees much more with the Democrats than Republicans. I had no choice but to close it. There was no longer any debate. It became Trancer's conspiracy thread...look at the last page...do you see ANY debate going on?

There was a good debate between Ron Paul and a Fed Governor which further emphasized the argument for doing away with our Fiat currency but I guess you didn't want people to see that he was opposed to their Fabian Socialist Keynesian ways all the way back in 1983.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.