-
World Finance Watch
- Thread starter Zoomerz
- Start date
Re: World Finance Watch
Shades of what you were talking bout Cary....
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=stor...al_gses_snow_dc
Z-Re: World Finance Watch
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(\"Zoomerz\")</div>
Zoomz,
Your understanding is pretty good. One small, but significant piece of the puzzle is that inflation is driven by expanding debt/credit and money supply. Too many dollars chasing a limited amount of goods results in higher prices. As China and India came on line with all the money they're accumulating from their record trade supluses with the US, they are building infrastructure. The infrastructure and its construction require oil and its products. The US has not reduced its energy demands, so you have a demand squeeze on a tapped out supply. That's what's driving oil prices higher - a debt and liquidity bubble enabled by the Fed, and fostered by our "borrow, spend, and consume" economy. And yes, petroleum based goods and services (what isn't these days) are feeling the pinch of higher oil prices. But excess and expanding liquidity and debt fuel inflation, just as contracting debt and money supply drive deflation. Higher prices during inflationary periods are the syptom of the phenomenon, just as falling prices are the symptom during deflationary periods.
A lot of words to say what I said, but inflation and deflation are some of the most misunderstood economic phenomenon around. It's always about the supply of debt and money. The Fed is gonna have to take the rap for this one when it blows. And I agree, we're probably in for some short term inflation, which will be followed by a deflationary depression. Timing is the only unknown on this one. Bond yields will go higher, as bondholders (mostly foreigners) get out of dollar denominated assets. This should accelerate as people begin waking up to the fact that the US can't pay off the $7+ trillion of debt it has now, plus the $50 trillion or so of unfunded Soc. Sec. and Medicare liabilities.
Another misunderstood phenomenon of economics is the cycle of inflation / deflation, or how they rotate from one to another. We were in a period of "disinflation" in most of the 80's and 90's. This is when the rate of inflation decelerates (from about 13% in 81 to about 2% in 2002). It's still positive, but the rate diminishes and generally triggers "deflation" fears. This is what happened when the Fed kept talking about an "unwelcome decrease in the rate of inflation" instead of just saying "we're concerned about deflation." So they put on the most massive monetary stimulus ever seen on the planet to keep the US from falling into deflation. Or so they thought. What they did was play the "reflation" trade, which is typical, by flooding the world with liquidity and encouraging debt. Instead of warding off deflation, they've fed it. They just made the downside pain much bigger over the last few years.
So we see spikes in the prices of things we need, and falling prices in the things we want. Things we need that have spiked: medical care, insurance, education costs, energy, raw materials, etc. Things we want that have fallen in price: electronics, computers, textiles and assorted gee gaws from China, broad band, autos, etc. So you see both effects of the reflation trade and the underlying deflation which has yet to manifest itself so that everyone will see it. The reflation trade has manifested itself in a series of "bubbles" mainly in financial assets (stocks, bonds, etc.) and hard assets (real estate, precious metals, and commodities). Problem is all bubbles pop. Their popping will herald in the BIG BAD Deflation that, as you say, will make the 30's look like everyone won the Millionaire game show.
I've copied a link to a chart, The Cycle of Deflation from Comstock Partners, Inc. in case you want to see where we are. We're on the downside of the top slope at about the "devaluation" to "competitive devaluation" level. We've also seen the beginnings of "protectionism and tariffs."
http://www.comstockfunds.com/files/NLPP00000%5C234.gif
Sorry for the long assed post. Just some rambling on a Thursday.
Cary
P.S. Oh, yeah. Almost forgot. Snow was only following up Greenspan's commentary from the day before about limiting Fannie and Freddie's portfolios. A few weeks ago, Greenspan suggested that Congress force Fannie and Freddie to reduce their mortgage portfolios (now totalling about $1.7 trillion) to about $200 billion. Talk about deflation. You remove $1.5 trillion from the mortgage market, and there'll be blood in the streets. Yeeha, maybe the bankers do want to push us into a depression. All the real estate and businesses that could acquired for pennies on the dollar must be tempting. Both Snow and Greenspan have been warning Congress not to ever guarantee Fannie or Freddie or any of the GSE's (govt. sponsored enterprise) debt. Too dangerous. Everybody acts like the GSE's have the "indirect" backing of the "full faith and credit" of the US govt. Truth is there's nothing backing these firms directly or indirectly. Maybe that's why the European Central Bank instructed all their member banks to get out of all GSE debt in 2003. These bankers can smell a mortally wounded animal from a mile away.BubbuClinton
Junior Member
Re: World Finance Watch
What is really amazing to me is that all of these "Crisises" are artificial. Let's do a quick review of International banking.
Most of the capital behind the international bank is artificial, it is based on Fractional lending. Beginning as far back as the Knights Templar in middle ages when they brought back a large portion of Isreal's treasure from Jerusulem, credit based fractional lending has developed. Basically the early Arrab traders would take checks based on templar gold and started the first modern banks. Theses banks quickly learned that if they practice fractional lending charging interest on multiples of the actual value of the assets in reserve, they could multiply thier profits. These banks diversified and started funding country treasuries starting with France, spain and england.
They convinced the early kings that if they borrowed notes from thier banks, the kings could fund gov. projects like wars, infrastructure improvement and humanitarian projects. The issue became serious when they started the fractional lending part. They would lend a multiple of credit based on a unit of treasure. For example if they had 1 million dollars of gold bullion they would lend credit up to 100 million dollars.
This idea of fractional lending is actually a biblical concept. For those theologians out there, you will recall that Jesus went into the temple and violently whipped the money changers. What Ciaphus the head of the Sanheddren was doing was requiring temple scrit to be used for the state impossed temple offerings and tithes. The temple tax had to be paid with temple money. So they would set the value of the the temple money based on a formula they controled. An example would be charging 3 temple copper pieces for 1 dove for sacrifice. It may cost 5 Isreal copper pieces for the 3 temple coppers or 2 Roman coppers for the 3 temple coppers. The value was not based on the weight of the metal. It was a scrit by Fiat. And only the good faith and credit of the People to honor the scrit made it worth anything. Then they would start lending the scrit to people to buy goods which were sold in the temple. They would charge interest on the loan. It may cost 6% for the loan to buy 50 pounds of wheat. The loan would have to be paid back in the temple scrit also. But they may base thier copper on some reserve the temple had and they may lend out many multiple of the reserve as loans charging 6%. So when it is paid back, they would get back 100 times the pinciple with 600% interest. They were living fat while the poor widow paid her might. They made it worse by cheating people by claim a weight weighted 50 pounds when it weighed only 40 pounds. Thus this pissed of Jesus and he called it a Den of thieves. Which in turn pissed off Ciaphis and the San Hedron and they had him killed in 3 days.
James Madison said
Well this pattern has continued into modern day. When the United States was founded they could break away from England because they issued their own Collonial scrit backed by the full faith of the collinist. It was the first Money in the US. The founder of the constitution specifically gave powers to congress to coin and print money and made it illegal for private corporations to have this power in the US.
Thomas Jefferson has a famous quote:
Well of course the private banks backed by the Rothschilds couldn't take this for long an quickly got Hamilton to use emergency powers to create the First Bank of the United states in 1791. This allowed for $10,000,000 in capital to begin the National Money supply $8,000,000 of which came from private investors and to whom the US paid Interest. The rest was owed by Congress.
This was the 1st time the US played with private banks. The Rothschilds were the ones pulling the strings on financial and banking decisions then.
Lincoln of course attempted to get away from the private bank and issued green backs which were Treasury bills or T-bills. These were backed only by Congress and the american people. They used T-bills to fight the south and then rebuild the country. He originally tried to back the green back with Gold and then moved to a currency by Fiat. Then he was shot.
Three other time the US has flirted with private central banks. The latest is the Federal Reservere founded in 1913. Now a private group of banks control the federal reserve. These banks are to American banks but they are owned are subsidiaries of private international banking cartels. Congress has never audited the books of the Federal Reserve since it was founded. The Federal reserve basically will print money (using the treasury departments central mints) and lend it to Congress who then supplies it to the Nation. It works like this. Congress wants to buy something. They have no money, so they say hey Fed we want a Trillion Dollars, they say OK print up a Trillion and put our name on it then pay us interest on the money. This is the prime lending rate. The Rate that Congress pays for the loans. Congress collects taxes and fees to pay it back usually in the form of a use or property tax. Sometimes a consumtion tax. Then the Fed is given the power to make banks to loan to businesses and private people. They use the same prime lending rates to lend to banks. They tell banks that they can lend $100 for $10 they have in deposits. Does this sound familiar. That's right fractional lending. So for every $10 the have deposited they can lend $100 so at 6% intest loans they collect 60% return. Its a nice gig if you can get it. The Fed has no expenses and gets to collect high interest rates.
We'll the Fed was worried that the Congress may just tell the banks not to pay back loans and just use Tbills at some time in the future. So the Fed wanted a insurance policy and got the 16th amendment sponsored to create the Federal Income tax. It is interesting to note that the 16th was ratified one state at a time and never got the number needed for it to be enacted. However, the Sectrary of State declared it valid in 1909 and it became the law. So the Fed created the IRS as its collection agency to collect its insurance premium. It is interesting to note that Life in 1909 was such that the normal man could work one job with decent hours and afford all of the luxuries of the day without dificulty. Try that today.
Now that the US has to pay interste for its money supply the value of the US dollars buying power continually declines. The Fed now controls the bond and stock market by simply raising a lowering the interest rates. Real estate is controlled by the lending rate also. When the Fed lowers the rate more people can afford houses. As soon as they raise them, people can't afford a house and loose them. It is a lot of power for a private corporation.
We'll the Fed also is the major lender in the World Bank and IMF they play the same games there. Lets say someone like Saddam Hussien needs cash and they want him to be in power, the IMF gives him $100 million loan to Iraq. He steels it and never pays it back. Oh well, as long and he give full faith and credit to the Fed Notes its ok. But if he tries to use the Euro instead as the base for oil, Take over his country. They can't have that.
The Feds only power comes from the US citizens pretending the Notes have value. When the Fed was started, a citizen could go to a Federal Reserver bank, present a $100 bill and get $100 dollars in gold back, now they just give a new note. So they have a currency by private Fiat just like the San Heddrin of old.
The power to issue money has alway rested with congress. But since everytime someone with Balls tries to change back to a National Central Bank they get killed like Lincoln and Kennedy, Congress has no balls to do it. All they have to do is issue TBills trade them for Fed Notes. Declare Fed notes worthless and presto Chango, no national Debt. The Fed has No Power. Congress can pass a law to print more money on their own. They don't need the Fed to give them the loan. It is only worthless paper and now only numbers in a computer. The Treasury department already prints the money. Kenndy printed Tbill and Silver coins, it worked well until they shot him. Anyway, if congress did this, there would be no need for an Income tax and just think of what it would do for banking. Loans originate to Congress. Congress could dump a lot of taxes and fund with interest on property loans alone. With all of the fractional lending they could do, the Dollar woiuld once again have real value.
The amazing thing is the same people that own the fed own the oil companies. Congress could once again take control of the oil markets and national policy.
Sorry for the length of this, but I just get pissed thinking about the Fed.
Bubbu
________________________________________
If congress has the right under the Constitution to issue paper money, it was given them to use themselves, not to be delegated to individuals or corporations.
Andrew Jackson
The Government should create, issue, and circulate all the currency and credits needed to satisfy the spending power of the Government and the buying power of consumers. By the adoption of these principles, the taxpayers will be saved immense sums of interest. Money will cease to be master and become the servant of humanity.
Abraham LincolnRe: World Finance Watch
Hey Bubbu,
Great post man. Would you be terribly offended if I made some additions and minor clarifications to your post? I hope not, cause I'm just enough of a jerk to do it without hearing from you. LOL Nothing major man, just some minor points. I get pissed thinking about the Fed myself.
The "capital" behind central banking systems in general is non-existent. Most, if not all, countries issue fiat currency. No country to my knowledge has an exchange rate with any hard assets redeemable by the respective treasury.
I'm glad you brought up the Knights Templar. There's a whole series of articles that I'll provide links to about the history and evolution of banking systems. It's the "Whence & Pence" series, which I believe is still being written.
You had a good explanation of the fractional reserve banking system. The Knights Templar were good at it, and got rich off of lending money to the royal houses of Europe. That's why the King of France got the Pope at the time to declare the Knights Templar as heretics. A lot of the Knights were tortured and killed. Lands, assets and personal property of the Knights was confiscated by the monarchy. The French King couldn't pay off his loans to the Knights and the interest was bankrupting him. So he had them killed off for the most part, seized their assets (the ones he could) and repudiated the debt he owed them. Shrewd and vicious bastard. The origins of Friday the 13th as unlucky comes from the initial crackdown on the Knights, which was a Friday the 13th, April I believe.
Yes, we've had several experiences with central or "federal" banks in the U.S. with the Federal Reserve as the current version. Before that, the Second Bank of the United States did not have its charter reviewed by Andrew Jackson. The Rotschild empire is definitely a part of the banking cartel that owns the Fed through its member banks. The income tax system was passed in the same year as the Fed, 1913, but before the Fed's creation. While, the Fed didn't set up the income tax system, income taxes were instituted to be able to pay for the expanded govt. spending and interest to be created by the Fed's "money generating" ability. It was the same people behind both schemes - Rockefeller and J.P. Morgan, so I guess you kind of have a point. But technically, the income tax system was made law before the Fed.
Actually, the Fed doesn't technically lend money to Congress. Congress approves a budget, which has been a deficit for generations. So the spending is authorized by Congress, the Treasury is responsible for making sure the money is available for the budget. The Fed is allowed to create money "out of thin air" and can do so electronically now at no cost to the Fed. If currency is to be printed up, the Fed coordinates with the U.S. Treasury and its office of Printing and Engraving. The Fed gets money into the system through its New York bank bond desk. It buys Treasury debt from the open market, or from the Treasury direct with it's "free money" and holds the debt. The debt held by the Fed receives interest. This is how the Fed gets its funding.
So technically the Treasury pays interest on debt it has issued, which has been authorized by Congress in the budget process. Congress technically doesn't "pay" anything.
It does not recieve appropriations from Congress. And you're correct in that it hasn't been audited by Congress. It's not part of the federal govt. and Congress has no oversight powers over the Fed. The semi-annual Humphrey-Hawkins testimony is all smoke and mirrors. It makes it look like Greenspan is accountable to the Congress. He's not. He testifies before the Committe on Foreign Relations (NWO think tank) more than he does Congress. But the Fed does have expenses. It pays employees, maintains its real estate, operations, etc. But the excess is paid out as dividends to its member banks, who in turn pay dividends to the cartel that owns them.
You're right about the devaluation of the dollar since the Fed was created. The Constitution in Article 1, Section 8, specifically authorizes Congress with the responsibility of the issue of money and it's value. The Coinage Act of 1792 ( http://landru.i-link-2.net/monques/coinageact.html ) specified that the US would issue:
"Dollars or Units?each to be of the value of a Spanish milled dollar as the same is now current, and to contain three hundred and seventy-one grains and four sixteenths parts of a grain of pure, or four hundred and sixteen grains of standard silver."
As long as we stayed on some form of hard currency backing our money supply, the value of the dollar held steady from the late 1790's through the mid to late 1920's. It was clear to every one that "one dollar" was redeemable in 371.25 grains of silver. Since then, the "value" of the dollar (aka Federal Reserve Note) has fallen over 95%.
I got to agree with you. Abolish the Fed and FRN's. Repudiate all debt held by the Fed. That'd wipe out about $4 trillion in Treasury debt. Get back to a currency backed by hard assets. The federal govt. got along fine without an incoome tax until the Fed came along. Abolish the income tax along with the Fed. Of course a lot of the social programs and global militarism would have to go away as well. Fine with me. Cancel all that crap. Turn the bums out of Washington, and turn this country back to the people. Would there be "bumps and pains" with dismantling all this? Absolutely. But we got some way more serious pain on the way anyway because of what the Fed has done since it's creation. I'll shut up now.
Cary
Here's the links to the "Whence & Pence" series:
Part One - The Founding
http://www.financialsense.com/fsu/editoria...2005/part1.html
Part Two - The Confounding
http://www.financialsense.com/fsu/editoria...2005/part2.html
Part Three - The Sounding
http://www.financialsense.com/fsu/editoria...2005/part3.html
Part Four - The Resounding
http://www.financialsense.com/fsu/editoria...2005/part4.html
Part Five - The Pounding
http://www.financialsense.com/fsu/editoria...2005/part5.html
Part Six - The Hounding
http://www.financialsense.com/fsu/editoria...2005/part6.html
Part Seven - The Rounding
http://www.financialsense.com/fsu/editoria...2005/part7.html
This is the one with the info you were asking me about Zoomerz about the "square mile" or financial district in the middle of London.
Part Eight - The Grounding
http://www.financialsense.com/fsu/editoria...2005/part8.html
Part Nine - The Wounding
http://www.financialsense.com/fsu/editoria...2005/part9.html
Part Ten - The Unwounding
http://www.financialsense.com/fsu/editoria...005/part10.html
There's a lot there, with links as well. You might want to print or save them on your computer so you can read them over time.
Wouldn't you know it. I get to the end of the post and find a page with links to all of the above, along with the author's series on Honesty Money. LOL My dumbass. Here's the link to all of these articles and then some.
http://www.financialsense.com/fsu/editoria...zo/archive.htmlRe: World Finance Watch
WOW! Cary AND Bubbu booty! Thanks to both of you. I'm very much in the learning stages, having only a cursory education on Illuminati. I think the financial maze and deceptive institutions are a very deliberate attempt to confuse and pacify the public. It's a lot to comprehend.
Cary; Thanks for the link!
Z-BubbuClinton
Junior Member
Re: World Finance Watch
Cary,
You can correct and amend me anytime. I just winged that post of the top of my head in a fit of hating the FED
.
I understand your technical point about Congress authorizing a budget and selling bonds on the open market. My point, although, unclear, is that most of the bonds are bought by the FED and a few nations who do not have our national interests in mind like China. This is how the FED inserts new money into the system. Congress decides to spend, they don't have the budget for it, they place a bond, the FED purchases the bond and authorizes the treasury to print some more worthless paper or they simply push a button on a computer and presto chango, new money. Congress can make new money by Fiat and they don't need the FED to do it. The FEDs papers is too expensive for no reason.
I wish I could only have the expenses they have that you listed and collect usurious intrest rates. That would be cool.
Thanks for the Links. I do have an interest in this stuff and always like information.
As far as the housing bubble, the bubble was created as a reaction to the Clinton deficit and 911. These two events caused the FED with the Blessing of the "Administration" to lower interest rates to record lows on real estate lending. By increasing the amount of property ownership, they increased taxes and created a more dependant populace. However, with the oil issue pushing inflation up, variable loans are becoming more expensive and causing a lot pain in areas with lower employment and lower wages compared to property value, and things are starting to crack. One of the side effects of more property ownership is that property becomes more expensive. But once you have the asset of a home, you now can qualify for more credit card loans, car loans and equity loans. All of these make more money for ..... thats right.... The FED.
I am not against property ownership and I am glad I own property. However, if unemployment spikes it will cause those on the finiancial edge to file for the bankruptcies and thus foreclosures. And the last I looked, about everybody is on the financial edge.I feeI uncomfortable with a foriegn private corporations having the right to forclose on my property and on all of the property in the United States. I would feel more comfortable with Congress holding this power. At least, theoretically, I have a right to vote for those guys. And, theorectically, they have the best interest of the country in mind. Right now, we are ripe for a major financial crisis. All the FED would have to do is raise the prime lending rate to 10% and Half of the Country will be foreclosed on. I don't see this happening unless a non-Yale grad. gets elected president or something. And who ever has heard of that happening in the last 20 years or so. Conversely, if the FED drops rates, then foreclosures will go down. I don't think they want to pop the bubble just yet because they have too much going on with the Land and Oil Grab in the middle east. The are forcing the US through the Oil Gouging which will cause inflation of prices by its self. It will kill Detroit and SUVs. Thus Michigan is starting to feel the pinch. But they will keep rates down to stop run away inflation. People will begin to foreclose because of cost of goods going up not intrest rates. They will have to drop rates so people can get loans to buy goods like food. The Raise in oil will also deflate the bubble because those on the lower income end will be forced out of the market.
Utah's bubble burst 4 years ago when the technology sector died. However areas, like LA, SF, Las Vegas, Phoenix, and other areas with accelerated growth are in trouble.
The issue on the income tax was actually debated in 1909 or so. While I agree that it wasn't directly related to creation of the FED, it was required before it could be created by those in power. Those guys were smart and evil and Pres. Wilson was a weak Teat. I sure wish we had someone with the guts to do what is right for the country and not just the puppets that are in office now.
Thanks again for the corrections and the insights.
Bubbu
________________________________