Editorial
The Fed Is a Fascist Cartel
No one in the freedom movement today disputes that the Federal Reserve is the source of many of our economic woes. Where disagreement arises is in defining the precise nature of the Fed and the source of its capacity to create the harm it does. Many who support gold money and free enterprise claim that the Federal Reserve is a "private corporation" run by capitalist mega-financiers. This I believe to be mistaken.
The Federal Reserve, in my opinion, should not be classified as a private corporation. It should be termed a government-run fascist cartel. There are several important reasons for this. For example, all nationally chartered banks in the Federal Reserve system are forced by the government to join the cartel. Bernanke and his board of governors are appointed by the President and approved by the Senate. The Federal Reserve came into being because of an act of Congress, and it can be altered or legislated out of being at anytime by Congress. These factors are not how private corporations are created or operated. The Fed entails government involvement in a massive way. Without the special monopoly privileges legislated by Congress that sustain the Fed, it disappears.
Moreover, the great bulk of the profits of the Reserve Banks are turned over to the federal treasury. As John McCormack explains in a Liberty magazine article: "[H]olding shares in the Fed is not a very profitable activity. Dividends to member shareholders are limited to 6% of nominal capital (hardly a great rate of return) and all Fed revenues above this amount (invariably vastly greater sums) are returned to the U.S. Treasury. In 1994, for example, total dividends to member banks amounted to $212 million while the Treasury received $20.5 billion, 97 times as much." [Liberty, March 1996.]
Government is thus a full partner in the Federal Reserve System. And a business entity with the government as a full partner is not a private corporation.
Courts Create a Fallacy
Much of the reasoning behind the mistaken notion that the Federal Reserve is a private corporation lies in court cases such as LEWIS vs. United States on June 24, 1982. In that case, the 9th Circuit Court ruled: "We conclude that the [Federal] Reserve Banks are not federal...but are independent, privately owned...corporations...without day to day direction from the federal government."
There are numerous cases like this where the courts have ruled that the Reserve Banks of the System are privately owned and controlled corporations. The mistake made here by those who support the notion of a "private Fed" is that because the courts declare something to be so, it somehow makes it so. This, of course, is a fallacy. Judges only interpret the law; they do not make the truth. Truth is something we discover through identification of the facts of reality and coherence with the laws of logic. Men find the truth through a process of synthesizing reason, experience and intuition.
What then are the facts of reality and the laws of logic in this case? They are as follows: A private entity in the marketplace is the opposite of a public entity. It is a free entity without monetary support and monopolistic legislation to protect it from government bureaucracy. It is an entity that is operating in a laissez-faire environment. To the extent that government intervenes into and controls, regulates, manipulates, or monopolizes an entity's market policies, then that entity is no longer private or free. It becomes statist / collectivist (i.e., socialist / fascist) to some degree or another. How much government involvement there is will determine how collectivist the entity becomes.
For example, Exxon Corporation is considered a private corporation. So let's compare it to the so called "private" Federal Reserve corporation. Does Exxon have its CEO and board of directors appointed and confirmed by the government? No, but the Fed does. Are 97% of Exxon's profits turned over to the federal Treasury? No, but the Fed's profits are. Can Exxon be voted out of existence tomorrow by Congress? No, but the Fed can. Therefore despite what our courts maintain, the Fed is not a private corporation; it is a government run cartel.
The fact that the courts define the Fed as "private" is the way that tyrannical ideologues pull the wool over the people's eyes. This is done to make the people think we are still a free, "private" enterprise country. This is how they smuggle us into corporate statism, i.e., economic fascism -- by getting the intelligentsia of the country to buy into their redefinition of words. The courts are run by statist judges, and the schools are run by statist professors -- all pretending that we are still a "free" enterprise system. In fact, many of them actually believe their own warped logic. It's the way they were taught, and they lack the intellectual rigor to investigate the fallacies of their assumptions. They ritualistically use the term "private" because it conveys the image of "free." But private in this instance is in name only. If a private entity does not have control over its operations, its profits, and its policies, then it is no longer private; it is public, and socialist or fascist to some degree or another.
Who Controls Who?
So do the bankers control the government, or does the Federal Government control the bankers? One way to answer this question is to ask who can abolish who? Can the Federal Government abolish the Fed? Certainly. Anytime it wants to, Congress could eliminate the Fed by a majority vote of its members. But can the mega-bankers, with all their power to influence politicians, abolish the Federal Government? Hardly. In this respect of creation and abolition, the Federal Government is the power behind the evil of our Federal Reserve system. But in actual practice, I think it is more accurate to say that the evil comes from the combine of the two forces. Separately, neither the mega-bankers, nor the Federal Government would be able to wield the dangerous control over our lives that they gain in concert. It is only when they join forces to become "partners" that they gain the power to do the evil they do.
When the mega-banks of America were still largely free-market institutions operating under the gold standard during the 19th century, their capacity for dangerous power over our economy and individual lives was limited. Likewise with the Federal Government; when it was still a defined Constitutional body without the ability to print paper money, its capacity for dangerous power over our economy and individual lives was limited. But in 1913, these limitations were destroyed because the mega-banks and the Federal Government went into partnership. They formed the massive cartel of the Federal Reserve System. And in doing so, the Federal Government granted monopolistic powers to the mega-banks, which gave them the ability to egregiously expand the money supply via credit creation. After elimination of the dollar's gold convertibility in 1933 and 1971, this became the power to create money indiscriminately.
What needs to be understood, however, is that the mega-banks could never have achieved such a dangerous power grab without the complicity of the Federal Government. Once again, it was the Federal Reserve Act of 1913 that brought the Creature into being. It was Congress that voted to grant monopoly status to the mega-bankers, which gave them their dangerous credit creation power. Without their monopoly backed by the force of government legal tender laws, the mega-bankers do not have the capacity to expand the money supply inordinately and rob us of our wealth. Thus for all their reputed control over world events, the mega-bankers do not become dangerous until they join forces with the government, which gives them the dangerous powers they now wield.
Reinforcing the Collectivist Mantra
It is important to clarify this misconception of a "private Fed" because the Fed is an evil institution. When we mistakenly define it as a private corporation, we then reinforce the collectivist mantra about free enterprise being evil. If the Fed is both a private corporation and evil, then the collectivist claim that private corporations need to be pervasively controlled by centralized government gains merit in the people's eyes.
If, however, we portray the Fed as it actually is (a government run cartel) then the solution to its evil becomes clear -- end its protective connection to the government, which would eliminate its monopoly status and its power to dangerously expand the money supply. Simply abolish the Reserve Banks and make the member banks independent institutions again. They would then have to live with the rules that the market would demand. And the market would demand open disclosure of the extent of their fractional reserve loans. Most important of all, the market would demand redemption of all bank issued paper notes with gold coins or bullion upon customer request. Both of these market demands would temper excess paper issuance on the part of banks and keep them responsible.
In other words, repeal the government's legal tender laws, establish a free-market for banking, and let the marketplace decide what should be used for money. The banks would then have to offer quality gold money that the people desired, rather than corruptible paper money that a government cartel mandates. This would decentralize the financial power of our economy out among the thousands of individual banks throughout the country and strip the Federal Government of its dangerous control over our wealth and productivity.
Statists and world government advocates on the left do not want a free banking system for obvious reasons. It would shrink their power and wealth greatly, and short-circuit their dreams for more and more centralized government. But populist conservatives on the right don't want a free banking system either; they want Congress to run banking instead of the Fed. The reason why populist conservatives in America want Congress to run the banking system of America is because they fear a private, free-market banking system. They fear it because they believe 19th century banking was a free-market mess of wildcat corruption, exploitation, and fraud.
But the mess and corruption of 19th century banking was not caused by any connection to laissez-faire capitalism. It was caused by incessant government intervention into the market to convey privileges to the banks and also heap mandates upon them that brought about financial distortions, fraud, and ill-collateralized institutions.
For example, government was famous for intervening to allow the more unscrupulous banks to suspend their contractual obligation of gold redemption to their depositors whenever such banks had expanded credit too excessively. This consequently allowed many banks to repeatedly issue excessive paper notes at larger and larger levels, which created bevies of insolvent institutions throughout the country. Government interventions also relaxed accounting standards for banks, allowed them to overstate their assets and understate their liabilities with impunity. Also government interventions often mandated that banks back shabby state bond issues, which brought many of them to financial ruin. But if the market had been left free, such practices and mandates would never have arisen, and the great majority of insolvent banks would never have come about. The mess and corruption of 19th century banking can be laid at government's interventionist door.
[On this issue of why free-market banking is not dangerous and is vitally necessary to maintain freedom in general, see the following: Ron Paul and Lewis Lehrman, The Case for Gold, (Washington, DC: Cato Institute, 1982), pp. 17-118. Antal E. Fekete, "Money and Credit," http://professorfekete.com/math.asp. George A. Selgin, The Theory of Free Banking: Money Supply under Competitive Note Issue (Totoway, NJ: Roman & Littlefield, 1988), pp. 5-15. Kurt Schuler, "The World History of Free Banking," Chapter 2, in Kevin Dowd (ed.) The Experience of Free Banking, (London: Routledge, 1992), pp 7-47.]
Separate the State and the Banks
The proper approach to this problem is first to portray the Fed in its true light, as a "fascist cartel" rather than as a "private corporation." If we do this, we can then arrive at the right solution to the financial corruption taking place in our society. That solution is to separate the state power from the financial power of society.
Separate the state and the banks just as we long ago separated the state and the churches. Independently, these three institutions will function properly; but let the coercive power of the state fuse with either the moral power of religion or the financial power of banking -- and you are begging for a dictatorship.
If the reader will stop and think about why it was so necessary for men to separate the moral power of the church from the state centuries ago, then he will understand also why it is so vital to separate the financial power of banking from the state today.
When the church and the state formed alliances during the Middle Ages, the clergy gained the power to impose their dictates upon the populace by the physical force of the law. With separation of the state and the church, however, it then became necessary for the clergy to win their converts over voluntarily. If a church member didn't like a certain policy of his religion, he was free to walk away without any fear of reprisals from the coercive machinery of the clergy-state combine.
This same principle applies to the banking world. When banks form alliances with the government, they then become capable of imposing their will (or paper money) upon the populace by the physical force of the law. With the separation of the state and the banks in a laissez-faire economy, however, all bankers must then win their customers over voluntarily with quality money and service, just as the clergy have had to win their converts over voluntarily with better ideas and service. Thus, it is not mega-banks that are dangerous and evil. It is mega-banks forming alliances with the state that is dangerous and evil.
Those on the political right, who preach that the Fed is a private corporation, play directly into the hands of those who hate capitalism and freedom. What else can one conclude about capitalism if the evil of the Fed is due to the fact that it is a "private corporation," and therefore needs to be "taken over by Congress?" If capitalism has created such an evil power, then we need (as the collectivists are always eager to tell us) more government power in Washington to counteract it. We need more centralization, more regulation, more bureaucracy, more taxes. This is the tyrannical con that collectivist intellectuals have been utilizing for decades. Demand more power for the central government to counteract evils that the power of the central government has brought into being in the first place. The Fed is a perfect example of this. We don't need a government solution to this problem; we need a government withdrawal from causing it.
Populist Reform of the System
There are several banking reform measures being proposed by populist conservatives today that fall victim to this idea that government is the solution to the evils of our Federal Reserve System. One such example is the National Economic Stabilization and Recovery Act (NESARA) -- a radical overhaul of America's monetary system. Because the NESARA people mistakenly conceive of the Fed as being private, they assume that the answer to its abuse of money is to give the money creation power to Congress. But this is jumping from the frying pan into the fire. Does anyone really believe that Congress will responsibly use such a power? They will do the same thing that the Fed has done for 90 years -- corrupt the currency in order to create the illusion of prosperity, so as to get congressionally elected and bureaucratically appointed to office again and again.
NESARA's reform plan actually states that by giving Congress the power to create money, "the people" will be able to "create as much or as little currency as they need." You can bet grandma's farm that once Congress has the power to create money, the people and their representatives will definitely "create as much as they need" all right. And since humans have a tendency toward endless need of money, they will ultimately succumb to the same pitfalls as our present Federal Reserve.
Thus many well-meaning advocates of freedom and Constitutional government on the political right are adding fuel to the statist / collectivist propaganda machine controlling our media and schools with their mistaken characterizations of the Federal Reserve as an evil, private corporation.
The mega-banks that make up the Federal Reserve System are dangerously evil, there is no doubt about that. But their evil does not spring from their "privateness," nor from their "corporateness." Their evil springs from the mixture of their corporate goals with government coercion, from the fact that they are in bed with the biggest evil of all -- the federal Leviathan in Washington, which grants them protection from market demand. Kick them out of that bed into the free-market, deny them any and all legislated privileges, and we solve the problem of mega-bank exploitation.
The collectivist one-worlders are hard at work today muddying up the ideological waters by smearing the system of capitalism. We do not need to give them added ammunition, which is what we do when we claim that the Federal Reserve is a private corporation. We reinforce the Marxist smear that private free enterprise is a system of favoritism for business class interests, that it is exploitation of the people by private financiers. Class interest favoritism and exploitation are certainly rife throughout our system. But such corruptions are not the result of private corporations and capitalism; they are the result of government cartels and fascism.
No private bank in a truly free-market would possess the power that the government's present mega-bank cartel (the Fed) possesses. The Fed only has it's power because government, having taken over much of the market today, has given the Fed a monopoly. Remove government monopoly privileges (i.e., legal tender laws), and the Fed's power evanesces.
Immense confusion reigns throughout our nation today as to what free enterprise is, what legitimate government entails, how monopolies form, what our rights are, etc. This confusion has been brought about primarily because of grievous political, philosophical and economic fallacies taught in the universities, which has given us legions of Orwellians who twist and corrupt the meaning of words to make them mean what they want them to mean. This process allows them to manipulate the masses into voting America into servitude. Such semantic manipulation is quite apparent in today's analysis of the Federal Reserve System. Our authorities in the courts and in the schools pretend that the Federal Reserve is a private corporation operating in a capitalist free-market independent of government, and most of our punditry buy into it. This enables the authoritarians to bamboozle the people into thinking we still have a free capitalist system, when in actuality we have an ever-increasing fascist economic system.
If we are to succeed in checking this dictatorial aggrandizement that is insidiously moving us toward a One World Government, then we must quit lending credence to collectivist pretenses. We must quit portraying monetary dangers to our freedom as coming from a "private" Federal Reserve. The despotism growing amidst us stems from the mega-banks and our government combining into a grotesque mutation that is neither private nor free. To win the battle against this despotism, we have to portray its reality properly to the people.
To read today's other editorial submission by Dr. Ron Paul, "Iran Sanctions are Precursor to War," click here now.
l 
|
You must be a site member to submit suggested edits or post feedback. In addition to submitting edit suggestions and posting feedback, your Free Membership to The Daily Bell gives you access to our Member Zone where you will discover a plethora of other member benefits. Want to learn more? click here |
|||||
|
|
||||
 |
Posted by Sovereignthink on 08/02/10 12:37 PM
America Belling, Liberty Belling, Alarm Belling
Step 1 Get a Liberty Bell and Carry it
Step 2 Ring that Bell at Noon, In Public, where ever you are. Ring the alarm bell when ever you feel the spirit of liberty, the need and desire to fight for Liberty.
more
Click to view link
|
Posted by Ddoggfather on 04/22/10 08:56 PM
I am currently doing a dissertation entitled: "Is the US a fascist state?". Had everything done (by the way it is) healthcare, military industrial complex etc and had an assumption that the Fed was a private institution after usurping the power of the people to coin their own monies.
Had seen all the documentaries but just needed it in plain english. The evidence presented herein by Nelson is actually scarier than I first imagined.
The definition of fascism (although disputed) is the merger of the state and corporations and this article suggests that this is the situation with the Fed and the US government.
"Fascism should more appropriately be called Corporatism because it is a merger of State and corporate power."
-Benito Mussolini
One thing I would say is that because the Fed has the power to create the money, it has the resources to continually pay off the congress, senate, executive.
Regrettably it looks like the only way in which a change will be made is when there is a total collapse of the US economy.
(it was thru Click to view link that i found this article.
Although Alex Jones is scarcely wrong he is continuously calling the Fed private. His response to this article woudd be quite interesting)
Thanks for the clarification.
Reply from The Daily Bell
Legally, the Fed is not private. It was empowered by an Act of Congress.
|
Posted by Peter Bove on 01/03/10 11:13 AM
Second Declaration of Independence continued
WHEREAS, despite the fact that the 16th Amendment was never ratified by all 48
States at the time of it's supposed inception and as it is an un-apportioned tax the
federal government under the guise of the internal revenue service has
unconstitutionally imposed direct taxes on American labor from wages and
salaries further placing a burden of existence on the people and contributing to
the present economic catastrophe.
WHEREAS, In direct defiance of the principals expressed in Amendment II writ
here A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right
of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed. The federal government
has resolved and presently campaigns to place infringements on the right to keep
and bear arms including prohibitions of type or quantity of arms or ammunition;
of the People.
WHEREAS, The current administration has resolved to require involuntary
servitude, or governmental service other than a draft during a declared war, or
pursuant to, or as an alternative to, incarceration after due process of law.
WHEREAS, At present we are subject upon the failure of Congress to defend the
Constitution, a president who refuses to produce evidence establishing his status
as a natural born Citizen as required by the Constitution.
Among these and many other crucial offenses and acts of high treason, here listed
in less detail include NAFTA, The NAU, the Fed/Treasury bailouts, The Stimulus
Package (so called) uncontrolled borders & immigration, and electronic voting "
proven to be subject to fraud.
In every stage of these oppressions we have petitioned for redress in the most
humble terms: our repeated petitions have been answered only by repeated injury.
Numerous resolutions having been presented to the Federal government by many
State General Assemblies without response or result from Congress or the federal
government. And the most grievous injury: A servant government that refuses, at
Page 4 of 4
every turn, to be held accountable " in any way - by failing to respond to the
People's repeated First Amendment Petitions for Redress of Grievances.
As James Madison said in the Federalist Papers, No. 45, "The powers delegated by
the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those
which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite."
As American Patriots in full agreement with all the principals and law defined in
the organic Constitution and in good conscience many having sworn oaths to
defend the Constitution We cannot allow the federal government legally defined as
THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA (corporation) and it's Judicial appointees to
continue to usurp state sovereignty for then we too, by virtue of complicity will be
guilty of treason.
We, therefore, the citizens of the reunited States of America, in a 2nd General
Congress, assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the
rectitude of our intentions, do, in the name, and by the authority of the good
people of these States, solemnly publish and declare, that these united States are,
and of right ought to continue to be free and independent States; that they are
absolved from all allegiance to the federal government, and that all political
connection between them and the federal government is and ought to be totally
dissolved; and that as free and independent States, they have full power to levy
war, conclude peace, contract alliances, establish commerce, and to do all other
acts and things which independent States may of right do, including the right to
arrest and hold to trial by jury in order to establish crimes of Treason which may
have been committed by members of the federal government including those living
members who no longer hold office. Further recreate a new federal government per
the Constitution. Replace through fair elections all members no longer available to
serve the people by virtue of their imprisonment due to the discovery of acts of
treason, including the presidency. And for the support of this declaration, with a
firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each
other our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor.
|
Posted by Peter Bove on 01/03/10 11:13 AM
Second
Declaration of Independence
[Original Adopted in Congress 4 July 1776]
Modified for the new Millennium February 24, 2009
The Unanimous Declaration of the fifty reunited States of America
When, in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to
dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to
assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which
the laws of nature and of nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the
opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel
them to the separation.
In order to honor and uphold the original intent of the Declaration of
Independence in light of the astounding parallels for need of this the Second
Declaration to the original all that is once again relevant to restore Liberty and
Freedom of for and to the People remains.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, "The American War of Independence"
commonly referred to as the American Revolutionary War, was fought and
successfully set into enactment law known as The united States Constitution, the
supreme law of this Constitutional Republic based on Democratic principals in
full recognition of the fact that all men are created equal, that they are endowed
by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty
and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights our government was
instituted among men deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.
Not the reverse, which is now largely the case and in fact the primary impetus for
this declaration. That whenever any form of government becomes destructive to
these ends, it is the right of the People including each sovereign Individual to alter
or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such
principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most
likely to effect their safety and happiness as defined by absolute goodness in the
eyes of their Creator. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long
established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly
all experience hath shown that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils
are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are
accustomed. But when a long train of abuses, usurpations and refusals to
respond to Petitions for Redress of grievances these violations of the Constitution
evinces a conspiracy to transition our Constitutional Republic to a pure
democracy, and to strip us of our Liberties and reduce us to serfdom under
absolute despotism, it is the right of the People to alter the Government, pro-
actively, non-violently with critical mass and to provide new guards for their
future security.
Page 2 of 4
Such is once again the patient sufferance of these 50 States; but especially to the
People, more so each sovereign Individual, who reside legally within them, and
such is now the necessity, which constrains them to alter their present system of
government. Specifically the federal government The history of the present federal
government is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct
object the establishment of an absolute tyranny over these States by attempting to
usurp sovereignty and incorporate them first under The North American Union
and eventually under a one-world fascist/socialist government it refers to as the
New World Order. The federal government is subservient to the States and all
government is subservient to We the People. The federal government has
infringed on OUR RIGHTS and has committed many usurpations of power against
the States and We the People. To prove this, let facts be submitted to a candid
world.
The offenses presented comprise but a fraction of all egregious offenses upon the
People to be exacted but remain beyond sufficient to weight the need for the
recreation of these united States of America in full allegiance with the original
intent of it's inception under the Constitution.
WHEREAS, Through actions such as the so-called Civil War (it was really The War
Between the States) when the rightful States of each American republic were
subverted by force and the operations of law that were established by the
insidious 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution & especially since 1913 with
the enactment of the Federal Reserve Act by the Federal Government whereby a
consortium of international bankers in the form of a private banking cartel
protected by unconstitutional law took control of the issuance of American
currency and the regulation of the value thereof, the federal government has
refused its assent to the principals and the laws within the original united States
Constitution, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good. A direct
consequence of these actions of a privately owned central bank, the abandonment
of the gold standard and a debt-based fiat dollar has resulted in economic
catastrophe.
WHEREAS, The 10th Amendment in the Constitution of the united States writ
here "The powers not delegated to the united States by the Constitution, nor
prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the
people." defines the total scope of federal power as being that specifically granted
by the united States Constitution and no more; The federal government has
steadily and stealthily to the notice for too long of many the people of these great
States sought to usurp the power of the people at the behest of international
bankers in order to form a New World Order in defiance of the Life, Liberty and
pursuit of Happiness of the People.
WHEREAS It has invaded foreign lands (inaccurately yet commonly referred to as
wars) without a declaration of war by Congress as per the supreme law of the
land. - Nations unconstitutionally invaded in partnership often with other nations
include, endless armed Middle East conflicts, Korea Vietnam Iraq (Desert Storm)
Afghanistan, Panama, Grenada, and Iraq again in 2003 to the present day.
Page 3 of 4
As well the federal government has waged a war on terrorism, which is a futile
engagement as the stated objective is one that can never be won through efforts of
war, causing it a nature of perpetual existence to burden the people.
WHEREAS, in direct defiance and betrayal of the principals expressed in
Amendment IV writ here The right of the people to be secure in their persons,
houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not
be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by
oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the
persons or things to be seized. Deprivations of privacy and an emerging police state
via the 'USA Patriot Act has resulted
Continued in next posting
|
Posted by Peter Bove on 01/03/10 10:19 AM
I did mention something of interest in my first feedback posting and I present it here. I believe it to be a viable solution to our current over reaching government in America.
Prelude to the Second Declaration of Independence
In light of the 30 plus State Sovereignty Resolutions being filed with the Federal Government I am concerned with the possibility of the states breaking apart through secession having this nation fracture into hostile camps. In response I have composed a 2nd Declaration of Independence. I firmly and passionately believe that the only way to defeat tyranny of the New World Order now roaring at top speed from the Federal Government into our lives is for all 50 States ultimately to reunite in a 2nd Continental Congress to defend the Constitutional principals of Liberty and Freedom reiterated in
point within this the Second Declaration of Independence. Seceding isn't the solution. It is not the other States who are the enemy it is the Federal Government.
Realizing the likelihood of reuniting all 50 States at once to be
miniscule at best it is suggested that we begin with one State to prove that this can be accomplished. From there we can inspire other states to also adopt sign and file this document with the Federal Government. When 75% of the States have joined together in this fight we have the necessary majority to
make it an amendment to the Constitution and the power to enforce it.
I ask that if you agree with the contents of the Second Declaration of Independence to request of everyone you know, yourself included to make copies, write a cover letter and send to the Legislative Body and Governor of your state as well as to the Sheriff in your county. I also believe we could make this a chain email. Our fellow American Patriots, some at least, would
be so inspired to get them out to their Governors, Legislators and Sheriff's. It's not too late to reclaim the America our founding fathers created.
Reply from The Daily Bell
Interesting, thanks.
|
Posted by Peter Bove on 01/03/10 09:38 AM
The primary issue I have with this concept is that it seems to suggest that our Government is the high point in the hierarchy of the rulers of the world. I don't believe this for one moment. Instead I believe that members of our Federal government (with few exceptions) are little more than henchman for their bosses; THE BANKS and bankers that comprise the FED. The Fed pulls the strings not the Federal Government.
Conversely, it is absolutely true that the Communitarian mindset can and undoubtedly would react in the way Nelson contends. Of course the FED may be allowed to dissolve on the grounds that it is unconstitutional as a precursor to creating the one world bank in line with the one world government being planned by the very same people who own the FED.
This matches the MO of al Globalist agenda efforts and workings. Despite that the Congress did n fact enact the Federal Reserve, to suggest Congress could now alter or retract the FED gave me a chuckle in spite of Ron Paul's great work, because I believe that through one avenue or another most are on the FED payroll.
This is argumentative to be sure but moving on if the Government owns the FED then to whom do we owe the National Debt? Ourselves? Also, and I may be wrong but it is my understanding that from the beginning of the FED'S inception Congress has had every right by law to audit the FEDERAL RESERVE but never has. Know that this is just off the top of my head, but here's something of interest.
Reply from The Daily Bell
Apparently the government cannot simply demand a full Fed audit or there would not be pending legislation in the House and Senate to make it happen.
 |
Posted by James Jaeger on 01/02/10 11:25 PM
THE DAILY BELL WROTE:
As far as the money system goes, we want central banks SHUT DOWN.
That's probably impossible until one or more of the following become obsolete: governments, debt, or money. See CITIZEN CURRENCY at Click to view link
No overlap between private money and the public wealth.
Technically all money is private wealth, because all money, a representation or TALLY of production, comes from the private sector. Government does not produce anything. Ellen, in her book WEB OF DEBT, has all this right when she says money is actually a tally of production, not just a store of value or a medium of exchange.
That would deal a tremendous blow to the ability of the globalists to fund their nefarious, murderous, war-mongering and ultimately genocidal schemes of world domination.
Globalization is on its way out because the petroleum era is over. See COLD FUSION PROVEN TRUE at Click to view link
SHUT DOWN CENTRAL BANKING. Let a private gold and silver standard emerge (as it would) -
Remember, fiat central banking is only as strong as the governments behind it. The Federal Reserve Note is backed by the full faith and credit of the U.S. government. When a government just starts out, it is almost impossible for it to issue fiat money, thus it MUST resort to gold or silver, something that works because it's promoted to the public as "having intrinsic value" or "it's pretty" or "it has utilitarian value for jewelry or electronics".
But remember, gold is where the bankers power originated from, so you can be sure that they still maintain it and thus any suppression or manipulation of the gold supply will always be controlled by them, not governments, which come and go, especially when the partnership gets rocky.
As free-market folk, we think the only way to remove the incredible abuse of mercantilism is to confine government to a tiny sliver of activities.
True, the US gov is supposed to be much more limited. See Click to view link
Reply from The Daily Bell
Jaeger: As far as the money system goes, we want central banks SHUT DOWN. .... That's probably impossible until one or more of the following become obsolete: governments, debt, or money.
See CITIZEN CURRENCY at Click to view link
Our response: Central banking is not so old. The world survived without (government sanctioned) central banking for thousands of years. It would keep spinning without central banking, which seems to us a fairly clear and powerful position.
---------------
Jaeger: No overlap between private money and the public wealth. ... Technically all money is private wealth, because all money, a representation or TALLY of production, comes from the private sector. Government does not produce anything. Ellen, in her book WEB OF DEBT, has all this right when she says money is actually a tally of production, not just a store of value or a medium of exchange.
Our response: Of course government doesn't create wealth. But it can seize wealth. And once it has seized wealth, it "has" wealth. Ideally, one would live in a society with little or not government, and thus the amount of wealth seized would be minimized.
---------
Jaeger: But remember, gold is where the bankers power originated from, so you can be sure that they still maintain it and thus any suppression or manipulation of the gold supply will always be controlled by them, not governments, which come and go, especially when the partnership gets rock
Our response: Why focus on gold which is bankers' money? A private gold and silver standard has proven successful throughout history and (we think) pre-history. In a free-banking environment a gold-and-silver private market standard would doubtless emerge once more - as it always does.
It is a clear philosophical position: Let the market decide.
Note ... having written the above, let us add, as we have before, that we think the idea of national banking would, at the very least in the short term, prove an improvement over the rapine and pillaging we have now. We will continue to track the progress of Ellen Brown and Brownism, which is the most successful movement of its type. We would invite Mr. Jaeger to do a follow-up interview on citizen currency if he wishes.
|
Posted by James Jaeger on 01/02/10 11:24 PM
ELLEN BROWN WROTE:
The Fed then agreed to rebate its profits to the government in return for maintaining its 'independence. However, the Fed continued to serve the banks rather than the government.
Ellen is correct here, the Fed does rebate most of the interest on monetized debt to the U.S. Treasury and they only get to keep enough to cover their operating expenses. But this is not where the quasi-PRIVATE bankers get their paydays.
The vast part of their fortune comes to Fed-member banks through the fractional reserve system, whereby they can "fan out" the money they have on deposit 10-fold -- however it got there, deposits or monetized debt. This is where money is really created out of thin air. See
Click to view link
A REAL government-owned central bank creates the money the government needs interest-free. The Fed has never done this, at least until last year. It has 'monetized only enough government debt to provide the 'reserves for the private banks it serves to generate the loans that create most of our national money supply at a hefty interest to the banks.
Again, Ellen is correct. A gov-owned central bank WOULD be able to create debt-free currency. Ever ask yourself WHY they don't just do it? The answer was provided by Jerry Day above:
The U.S. government does not dare cross the Federal Reserve, hence the international banking cartel started by Rothschild. Why? Simple. Paper currency no longer redeemable in gold or silver only has a certain life cycle. It then inflates to oblivion or is abandoned because the credit worthiness of the issuing government declines or government itself destroys itself in wars (as all the Rothschild-funded empires of Europe did in the past century).
The U.S. government knows all this and Pat Buchanan discusses much of this in my new documentary, ORIGINAL INTENT. The U.S. government knows the Federal Reserve Note, now an unbacked fiat currency, will soon run its course and have to be replaced by something else. The only question is what?
Gold, always overtly or covertly controlled by the international bankers is always the default. But gold is never the most profitable form of money, at least for governments and the bankers. Only fiat money can lay claim to this. And it's been a great fiat money partnership for decades of U.S. Congressmen who got all the money they wanted for their constituencies, endless terms in office and their banking buddies got endless trillions in interest payments -- all paid for by the lumpin U.S. and Worldwide taxpayers.
Yes, all the stupid people aren't JUST in the U.S. folks. So, rather than blowing the whole game -- pissing off their international banking buddies hiding in Basel, Switzerland and who knows what yachts all over the Mediterranean, any "prudent" gov will go along so they can get in on the next wave, the next wave of fiat money, said to be the Special Drawing Right by writers for the CFR.
But remember, if the U.S. doesn't go along with their banking task masters, the taskmasters will pull out their ultimate weapon - GOLD - and make THIS the new wave, the new global currency. Then, they will not have to share ANY of the wealth with the US gov, as the U.S. gov will crumble as it watches its defunded military crumble.
At such time the international banking cartel will be in a sellers market of gold, to whatever government wants its shot on the world stage as the next superpower or empire. Ho hum. All this wasted energy on stupid games when an entire universe begs to be explored. See ENTERING SPACE by Robert Zubrin
Reply from The Daily Bell
Out point with the Ellen Brown remains the same: If you promote a national central bank, you leave the mechanism in play (no matter for good or ill) along with the perception that MERCANTILISM is appropriate if controlled by the "people." Why not insist, as a philosophical position, on free-markets rather than mercantilism which ruins every society it touches? We would be in favor of free-market money, by the way, the "historical default" - which is a private silver-and-gold standard that bankers could not "control." We look forward to your new documentary.
|
Posted by James Jaeger on 01/02/10 11:23 PM
I am going to comment on portions of Jerry Day, Ellen Brown and the Daily Bell's feedback in this one post. Much of what I have to say is based on my observations of banks and governments over the years and by thinking about motives, seen and unseen, mostly unseen.
After I read Mr. Hultberg's article, I walked away for the most part agreeing with it. He had everything right, with the possibility that he may have inverted the truth about who dominates who AND he never stated the exact definition of what the Federal Reserve System is:
THE FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM IS A QUASI-PRIVATE, GOVERNMENT-SANCTIONED BANKING CARTEL.
This definition was first proffered by G. Edward Griffin, and says it all. Now onto some specific comments.
JERRY DAY WROTE:
Mr. Hultberg's article is based on badly flawed in reasoning. it is World Bankers, not government who were the designers and creators of the system and who have put government and all elected officials in a position of compliance and obedience to the Federal Reserve system.
Jerry is correct on this. Most of the seven men who attended the secret meting on Jekyll Island in 1910 were representatives from the world's most powerful PRIVATE banks and it was Paul Warburg, the designer of the Bank of England, designed the U.S. Federal Reserve System. My documentary, FIAT EMPIRE, with Ron Paul goes into this in detail as well as the partnership between the New York money-center banks and the U.S. Congress that exists to this very day. See Click to view link
The Federal Reserve system was a deliberate trap of taxpayers by World Bankers by taking command of governments through financial crisis. Government was and is forced into the arrangement on many political and economic levels and government now has absolutely no option but to continue with that system according to the Fed's dictates or shut down government altogether.
Again Jerry is correct. Even though the U.S. Congress passed the Glass-Owen Act in 1913 establishing the Federal Reserve System, it is an ILLUSION that "all" Congress has to do is rescind the Act and the Fed is gone. Only the ignorant or naive would believe this.
Ever since Rothschild in the 1700s, bankers have lent money (i.e. gold) to governments. Since a government can acquire money (mainly to preserve its power through military force) in only three (3) ways: taxes, borrowing or plunder, the international bankers that lent to governments held very powerful positions.
And to the degree GOLD was the money of the day (not paper), their power was even greater. Thus, since the U.S. was on the gold standard until 1933, it would be safe to say the bankers held great sway over the U.S. gov until at least then, possibly until 1971 when Nixon closed the gold window, effectively defaulting on the US government's foreign obligations of redemption.
So Jerry again is correct: the U.S. government in effect declared bankruptcy many years ago, and the bankers probably do hold all or most of the collateral in the form of gold and probably silver to this very day. Unfortunately, no one will be able to prove that statement until Ron Paul gets the Fed audited, which will probably never happen.
Because government's very existence depends on service of the debt, government will maintain debt service to the bitter end when taxpayers simply refuse or fail to pay the endlessly growing interest.
The government's very existence does not depend on debt, it depends on weapons and weapon technology. Same for ALL govs. And weapons are paid for by taxes, borrowing or plunder. Thus, when it's politically incorrect for a gov to tax or plunder (for more weapons or more wars) they are forced to borrow. Enter banking cartels.
Thus the U.S. gov is under the domination of the international community of banking cartels because this is the only way it can viably a) finance its military and b) roll over its debt to maintain its credit rating. War provides a vast enough expenditure to hide the endless rollovers, re-financings of debt, that MUST be done in order for the US to maintain its credit with places like China and the various publics in the global financial community.
IF the U.S. lost its credit rating, it would become MUCH more dependent on TAXES and PLUNDER ... or GOLD and SILVER. Fiat paper money can ONLY be issued when the credit rating of the government is good and/or the issuing government has enough military strength to blow away one that says differently. This is what REALLY irritates the world, because they blew their empires by engaging in endless wars, and now their jealousy wants to see the U.S. blow its position as well.
Thus, to the degree the U.S. gov fails it falls away from fiat paper currency, it must thus rely on the international bankers who have confiscated the world's gold and silver supplies, you can be sure. Only strong govs can issue paper and thus disentangle themselves from the power of the international banking cartel started in the Rothschild Dynasty.
So the U.S. Federal government is in a deadly game of power with the corporate fascists that ARE the Federal Reserve System and their alter ego, the IMF/World Bank. See my new documentary, ORIGINAL INTENT, where Ron Paul, Pat Buchanan, G. Edward Griffin and Edwin Vieira, better describe these issues.
Reply from The Daily Bell
Thanks. From our point of view, it is obvious that the US government is involved in the Federal reserve. How this point becomes debatable is a puzzlement to us.
In fact ... the Fed is the WORST kind of hybrid. It is designed deliberately as a MERCANTILIST corporation. That is, a powerful group of banking families have used the color and shield of American law to advance their own competitive interests.
It is in the problem of the modern world.
It is what Thomas Jefferson warned against.
A tiny group of powerful men CIRCUMVENTED the free-market by using the law to gain what they would not be able to gain in free competition. This is what makes central banking so ruinous - it uses the force of law to compel its ruinous practices.
We would, in fact, have nothing against central banking, were it practiced within a free-market/free-banking system without any legal advantage. Of course, it wouldn't work - and that's just the point. We think Nelson might agree with this, thought we can't speak for him.
|
Posted by Ellen Brown on 01/02/10 11:01 PM
Thanks. I was joking about "baiting." It's more like "tempting," the allure of a good debate, something I can't resist! You all are great debaters, and so polite, as aforesaid. I'm not sure what you mean by "news on the front of the kinds of banks you seek." I do have a pretty good intelligence network going here! I can report on many things -- so exciting. I think we're on the same team, just viewing it from different angles. I quoted Nelson Hultberg in my book and liked his discussion of "real bills" very much.
Reply from The Daily Bell
Thanks. In fact, Hultberg has an interview with us that will appear tomorrow (Sunday).
That was a great article link, you sent. So, article links, news about national central banks versus private ones, private, communal money movements - if it is noteworthy and you or others bring it to our attention, we will consider bringing it to the attention of our readers. There is no reason to let the perfect be the enemy of the good. Thanks again.
|
Posted by Ellen Brown on 01/02/10 08:36 PM
Hi, by 'baited I just meant that you mentioned "Brownians" three times in your responses, and said to send the article to every Brownian anyone knew, suggesting you were looking for a response. It worked, if a bit late. Two people sent me the article and said I should respond.
On the question whether you are playing into the hands of the globalists (though unwittingly, I'm sure), here is a quote from that article to which I sent a link, by Connie Fogal, who ran for President of Canada on the money reform party ticket. She says:
The reason our governments do not maximize the power of our own Bank of Canada is because to do so would be contrary to the command of the globalization process, the privatization of the world, led by the IMF and the World Bank. Canada now uses the Bank of Canada for only about 1% to 5% of its financing of the nation's needs. The rest is borrowed from private
banks and hence the escalating exponential interest growth on the national debt.
Many countries have had a central bank like the Bank of Canada that was owned by the people which was used to put money into the system for infrastructure etc at no or very low cost to the money. Any cost that did arise goes/went back to the countries' coffers. Private banks like TD, CIBC, Royal etc charge high interest and keep it for their own profits.
The mandate of globalization requires that all the national banks be privatized in order that there remains no competition for the private banks, except among each other to practice their usury. One of the terms of conquest of the illegal war against Yugoslavia was the demand by the IMF and NATO (read U.S.) that Yugoslavia give up its central national bank
which it was forced to do.
Reply from The Daily Bell
Ellen, you write that in reader responses, we suggested "send[ing] the article [on Fed fascism] to every Brownian anyone knew."
That's not quite true.
Here is the actual response we made, first the letter and then the response. It is a direct suggestion to Mr. Lorenz, nothing more than that, given his sense of apotheosis.
It doesn't seem like baiting to us (which sounds impolite), but we are glad you responded anyway, though we still don't believe the Bell is an unwitting tool of elite bankers.
We have also written publicly that your solutions might well be better than what we have now, though we still believe the ABOLITION of central banking is far preferable. If you have news on the front of the kinds of banks you seek, send it to us and we will seriously consider publishing it in our "noted" section.
Thanks again for the link. The perfidy is never ending.
----------------------------------------
Posted by Jim Lorenz on 12/22/2009 4:21:48 PM
Nelson Hultberg has changed my mind and clarified my thinking as to the evil, government empowered Federal Reserve Cartel.
I was used to saying that the FED was private bank owned by the Money Powers; now I must admit that is absolutely not true.
It is the worst possible of combination of government & private avarice, with a fraudulent government providing the force of law. This combination is evil to its core and must be dissolved, ASAP.
Thanks for publishing this, I'm going to circulate it as widely as I can.
------------------
Reply from the Daily Bell:
Good, send it to any Brownians you know. The concept is called mercantilism.
|
Posted by Ellen Brown on 01/02/10 09:47 AM
I see you are baiting the Brownians for a response, knowing we can't resist a good bait! So here goes.
I would agree with Mr. Hultberg in part and disagree in part. The Fed and the Treasury are deviously and hopelessly intertwined, but I would see it as the Goldman Sachs/JPMorgan-driven Fed infiltrating the government rather than the reverse. There is no question that the Fed was set up in 1913 to be a private profit-generating institution that would create the national money supply and charge interest for lending it to the government. The Fed did collect the interest for many years, and the same Wall Street bankers who set up the Fed arranged for an income tax the same year, specifically to fund the interest that was going to be due from the government on this perpetual cash cow. It worked until the 1960s, when Wright Patman, who was then head of the House Banking and Currency Committee, got wise to what was going on and moved to nationalize the Fed. The Fed then agreed to rebate its profits to the government in return for maintaining its 'independence. However, the Fed continued to serve the banks rather than the government.
A REAL government-owned central bank creates the money the government needs interest-free. The Fed has never done this, at least until last year. It has 'monetized only enough government debt to provide the 'reserves for the private banks it serves to generate the loans that create most of our national money supply at a hefty interest to the banks. Only last year did Ben Bernanke boldly announce that he was going to monetize $300 billion in long-term government bonds. However, the Chinese were immediately all over him. 'We HOPE the U.S. is not planning to MONETIZE its debt, they said, which is pretty funny considering that China is the king of monetizing debt. The difference is that they don't call it 'debt. Their government-owned central bank just prints the money the government needs and hands it over. Correct me if I'm wrong but that's my reading of Chinese practice right up until it joined the WTO, when they made a show of complying with U.S. lending standards, though they haven't really changed their practices much. They just renamed their money-printing 'non-performing loans.
There are other, better examples of government-owned central banks actually operating as government entities that served to provide the money needed by their governments. Canada, Australia and New Zealand all did this very successfully in the 20th century, funding infrastructure, development, their national health services, and their war efforts interest-free. They did it until they fell to the globalizers' drive for privatization in the 1970s and 1980s, when they were forced to switch to borrowing from private international banks at a hefty interest rather than using their own central banks to fund their governments. That is the globalizers' plan, and I'm afraid you all are playing right into it. To illustrate my point, here is a very good article about what happened in Canada:
Click to view link
Reply from The Daily Bell
Well, thank you Ellen. We certainly weren't trying to bait you or your massively enthusiastic following, but thanks for taking the time to respond. Your response, as usual, is a cogent analysis, lucid and thought-provoking.
We do have several quibbles. From a personal standpoint, we don't see how you can write that we are "playing" into the globalizers plans. Every day the Bell writes unique articles both analyzing globalist promotions and deploring them.
As far as the money system goes, we want central banks SHUT DOWN. All of them. No overlap between private money and the public weal. That would deal a tremendous blow to the ability of the globalists to fund their nefarious, murderous, war-mongering and ultimately genocidal schemes of world domination.
We think this is a most tenable position. And a very simple one. SHUT DOWN CENTRAL BANKING. Let a private gold and silver standard emerge (as it would) - of the kind that functioned on and off throughout the world for thousands of years, and partially functioned in America as well.
Something that simple is ultimately something that people can understand. What you are proposing is far more nuanced and easily reversed (we think) when the political climate changes. It remains difficult for us to see how government - a force more dangerous than fire, Washington said - can be tamed by the people on behalf of the people. That has not been in its history.
As free-market folk, we think the only way to remove the incredible abuse of mercantilism is to confine government to a tiny sliver of activities. (Maybe collecting tolls on toll roads.) In fact, Austrian economics shows us there can be NO long-term abuse of the market (including monopoly abuse) without government/private partnerships.
This is why it is important to understand that central banking (no matter how well meaning) must ultimately end up as a government/private partnership and subject to all the mercantilist abuses stemming from it. Expanding government powers (in a sense) in order to constrain private/public abuses (for that is what they are) essentially proposes a contradiction in terms, in our opinion.
Thanks again for writing, as we always enjoy your thoughtfulness and engagement. And, as we have indicated before, it is perfectly possible that your solutions might prove better, at least in the short-term, than what we have now. (Of course almost anything would.) Anyway, it also gives us the opportunity to wish you - and Brownians generally - Happy Holidays and happy New Year!
|
Posted by Jerry Day on 01/01/10 05:31 PM
Dear JRI,
Mr. Hultberg's article is based on badly flawed in reasoning. As the World Bankers impersonate government-created entities in the form of the "Federal Reserves", it is World Bankers, not government who were the designers and creators of the system and who have put government and all elected officials in a position of of compliance and obediency to the Federal Reserve system.
The Federal Reserve system was a deliberate trap of taxpayers by World Bankers by taking command of governments through financial crisis. Government was and is forced into the arrangement on many political and economic levels and government now has absolutely no option but to continue with that system according to the Fed's dictates or shut down government altogether.
The U.S. Government is bankrupt many times over and World Banks hold the collateral. Governments have every reason to continue the debt (and full compliance as debtor) because government's existence relies upon that continuance. They have no reason to default because it is not the Congresspersons, Senators or Presidents who must pay the debt.
Because government's very existence depends on service of the debt, government will maintain debt service to the bitter end when taxpayers simply refuse or fail to pay the endlessly growing interest. Government will use all available authority and force to compel payment by citizens until all authority and force simply fails, then government will fail along with the Federal Reserve and the World Banks. That may be a year away or it may be 40 years away, but that is how our financial system must play out based on the political and economic realities.
Government at all levels is controlled, primarily though corrupt and secret means, by the Federal Reserve's de facto authority and wealth. To take the government's "establishment" of the Federal Reserve at face value is naive child's play and it ignores completely the reason WHY the government "established" the Federal Reserve.
Reply from The Daily Bell
Thanks for your feedback. We disagree with Brownian analysis and have had lengthy discussions of these issues in these pages with Ms. Brown and many others
|
Posted by Glenn W. Murphy on 01/01/10 11:23 AM
Introduce this astonishingly clear-thinking gentleman to Mr. Browne, and record their discourse for an article.
The world needs to see how quickly Free Market Logic defeats and chastises such lapdogs of Fascism as the "esteemed" mr. Browne.
I predict Point, Game, and Match to Mr. Hultberg faster than a Rod "The Rocket" Laver victory at Wimbleton when The Rocket" was in his prime.
Reply from The Daily Bell
We have an interview upcoming with Mr. Hultberg on Sunday. We greatly admire his writing and thinking. On the issue of the Fed we are on board with his viewpoint entirely.
|
Posted by John Butler on 12/26/09 01:24 PM
Please add this to my previous comments I inadvertantly pushed the wrong key and logged out
What I find very interesting about Jerrys comments is not that he is fairly accurate in his assessment of Canadian politics, but that he is totally oblivious to the situation in this country. Its time to get our heads out of the sand America.
Reply from The Daily Bell
We just made that point for you, thanks.
|
Posted by John Butler on 12/26/09 01:07 PM
Mr. Hultbergs article in my opinion is on the money (pun intended). About a year ago we moved to Washington state from Canada. I enjoyed light hearted talks with our new neighbour across the road on several occasions. Jerry was quick to point out that he could never live in Canada because because of its liberal socialist leanings.
Reply from The Daily Bell
Yes, people still don't understand money - and is there an excuse with so many articles on the Internet?
|
Posted by Frank Checorski on 12/23/09 12:12 PM
This guy Hultberg is an idiot. How does he manage to make the big money and get quoted in your news letter? If the courts say the Fed is a private corp, guess what, it's a private corp. When Kennedy was about to abolish them he got killed. The Fed is mega money that makes and breaks politicians. They are an entity to themselves that protects the wealthy, which the last debacle, the stim package, only proves. The govt. can't even look at their books. They're a private corp and this guy is an idealistic dreamer who can't discern reality.
Reply from The Daily Bell
Thanks for the feedback. Shouldn't call people names, though, if you can help it. Weakens the argument. Are you a Brownian?
|
Posted by David Anderson on 12/23/09 12:00 PM
That just may be the best summary of the evils of banking-government collusion ever written. I especially liked the analogy between government-centralized banking and government-church. Thank you for publishing it.
Reply from The Daily Bell
Thanks for reading, and for the kind words.
|
Posted by Kevin on 12/23/09 10:59 AM
Once again, Mr Hultberg distills the ideas and presents a compelling vision of what is happening. Thank you Mr Hultberg for telling the truth and especially taking to task the enablers on the "right". I plan to send this editorial to everyone I know. The light of truth is our greatest hope and most powerful weapon; if the people have eyes to see. KF
Reply from The Daily Bell
On behalf of Mr. Hultberg, thanks for the kind words.
|
Posted by Duane Bass on 12/23/09 09:33 AM
Wow, was that an eye opener. I too mistakenly thought that the Fed was a private concern, which I still think it is, but is indeed in bed with the government to form an unholy alliance and Fascist Monopoly.
Did i get that right?
I am wondering if I stated that correctly, I actually do not know, but it makes perfect sense to me, and I will be sharing this gem. . .
Once again great stuff, and thanks
Reply from The Daily Bell
The Fed is mercantilist. He calls it fascist. These are merely terms. It is a combination of private enterprise and state authority. That is always a bad thing, and when that thing is created for the purpose of printing money, it is even worse.
|
|
