Rates may have not yet bottomed??

[Longsnowsm]

The other thing that is different between WWII and now is that they had room on the credit cards to fund that war machine. Today we have blown it on garbage and don't have room on the credit cards to fund something like this on a global scale. We don't have anything to show for the money we spent, no manufacturing, no capital, no real source of wealth to draw on. This is going to be ugly with a capital UGLY.

I agree, I think they will try to push us into WWIII as soon as they see the funny money not working. That is why I alluded to the millions if not billions that will die due to this giant fraud unless we put the brakes on it now and let the criminals go broke... You know they have this setup as the fall back if the "public works" programs don't produce the miracle recovery they anticipate. Just like FDR this too will fall on it's face and they will be forced to extreme measures. The problems are too massive to be overcome with the kind of money they are trying to throw at it. At the current rate of spending for stimulus we will be at the same level of GDP to debt ratio we had during WWII very quickly, so where they will get the money to fight this global war is going to be interesting.

I am all for a gold standard. Money supply directly linked to the gold we have on hand. No gold leasing, no more funny money contract games with gold that has been used to manipulate the gold markets. What gold you have on hand is what you can put in circulation. Until we get back to sound money and sane fiscal policy we are all just standing around listening to the band play on the deck of the Titanic. I think if we can get the Federal Reserve audited and when the truth gets out of the fraud on a global scale we might just get the political will to run this band of banker thieves out of town... I dare to hope and dream!


Longsnowsm

[GMAN]

Prior to WWII we were in an isolationist mode. FDR wanted to get us into the war, but the people felt that it wasn't our business...at least until the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor. FDR did get us involved indirectly prior to our formal declaration of war with Germany when he came up with a "lend lease" program. Basically, he loaned or leased Great Britain tanks and other hardware they needed to fight the war. It was a way to help without having our troops directly involved. We didn't have much money or debt prior to the war beginning. In fact, I believe we actually had a balanced budget prior to the war. The war was pretty much financed with "War Bonds." Many of those who purchased them were individuals. We were still trying to come out of the Depression. I believe the unemployment rate was somewhere around 20-25% just before the war. This is from memory, but I think those numbers are close. When we first got into the war, we had thousands of men who enlisted to fight. That left mostly women and older men to build the war machines. We had massive rationing of simple things like sugar, shoes and gas. We sacrificed because of a single purpose....to defeat Japan, Germany and Italy.

[Dejanh]

I think that it it too late for us to move to the gold standard as the golds supply could not meet our demand.Chinese recently announced that they control over 33.89 million ounces of gold for monetary purposes. That’s an increase of 75% in Chinese gold holdings over the past six years. whenever IMF sells gold China buys it. we are behind the curve in many ways i think.


After the alcohol wears off, we will have a hell of hangover..


http://www.cnbc.com/id/33004753 am amazed to see our media actualy report on this..WOW..

"The U.S. has to quit spending, cut back, start saving, and scale backward," Robertson said. "Until that happens, I don't think we're anywhere near out of the woods.”..........

[GMAN]

That is an interesting link, Dejanh. I don't understand why these people we have elected to represent us have put this country in such jeopardy. This is not something that happened over night, but you cannot continue to pass the buck when it comes to solving this problem. We need to cut government spending and start cutting payroll at all levels of government. We only need about 1/3 of the government we actually have in place. Rather than confronting the problem and trying to solve it, these people spend more money than ever. We also need to cut taxes and encourage more businesses to start up and expand. Greater fiscal responsibility and lower taxes would go a long way to encourage businesses to locate here.

[Longsnowsm]

I am not sure I buy the idea that there isn't enough gold to go around, it just means that the price of gold goes up dramatically and is no longer manipulated by the Federal Reserve. They have now been caught manipulating the price of gold with swaps:

Federal Reserve Admits Hiding Gold Swap Arrangements, GATA Says - Yahoo! Finance

They have been accused of this for decades now, but apparently now they have admitted it. A couple of weeks ago we caught them secretly buying treasuries with money they created out of thin air. Again something they said they wouldn't do. They have been asked where 2.2 trillion dollars went in bailout money and have told congress they don't have to tell us where the money went. So the plot thickens.

Strangely the weaker dollar could help propel us back to a more competitive place in the global market place. If the dollar is weaker it becomes cheaper to do business here and cheaper to manufacture here. The downside is that we become a much poorer nation than we are today for that to happen, and it means that these other countries who are playing chicken by racing to the bottom would have to wise up to the insanity and stop allowing these bankers to bankrupt their countries. So I guess we will see how this plays out.

I think it will help to reduce taxes, but it will take a lot more than that. I also think we need to wise up to the role that the international criminals have in the way this is playing out. Between the Wall Street crowd and the bankers they own this country(and planet). Unless someone puts these guys on a short leash we are not going to get out of this mess.

Our politicians are not going to pretend to act on our behalf until they think they have a reason to listen to us. Our population has become addicted to government handouts and the overbearing role it has taken in our society. Sorta like a crack head who constantly needs a fix. The government has created generations of "dependents". Unless we can wake people up and realize the dangers of the "matrix" they are in they will continue in denial.

Longsnowsm

[GMAN]

I seem to recall JFK wanting to get rid of the Federal Reserve when he was president. We were a stronger country and our money was more stable when we used gold as the standard. We could not just print money when we need it. I think every country needs to have a means to back up their currency. I think the only ones who benefit from not having gold reserves are the Federal Reserve banks. Most people don't realize that the Federal Reserve is not owned by the government. It is owned by a group of banks, mostly European. I think it makes it easy for them to manipulate the world economy. I suppose you could build a good conspiracy theory around those thoughts.

[no_worries]

I won't get into the rest (except for the part about last weeks 5-year being a failure; a 2.4 bid-to-cover is hardly a bust in the world of Treasury auctions) but about this gold standard...why does pegging your currency to something that has dubious intrinsic value, is easily manipulated, and is subject to volatile supply and demand pressures seem like a good idea?

[Rev.Vassago]

Originally Posted by GMAN

Most people don't realize that the Federal Reserve is not owned by the government. It is owned by a group of banks, mostly European.

Completely untrue.

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 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 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 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, traded, or pledged as security for a loan; dividends are, by law, 6 percent per year.

FRB: FAQs: Federal Reserve System

I suppose you could build a good conspiracy theory around those thoughts.

Indeed. False information makes the best conspiracy theories.

[Rev.Vassago]

Originally Posted by no_worries

why does pegging your currency to something that has dubious intrinsic value, is easily manipulated, and is subject to volatile supply and demand pressures seem like a good idea?

Because people see the value of gold constantly rising, and they buy into the hype that it will continue to do so indefinitely.

At current prices, there isn't enough gold to support a gold standard, which means that to go back to such a standard, the price of gold would have to increase exponentially. It would eliminate effective monetary policy to deal with fluctuations in the economy during a recession. Many blame the gold standard for prolonging the Great Depression.

[leaseman]

As a truck financing company we haven't seen any change in the incomes of our clients. They all have same thing to say about income as they did several months ago. We are seeing a slight increase in submissions however.

[GMAN]

Originally Posted by Rev.Vassago

Completely untrue.

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 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 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 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, traded, or pledged as security for a loan; dividends are, by law, 6 percent per year.

FRB: FAQs: Federal Reserve System



Indeed. False information makes the best conspiracy theories.

Federal Reserve Act

Section 5. Stock Issues; Increase and Decrease of Capital

1. Amount of Shares; Increase and Decrease of Capital; Surrender and Cancellation of Stock

The capital stock of each Federal reserve bank shall be divided into shares of $100 each. The outstanding capital stock shall be increased from time to time as member banks increase their capital stock and surplus or as additional banks become members, and may be decreased as member banks reduce their capital stock or surplus or cease to be members. Shares of the capital stock of Federal reserve banks owned by member banks shall not be transferred or hypothecated. When a member bank increases its capital stock or surplus, it shall thereupon subscribe for an additional amount of capital stock of the Federal reserve bank of its district equal to 6 per centum of the said increase, one-half of said subscription to be paid in the manner hereinbefore provided for original subscription, and one-half subject to call of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System. A bank applying for stock in a Federal reserve bank at any time after the organization thereof must subscribe for an amount of the capital stock of the Federal reserve bank equal to 6 per centum of the paid-up capital stock and surplus of said applicant bank, paying therefor its par value plus one-half of 1 per centum a month from the period of the last dividend. When a member bank reduces its capital stock or surplus it shall surrender a proportionate amount of its holdings in the capital stock of said Federal Reserve bank. Any member bank which holds capital stock of a Federal Reserve bank in excess of the amount required on the basis of 6 per centum of its paid-up capital stock and surplus shall surrender such excess stock. When a member bank voluntarily liquidates it shall surrender all of its holdings of the capital stock of said Federal Reserve bank and be released from its stock subscription not previously called. In any such case the shares surrendered shall be canceled and the member bank shall receive in payment therefor, under regulations to be prescribed by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, a sum equal to its cash-paid subscriptions on the shares surrendered and one-half of 1 per centum a month from the period of the last dividend, not to exceed the book value thereof, less any liability of such member bank to the Federal Reserve bank. [12 USC 287. As amended by act of Aug. 23, 1935 (49 Stat. 713).]





It sounds to me as though the Federal Reserve is owned by private banks.

[GMAN]

Originally Posted by Longsnowsm

I am not sure I buy the idea that there isn't enough gold to go around, it just means that the price of gold goes up dramatically and is no longer manipulated by the Federal Reserve. They have now been caught manipulating the price of gold with swaps:

Federal Reserve Admits Hiding Gold Swap Arrangements, GATA Says - Yahoo! Finance

They have been accused of this for decades now, but apparently now they have admitted it. A couple of weeks ago we caught them secretly buying treasuries with money they created out of thin air. Again something they said they wouldn't do. They have been asked where 2.2 trillion dollars went in bailout money and have told congress they don't have to tell us where the money went. So the plot thickens.

These people have become so arrogant that they think that they are above the law. It seems strange to me that this so called bank failure coincided with the dramatic 50% (approx) drop in oil futures prices. Gee, I wonder if there could be a connection?!


Strangely the weaker dollar could help propel us back to a more competitive place in the global market place.

I think this was the reason Nixon took us off the gold standard. The dollar was very strong at that time. He felt that it would be in our best interest to devalue our currency in order to be more competitive on the global marketplace. In fact, I believe Nixon voluntarily devalued our currency to make it weaker and more competitive.

I think it will help to reduce taxes, but it will take a lot more than that. I also think we need to wise up to the role that the international criminals have in the way this is playing out. Between the Wall Street crowd and the bankers they own this country(and planet). Unless someone puts these guys on a short leash we are not going to get out of this mess.

I am not sure they can put them on a short leash at this time.


Our politicians are not going to pretend to act on our behalf until they think they have a reason to listen to us. Our population has become addicted to government handouts and the overbearing role it has taken in our society. Sorta like a crack head who constantly needs a fix. The government has created generations of "dependents". Unless we can wake people up and realize the dangers of the "matrix" they are in they will continue in denial.

Longsnowsm

These handouts are there for big businesses as well as individuals. Both have become addicted. A small business can't always find assistance unless they are a member of a minority group. I remember several years ago I attended an SBA seminar. There were many programs for women and minorities, but practically nothing for white men. It seemed strange that they would discriminate so blatantly.

[Rev.Vassago]

Originally Posted by GMAN

It sounds to me as though the Federal Reserve is owned by private banks.

I know my post had lots of big words in it, but if you look at the last few sentences, it covers this. I'll put it in bigger letters so maybe you'll see it:

The twelve regional Federal Reserve Banks, which were established by 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, traded, or pledged as security for a loan; dividends are, by law, 6 percent per year.

[GMAN]

The Federal Reserve is owned by banks. It is in your post. It is also in what I posted. I suppose you missed that. The fact that they pay a guaranteed percentage has nothing to do with ownership. It is set up similar to those owning preferred stock in a corporation. It is a pretty good scam they have set up for themselves. They are guaranteed a 6% profit or dividend no matter what. I suppose you can pick and choose what you want to believe. What you originally posted showed that they were owned by private banks. You need to read your own post before trying to dispute what I or anyone else says. If you need help in reading it again, I will be glad to pull that part out for you.

[Rev.Vassago]

Originally Posted by GMAN

I suppose you can pick and choose what you want to believe.

You seem to be doing a good job of it, so yes. You can. But I can see how a sentence like "The Federal Reserve System is not "owned" by anyone and is not a private, profit-making institution" can be misconstrued into believing that they are owned by someone.

You see what you want to see. I've said it before, and I'll continue to do so. Conspiracy theories shall abound.

[GMAN]

I don't recall mentioning conspiracy theories. I think that you are confused. It says that the Federal Reserve Banks are owned by member banks. It also states that they are guaranteed a 6% return by law. According to the article, banks must purchase stock in order to be a member of the Federal Reserve. Since they operate as non profit they probably don't pay income taxes. It plainly states that they have a guaranteed dividend of 6%. There are many major corporations who would love to have a guaranteed 6% dividend, especially when it is tax free.

[Rev.Vassago]

Originally Posted by GMAN

I don't recall mentioning conspiracy theories.

Originally Posted by GMAN

I suppose you could build a good conspiracy theory around those thoughts.

Rates may have not yet bottomed??

[Longsnowsm]

Actually Rev you would be wrong. I believe there is info out there that talks about the worlds largest banks are the actual share holders of the Federal Reserve shares. They are not available to the public and they are in fact a private bank. No conspiracy, go get your information from someone besides the Fed. The Fed is no more Federal than Fedex. Time to do some digging... It is well documented. I would suggest you go watch "The Money Masters" on YouTube, you might just be surprised at how this game is played.

On the gold standard I think if we have to explain gold standard vs fiat paper that is printed on demand and destroys value and wealth then it is a waste of time talking about it. It is clear you believe and trust the crooks to lead us out of this. So let's check back in here in about 5 years and lets see who is right and who's trust is misplaced.

You guys we have the fox watching the chicken coop, and giving us the reports everything is fine... Go figure.

Longsnowsm

[Longsnowsm]

I am glad someone touched the topic of the great depression... Blaming the gold standard for shakey lending practices and out of control credit/lending during those days is some sort of joke right? Credit lines, margin accounts, and out of control lending created the bubble that caused the crash and depression. The bankers try to state that the gold standard prolonged this? Well how about creating money out of thin air and then somehow expecting that money to materialize when there wasn't enough real money in circulation to even begin to cover the credit and debt markets cash that had been created.

This is not an issue with the gold standard, but in fact and issue with the people who are suppose to regulate the banks and ensure that they have both the reserves in "real money" and to ensure that the money supply is adequate to respond to the needs of the economy. IE it was the job of the FED. This was a banker created fiasco, and yet we still have learned nothing and still listen to the guys who got us into the mess in the first place.

You do recall that the Federal Reserve was in fact setup to deal with money supply and monetary policy due to runs on the banks and basically insolvent banking institutions and out of control fractional reserve standards created a situation of instability. So they put Fed in charge(handed the keys to the hen house to the fox) to make sure this would never happen again... And along comes 1929 and we were off to the races all over again.

So to somehow say that the gold standard was to blame when it was loose banking standards and poor monetary policy that clearly was to blame is a nice ploy... Bankers blaming everyone and everything else for problems they themselves created. Starting to sound familiar... Where have I heard this story before.... hmmm

So how many banks are out there right now are leveraged 20-1, 30-1, 40-1? And they claim that 10 or 12-1 is a good reserve ratio. This is a joke right? Is is April already?

Longsnowsm

[no_worries]

Most of that "info" emanates from Eustace Mullins' 1952 book outlining the "conspiracy" of the Fed. Nevermind the fact that his sources can't be verified or that his claims of ownership are contradicted by public records. Oh, there's also the little problem that he happened to be anti-Semitic and that his theory boiled down to the claim that it was all a plot by evil Jews in Britain. Other than that, I'm sure it was sound.

Here's yet another source for how the Fed is structured:

Ownership of the Federal Reserve System

It's even taken from a goldbug site, so maybe that leads a little extra credence. Then again, it's properly referenced so it doesn't qualify as a good source for conspiracy theorists.

Don't explain the gold standard relative to fiat currency. Simply make a case for the gold standard...period. Since it's such an obvious solution, it shouldn't be too difficult.

If the gold standard is the answer in five years, it should have been the answer 5 years ago, and 10 years before that, and 30 before that. Rev was right, the length and depth of the Great Depression was a direct correlation to how long a country stayed on the gold standard.