18 Dec 2017 2:24 pm
So basically you are admitting that anyone who took an econ 101 class knows that private banks cannot simply print money to pay their debt. I agree.peepee » 18 Dec 2017 2:08 pm » wrote:charles.thompson » 18 Dec 2017 10:52 am » wrote:The us has a very messy currency system...and it is designed to give maximum control over the us economy. I can understand why you are confused by it.
The federal reserve LOANS money to private banks. The interest they charge sets the federal interest rate. Banks that want to make a profit are obviously forced to charge a higher interest on their loans than the federal rate.
The federal reserve also does not print the actual money. Us engraving and printing does.
The federal reserve is sort of private...but the pres appoints the chair...the house sets the salary...and the profit of the federal reserve is taxed by the federal government at a rate around 96%
...i'm 'confused'?!]
...AGAIN, THE VAST MAJORITY OF 'DOLLARS' ARE CREATED BY PRIVATE COMMERCIAL BANKSTERS NOT 'THE [NOT] FEDERAL, [NO] RESERVE'...you have a lot of honest learning to do charles...read 'out of debt, out of danger' by voorhis...deezer says he read it and i've noticed he's not as much of republican-radio-leveler anymore...BTW, WHERE IS DEEZER?!...AND WHERE IS TRUMPWONHAHA?!...trumpwonhaha is by far the smartest republican at this site and i was hoping he could rub-off on the squirmy stinky cedar dildo roadkill coalition of republican-radio-level dumbasses around here...
....but i digress...BACK TO CHARLES...YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO GET YOUR HEAD OUT OF YOUR ARSE, CHARLES...steve zarlenga, ellen brown, bill still, merrill jenkins, byron dale, etc.. and of course, the magnificent peepee!..
http://www.webofdebt.com/articles/monetizethis.php
"...For the government, the difference between borrowing credit created with accounting entries from a private bank and borrowing the same sort of credit from the Federal Reserve is that borrowing from the Fed is nearly interest-free. That is true today, but it has not always been true. Congressman Wright Patman, Chairman of the House Banking and Currency Committee, wrote in a 1964 treatise called A Primer on Money:
“The Federal Reserve Banks create money out of thin air to buy Government Bonds from the U.S. Treasury . . . [creating] out of nothing a . . . debt which the American people are obliged to pay with interest.”
Patman was outraged at the inequity of this practice and boldly agitated for Congress to nationalize the privately-owned Federal Reserve, a move that would have allowed the government to issue the national money supply directly. Needless to say, however, this proposal met with strong opposition. Nationalization did not happen, but the Fed did have to compromise. According to Jerry Voorhis:
“As a direct result of logical and relentless agitation by members of Congress, led by Congressman Wright Patman as well as by other competent monetary experts, the Federal Reserve began to pay to the U.S. Treasury a considerable part of its earnings from interest on government securities. This was done without public notice and few people, even today, know that it is being done. It was done, quite obviously, as acknowledgment that the Federal Reserve Banks were acting on the one hand as a national bank of issue, creating the nation’s money, but on the other hand charging the nation interest on its own credit – which no true national bank of issue could conceivably, or with any show of justice, dare to do.”
Voorhis went on, “But this is only part of the story. And the less discouraging part, at that. For where the commercial banks are concerned, there is no such repayment of the people’s money.” Commercial banks, he explained, do not rebate the interest, although they also “‘buy’ the bonds with newly created demand deposit entries on their books – nothing more.”6
Voorhis noted that the Constitution provides, “Congress shall have the power to coin money [and] regulate the value thereof.” Whether “to coin money” means “to issue money” has been debated; but as President Andrew Jackson observed, if anyone was given the power to issue money, it was Congress, not a private banking elite. For a full century before the American Revolution, the colonists funded a period of unprecedented prosperity and productive enterprise with paper money issued directly by their own local governments or government-owned banks. According to Benjamin Franklin, it was chiefly to get that power back after King George halted the practice that the colonists fought the Revolution.7 They won the war but lost the money-creating power to a private banking cartel...
What is all this other irrelevant nonsense?
I mean did you study SO MUCH ECON that you lost the ability to make a point? Because I see you making more claims about conservative radio than economics.