Pick'em Leagues: THE BIG SHOW CASUAL BEST OF THE REST Single Event PvP: FANTASY POOLS Betting Leagues: THE BIG SHOW BEST OF THE REST

Apparently 9 out of 10 americans are unaware of this

Print  
Time to rise up?
Yes, I'm fed up 12 63%
No; I 7 37%
  Page 4 of 5     1     2     3     4     5  
Posted By Message

warglory

Heavyweight Champ

warglory Avatar
1
 
 
 


 
 
Posts:4,023
Career:535-344
Joined:Feb 2007
Chips:
776
The Federal Reserve is not owned by private corporations. The Chairman is chosen by the President and vetted by Congress. The Chairman and members of the board must meet before a Congressional oversight committee. It includes private banking institutions among it's board members because America's currency is managed by private banks. You can't possibly make decisions about the Federal economy without consulting with major banking institutions that make up the reserve banks. It's impossible.

The only alternative is to eliminate a central banking system, which would eliminate any oversight over regulation of federal economics, which as history as shown, is a potentially disastrous proposition.

You can't have it both ways.

Post #46   10/15/13 9:24:50PM   

george112

The Playground OG

george112 Avatar
2

 
 
 


 
 
Posts:5,355
Career:1,237-808
Joined:Jan 2007
Camp: Playground Legends
Chips:
1,057

Posted by warglory

The Federal Reserve is not owned by private corporations. The Chairman is chosen by the President and vetted by Congress. The Chairman and members of the board must meet before a Congressional oversight committee. It includes private banking institutions among it's board members because America's currency is managed by private banks. You can't possibly make decisions about the Federal economy without consulting with major banking institutions that make up the reserve banks. It's impossible.

The only alternative is to eliminate a central banking system, which would eliminate any oversight over regulation of federal economics, which as history as shown, is a potentially disastrous proposition.

You can't have it both ways.




Yes it IS owned by private corporations.

But you are right its chairman is chosen by the President and it does go to congress, But so what? That makes it a good thing?? No not at all.

I know you read my post full of FACTS

_______________________________________
Ron Paul 2016

Post #47   10/15/13 9:33:02PM   

warglory

Heavyweight Champ

warglory Avatar
1
 
 
 


 
 
Posts:4,023
Career:535-344
Joined:Feb 2007
Chips:
776

Posted by george112

You posted a link to a site where experts speak of a hypothetical scenario

That being- Would the US be better off had they stayed on the Gold Standard


It does not take an expert to see that the economy before we were taken off was better off then it is now.


Now by saying that i am not saying our economy is in the shitter because were are not on the gold standard.



Dozens of elite economists just stated that our economy would be worse if we were on the gold standard. Pretty cut and dry.





Also to address your Fed comment.




Seriously????? The Fed is a fucking monster. Yeah you're right it is important but thats only because it has been given the power to print money and do with it as it pleases. It prints money then buys US bonds with the money it prints. Further driving the value of the dollar down
[/quote]


Every single dollar printed by the Fed is backed by the international banking system. It's not fantasy money.

[quote]
You seem very uneducated in what the fed does and what Ron Paul has been arguing for decades.


1. The Federal Reserve is NOT government run. FACT

2. Gold has been used as money for ALL TIME. Yet we Americans come along and since 1932 we have devalued gold.

3. Ron Paul believes the market should determine the value of the dollar, not interest rates or anything like that. Bernanke is a COMPLETE idiot and it doesnt take an expert to see that



1. If you think this is fact than prove it with real sources.

2. Gold is a commodity bought and sold on the private marketplace. 50 years ago our nation woke up and realized we can't base our entire federal economy on the volatility of a commodity.

3. Ben Bernanke is a veteran economist, Ron Paul is a politician and a doctor. Would you take Ben Bernanke's position on how to properly deliver a baby over Ron Paul's? I wouldn't.

Last edited 10/15/13 9:37PM server time by warglory
Edit note/reason: n/a
2 total post edits

Post #48   10/15/13 9:35:50PM   

warglory

Heavyweight Champ

warglory Avatar
1
 
 
 


 
 
Posts:4,023
Career:535-344
Joined:Feb 2007
Chips:
776
Here is a good independent resource explaining how the Fed works.

http://www.factcheck.org/2008/03/federal-reserve-bank-ownership/

Post #49   10/15/13 9:44:30PM   

george112

The Playground OG

george112 Avatar
2

 
 
 


 
 
Posts:5,355
Career:1,237-808
Joined:Jan 2007
Camp: Playground Legends
Chips:
1,057
We’ll examine evidence in the Federal Reserve legislation; in how the Fed operates; from Congressional testimony; from statements from the Federal Reserve’s publications; in statements by former Chairmen of the House Banking Committee; and in official rulings by US courts, to show why we conclude that although there are some elements of ambiguity, the Federal Reserve system is essentially dominated and controlled by private financiers, not our government; and to the extent that there is ownership of it, it is entirely private. Therefore despite the ambiguity – and confusion – the Fed is more accurately seen as a private, not a governmental institution, though with substantial governmental ties.

The ambiguity arises from a combination of misleading appearances; the fact that our President appoints (with consent of the Senate) the Chairman of the Fed to four year terms, and the 5 member Board in Washington to 14 year terms; the fact that the Fed is supposed to promote governmental fiscal policy; and the fact that the system was originally set up in law by Congress in 1913 and can be altered, nationalized or even dismantled by Congress.

Most Americans understand that the Fed controls our money system, but they believe its part of our government, as would be expected of any organization holding that much power over the destiny of our country. Americans also erroneously believe the banking business consists of accepting deposits from clients and then re-loaning them to borrowers at a higher rate of interest. Though the number is definitely growing, most Americans have no idea that money (or more accurately interest bearing bank credits – purchasing media which serves as money) is created by the banking system when loans are made, through the fractional reserve provisions. This is understood by few novices, and often economists and even bankers fail to comprehend that they function as part of a money creation system, when they issue credits, and deposit them into their client’s accounts when loans are extended.

Therefore most Americans would be surprised to learn that almost all of what we use for money is not issued by our government, but by private banks. They have been “allowed” to form erroneous assumptions about our money and banking system that are far from reality and that serves to shield from closer scrutiny, whether the Fed is truly operating in the public interest or advancing more private agendas, either on purpose or by default.



The Federal Reserve consists of 12 regional Federal Reserve banks, with boards of Directors, under an umbrella direction of the 7 member Federal Reserve Board in Washington, with the power to determine major aspects of banking activity, such as setting interest rates, and the reserve and other operational requirements. There are no shares of the Washington Fed Board organization; the only “ownership” of the Fed is in shares of each of the 12 regional banks which are entirely owned by the private member banks within their respective districts, according to a formula based on their size (they must subscribe to the shares with 3% of their capital plus surplus). The ownership is highly restricted in that such ownership is mandatory; the shares can’t be sold; and they pay a guaranteed 6% annual dividend




t will be clear from the following points that the Fed is definitely not part of the US Government:

* The Fed is not organized within the Executive, Legislative or Judicial branches of our government.

* Who pays the Fed’s bills and determines its budget? Not any part of our government. The Fed gets its funding from its own specially privileged operations. The Fed Board determines Fed budgets.

* Who monitors and oversees Fed activities? Again the Fed itself. While some important elements of proper auditing have taken place, there has not yet been a comprehensive independent audit, by the Government Accountability Office as proposed in a recent letter from Ralph Nader to new Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke, calling for greater monetary transparency.

* Federal Reserve Employees are not part of the US Civil Service System and are not covered by government employees’ health insurance or pension programs. Who does the hiring and firing? Except for the highly publicized Chairman and 7 member Washington Board, this is in private, unelected hands.

* Federal Reserve Banks are not listed as government organizations by the telephone companies, a small but telling fact.

_______________________________________
Ron Paul 2016

Post #50   10/15/13 9:50:19PM   

george112

The Playground OG

george112 Avatar
2

 
 
 


 
 
Posts:5,355
Career:1,237-808
Joined:Jan 2007
Camp: Playground Legends
Chips:
1,057

Posted by warglory

Here is a good independent resource explaining how the Fed works.

http://www.factcheck.org/2008/03/federal-reserve-bank-ownership/



That is according to the GOVERNMENT!!


OF COURSE the government does not want to hold any responsibility for the problems the Fed causes. Why can you not see that. It is an ILLUSION.


And you wonder why the Fed gets so defensive when its asked about ownership?? I dont wonder I know why. You wonder why they tried to avoid a complete audit for so long and then when it did get audited Bernanke and many of the higher ups had NO IDEA where MILLIONS AND BILLIONS of OUR SUPPOSED dollars went


Open your eyes

_______________________________________
Ron Paul 2016

Post #51   10/15/13 9:54:45PM   

george112

The Playground OG

george112 Avatar
2

 
 
 


 
 
Posts:5,355
Career:1,237-808
Joined:Jan 2007
Camp: Playground Legends
Chips:
1,057
Here is your proof










1) JOHN L. LEWIS, Plaintiff/Appellant, vs. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant/Appellee.

(No. 80-5905, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS, NINTH CIRCUIT

680 F.2d 1239; 1982 U.S. App. LEXIS 20002; March 2, 1982, Submitted; April 19, 1982, Decided)

[Lewis had been injured by a car owned by the San Francisco Fed and sued the US Government for damages. Note that this ruling particularly applies to the regional Federal Reserve Banks, not necessarily the Federal Reserve Board. Thus even more ambiguity!]

Excerpts from the ruling:

The district court dismissed, holding that the Federal Reserve Bank is not a federal agency within the meaning of the Federal Reserve Act and that the court therefore lacked subject matter jurisdiction….

“Federal agency” is defined as: the executive departments, the military departments, independent establishments of the United States, and corporations acting primarily as instrumentalities of the United States, but does not include any contractors with the United States.

There are no sharp criteria for determining whether an entity is a federal agency within the meaning of the Act (28 U.S.C. § 2671), but the critical factor is the existence of federal government control over the “detailed physical performance” and “day to day operation” of that entity…. Other factors courts have considered include whether the entity is an independent corporation…, whether the government is involved in the entity’s finances…. and whether the mission of the entity furthers the policy of the United States… Examining the organization and function of the Federal Reserve Banks, and applying the relevant factors, we conclude that the Reserve Banks are not federal instrumentalities for purposes of the FTCA, but are independent, privately owned and locally controlled corporations.

Each Federal Reserve Bank is a separate corporation owned by commercial banks in its region. The stockholding commercial banks elect two thirds of each Bank’s nine member board of directors. The remaining three directors are appointed by the Federal Reserve Board. The Federal Reserve Board regulates the Reserve Banks, but direct supervision and control of each Bank is exercised by its board of directors. 12 U.S.C. § 301. The directors enact by-laws regulating the manner of conducting general Bank business, 12 U.S.C. § 341, and appoint officers to implement and supervise daily Bank activities. These activities include collecting and clearing checks, making advances to private and commercial entities, holding reserves for member banks, discounting the notes of member banks, and buying and selling securities on the open market. See 12 U.S.C. §§ 341 [**5] 361….

It is evident from the legislative history of the Federal Reserve Act that Congress did not intend to give the federal government direction over the daily operation of the Reserve Banks: It is proposed that the Government shall retain sufficient power over the reserve banks to enable it to exercise a direct authority when necessary to do so…. In other words, the reserve-bank plan retains to the Government power over the exercise of the broader banking functions, while it leaves to individuals and privately owned institutions the actual direction of routine…[Note: neither the Act, nor this court explained how that is done] the Federal Reserve Banks, though heavily regulated, are locally controlled by their member banks. Unlike typical federal agencies, each bank is empowered to hire and fire employees at will. Bank employees do not participate in the Civil Service Retirement System. They are covered by worker’s compensation insurance, purchased by the Bank, rather than the Federal Employees Compensation Act. Employees traveling on Bank business are not subject to federal travel regulations and do not receive government [**7] employee discounts on lodging and services.

The Banks are listed neither as “wholly owned” government corporations under 31 U.S.C. § 846 nor as “mixed ownership” corporations under 31 U.S.C. § 856, … a factor considered in Pearl v. United States, 230 F.2d 243 (10th Cir. 1956), which held that the Civil Air Patrol is not a federal agency under the Act. … Additionally, Reserve Banks, as privately owned entities, receive no appropriated funds from Congress. …The Reserve Banks have properly been held to be federal instrumentalities for some purposes….The Reserve Banks are deemed to [**10] be federal instrumentalities for purposes of immunity from state taxation…. The Reserve Banks, which further the nation’s fiscal policy, clearly perform an important governmental function….Performance of an important governmental function, however, [**11] is but a single factor and not determinative in tort claims actions…. Brink’s Inc. v. Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, 466 F. Supp. 116 (D.D.C.1979), held that a Federal Reserve Bank is a federal [**12] instrumentality for purposes of the Service Contract Act, 41 U.S.C. § 351. … For these reasons we hold that the Reserve Banks are not federal agencies for purposes of the Federal Tort Claims Act and we affirm the judgment of the district court. [end of excerpts]

_______________________________________
Ron Paul 2016

Post #52   10/15/13 9:58:38PM   

Svartorm

Hammer of the Gods

Svartorm Avatar
9
 
 
 
 


 
 
Posts:4,188
Career:2,077-1,253
Joined:Jan 2007
Chips:
861

Posted by infestructure

I'm self employed and a firm believer in earning your way, and it seems some people in this thread seem to think the video is calling for socialism, which is not the case, it is calling for people to look at wealth distribution and to see that the current system is unfair and causes undue problems.



I'm disagreeing with it being unfair. I'm self-employed with a small restaurant.

My first year, I made $6,000
My second I made $30,000
This year I'll make $80,000

This is all due to hard work and forward thinking on my part. Lets fast-forward twenty years and assume I'm part owner of a massive national chain of my brand. Maybe I pull in $30m a year and I'm in that top crust in the video. How is that unfair, or how does that even involve anyone? The only part that would be unfair is if I'm taxed 75% of that, just because I happened to find a way to make a fortune. The wealthy are the only segment of this population that is continuously bled dry. No one who gets a hand-out or works part-time at minimum wage can ever complain about the system being unfair, because they exist solely because of it.

Someone mentioned earlier that this isn't communist Russia where wealth was distributed anyways. You have an ability to take as large of a piece of that pie as you'd like, or to underachieve and take none at all. No part of this is unfair, and people's problems are largely of their own creation.

_______________________________________
All brave men with hearts of war, ride the path of mighty Thor.

DREAM 1 - 2nd in Pts
Cage Rage 23 - 6th in Pts
Secondary League Season 3 - 12th in Pts
Secondary League Season 7 - 16th in Wagers
Primary League Season 7 - 26th in Wagers
Secondary League Season 6 - 30th in Pts
Secondary League Season 1 - 31st in Pts
Primary League Season 6 - 39th in Wagers
Secondary League Season 7 - 41st in Pts

Post #53   10/16/13 12:51:20PM   

warglory

Heavyweight Champ

warglory Avatar
1
 
 
 


 
 
Posts:4,023
Career:535-344
Joined:Feb 2007
Chips:
776

Posted by george112


Posted by warglory

Here is a good independent resource explaining how the Fed works.

http://www.factcheck.org/2008/03/federal-reserve-bank-ownership/



That is according to the GOVERNMENT!!


OF COURSE the government does not want to hold any responsibility for the problems the Fed causes. Why can you not see that. It is an ILLUSION.


And you wonder why the Fed gets so defensive when its asked about ownership?? I dont wonder I know why. You wonder why they tried to avoid a complete audit for so long and then when it did get audited Bernanke and many of the higher ups had NO IDEA where MILLIONS AND BILLIONS of OUR SUPPOSED dollars went


Open your eyes



What's your alternative then? Do away with the Fed? Go back to 1907 all over again? How about we get rid of the FDIC too and the US Treasury?

Ron Paul's sole motivation is to do away with what he deems to be non-essential government entities, the Fed included. In all his interviews and speeches, he clearly does not comprehend why they are in place to begin with, nor does he have a viable alternative.

Does the Fed need better oversight with more frequent audits? I think that is certainly up for discussion, but to demonize an essential part of American capitalism and Keynesian economics, is foolhardy.

Post #54   10/16/13 1:11:38PM   

warglory

Heavyweight Champ

warglory Avatar
1
 
 
 


 
 
Posts:4,023
Career:535-344
Joined:Feb 2007
Chips:
776

Posted by Svartorm


Posted by infestructure

I'm self employed and a firm believer in earning your way, and it seems some people in this thread seem to think the video is calling for socialism, which is not the case, it is calling for people to look at wealth distribution and to see that the current system is unfair and causes undue problems.



I'm disagreeing with it being unfair. I'm self-employed with a small restaurant.

My first year, I made $6,000
My second I made $30,000
This year I'll make $80,000

This is all due to hard work and forward thinking on my part. Lets fast-forward twenty years and assume I'm part owner of a massive national chain of my brand. Maybe I pull in $30m a year and I'm in that top crust in the video. How is that unfair, or how does that even involve anyone? The only part that would be unfair is if I'm taxed 75% of that, just because I happened to find a way to make a fortune. The wealthy are the only segment of this population that is continuously bled dry. No one who gets a hand-out or works part-time at minimum wage can ever complain about the system being unfair, because they exist solely because of it.

Someone mentioned earlier that this isn't communist Russia where wealth was distributed anyways. You have an ability to take as large of a piece of that pie as you'd like, or to underachieve and take none at all. No part of this is unfair, and people's problems are largely of their own creation.



But Svartorm, I think what you are describing is a utopian scenario (congrats on your success btw, that's pretty awesome). There is a bridge between self made wealth, and exploitation. Hedge fund managers are probably known to be the wealthiest human beings on the planet, in addition to a select few other individuals who by and sell commodities (often other companies). These people don't make anything, and often exploit loopholes at the expense of others to increase their value. When a company is bought and then re-sold for profit, benefits can be slashed and/or layoffs commonly occur. This allows for stakeholders in all forms, to profit. Is this illegal? Probably not. But the one clear flaw about capitalism, is that it's designed to make it easier for the rich to keep getting richer. And of course, with wealth comes influence, so these individuals and corporations can successfully lobby Congress to steer lawmakers to do their bidding.

Wealth distribution is something we should all be made aware of. This video tried to do that, but it was clearly biased and didn't ask the right questions, because this is most definitely not a black and white situation.

Post #55   10/16/13 1:22:28PM   

Svartorm

Hammer of the Gods

Svartorm Avatar
9
 
 
 
 


 
 
Posts:4,188
Career:2,077-1,253
Joined:Jan 2007
Chips:
861

Posted by warglory
But Svartorm, I think what you are describing is a utopian scenario (congrats on your success btw, that's pretty awesome). There is a bridge between self made wealth, and exploitation. Hedge fund managers are probably known to be the wealthiest human beings on the planet, in addition to a select few other individuals who by and sell commodities (often other companies). These people don't make anything, and often exploit loopholes at the expense of others to increase their value. When a company is bought and then re-sold for profit, benefits can be slashed and/or layoffs commonly occur. This allows for stakeholders in all forms, to profit. Is this illegal? Probably not. But the one clear flaw about capitalism, is that it's designed to make it easier for the rich to keep getting richer. And of course, with wealth comes influence, so these individuals and corporations can successfully lobby Congress to steer lawmakers to do their bidding.

Wealth distribution is something we should all be made aware of. This video tried to do that, but it was clearly biased and didn't ask the right questions, because this is most definitely not a black and white situation.



The video doesn't mention exploitation though, and you're not necessarily a bad person for being ultra-wealthy.

The methods you're describing, if done ethically, are all just methods of money making on massive scale. If it horrible/unethical/illegal if I buy a motorcycle on craigslist for $2,000, polish it and sell it for $3,000? If not, then why is it now a crime if I buy a textile factory for $15m, make it more profitable via new systems of management and sell it for $17m? I don't see these things as being bad.

I agree that it's easier to get richer if you're already rich, but the by-product of this is that you're creating opportunities for everyone else. Even the "pop star" in that video in the upper crust would employ a manager, a sound engineer, a backing band and dancers, and equipment crews. Success breeds opportunities for others, whom if they do well, can become successful themselves. I can't see the evil in this.

_______________________________________
All brave men with hearts of war, ride the path of mighty Thor.

DREAM 1 - 2nd in Pts
Cage Rage 23 - 6th in Pts
Secondary League Season 3 - 12th in Pts
Secondary League Season 7 - 16th in Wagers
Primary League Season 7 - 26th in Wagers
Secondary League Season 6 - 30th in Pts
Secondary League Season 1 - 31st in Pts
Primary League Season 6 - 39th in Wagers
Secondary League Season 7 - 41st in Pts

Post #56   10/16/13 2:37:13PM   

george112

The Playground OG

george112 Avatar
2

 
 
 


 
 
Posts:5,355
Career:1,237-808
Joined:Jan 2007
Camp: Playground Legends
Chips:
1,057

Posted by warglory


Posted by george112


Posted by warglory

Here is a good independent resource explaining how the Fed works.

http://www.factcheck.org/2008/03/federal-reserve-bank-ownership/



That is according to the GOVERNMENT!!


OF COURSE the government does not want to hold any responsibility for the problems the Fed causes. Why can you not see that. It is an ILLUSION.


And you wonder why the Fed gets so defensive when its asked about ownership?? I dont wonder I know why. You wonder why they tried to avoid a complete audit for so long and then when it did get audited Bernanke and many of the higher ups had NO IDEA where MILLIONS AND BILLIONS of OUR SUPPOSED dollars went


Open your eyes



What's your alternative then? Do away with the Fed? Go back to 1907 all over again? How about we get rid of the FDIC too and the US Treasury?

Ron Paul's sole motivation is to do away with what he deems to be non-essential government entities, the Fed included. In all his interviews and speeches, he clearly does not comprehend why they are in place to begin with, nor does he have a viable alternative.

Does the Fed need better oversight with more frequent audits? I think that is certainly up for discussion, but to demonize an essential part of American capitalism and Keynesian economics, is foolhardy.



ummm yes!! We do not NEED the Fed.


Why don't you address the problems i have posted in this thread? Because it surely seems it has done more harm than good. Would you not agree with that?

_______________________________________
Ron Paul 2016

Post #57   10/16/13 2:59:01PM   

kopower

Heavyweight Champ

kopower Avatar
14
 
 
 
 


 
 
Posts:5,627
Career:2,271-1,222
Joined:Jul 2007
Camp: Dark Horse
Chips:
1,386

The video doesn't mention exploitation though, and you're not necessarily a bad person for being ultra-wealthy.

The methods you're describing, if done ethically, are all just methods of money making on massive scale. If it horrible/unethical/illegal if I buy a motorcycle on craigslist for $2,000, polish it and sell it for $3,000? If not, then why is it now a crime if I buy a textile factory for $15m, make it more profitable via new systems of management and sell it for $17m? I don't see these things as being bad.

I agree that it's easier to get richer if you're already rich, but the by-product of this is that you're creating opportunities for everyone else. Even the "pop star" in that video in the upper crust would employ a manager, a sound engineer, a backing band and dancers, and equipment crews. Success breeds opportunities for others, whom if they do well, can become successful themselves. I can't see the evil in this.



Well said

_______________________________________
Billy Madison-

What you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in the playground is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no props, and may the mods have mercy on your soul.


Post #58   10/16/13 3:38:11PM   

infestructure

NOW KITH

infestructure Avatar
4



 
 
 


 
 
Posts:1,914
Career:734-445
Joined:Jan 2012
Camp: Project Mayhem
Chips:
635

Posted by Svartorm


Posted by warglory
But Svartorm, I think what you are describing is a utopian scenario (congrats on your success btw, that's pretty awesome). There is a bridge between self made wealth, and exploitation. Hedge fund managers are probably known to be the wealthiest human beings on the planet, in addition to a select few other individuals who by and sell commodities (often other companies). These people don't make anything, and often exploit loopholes at the expense of others to increase their value. When a company is bought and then re-sold for profit, benefits can be slashed and/or layoffs commonly occur. This allows for stakeholders in all forms, to profit. Is this illegal? Probably not. But the one clear flaw about capitalism, is that it's designed to make it easier for the rich to keep getting richer. And of course, with wealth comes influence, so these individuals and corporations can successfully lobby Congress to steer lawmakers to do their bidding.

Wealth distribution is something we should all be made aware of. This video tried to do that, but it was clearly biased and didn't ask the right questions, because this is most definitely not a black and white situation.



The video doesn't mention exploitation though, and you're not necessarily a bad person for being ultra-wealthy.

The methods you're describing, if done ethically, are all just methods of money making on massive scale. If it horrible/unethical/illegal if I buy a motorcycle on craigslist for $2,000, polish it and sell it for $3,000? If not, then why is it now a crime if I buy a textile factory for $15m, make it more profitable via new systems of management and sell it for $17m? I don't see these things as being bad.

I agree that it's easier to get richer if you're already rich, but the by-product of this is that you're creating opportunities for everyone else. Even the "pop star" in that video in the upper crust would employ a manager, a sound engineer, a backing band and dancers, and equipment crews. Success breeds opportunities for others, whom if they do well, can become successful themselves. I can't see the evil in this.



Who said you were a bad person for being wealthy?
No-one said it would be a crime to make 2M buying and selling textile factories. The problem is that the rich get richer. As much as you like to think everyone has an equal footing it comes to making money, this isn't the case. That top 1% owns 50% of stocks and shares in the US. the bottom 20% owns less than 0.5%. Everyone might be equal on paper; but thats not the reality. Thanks for being civil people

good discussion

Post #59   10/16/13 4:04:43PM   

warglory

Heavyweight Champ

warglory Avatar
1
 
 
 


 
 
Posts:4,023
Career:535-344
Joined:Feb 2007
Chips:
776

Posted by george112


Posted by warglory


Posted by george112


Posted by warglory

Here is a good independent resource explaining how the Fed works.

http://www.factcheck.org/2008/03/federal-reserve-bank-ownership/



That is according to the GOVERNMENT!!


OF COURSE the government does not want to hold any responsibility for the problems the Fed causes. Why can you not see that. It is an ILLUSION.


And you wonder why the Fed gets so defensive when its asked about ownership?? I dont wonder I know why. You wonder why they tried to avoid a complete audit for so long and then when it did get audited Bernanke and many of the higher ups had NO IDEA where MILLIONS AND BILLIONS of OUR SUPPOSED dollars went


Open your eyes



What's your alternative then? Do away with the Fed? Go back to 1907 all over again? How about we get rid of the FDIC too and the US Treasury?

Ron Paul's sole motivation is to do away with what he deems to be non-essential government entities, the Fed included. In all his interviews and speeches, he clearly does not comprehend why they are in place to begin with, nor does he have a viable alternative.

Does the Fed need better oversight with more frequent audits? I think that is certainly up for discussion, but to demonize an essential part of American capitalism and Keynesian economics, is foolhardy.



ummm yes!! We do not NEED the Fed.


Why don't you address the problems i have posted in this thread? Because it surely seems it has done more harm than good. Would you not agree with that?



Dude, come on, be realistic. Let me list the countries that do not have a central banking system:

Andorra
Hungary
Monaco
The Vatican

That's it! Out of 194 nations, only 4 do not have a central banking system! But if you want, I will dissect your previous posts.

Post #60   10/16/13 6:59:34PM   
 
  Page 4 of 5     1     2     3     4     5