- Oct 30, 2010
- 5,548
- 4,366
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
wrong. it is the central bank of the US and has both public and private aspects, but as far as monetary policy, regulation etc, it acts exactly the same as the RBA.
Connecting the dots - Are we on the brink of calamity?
- Thread starter Smiling Buddha
- Start date
- Tagged users None
wrong. it is the central bank of the US and has both public and private aspects, but as far as monetary policy, regulation etc, it acts exactly the same as the RBA.
Papa Juggs
Hall of Famer
- Banned
- #152
WRONG!
It is a private bank with the power and protection of the government without any public ownership.
- Oct 30, 2010
- 5,548
- 4,366
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
yeah, a private bank that gives 98% of its profits to treasury! lol. there is little difference between the US fed and the RBA. get a clue.
Papa Juggs
Hall of Famer
- Banned
- #154
It's not about the money they make themselves it's about how they create money out of debt for the wealthy bankers skewing the distribution of wealth to the 1%.
I have a clue. It seems like you're one of those corporate puppets that trolls the internet trying to support bankster terrorists.
- Oct 30, 2010
- 5,548
- 4,366
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
so, even if we accept this infantile view on face value explain
a) how this is different to what the RBA does and;
b) how this would be different if the structure of the fed was completely government in nature.
Papa Juggs
Hall of Famer
- Banned
- #156
The money doesn't help the public and people are suffering due to interest payments on national debt.
This is because of private central banking.
If governments had any control at all this situation wouldn't exist.
This is because of private central banking.
If governments had any control at all this situation wouldn't exist.
- Oct 30, 2010
- 5,548
- 4,366
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
you have no idea what you're talking about and you didn't answer either question.
Papa Juggs
Hall of Famer
- Banned
- #158
That was intentional. It's called not feeding the troll.
- Oct 30, 2010
- 5,548
- 4,366
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
3. Inability to answer questions. For people who loudly advertise their determination to the principle of questioning everything, they're pretty poor at answering direct questions from sceptics about the claims that they make.
LOL Long Live HFC, that's a cute view of the world you have.
The Federal Reserve system is controlled by a conglomerate of international banks and the system is designed to enrich them at the expense of the average citizen. How anyone fails to see that in this day and age is beyond me.
It doesn't really matter who owns it either. You just need to look at the role central banks play in the creation of money to see how inherently corrupt the whole system is.
The Federal Reserve system is controlled by a conglomerate of international banks and the system is designed to enrich them at the expense of the average citizen. How anyone fails to see that in this day and age is beyond me.
It doesn't really matter who owns it either. You just need to look at the role central banks play in the creation of money to see how inherently corrupt the whole system is.
- Oct 30, 2010
- 5,548
- 4,366
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
what a load of nonsense. the fed is "controlled" by the board of governors, an independent federal government agency. no different to our central bank. no real difference to ANY central bank in the world.
central banks are "designed" to maintain currency stability, stable prices, full employment, control inflation, act as a lender of last resort. they also perform various regulatory functions (but those would differ depending on each nation and not particularly relevant to the crazy nonsense you commonly see).
central banks around the world are part of their respective governments. they are there for economic stability. sometimes they fail spectacularly, but they don't deserve the paranoia.
- Thread starter
- Banned
- #162
Can the mods please split this thread into two: The first being the original thread, which focuses on a set of distinct issues facing Australia and the world; the second being a thread to discuss the Federal Reserve and other reserve banks in general?
Until recently this was a good thread where posters showed each other respect. I don't want to see it intentionally tarnished by certain parties.
Until recently this was a good thread where posters showed each other respect. I don't want to see it intentionally tarnished by certain parties.
I never said The Fed operated any differently to other central banks. Almost all of them operate exactly the same way.
The reality is that they don't accomplish any of those objectives. They destroy the purchasing power of our currency due to endless money printing and fractional reserve banking, which in itself is a hidden tax (inflation). Not only are central banks destroying our prosperity, they are instruments of war and are the reason we have Aussie soldiers fighting and dying in The Middle East.
Jefferson was spot on when he said that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies.
Last edited:
- Oct 30, 2010
- 5,548
- 4,366
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
Did you know the purchasing power of wages has doubled (in the US) since WW2? yes, each individual unit of currency is worth less, but people can buy twice as much with what they have.
fractional lending is a great system whereby people can demand their deposits at any time while money is being lent to others.
fractional lending is a great system whereby people can demand their deposits at any time while money is being lent to others.
Bollocks.
It's a great system for the banks who can create money out of nothing for the purpose of lending, but it ain't good for your average Joe. And if we all went and demanded our deposits, the banks would struggle to pay 1 in 20 people. That's because our ******* deposits aren't even there.
It's a great system for the banks who can create money out of nothing for the purpose of lending, but it ain't good for your average Joe. And if we all went and demanded our deposits, the banks would struggle to pay 1 in 20 people. That's because our ******* deposits aren't even there.
- Oct 30, 2010
- 5,548
- 4,366
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
true story.
http://andolfatto.blogspot.com.au/2011/03/ron-pauls-money-illusion-sequel.html
because average joes don't borrow money or have an account they use for electronic transactions that is both convenient and relatively cheap?
funny how this never ever happens isn't it. feel free to give me all your imaginary deposits that don't really exist
- Apr 4, 2013
- 13,670
- 16,890
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
I think if you were talking about the powers that be who wield that kind of unseen-by-the-public influence the Joyes would be right up there in Australia.
- May 8, 2006
- 13,700
- 11,422
- AFL Club
- Essendon
- Other Teams
- NYJ
A modern day U.S civil war always gets me thinking of one thing.
Non military people can only hold so much ammo in their possession. A civil 'war' (riots, looting, murders and an all round free-for-all) would surely fade out after 10 weeks or so wouldn't it?
Everyone shooting at everyone while either protecting their stocks or attacking someone for theirs is not gunna last that long.
The army would soon get control back once all food, ammo and water supplies started to run out. People would be eventually want peace and order...right?
Non military people can only hold so much ammo in their possession. A civil 'war' (riots, looting, murders and an all round free-for-all) would surely fade out after 10 weeks or so wouldn't it?
Everyone shooting at everyone while either protecting their stocks or attacking someone for theirs is not gunna last that long.
The army would soon get control back once all food, ammo and water supplies started to run out. People would be eventually want peace and order...right?
Depends on how many people rebel/revolt.
And I don't think that it wouldn't be citizens v citizens, rather it would be more of a revolution with a majority of lower/middle class citizens vs. government & upper class.
If a revolution of such size were to take place, there is no guarantee that the U.S. Defence Force would be united in its protection of the U.S. Government & the Elite. I'd be confident that ammo, weapons & supplies would find their way to any revolutionaries.
There is a very fine line between "maintaining peace and order" and "maintaining control." Excessive control to the point where people need to break the law to support themselves (eg. stealing food) will encourage people to revolt. If there is no improvement in conditions, then there is little for a revolutionary to gain by seeking peace.
I agree with the loss of faith in democracy being very dangerous. I also believe that an economy with infinite growth at its foundation is bound to collapse at some point. There is also many hot spots around the world where nasty people like elements in the US, Russian and Chinese leadership can duke it out.
However, what is the straw that will break the camels back of our industrial civilisation is climate change.
Where too ****ed up to cope with climate change. We're too ****ed up to deal with it either.
All this talk about war being good for the economy has some truth. As horrible as it sounds there is a big reduction in population which opens up opportunities for many and after a period of banding together we saw an egalitarianism after WW2 which has never been seen before. Monboit writes some fantastic stuff about this.
Anyhow the most depressing thing about watching us squabble while we change the climate to the point that the industrial farming won't be a reliable source of food for 9,000,000,000 people is that banding together and attacking this problem will provide the economic and social gains that a war could. However, unlike a normal war we wont see the destruction and nations could potentially band together with a common goal rather than work towards each others destruction.
However, what is the straw that will break the camels back of our industrial civilisation is climate change.
Where too ****ed up to cope with climate change. We're too ****ed up to deal with it either.
All this talk about war being good for the economy has some truth. As horrible as it sounds there is a big reduction in population which opens up opportunities for many and after a period of banding together we saw an egalitarianism after WW2 which has never been seen before. Monboit writes some fantastic stuff about this.
Anyhow the most depressing thing about watching us squabble while we change the climate to the point that the industrial farming won't be a reliable source of food for 9,000,000,000 people is that banding together and attacking this problem will provide the economic and social gains that a war could. However, unlike a normal war we wont see the destruction and nations could potentially band together with a common goal rather than work towards each others destruction.
- Thread starter
- Banned
- #175
Funny how that graph cuts out at 2008.
Got anything a bit more relevant i.e. including the past half decade? Or which cites nominal and real?
