|
| quote: | Originally posted by culorut
How the Fed Harms the Public Interest |
Oh great, you never fail to use other people's work as your argument. In academia, we call it plagiarism. I'll answer it nonetheless...
Point 1: Through the invisible tax of inflation that results from the dilution of purchasing power caused by newly created money entering the system reducing the value of dollars already there.
Well, what's the alternative? Deflation? You want prices to fall? You want stocks, homes, business values, and assets of all kinds to fall in value? Inflation is an indication of healthy buying in an economy. Printing currency is necessary because as goods and services increase, so to does the money supply, lest they want to deflate everything. There is no such thing as an "inflation tax". It's a great scare tactic. The reality is, prices go up, but so too does wages, and investments, which make up for inflation.
Point 1.5: Furthermore, since March, 2006, the Fed stopped publishing the M-3 aggregate of the total amount of dollars in circulation. With that transparency gone, big buyers of US Treasuries now have to calculate the value of the dollar based on speculation and uncertainty rather than hard data - not a way to inspire trust in the financial markets that function best in an atmosphere of openness and clarity.
The M-3 aggregate was, "M2 + all other CDs (large time deposits, institutional money market mutual fund balances), deposits of eurodollars and repurchase agreements." The reason they stopped publishing the M-3 aggregate is because it didn't really tell you anything substantially important, that the M-2 aggregate did not already do. I'm guessing you didn't even bother to study up on what the M-aggregates even are...
Point 2: The public also loses because the banking cartel is able to practice usury - from it's power over a flexible currency to artificially move rates up or down to any level it chooses which many small lenders in a truly free and open market can't do.
Wrong. The Federal Reserve board of governors (who are nominated by the President) decide the interest rates, by lowering or raising the Federal Funds Rate. This is NOT DICTATED BY THE BANKS. It is dictated by the market, in something called the Open Market Operations. I'm not expecting you to have researched any of this... ...but you need to first learn the basic economics of our financial system, before you go about speaking from ignorance about how evil it all is...
Point 3: Through the taxes, we, the public, must pay to cover the interest on the huge national debt (now over $8.4 trillion) accumulated from the money the Fed printed and loaned to the government. As mentioned earlier, that now totals an annualized amount exceeding two-thirds of a trillion dollars and increasing daily. It's made the bankers rich, ordinary people poorer, and the public none the wiser it's been fleeced big time.
Wrong again. All interest paid to the Federal Reserve is REBATED, REFUNDED, RETURNED, GIVEN BACK, ETC ETC BACK TO THE US TREASURY. HOW MANY TIMES MUST I REPEAT THIS BEFORE IT'LL SINK INTO YOUR BRAIN???
Point 4: Compounding the above abuse, the cartel is able to get the public to bail out the system with more of its tax dollars. It happens whenever any of the too-big-to-fail banks need financial help to survive. The same is true for big corporations like Chrysler or Lockheed, large investment firms or hedge funds like Long-Term Capital Management or even countries like Mexico. It's also true when a single bank goes out of business and depositors must be compensated or more seriously in the wake of a systemic financial meltdown like the one that wiped out many savings and loan banks in the 1980s. Whether it's a single bank or many dozens at a time, public tax dollars are used to save the system or just pick up the tab to repay depositors insured against losses through government insurance protection up to a stipulated amount per account.
Corporate bail outs are seriously ridiculous. We reward executives for running their own companies into ground, privatizing profits, socializing losses, can't disagree here...
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Seeing as you just lumped together 3 persuasive essays together, I'm only going to respond to the first one. Additionally, since you failed to come up with your own arguments, I'm not expecting you to post any reliable response. Why? Because you plagarize other people's work. Whoever wrote those essays can not come here to the PDD, and argue with us. It's you who must argue, and it's you, who refuses to argue. So what's next? You going to insult my intelligence again???
___________________
Last edited by Krypton on Oct-16-2008 at 01:50
|
