Originally posted by culorut
Don't bother ********, they are just going to point to links on the FED's website and claim they are honest because they only "report" that they own 1.5 in T-Bonds.
They do not even know how much debt the USA is really in, never mind the fact that private bankers own and control the FED through member bank shares.
You'r trying to quote the treasury. So the government or the Fed can't be trusted, but the Treasury can? You are full of contradictions, half-truths, and misconceptions, it really is sad...
culorut
quote:
Originally posted by jerZ07002
it seems like the money supply is an amorphous amount. at first, you said 50, i believe, now it's 115 trillion. noone can answer the question when it keeps changing.
115 Trillion is the amount of total monetary supply which the USA holds in the worlds total.
Half of the USA's monetary total the FED accounts for. Equal to roughly 50 Trillion.
The total monetary supply was roughly around 90 Trillion for the USA before the last few bail outs which upped it to the estimated 115 Trillion (this info is splattered all over the internet and just about everywhere else you look), it is that hard to use in google or what?
culorut
quote:
Originally posted by Krypton
You'r trying to quote the treasury. So the government or the Fed can't be trusted, but the Treasury can? You are full of contradictions, half-truths, and misconceptions, it really is sad...
And if I use another source then you will say the same thing about that one. How about you cannot use the FED's or the Treasuary's website for your case either, what then?
You will be forced to actually do some math instead of pointing to some figures which you did not understand in the first place.... that's what.
You make absolutely no sense and still have not proved anything incorrect. It was you and your troll friends who quoted the figure of 1.5 Trillion in bonds that you were cheer leading all about a few pages back and now that I am putting you on the spot you cannot answer me because the numbers do not add up in regards to the total monetary supply which is available.
Congrats dik head, you won the retarded award again.
jerZ07002
quote:
Originally posted by culorut
115 Trillion is the amount of total monetary supply which the USA holds in the worlds total.
Half of the USA's monetary total the FED accounts for. Equal to roughly 50 Trillion.
The total monetary supply was roughly around 90 Trillion for the USA before the last few bail outs which upped it to the estimated 115 Trillion (this info is splattered all over the internet and just about everywhere else you look), it is that hard to use in google or what?
Estimates of money supply using the M3 definitions only amount to about 14-15 trillion in money supply.
Where exactly are you finding you this data. perhaps you could provide a direct link.
Good source, for once I have to applaud you.
What happens if you multiply that figure by lets say 10 times?(fractional banking)
jerZ07002
quote:
Originally posted by culorut
Good source, for once I have to applaud you.
since the M1, M2, and M3 (when it was in use) numbers match those issued by the fed, I assume his data is accurate within an acceptable margin of error. the dude also has an MBA from Dartmouth Tuck, so he probably knows what he's doing.
quote:
Originally posted by culorut
What happens if you multiply that figure by lets say 10 times?(fractional banking)
Let's take a look at M1, M2, and M3 definitions:
quote:
M1: Ml includes funds that are readily accessible for spending. M1 consists of: (1) currency outside the U.S. Treasury, Federal Reserve Banks, and the vaults of depository institutions; (2) traveler's checks of nonbank issuers; (3) demand deposits; and (4) other checkable deposits (OCDs), which consist primarily of negotiable order of withdrawal (NOW) accounts at depository institutions and credit union share draft accounts.
M2: Equals M1 + savings deposits, time deposits less than $100,000 and money market deposit accounts for individuals. M2 represents money and "close substitutes" for money. M2 is a broader classification of money than M1. Economists use M2 when looking to quantify the amount of money in circulation and trying to explain different economic monetary conditions. M2 is a key economic indicator used to forecast inflation.
M3: Equals M2 + large time deposits, institutional money-market funds, short-term repurchase agreements, along with other larger liquid assets.
As the definition from your favorite source indicates, M1 captures currencies and other highly liquid forms of money (checking accounts), and M2 captures savings and time deposits.
If a bank receives 100K from a customer who deposits it in a savings account, that 100K will fall under the M2 definition of money supply. Now, if the bank lends 90K (assuming a 10% reserve requirement) to a customer who uses the loan proceeds to purchase a house, the 90K paid to the seller will either be considered in the computation of money supply in M1 if it is held in a checking account of the seller, or M2 if the money is held by the customer in a savings account. Thus, taking into account only the one lending transaction, the 100K initial deposit is counted in M2 definition twice, for a total of 190K in money supply. When that 100K is fully lent by the banking system, to the maximum allowed by the reserve requirement (i.e., 100 -> 90 -> 81 -> 72.9 -> 65.6 ->>>>> 1000), since the lent money will eventually end up in a savings or checking account (etc...) of someone or as currency held by someone, the consequences of the multiplier effect (or as you call it, fractional banking) is significantly captured in the calculation of money supply under the M2 defintion, and fully captured under the M3 definition. So, if we assume the 15 trillion number is correct, there is no need to multiply it by 10 because that factor is already considered in the calculation.
Krypton
quote:
Originally posted by culorut
And if I use another source then you will say the same thing about that one. How about you cannot use the FED's or the Treasuary's website for your case either, what then?
You will be forced to actually do some math instead of pointing to some figures which you did not understand in the first place.... that's what.
Why are you using a source that you yourself say carried out 9/11.
Math? What do you know about math?:stongue:
quote:
You make absolutely no sense and still have not proved anything incorrect. It was you and your troll friends who quoted the figure of 1.5 Trillion in bonds that you were cheer leading all about a few pages back and now that I am putting you on the spot you cannot answer me because the numbers do not add up in regards to the total monetary supply which is available.
We make no sense? LOL. To think you have the nerve to talk to us about making sense...:rolleyes:
DOOMBOT
Interpret this as you may. I just believe that if Bernanke is worried about the reactions people may have after auditing the Fed, they may not like what they find. I understand that he is following policy and procedure of the Federal Reserve but this does not mean that what they are doing is for the good of the country. All I can say is that I hope this gets passed.
Krypton
quote:
Originally posted by DOOMBOT
Interpret this as you may. I just believe that if Bernanke is worried about the reactions people may have after auditing the Fed, they may not like what they find. I understand that he is following policy and procedure of the Federal Reserve but this does not mean that what they are doing is for the good of the country. All I can say is that I hope this gets passed.
Very good answer. Bernanke knows what he's doing.
culorut
quote:
Originally posted by jerZ07002
since the M1, M2, and M3 (when it was in use) numbers match those issued by the fed, I assume his data is accurate within an acceptable margin of error. the dude also has an MBA from Dartmouth Tuck, so he probably knows what he's doing.
Let's take a look at M1, M2, and M3 definitions:
As the definition from your favorite source indicates, M1 captures currencies and other highly liquid forms of money (checking accounts), and M2 captures savings and time deposits.
If a bank receives 100K from a customer who deposits it in a savings account, that 100K will fall under the M2 definition of money supply. Now, if the bank lends 90K (assuming a 10% reserve requirement) to a customer who uses the loan proceeds to purchase a house, the 90K paid to the seller will either be considered in the computation of money supply in M1 if it is held in a checking account of the seller, or M2 if the money is held by the customer in a savings account. Thus, taking into account only the one lending transaction, the 100K initial deposit is counted in M2 definition twice, for a total of 190K in money supply. When that 100K is fully lent by the banking system, to the maximum allowed by the reserve requirement (i.e., 100 -> 90 -> 81 -> 72.9 -> 65.6 ->>>>> 1000), since the lent money will eventually end up in a savings or checking account (etc...) of someone or as currency held by someone, the consequences of the multiplier effect (or as you call it, fractional banking) is significantly captured in the calculation of money supply under the M2 defintion, and fully captured under the M3 definition. So, if we assume the 15 trillion number is correct, there is no need to multiply it by 10 because that factor is already considered in the calculation.
Maybe it's just me but I swear I could have posted this information 40 fuking pages ago.
And for the last time 15 Trillion is not the actual figure.
Read the whole fuking web page for once, not just what ever fits with the FED's numbers and the distorted view of most people.
(1) Fiscal year ended September 30th. (2) Revised to include gross federal debt, not just "public" debt. While the non-public debt is debt the government owes to itself for Social Security, etc., the obligations there are counted as "funded" and as such are part of total government obligations. (3) On a consistent reporting basis, net of one-time changes in actuarial assumptions and accounting, SGS still estimates that the GAAP-based deficit for 2007 topped $4 trillion, with negative net worth of $57.1 trillion and total obligations of $59.8. So as to maintain consistency with the official GAAP statements, the "official" numbers are shown in the table for 2007. (4) SGS estimates $3.4 trillion, excluding one-time unfunded setup costs of the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act of 2003 (enacted December 2003). Again, in order to maintain consistency with the official GAAP statements, the "official" numbers are shown in the table for 2004. Link to the 2008 statements: http://www.fms.treas.gov/fr/08frusg/08frusg.pdf
Please click on the link and read the chart also.....yeah that's 60 Trillion dollars of debt and another 65 Trillion dollars of debt. Debt which has to be paid back with interest.
DEBT IS ING MONEY!!!!!!!!!!
Guess who created half of that air credit/FED money and who's paying interest on it? You.
If there is only 15 Trillion dollars in the economy please explain why the revenues for the top largest private companies in the US added up to 1.8 Trillion last year alone by themselves. They would have been able to pay off the debt for the US in a few short years by now.
There is way more money then you think there is out there. You could have easily seen this by looking at the figures on the same website (which I linked to first) spouting your claims to be true.
culorut
quote:
Originally posted by Krypton
Why are you using a source that you yourself say carried out 9/11.
Math? What do you know about math?:stongue:
We make no sense? LOL. To think you have the nerve to talk to us about making sense...:rolleyes:
^^^^
Look the king of all fuking stupid people is back again.
Can you do any calculations on your own or are you just going to cheer lead more for the side which is currently losing this discussion?
Where is all the interest of the money (50 Trillion) which is held in DEBT by the US and the American people (taxpayers) have to pay back is?
The sad part is at this point the money and interest being made is real and exists but you are too fuking stupid to admit it.
:stongue: :stongue: :stongue: :stongue: :stongue:
culorut
quote:
Originally posted by Krypton
Very good answer. Bernanke knows what he's doing.
He knows how to make them money and cover up their huge profits which are not returned to the US, that's why he is there.
Make no mistake about it. If you cannot see this you are fuking retarded but then again we already know you are that's for sure.
