Modern Day Event the federal reserve

[Barry Roundhouse]

the PRIVATELY OWNED federal reserve bank of Australia is not controlled or owned by the federal govternment. the are owned and run by the Rothschild family empire.

the fact we stand by and allow a corporation control the money flow in almost every country on the planet is crazy.
every dollar they print has a percentage of interest that needs to be paid back (they print $1 and for example $1.05 needs to be paid back). they are the sole reason for inflation and the curious pattern of a recession every 10 years and a depression every 20 (give or take).
these privately banking cartels are well on there way to controlling the governments in every country.. before 9/11 there were a few country's with out this Rothschild banking system in place.. they were Afghanistan, Iraq, Sudan, Libya, cuba, Iran and North Korea.
no surprise that the only country's without a Rothschild controlled central bank are Iran, Cuba and North Korea.

curiously the country's that the western world have NEEDED to spread democracy and freedom too have had these exact banks put in place as soon as there governments have fallen, and the propaganda is well in progress against NK and Iran. Cuba May be safe in the near future as they tried and failed.

HAVE AT IT BIG FOOTY

 

[JD11]

Isn't our reserve bank state owned?

 

[Yellow Feathers]

I think he is talking about America? Typo?

 

[JD11]

I think he is talking about America? Typo?

the PRIVATELY OWNED federal reserve bank of Australia is not controlled or owned by the federal govternment.

The Bank is a body corporate wholly owned by the Commonwealth of Australia.

source: the rba website... maybe they're in on it?

 

[Barry Roundhouse]

I think he is talking about America? Typo?

it's every country other than the ones listed.. the names are different but the theory is the same

 

[Barry Roundhouse]

it's every country other than the ones listed.. the names are different but the theory is the same

if it's owned by the common wealth of Australia why does the federal govt. have no control over interest rates?

 

[Barry Roundhouse]

I'm on my phone and can't figure out how to get links onto here but if you look at "conscious entity" s Facebook page links got posted to him not long ago...

he is a lawyer specialising in common law and is very informative about the crimes committed by our government and the corporations controlling it..

highly recommend it
plus he has proof for everything

 

[Sydney Bloods]

if it's owned by the common wealth of Australia why does the federal govt. have no control over interest rates?

Because it's setup as an independent regulatory body.

We do strange s**t like that in this country, believe it or not we appoint judges to precede over criminal hearings as well.

It's this strange notion of minimising political interference.

And the government does have control over interest rates, via the budget and appointing stoogies in the treasury and RBA.

And if they really wanted to they could just sack the boss of the RBA and appoint someone who will set interest rates at a politically advantageous level.

 

[Barry Roundhouse]

what a well written sarcastic and facetious piece ..

http://www.independentaustralia.net...is-the-reserve-bank-really-looking-after,5243

while I know this doesn't say anything about it being privately owned, it makes some very good points about decisions being made that work against the middle and lower classes while benefiting big business.

 

[Barry Roundhouse]

you said

The Bank is a body corporate wholly owned by the Commonwealth of Australia.

http://thearrowsoftruth.com/why-is-there-a-commonwealth-of-australia-registered-in-washington-dc/

http://loveforlife.com.au/content/09/09/20/commonwealth-australia-corporation

http://fairdinkumradio.com/resources/illusion of AUSTRALIAN Government.pdf

have a read and then tell me how "our" government has Australia's citizens best interests at heart and how the commonwealth of Australia is Australian owned, controlled and operated

therefore the federal reserve is too

 

[MaddAdam]

Dude, don't believe everything you read on the Net. The US Federal Reserve is a very different creature to Australia's Reserve Bank.

It was, IIRC, Keating who made the Reserve Bank independent in terms of interest rate setting. This was an eminently wise decision which aimed, largely successfully given we've had 20+ years of consecutive growth, to stop the savage booms and busts associated with the previous governments - that would be John Howard as Treasurer.

Keating also allowed the dollar to float.

In fact, you've got the cart before the horse if you're suggesting governments use the Reserve Bank and the dollar to directly intervene in the economy.

It USED to be that way. See now with the dollar being so high, in the bad old days the government would simply change its value, in reaction to squealing from politically vested interests. It can't do that now. Yes, there are levels that can be employed, but the direct power to manipulate the value of the currency via Cabinet is gone, and for the better.

Australia in fact has one of, if not THE, best arrangements for governing our central bank and our currency of anywhere in the world. It goes a long way to explaining why we avoided the worst of the 2008 Great Recession.

 

[Showbags]

The RBA is different from the American Fed and is owned by the Government as far as I can see. That isn't the problem imo.

The problem is how the currency is created, who creates the currency, who has first use of the newly created currency and who benefits from creating the money and lending it at interest.

The answer to this is commercial banks create most of the money in circulation (through fractional reserve lending). Why is this allowed? Why are private institutions allowed a monopoly on money creation and why are we having to pay interest for the use of this money?

I'm no expert by any means at all but I've always thought that running the banking system as a public institution that exists solely for the public good rather than private profit is much more preferable to the current model which is unsustainable and detrimental to public wellbeing.

 

[vealesy]

So simply put, the problem is fractional reserve lending.

 

[Yellow Feathers]

So simply put, the problem is fractional reserve lending.

And the fact that tax payers must pay interest to the Federal Reserve on the printed money...

More importantly, it's a fiat currency. The system was taken off the gold standard and has no real value.

Fraction reserve lending isn't helping the inflation, but I think the problem started when the dollar was taken off the gold standard.

 

[MaddAdam]

And the fact that tax payers must pay interest to the Federal Reserve on the printed money...

More importantly, it's a fiat currency. The system was taken off the gold standard and has no real value.

Fraction reserve lending isn't helping the inflation, but I think the problem started when the dollar was taken off the gold standard.

People blether on about the gold standard and fiat currency but these are simply red herrings pushed by American types with very very distinct, and utterly inapplicable to Australia, political agendas.

Lack of gold standard tied currency didn't create the 2008 depression.

Of far more concern are the short termist "shareholder value" culture that has been allowed to grow and especially the reliance in the Anglosphere on housing as an engine of economic "growth" in the absence of true production that was gutted by Reagan/Thatcher.

(Cue medusala to give us a one liner about Thatcher and link to the Daily Telegraph that slates Gordon Brown)

 

[Showbags]

People blether on about the gold standard and fiat currency but these are simply red herrings pushed by American types with very very distinct, and utterly inapplicable to Australia, political agendas.

Lack of gold standard tied currency didn't create the 2008 depression.

Of far more concern are the short termist "shareholder value" culture that has been allowed to grow and especially the reliance in the Anglosphere on housing as an engine of economic "growth" in the absence of true production that was gutted by Reagan/Thatcher.

(Cue medusala to give us a one liner about Thatcher and link to the Daily Telegraph that slates Gordon Brown)

Top post.

Fractional Reserve Lending would be of great benefit to society if it was used to finance important public works projects or entrepreneurship. Instead it is used to finance speculation in the housing/share markets and helps fuel asset bubbles (like in 2008).

Here is a good article by respected Australian economist Steve Keen who points out how the "Money Multiplier", which is taught in schools and universities, is a myth and isn't how new money is created at all. Money is solely created by banks and Central Banks and Governments are basically irrelevant in this process. It is done through double entry book keeping and has no restrictions in the amount of money it can create (the only restriction is the amount of people willing to borrow). Even in America with their 10% reserve ratio, the restrictions are still basically non-existant and banks can create/lend as much money as they want and worry about the reserve requirement later.

http://www.businessspectator.com.au/article/2012/10/22/commodities/myth-money-multiplier

 

[MaddAdam]

Top post.

Fractional Reserve Lending would be of great benefit to society if it was used to finance important public works projects or entrepreneurship. Instead it is used to finance speculation in the housing/share markets and helps fuel asset bubbles (like in 2008).

Here is a good article by respected Australian economist Steve Keen who points out how the "Money Multiplier", which is taught in schools and universities, is a myth and isn't how new money is created at all. Money is solely created by banks and Central Banks and Governments are basically irrelevant in this process. It is done through double entry book keeping and has no restrictions in the amount of money it can create (the only restriction is the amount of people willing to borrow). Even in America with their 10% reserve ratio, the restrictions are still basically non-existant and banks can create/lend as much money as they want and worry about the reserve requirement later.

http://www.businessspectator.com.au/article/2012/10/22/commodities/myth-money-multiplier

Yep, the ratios that should be of far more concern to people than fractional lending are house prices vs annual salaries and % of consumer debt to household income.

 

[Sydney Bloods]

And the fact that tax payers must pay interest to the Federal Reserve on the printed money...

More importantly, it's a fiat currency. The system was taken off the gold standard and has no real value.

Fraction reserve lending isn't helping the inflation, but I think the problem started when the dollar was taken off the gold standard.

A gold standard is of no greater strength the fractional return lending.

Both rely on utter faith placed on them by the masses.

A dollar is worth a dollar because that's the value people place on it.

Like wise a lump of gold is only worth what people are prepared to pay. thankfully paranoid people will always ensure that value is quite high. (although silver and platinum out perform gold in terms of investment returns)

The fallacy that dollar is has more backing when linked to an actual gold standard is pure nativity. Yes it means the you can't have more "money" then gold.

But in reality the cash value is altered higher or lower based on the value of gold at the time if the gold price.

It still comes down to pure market faith and if the gold price get significant devalued (say by a large amount of gold dumped on the market) the dollars worth plummets.

Don't be fooled into thinking it's any safer at a currency level.

 

[Showbags]

A good couple of books to read on this topic are "The Creature from Jekyll Island" by G. Edward Griffin and "Web of Debt" by Ellen Brown.

They both show the US Fed was first set up and how the Panic of 1907-10 was a completely staged event that was used as an excuse to setup a Central Bank in America (which was sold to the public as if it was going to properly regulate banking and economic volatility). A US Senator called Nelson Aldrich, who was influenced by many major banking figures like Paul Warburg, The Rothschilds and John D. Rockefeller amongst many others, introduced the Federal Reserve Act in 1913.

 

[MaddAdam]

By my reckoning we are about five posts max away from someone bringing "the people of the Book" into this.

 

[monstabud]

the federal reserve is owned by the commonwealth. it is not a government department.
hence if there is a dispute between the federal government and the reserve bank then the governor general the (queens rep) makes a decision based on what the queen says. as she is the "head" of the commonwealth.
although, even tho the queen is the "head" of the commonwealth she dont own the commonwealth.
the queen is subservient to the bankers,(Rothschild). who in the Napoleon Bonaparte days hoodwinked the royals.
therefore the bankers own the commonwealth and the royals work with and for them.
in early days people would bow and kertsy to rothschild he even was towed around with zebras instead of horses to show his wealth and power.

 

[monstabud]

 

[Sydney Bloods]

the federal reserve is owned by the commonwealth. it is not a government department.
hence if there is a dispute between the federal government and the reserve bank then the governor general the (queens rep) makes a decision based on what the queen says. as she is the "head" of the commonwealth.
although, even tho the queen is the "head" of the commonwealth she dont own the commonwealth.
the queen is subservient to the bankers,(Rothschild). who in the Napoleon Bonaparte days hoodwinked the royals.
therefore the bankers own the commonwealth and the royals work with and for them.
in early days people would bow and kertsy to rothschild he even was towed around with zebras instead of horses to show his wealth and power.

wrong the people of australia (citizens) make up the Commonwealth of Australia they own it and have mostly complete control over it, the federal government is selected by the people to manage and run the the commonwealth of australia. which the RBA is owned by the commonwealth of Australia.

the governor general is the Queens representative of the Commonwealth of Nations in australia because the commonwealth of australia is part of Commonwealth of nations. (a free, equal and voluntary part i might add)

the queen no longer holds proper dominion over australia at all, Australia following the Balfour declaration in 1926 which by royal decree changed what the commonwealth was, it meant that britain and its dominions were "equal in status, in no way subordinate one to another in any aspect of their domestic or external affairs, though united by common allegiance to the Crown, and freely associated as members of the British Commonwealth of Nations."

This further became ratified with the statue of westminster which formally ended british controls over a country once it was ratified by the federal parliaments within the commonwealth.

for those who aren't lunatics heres a fun fact not all sections of the statue of westminster were ratified by australia and thus Britain did have some controls over australia until 1986 when the Australia act was passed, this eliminated all control of the Queen and britain over australia.

Further more the governor general is to Queens representative in name only this allows the governor general to act/attach royal authority to and titles and such. But the Governor General is bound by the Australian constitution only. The queen nor Britain have any control over the governor General (except to accept or decline the appointment) "the principal and most important of his powers and functions, legislative as well as executive, are expressly conferred on him by the terms of the Constitution itself. They are legislative and executive powers and functions conferred on the Governor-General, not by Royal authority, but by statutory authority"

the governor general for those who don't actually understand is the head of the Federal Executive Council (that is the federal government) the governor generals job is primarily to ensure that the Federal Executive Council does not violate the constitution and the commander in chief of Australian Defence force (basically the Governor General is the President of australia, but is appointed rather then elected, but without power to pass legislation think of the governor general as the bottle cap on the government and zar of the armed forces)

further more the governor general post 1986 can only exercise powers in full accordance with the constitution this means they can only be used in convention. so "the dismissal" can not happen to today. the governor can no longer determine what "powers" he has unless they are clearly written down he/she must appeal to the federal high court for clarity.

 

[monstabud]

written like the true mason that you are.

this from the ggs website.

Governor-General's Role
The Governor-General’s role is both complex and demanding. The following summary outlines some of the key features.

The office of Governor-General was established by the Constitution of the Commonwealth of Australia in 1901.

The Governor-General is appointed by The Queen on the advice of the Prime Minister (see the Commission of 21 August 2008). After receiving the commission, the Governor-General takes an Oath of Allegiance and an Oath of Office to The Queen and issues a Proclamation assuming office.

The Governor-General’s appointment is at The Queen’s pleasure, that is, without a term being specified. In practice, however, there is an expectation that appointments will be for around five years, subject on occasion, to some extension.

The Governor-General’s salary is set by an Act of Parliament at the beginning of each term of office, and cannot be changed during the appointment. (See Constitution, s 3 and the Governor-General Act 1974).

The Governor-General’s powers and role derive from the Constitution. Letters Patent from The Queen, dated 21 August 2008, also set out certain provisions relating to the Governor-General.
In several sections of the Constitution the Governor-General’s powers and role are expressed. Section 2 provides that

A Governor-General appointed by the Queen shall be Her Majesty’s representative in the Commonwealth, and shall have and may exercise in the Commonwealth during the Queen’s pleasure, but subject to this Constitution, such powers and functions of the Queen as Her Majesty may be pleased to assign to him.

Additionally and importantly, Section 61 of the Constitution provides that

The executive power of the Commonwealth is vested in the Queen and is exercisable by the Governor-General as the Queen’s representative, and extends to the execution and maintenance of this Constitution, and of the laws of the Commonwealth.

In addition to being The Queen’s representative in Australia, the Governor-General also has specific constitutional and statutory powers. In fact, since the passage of the Australia Act in 1986, the only action performed by The Queen under the Constitution is the appointment of the Governor-General, on the advice of the Australian Prime Minister.

In 1975 the then Commonwealth Solicitor-General, Mr Maurice Byers (later Sir Maurice Byers QC) gave the following legal opinion in relation to the powers of the Governor-General:

The Constitution binds the Crown. The Constitutional prescription is that executive power is exercisable by the Governor-General although vested in The Queen. What is exercisable is original executive power: that is, the very thing vested in The Queen by Section 61. And it is exercisable by The Queen’s representative, not her delegate or agent. The language of Sections 2 and 61 had in this respect no contemporary parallel...*

In other words, the Constitution does not describe the Governor-General’s power, it prescribes it.

When exercising the executive power of the Commonwealth, in accordance with long established constitutional practice, the Governor-General acts on the advice of Ministers who are responsible to the Parliament. That advice is conveyed largely through the Federal Executive Council. The Governor-General presides at meetings of the Executive Council which are attended by at least two members of the Council.

However, there are some powers which the Governor-General may, in certain circumstances, exercise without – or contrary to – ministerial advice. These are known as the reserve powers. While the reserve powers are not codified as such, they are generally agreed to at least include:

1. The power to appoint a Prime Minister if an election has resulted in a ‘hung parliament’;
2. The power to dismiss a Prime Minister where he or she has lost the confidence of the Parliament;
3. The power to dismiss a Prime Minister or Minister when he or she is acting unlawfully; and
4. The power to refuse to dissolve the House of Representatives despite a request from the Prime Minister.

In addition, the Governor-General has a supervisory role to see that the processes of the Federal Executive Council are conducted lawfully and regularly.

In essence then, the Governor-General’s role is to protect the Constitution and to facilitate the work of the Commonwealth Parliament and Government. For example, before giving assent to legislation, the Governor-General must be satisfied that the proposed law has passed both Houses of Parliament and that the necessary certification from the Attorney General has been obtained.

In summary, the Governor-General has many important constitutional, ceremonial and community duties to perform. For example, the Governor-General:

• dissolves the Parliament and issues writs for new elections;
• commissions the Prime Minister and appoints other Ministers after elections;
• gives assent to laws when they have been passed by the two Houses of Parliament – the Senate and the House of Representatives**;
• acts on the advice of Ministers through the Executive Council to issue regulations and proclamations under existing laws; to appoint Federal Judges; to appoint Ambassadors and High Commissioners to overseas countries, to appoint other senior Government officials; to issue Royal Commissions of Inquiry; and other matters, as required by particular legislation;
• authorises many other executive decisions by Ministers such as approving treaties with foreign governments.

Under Section 68 of the Constitution, the Governor-General is also the Commander-in-Chief of the Australian Defence Force, although in practice he or she acts only on the advice of Ministers of the Government. The Minister for Defence is responsible for Australia’s defence policy.

The day-to-day administration and operation of the services are under the command of the Chief of the Defence Force and his officers. Through the Executive Council, the Governor-General:

• appoints the Chief of the Defence Force and the Chiefs of the three Armed Services; and
• commissions officers in the Royal Australian Navy, the Australian Army and the Royal Australian Air Force.

As Commander-in-Chief, the Governor-General has an important ceremonial role to play. He or she attends military parades and special occasions such as ANZAC Day and Remembrance Day, and presents Colours and other insignia to units of the Australian Defence Force.***

There are many other duties performed by the Governor-General. For example, he or she:

• receives and entertains visiting Heads of State, Heads of Government and other prominent visitors to Australia;
• opens new sessions of the Commonwealth Parliament;
• receives the credentials of Ambassadors and some High Commissioners appointed to represent their countries in Australia;
• conducts Investitures at which people receive Awards under the Australian Honours system for notable service to the community, or for acts of bravery; and
• meets many Australian citizens and representatives or organisations acting in the life of the community.

The Governor-General is Patron of a great many organisations and takes a keen interest in their activities. A list of the Vice-Regal Patronages can be found here.

Possibly the most visible role of the Governor-General, as the office has evolved over the years, is to encourage, articulate and represent those things that unite Australians as a nation. In this capacity, the Governor-General and his or her spouse:

• travel widely throughout Australia visiting the capital cities, regional centres, rural districts, indigenous communities and disadvantaged groups;
• accept patronage of many national, charitable, cultural, educational, sporting and professional organisations;
• open and participate in conferences where topics of national importance are discussed – such as educational, health, cultural, welfare, defence, economic and rural issues;
• attend services, functions, commemorations and exhibitions of local significance, lending their encouragement to individuals and groups who are making a substantial contribution to their communities and to the nation; and
• issue congratulatory messages to Australians who achieve significant milestones in their lives such as 100th birthdays and 50th wedding anniversaries.
• The role of Governor-General differs from that of a State Governor in three ways. The Governor-General alone:
• receives the credentials of foreign Ambassadors and High Commissioners to accredit them to represent their countries in Australia;
• is Commander-in-Chief of the Australian Defence Force; and
• is Chancellor of the Order of Australia, Australia’s unique system of honours and awards.

 

[Killer Power]

Is there a point you are trying to make there (other than that you can copy and paste) because im not going to read through all of that.