ATG
Banned
+5,233|6833|Global Command
https://msnbcmedia.msn.com/j/MSNBC/Components/Video/081121/n_todd_mitchell_081121.standard.jpg

Geithner has been a key player in the current economic crisis -- helping Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson and his team manage the wall street bailout. Defense Secretary Robert Gates has agreed to stay on under President-elect Barack Obama, according to officials in both parties.

So we will still have the same old foxes guarding our fiscal hens house, and the same hawks over the fields.

I find it especially troubling that, in this time of nationalizing businesses and socializing their bad debts we are not nationalizing the one business that is capitalizing on this and that stands to make trillions in interest in servicing these tax payer backed loans.

We should not be using tax payer money to buy interests in failing businesses, we should be using it to end our relationship with the federal reserve banking system. But no, our new president has chosen the leader of the most powerful of the privately ruled " federal " reserve banks to be directly in charge of " saving " our economy.

Whatever you want to think about the federal reserve system, at least understand what it is, how it may benefit from this bailout in terms of interest paid on these borrowed trillions.

Get this, when you hear of the government giving billions to companies and banks dig it that they say they will use these same " toxic assets " to back up as collateral the money the are borrowing from the federal reserve. Meaning many of us, or our parents will end up with new lardlords, or mortgage paper holders. But then last week Paulson said we weren't going to do that...wtf.

So my question; what is being used as security for these trillions in loans, other than toxic assets [ mortgage securities } or future tax revenues? What happens to the programs that were sheduled to go broke before this all happened like social security?

I'd like an answer other than long term fucked. Because that's how I see it.

See, it is against the law, specically TITLE 12 > CHAPTER 3 > SUBCHAPTER VII > § 301 for banks to make unsound loans. There are specific federal reserve mandates to prevent asset bubbles.

All of which has happened, and in a bad way under the management of the federal reserve system and especially the george bush administration.
While my hope was that president Obama wwould breed change it has been resoundingly squashed before he has been sworn in.





Some say the federal reserve bank is owned by foreign entities, specifically the rothchildes, This essay examines the accuracy of these claims.Specifically, it investigates the charge that the New York Federal Reserve Bank is owned, directly or indirectly, by foreign elements, whether the New York Fed in effect runs the whole Federal Reserve System, and whether its enormous annual profits accrue primarily to foreigners or to the U.S government.
SealXo
Member
+309|6840
/sigh

Last edited by SealXo (2008-11-25 19:28:38)

AussieReaper
( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
+5,761|6457|what

A lot of positions are not changing, but I expect after 18months (when the US economy is expected to start recovering) you'll see all these people's heads roll. They are sadly needed and the most experienced. Pres Clinton's former staff aren't that different in strategy to the Bush policy makers when it comes to how to spend their way out of a recession.

You can argue whether now is the best or worst time to change all the key positions but I don't think a completely new outlook will make the situation any better. Rose coloured glasses isn't what's needed.
https://i.imgur.com/maVpUMN.png
Catbox
forgiveness
+505|7021
it's kind of ironic... Barack isn't going to repeal the Bush tax cuts it has been rumored... he is picking a lot of Clintons people... looks like he might end up pissing off the far left after all is said and done... time will tell and I wish him well with all my heart... it won't be easy but we will survive...
Love is the answer
Marinejuana
local
+415|6890|Seattle
Yeah, a cabinet of Capitol Hill veterans here to bring us real change.

From your article:

"A brief look at how the Fed's powers over monetary policy are actually distributed shows that the key assumption in the Mullins-Kah conspiracy theory is erroneous. The Federal Reserve System is controlled not by the New York Fed, but by the Board of Governors (the Board) and the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC). The Board is a seven member panel appointed by the President and approved by the Senate. It determines the interest rate, known as the discount rate, for loans to commercial banks and thrifts, selects the required reserve ratio which determines how much of customer deposits a bank must keep on hand (a factor that significantly affects a bank's ability create new loans), and also decides how much new currency Federal Reserve Banks may issue each year (12 USCA 248). The FOMC consists of the members of the Board, the president of the New York Fed, and four presidents from other Fed Banks. The FOMC formulates open market policy, which determines how much in government bonds the Fed Banks may trade, and is the most effective and commonly used of the Fed's monetary policy tools (12 USCA 263). The key point is that a Federal Reserve Bank cannot change its discount rate or required reserve ratio, issue additional currency, or purchase government bonds without the explicit approval of either the Board or the FOMC."

It's easy to mistake the author's article about Mullins and Kah for an article about the Fed's ownership. His key assumption is that a senate/presidentially appointed committee precludes corruption. A dozen of our own presidents have warned us. For example: "The real truth of the matter is, as you and I know, that a financial element in the large centers has owned the government of the U.S. since the days of Andrew Jackson." - Franklin D. Roosevelt
topthrill05
Member
+125|6882|Rochester NY USA
Yeah and if he had chosen a nobody everyone would be happy right?

Maybe save the bitching for when he is in office. Admittedly he has gone further center then I thought he would.
JahManRed
wank
+646|6932|IRELAND

ATG wrote:

We should not be using tax payer money to buy interests in failing businesses, we should be using it to end our relationship with the federal reserve banking system.
I agree. Though its impossible. The privately owned Federal reserve owns the USA. You owe them trillions. That debt cannot be wiped in a capitalist system. The foundations of your financial systems are built on debt. It was a big mistake bringing the Federal reserve act in. But you have to live with it.
It played right into the hands of the banking dynasties and set them up as a kind of "royalty" in the US with every citizen/subject paying income tax to pay interest on their "loans". Same way our royal family get paid millions of tax money to do fuck all.

Federal reserve system=Feudal system IMO.
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,817|6410|eXtreme to the maX
I would like to know why big businesses are getting bailouts and small businesses are getting zip.

All you need to do is prove big businesses are run in general by whites and small businesses are run by a higher proportion of non-whites, and you have the mother of all class actions.
Fuck Israel
usmarine
Banned
+2,785|7066

"yes we can"


rofl
SealXo
Member
+309|6840

Dilbert_X wrote:

I would like to know why big businesses are getting bailouts and small businesses are getting zip.

All you need to do is prove big businesses are run in general by whites and small businesses are run by a higher proportion of non-whites, and you have the mother of all class actions.
It's not that its just big business has a fuckload of money because big business had this country paid in full long ago.
Kaosdad
Whisky Tango Foxtrot?
+201|6983|Broadlands, VA
And I heared on the news that Mr. Change just came to the realization that if you undo the Bush tax cuts, that takes cash out oft he economy, Soooooo......  that might not be happening.  Seriously?  You mean it took him this long to figure that out?
SealXo
Member
+309|6840

Kaosdad wrote:

And I heared on the news that Mr. Change just came to the realization that if you undo the Bush tax cuts, that takes cash out oft he economy, Soooooo......  that might not be happening.  Seriously?  You mean it took him this long to figure that out?
Thats what a law degree gets you.
Spearhead
Gulf coast redneck hippy
+731|6994|Tampa Bay Florida
So now you all hate Obama for not being a far lefty pinko communist?  And instead for being a centrist?  o lawd

edit- and about the Bush tax cuts... you know they said that he'll still be repealing them in a few years, right?  Recessions change things.

Last edited by Spearhead (2008-11-26 09:57:13)

Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6710|North Carolina

Kaosdad wrote:

And I heared on the news that Mr. Change just came to the realization that if you undo the Bush tax cuts, that takes cash out oft he economy, Soooooo......  that might not be happening.  Seriously?  You mean it took him this long to figure that out?
Repealing the Bush tax cuts is a good thing.  I guess Obama doesn't understand that.  We need to cut spending but increase taxes in certain sectors to pay off our national debt.

We also need to let the market clear itself on the Big Three and all these other corporations.

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2025 Jeff Minard