|
some selected quotes
|
|
Topic Started: Feb 6 2009, 01:03 PM (250 Views)
|
|
thePhilosopher
|
Feb 9 2009, 11:39 AM
Post #16
|
All-Star
- Posts:
- 1,400
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #130
- Joined:
- February 9, 2008
|
Good points, Aaron. I think we can say that, at least, this can serve as a useful analogy. But, in reality, people are losing their homes and they expect the government to take care of it. In all reality, the government has made a deal with the devil (private banks) in order to get all of their goodies and have screwed the average American in the process, not to mention future generations.
|
|
| |
|
HoosierLars
|
Feb 9 2009, 12:17 PM
Post #17
|
3 in a row
- Posts:
- 22,921
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #20
- Joined:
- February 5, 2008
|
- thePhilosopher
- Feb 9 2009, 10:51 AM
Here's one of the most prophetic Jefferson quotes:
"I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies . . . If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around [the banks] . . . will deprive the people of all property until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered . . . The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it properly belongs."
A good number of Americans ARE waking up homeless, and it will be a lot more if we blindly trust the Central Bank's solution of government spending to get us out of this mess. We will be FINANCIAL SLAVES to banks and foreign countries if we keep this up, if we aren't already. I think we're too far gone, but perhaps people will wake up once we hit hyperinflation and chaos hits the American streets. Then we'll have to sort out this mess, perhaps as the Founding Fathers did, but I hope we can get this thing turned around peacefully.
Jefferson in this quote sounds like... Ron Paul? :cheers: What do ya say, Lars and boilergrad? The Federal Reserve isn't a "private bank." Its managers are appointed by elected officials, who all answer to the American people.
The fundamental problem is government spending, and our move toward socialism. This could just as easily occur with or without the Fed. Without the Fed, the government could still issue IOU's (treasuries) to fund deficit spending.
I've been thinking more about inflating the money supply, and its effect on our economy. OldSchool argues that the banks see most of the benefit, because they can take advantage of the current buying power of the dollar before the introduction of more money reduces its value. I think this effect is minimal, because we're only talking about 1-2% inflation per year, on average.
Libertarians should focus their political capital on limiting government spending, not on the Federal reserve.
|
|
| |
|
troubleatiu
|
Feb 9 2009, 12:21 PM
Post #18
|
Coach
- Posts:
- 3,218
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #21
- Joined:
- February 5, 2008
|
- HoosierLars
- Feb 9 2009, 12:17 PM
- thePhilosopher
- Feb 9 2009, 10:51 AM
Here's one of the most prophetic Jefferson quotes:
"I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies . . . If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around [the banks] . . . will deprive the people of all property until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered . . . The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it properly belongs."
A good number of Americans ARE waking up homeless, and it will be a lot more if we blindly trust the Central Bank's solution of government spending to get us out of this mess. We will be FINANCIAL SLAVES to banks and foreign countries if we keep this up, if we aren't already. I think we're too far gone, but perhaps people will wake up once we hit hyperinflation and chaos hits the American streets. Then we'll have to sort out this mess, perhaps as the Founding Fathers did, but I hope we can get this thing turned around peacefully.
Jefferson in this quote sounds like... Ron Paul? :cheers: What do ya say, Lars and boilergrad?
The Federal Reserve isn't a "private bank." Its managers are appointed by elected officials, who all answer to the American people. The fundamental problem is government spending, and our move toward socialism. This could just as easily occur with or without the Fed. Without the Fed, the government could still issue IOU's (treasuries) to fund deficit spending. I've been thinking more about inflating the money supply, and its effect on our economy. OldSchool argues that the banks see most of the benefit, because they can take advantage of the current buying power of the dollar before the introduction of more money reduces its value. I think this effect is minimal, because we're only talking about 1-2% inflation per year, on average. Libertarians should focus their political capital on limiting government spending, not on the Federal reserve. lars, please, FOR THE LOVE OF GOD, stay out of the economic discussions. the federal reserve IS A PRIVATE BANK, not in the sense of ONE bank, but A CARTEL of private banks. there is nothing "federal" about the federal reserve. this is NOT a government institution.
|
 "The illegal we do immediately. The unconstitutional takes a little longer."--Henry Kissinger "What luck for rulers that men do not think."- Adolph Hitler "Terrorists don't want your freedoms--they want your life. It's dictators and tyrants who want your freedoms."-author unidentified
|
| |
|
troubleatiu
|
Feb 9 2009, 12:24 PM
Post #19
|
Coach
- Posts:
- 3,218
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #21
- Joined:
- February 5, 2008
|
The Federal Reserve isn't a "private bank." Its managers are appointed by elected officials, who all answer to the American people.-lars
when is the last time a fed manager was on any ballot you cast? THEY DAMN SURE HAVENT BEEN ON MINE. these guys arent elected, THEYRE APPOINTED. there is no accountability to the american people. could you vote greenspan out? hell no. how about bernecke? i didnt see his position on my ballot either. thats as ignorant a statement you have ever made here.
|
 "The illegal we do immediately. The unconstitutional takes a little longer."--Henry Kissinger "What luck for rulers that men do not think."- Adolph Hitler "Terrorists don't want your freedoms--they want your life. It's dictators and tyrants who want your freedoms."-author unidentified
|
| |
|
troubleatiu
|
Feb 9 2009, 12:35 PM
Post #20
|
Coach
- Posts:
- 3,218
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #21
- Joined:
- February 5, 2008
|
- troubleatiu
- Feb 9 2009, 12:24 PM
The Federal Reserve isn't a "private bank." Its managers are appointed by elected officials, who all answer to the American people.-lars
when is the last time a fed manager was on any ballot you cast? THEY DAMN SURE HAVENT BEEN ON MINE. these guys arent elected, THEYRE APPOINTED. there is no accountability to the american people. could you vote greenspan out? hell no. how about bernecke? i didnt see his position on my ballot either. thats as ignorant a statement you have ever made here.
my bad. i see you did say they are APPOINTED by ELECTED officials. that not-with-standing, its still an appointee position, and we all know most of america doesnt follow politics that closely. look at greenspan, he was fed chairman from '87- what '04? 4 presidents let him inject his poison into our economy and nobody spoke out against him. fuck, he was revered as a God up till 18 monthes ago. now people realize his policies directly contributed to this current mess.
|
 "The illegal we do immediately. The unconstitutional takes a little longer."--Henry Kissinger "What luck for rulers that men do not think."- Adolph Hitler "Terrorists don't want your freedoms--they want your life. It's dictators and tyrants who want your freedoms."-author unidentified
|
| |
|
troubleatiu
|
Feb 9 2009, 12:38 PM
Post #21
|
Coach
- Posts:
- 3,218
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #21
- Joined:
- February 5, 2008
|
alan greenspan- In the absence of the gold standard, there is no way to protect savings from confiscation through inflation. There is no safe store of value.
History has not dealt kindly with the aftermath of protracted periods of low risk premiums.
Whatever you tax, you get less of.
|
 "The illegal we do immediately. The unconstitutional takes a little longer."--Henry Kissinger "What luck for rulers that men do not think."- Adolph Hitler "Terrorists don't want your freedoms--they want your life. It's dictators and tyrants who want your freedoms."-author unidentified
|
| |
|
thePhilosopher
|
Feb 9 2009, 02:58 PM
Post #22
|
All-Star
- Posts:
- 1,400
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #130
- Joined:
- February 9, 2008
|
- HoosierLars
- Feb 9 2009, 12:17 PM
- thePhilosopher
- Feb 9 2009, 10:51 AM
Here's one of the most prophetic Jefferson quotes:
"I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies . . . If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around [the banks] . . . will deprive the people of all property until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered . . . The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it properly belongs."
A good number of Americans ARE waking up homeless, and it will be a lot more if we blindly trust the Central Bank's solution of government spending to get us out of this mess. We will be FINANCIAL SLAVES to banks and foreign countries if we keep this up, if we aren't already. I think we're too far gone, but perhaps people will wake up once we hit hyperinflation and chaos hits the American streets. Then we'll have to sort out this mess, perhaps as the Founding Fathers did, but I hope we can get this thing turned around peacefully.
Jefferson in this quote sounds like... Ron Paul? :cheers: What do ya say, Lars and boilergrad?
The Federal Reserve isn't a "private bank." Its managers are appointed by elected officials, who all answer to the American people. The fundamental problem is government spending, and our move toward socialism. This could just as easily occur with or without the Fed. Without the Fed, the government could still issue IOU's (treasuries) to fund deficit spending. I've been thinking more about inflating the money supply, and its effect on our economy. OldSchool argues that the banks see most of the benefit, because they can take advantage of the current buying power of the dollar before the introduction of more money reduces its value. I think this effect is minimal, because we're only talking about 1-2% inflation per year, on average. Libertarians should focus their political capital on limiting government spending, not on the Federal reserve. BUZZ! Sorry, Lars. We have no congressional oversight on anything that goes on inside the Federal Reserve. There's $2 Trillion that the Fed simply will not say anything about. (Bloomberg: $2 Trillion)
So if they all answer to the American people, why can't we find out about the $2 trillion? Go ahead, write your congressperson. Try to find out where that money is. I'd love to hear the response.
|
|
| |
|
HoosierLars
|
Feb 9 2009, 03:21 PM
Post #23
|
3 in a row
- Posts:
- 22,921
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #20
- Joined:
- February 5, 2008
|
- thePhilosopher
- Feb 9 2009, 02:58 PM
- HoosierLars
- Feb 9 2009, 12:17 PM
- thePhilosopher
- Feb 9 2009, 10:51 AM
Here's one of the most prophetic Jefferson quotes:
"I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies . . . If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around [the banks] . . . will deprive the people of all property until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered . . . The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it properly belongs."
A good number of Americans ARE waking up homeless, and it will be a lot more if we blindly trust the Central Bank's solution of government spending to get us out of this mess. We will be FINANCIAL SLAVES to banks and foreign countries if we keep this up, if we aren't already. I think we're too far gone, but perhaps people will wake up once we hit hyperinflation and chaos hits the American streets. Then we'll have to sort out this mess, perhaps as the Founding Fathers did, but I hope we can get this thing turned around peacefully.
Jefferson in this quote sounds like... Ron Paul? :cheers: What do ya say, Lars and boilergrad?
The Federal Reserve isn't a "private bank." Its managers are appointed by elected officials, who all answer to the American people. The fundamental problem is government spending, and our move toward socialism. This could just as easily occur with or without the Fed. Without the Fed, the government could still issue IOU's (treasuries) to fund deficit spending. I've been thinking more about inflating the money supply, and its effect on our economy. OldSchool argues that the banks see most of the benefit, because they can take advantage of the current buying power of the dollar before the introduction of more money reduces its value. I think this effect is minimal, because we're only talking about 1-2% inflation per year, on average. Libertarians should focus their political capital on limiting government spending, not on the Federal reserve.
BUZZ! Sorry, Lars. We have no congressional oversight on anything that goes on inside the Federal Reserve. There's $2 Trillion that the Fed simply will not say anything about. ( Bloomberg: $2 Trillion) So if they all answer to the American people, why can't we find out about the $2 trillion? Go ahead, write your congressperson. Try to find out where that money is. I'd love to hear the response. Sorry Phil, the Fed Chairman is appointed by the President, and can be fired too.
|
|
| |
|
thePhilosopher
|
Feb 9 2009, 05:09 PM
Post #24
|
All-Star
- Posts:
- 1,400
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #130
- Joined:
- February 9, 2008
|
- HoosierLars
- Feb 9 2009, 03:21 PM
- thePhilosopher
- Feb 9 2009, 02:58 PM
- HoosierLars
- Feb 9 2009, 12:17 PM
- thePhilosopher
- Feb 9 2009, 10:51 AM
Here's one of the most prophetic Jefferson quotes:
"I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies . . . If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around [the banks] . . . will deprive the people of all property until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered . . . The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it properly belongs."
A good number of Americans ARE waking up homeless, and it will be a lot more if we blindly trust the Central Bank's solution of government spending to get us out of this mess. We will be FINANCIAL SLAVES to banks and foreign countries if we keep this up, if we aren't already. I think we're too far gone, but perhaps people will wake up once we hit hyperinflation and chaos hits the American streets. Then we'll have to sort out this mess, perhaps as the Founding Fathers did, but I hope we can get this thing turned around peacefully.
Jefferson in this quote sounds like... Ron Paul? :cheers: What do ya say, Lars and boilergrad?
The Federal Reserve isn't a "private bank." Its managers are appointed by elected officials, who all answer to the American people. The fundamental problem is government spending, and our move toward socialism. This could just as easily occur with or without the Fed. Without the Fed, the government could still issue IOU's (treasuries) to fund deficit spending. I've been thinking more about inflating the money supply, and its effect on our economy. OldSchool argues that the banks see most of the benefit, because they can take advantage of the current buying power of the dollar before the introduction of more money reduces its value. I think this effect is minimal, because we're only talking about 1-2% inflation per year, on average. Libertarians should focus their political capital on limiting government spending, not on the Federal reserve.
BUZZ! Sorry, Lars. We have no congressional oversight on anything that goes on inside the Federal Reserve. There's $2 Trillion that the Fed simply will not say anything about. ( Bloomberg: $2 Trillion) So if they all answer to the American people, why can't we find out about the $2 trillion? Go ahead, write your congressperson. Try to find out where that money is. I'd love to hear the response.
Sorry Phil, the Fed Chairman is appointed by the President, and can be fired too. Lars, read what I said. I said that there is no congressional oversight, that is, the Fed does not need to answer to the Congress. The President does appoint the chairman, but he's one person at the top of the chain. I'd argue that the Fed chairman is really a figure-head, with no real power to make changes to what has already been set forth. The die has been cast. What we need is transparency, and something everyone that believes in democracy and representational government should be shouting from the rooftops for.
Are you going to look into that $2 trillion?
|
|
| |
|
yawnzzz
|
Feb 9 2009, 05:56 PM
Post #25
|
Coach
- Posts:
- 4,964
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #58
- Joined:
- February 6, 2008
|
- HoosierLars
- Feb 9 2009, 03:21 PM
Sorry Phil, the Fed Chairman is appointed by the President, and can be fired too. Most people who vote don't even know what the Fed does... so while logically, yes someone could show their disapproval for the Fed's actions by voting against a President; I'd say it's very unlikely that those issues will ever rise to the top of voting patterns.
|
|
|
| |
|
HoosierLars
|
Feb 9 2009, 06:12 PM
Post #26
|
3 in a row
- Posts:
- 22,921
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #20
- Joined:
- February 5, 2008
|
- thePhilosopher
- Feb 9 2009, 05:09 PM
- HoosierLars
- Feb 9 2009, 03:21 PM
- thePhilosopher
- Feb 9 2009, 02:58 PM
- HoosierLars
- Feb 9 2009, 12:17 PM
- thePhilosopher
- Feb 9 2009, 10:51 AM
Here's one of the most prophetic Jefferson quotes:
"I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies . . . If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around [the banks] . . . will deprive the people of all property until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered . . . The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it properly belongs."
A good number of Americans ARE waking up homeless, and it will be a lot more if we blindly trust the Central Bank's solution of government spending to get us out of this mess. We will be FINANCIAL SLAVES to banks and foreign countries if we keep this up, if we aren't already. I think we're too far gone, but perhaps people will wake up once we hit hyperinflation and chaos hits the American streets. Then we'll have to sort out this mess, perhaps as the Founding Fathers did, but I hope we can get this thing turned around peacefully.
Jefferson in this quote sounds like... Ron Paul? :cheers: What do ya say, Lars and boilergrad?
The Federal Reserve isn't a "private bank." Its managers are appointed by elected officials, who all answer to the American people. The fundamental problem is government spending, and our move toward socialism. This could just as easily occur with or without the Fed. Without the Fed, the government could still issue IOU's (treasuries) to fund deficit spending. I've been thinking more about inflating the money supply, and its effect on our economy. OldSchool argues that the banks see most of the benefit, because they can take advantage of the current buying power of the dollar before the introduction of more money reduces its value. I think this effect is minimal, because we're only talking about 1-2% inflation per year, on average. Libertarians should focus their political capital on limiting government spending, not on the Federal reserve.
BUZZ! Sorry, Lars. We have no congressional oversight on anything that goes on inside the Federal Reserve. There's $2 Trillion that the Fed simply will not say anything about. ( Bloomberg: $2 Trillion) So if they all answer to the American people, why can't we find out about the $2 trillion? Go ahead, write your congressperson. Try to find out where that money is. I'd love to hear the response.
Sorry Phil, the Fed Chairman is appointed by the President, and can be fired too.
Lars, read what I said. I said that there is no congressional oversight, that is, the Fed does not need to answer to the Congress. The President does appoint the chairman, but he's one person at the top of the chain. I'd argue that the Fed chairman is really a figure-head, with no real power to make changes to what has already been set forth. The die has been cast. What we need is transparency, and something everyone that believes in democracy and representational government should be shouting from the rooftops for. Are you going to look into that $2 trillion? Phil, reread what I initially wrote: The Federal Reserve isn't a "private bank." Its managers are appointed by elected officials, who all answer to the American people.
I agree there is currently a lack of transparency. But when you consider that we have a Congress where both major parties have been trying to outspend each other, we have bigger fish to fry.
|
|
| |
|
HoosierLars
|
Feb 9 2009, 06:14 PM
Post #27
|
3 in a row
- Posts:
- 22,921
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #20
- Joined:
- February 5, 2008
|
- Hoosier_Faithful_07
- Feb 9 2009, 05:56 PM
- HoosierLars
- Feb 9 2009, 03:21 PM
Sorry Phil, the Fed Chairman is appointed by the President, and can be fired too.
Most people who vote don't even know what the Fed does... so while logically, yes someone could show their disapproval for the Fed's actions by voting against a President; I'd say it's very unlikely that those issues will ever rise to the top of voting patterns. Most people don't know that Obama's vision is for a socialist country, and he sucks ass.
|
|
| |
|
troubleatiu
|
Feb 10 2009, 09:12 AM
Post #28
|
Coach
- Posts:
- 3,218
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #21
- Joined:
- February 5, 2008
|
"Libertarians should focus their political capital on limiting government spending, not on the Federal reserve."-lars
heres something to ponder, if we abolished the federal reserve, (ie took away the ability to inject money out of thin air), wouldnt that in and of itself force government to limit its spending? how do you propose we limit govt spending under the current set-up? with fractional reserve lending, its impossible. a hard currency would make it next to impossible to print and spend like we currently do.
|
 "The illegal we do immediately. The unconstitutional takes a little longer."--Henry Kissinger "What luck for rulers that men do not think."- Adolph Hitler "Terrorists don't want your freedoms--they want your life. It's dictators and tyrants who want your freedoms."-author unidentified
|
| |
|
HoosierLars
|
Feb 10 2009, 11:35 AM
Post #29
|
3 in a row
- Posts:
- 22,921
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #20
- Joined:
- February 5, 2008
|
- troubleatiu
- Feb 10 2009, 09:12 AM
"Libertarians should focus their political capital on limiting government spending, not on the Federal reserve."-lars
heres something to ponder, if we abolished the federal reserve, (ie took away the ability to inject money out of thin air), wouldnt that in and of itself force government to limit its spending? how do you propose we limit govt spending under the current set-up? with fractional reserve lending, its impossible. a hard currency would make it next to impossible to print and spend like we currently do.
In the past I've agreed that eliminating the Fed would force Congress to be more disciplined. However, we could still sell treasuries, and run deficits.
I know we disagree, but the ability to quickly expand and contract the money supply is very helpful when trying to keep a large economy running smoothly. The money supply also needs to keep expanding to match the overall wealth of our country. The Fed has done a great job doing this until the 60's when the liberals started passing more entitlements and got us into Vietnam, and running larger deficits. The Repubs also deserve blame for being too hawkish, and spending too much on defense. There's plenty of blame to go around, but most of it belongs with the Congress, which are elected by the people. So we basically have ourselves to blame.
|
|
| |
|
troubleatiu
|
Feb 10 2009, 11:52 AM
Post #30
|
Coach
- Posts:
- 3,218
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #21
- Joined:
- February 5, 2008
|
you get so close lars, then you say something like this, "I know we disagree, but the ability to quickly expand and contract the money supply is very helpful when trying to keep a large economy running smoothly."
i really want to help you on that last 10% you cant comprehend. i really do. its why you are not on my "ignore."
|
 "The illegal we do immediately. The unconstitutional takes a little longer."--Henry Kissinger "What luck for rulers that men do not think."- Adolph Hitler "Terrorists don't want your freedoms--they want your life. It's dictators and tyrants who want your freedoms."-author unidentified
|
| |
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
|