Picture of Boston Federal Reserve Bank

[Knightskye]

EDIT: I was on vacation and I took a picture of the skyline.

http://img835.imageshack.us/img835/5229/fedbuildingboston.png

[Daamien]

Why is this being posted?

[Anti Federalist]

Why is this being posted?

Know Your Enemy?

[Kludge]

Knightskye is most likely posting this as a warning to FRBB's Henri Termeer, threatening to exploderate One Boston Place if he doesn't close shop.

[DamianTV]

Know what an obscure shape in a horizon photo looks like.

[WaltM]

Why is this being posted?

YouTube - Whitest Kids U Know: It's illegal to say... (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QEQOvyGbBtY)

[dannno]

Why is this being posted?

I'm guessing he is referring to it's size and/or phallic nature, not brainstorming targets to hit.

[Promontorium]

That it's a freaking tower standing above the rest! The government, let alone a pet project like controlling world banks, shouldn't be so imposing.

[rawful]

The Philly Fed is two blocks from Independence Hall. And people are upset about a mosque? :mad:

[Johnnybags]

and it has a light show on the side of the buillding that says ABOLISH ME.

BTW, the missing floor means there is one way out. And behind the walls are machine guns.

[awake]

That building is going to make an awesome call center some day...

[lester1/2jr]

I was a courier in downtown Boston for many years and have been in that building a dozen times. The security is far more extensive than any building in boston I know of, governmental or otherwise. They check under your car for stuff when yo udrive in then you go through ANOTHER metal detector thingy like normal when you go in. The building is gigantic and metal and very ugly

[sync]

The Philly Fed is two blocks from Independence Hall. And people are upset about a mosque? :mad:

+1000

That's goin in my sig :D

[acptulsa]

The Philly Fed is two blocks from Independence Hall. And people are upset about a mosque? :mad:

What if an entire people really, really did have God on their side, then forgot why?

It's the freedom, stupid. 'They' don't hate us for having it. 'They' hate us for being so spoiled we'd just fritter it away.

[Knightskye]

I was on vacation in Boston and took a picture of the skyline, and noticed that one of the buildings was a Federal Reserve building. I thought it was worth sharing.

[Vessol]

I just wanted to say HI to all the FBI and Homeland Security guys reading this page.

HI!

[Kludge]

So, I've redone my aluminum foil still and it's still kicking a surprising amount of ass.

Big pot on a bunsen burner. One large metal bowl ("external bowl") on top filled with ice with the depression of the large bowl directly over a smaller bowl centered inside the pot. The small internal bowl has aluminum foil going over it, depressed, with a small hole in the middle so alcohol will drip in from the roof made by the "external bowl," but if it tries evaporating from the small internal bowl, will drip back into the bowl.

Of course, there's a small wedge between the big steel pot and the "external bowl" lid and a fan right next to it blowing possible escaping fuel outdoors. It's extremely effective, extremely cheap (less the burner I happened to have) & simple, and the bunsen allows a good bit of control + there's no flame.

The shitty wines we mass-produce go into the still and we come out with some relatively strong (though very crude-tasting) alcohol I can do in shots (couldn't with the shit wine).

[libertybrewcity]

I just wanted to say HI to all the FBI and Homeland Security guys reading this page.

HI!

I'll join in. HELLO!

[MN Patriot]

I'll join in the "Hellos" to our public servants at the FBI and Homeland Security, glad to know you are monitoring the incipient revolution. Maybe our deep-rooted cultural heritage of freedom will convince you that we need to PEACEFULLY abolish the Fed and restore honest money. We Americans have become tax slaves to the Establishment.

Anyway, here is my local Fed Res Bank. It is built like a fortress along the Mississippi River. Same basic design, first floor is empty.

http://www.asla.org/meetings/awards/awds01/imagesjpg/fedresminn2.jpg

Here is the old Fed building in Minneapolis. Same design, but no fortress around it. So they somehow raised enough money to build a new one about 15 years ago. (note the for sale sign)
http://www.phototour.minneapolis.mn.us/pics/121.jpg

[MN Patriot]

I was on vacation in Boston and took a picture of the skyline, and noticed that one of the buildings was a Federal Reserve building. I thought it was worth sharing.

I was in Boston this summer, too. Visited the USS Constitution (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Constitution) and took this picture on the gun deck.

http://i242.photobucket.com/albums/ff109/emj1962/liberty_forever.jpg?t=1284807931

[Bruno]

I wonder what the building design means?

[Teaser Rate]

Why is there such animosity towards the Fed on this forum? The Fed is one of a few branches of the Federal government that carries out its mandate effectively and on cost. At the very least it certainly does a better job managing monetary policy than either congress or the executive branch would if the fed were abolished.

I understand that there’s a good theoretical argument for reforming and/or eliminating the Fed and replacing it with free-market money or a gold standard, and that’s a fun debate to have, but I don’t see why it has to bring such strong emotions.

[lester1/2jr]

"Why is there such animosity towards the Fed on this forum?"

I know right?


lol wtf dude

[A Son of Liberty]

why is there such animosity towards the fed on this forum? The fed is one of a few branches of the federal government that carries out its mandate effectively and on cost. At the very least it certainly does a better job managing monetary policy than either congress or the executive branch would if the fed were abolished.

I understand that there’s a good theoretical argument for reforming and/or eliminating the fed and replacing it with free-market money or a gold standard, and that’s a fun debate to have, but i don’t see why it has to bring such strong emotions.

http://images2.fanpop.com/images/photos/6500000/LOLWUT-random-6599568-378-413.jpg

[Bruno]

Why is there such animosity towards the Fed on this forum? The Fed is one of a few branches of the Federal government that carries out its mandate effectively and on cost. At the very least it certainly does a better job managing monetary policy than either congress or the executive branch would if the fed were abolished.

I understand that there’s a good theoretical argument for reforming and/or eliminating the Fed and replacing it with free-market money or a gold standard, and that’s a fun debate to have, but I don’t see why it has to bring such strong emotions.

What does your screen name mean? Are you using the banking terminology?


http://images2.fanpop.com/images/photos/6500000/LOLWUT-random-6599568-378-413.jpg

lmao

[MN Patriot]

Why is there such animosity towards the Fed on this forum? The Fed is one of a few branches of the Federal government that carries out its mandate effectively and on cost. At the very least it certainly does a better job managing monetary policy than either congress or the executive branch would if the fed were abolished.

I understand that there’s a good theoretical argument for reforming and/or eliminating the Fed and replacing it with free-market money or a gold standard, and that’s a fun debate to have, but I don’t see why it has to bring such strong emotions.

Because the Fed creates fiat currency, which we are by law supposed to use. Classic case of economic tyranny. The government and banks create inflation (which we are told by the Establishment mainstream media they fight), which robs us of our wealth. Money is power, so the power mongers take our money through the Marxist income tax and with inflation.

[Danke]

The Fed is responsible for Teaser Rate (s).

[Teaser Rate]

What does your screen name mean? Are you using the banking terminology?

Yes, it's the kind of interest rate which is deemed to be "too good to be true". A lot of people bought houses they could only afford with these kinds of rates during the bubble and couldn't pay their mortgages anymore once the rates went up.

Some would say that much of the current US debt is basically financed in the same way; the government sells a great deal of short-term bonds with 0% interest or very close to it and rolls them over every few months.


Because the Fed creates fiat currency, which we are by law supposed to use. Classic case of economic tyranny. The government and banks create inflation (which we are told by the Establishment mainstream media they fight), which robs us of our wealth. Money is power, so the power mongers take our money through the Marxist income tax and with inflation.

1-Every western country issues fiat currency. Are they all economic tyrannies as well?

2-Inflation or deflation for that matter, is not necessarily a bad thing if it is widely known. The bad kind of inflation/deflation is the kind which comes by surprise and distributes wealth from borrowers to lenders or vice-versa; if consumers are aware of the trend, then they can adjust to it.

In an ideal fiat-currency world, the central bank targets a certain level of inflation which is explicit and everyone in the economy adjusts. Stable inflation over the long run is better than no inflation with high levels of volatility. See this chart:

http://img716.imageshack.us/img716/1701/800pxushistoricalinflat.png

Sure, the dollar lost most of its value since the Fed was created, but it has also enjoyed its most stable century in American history.

A large problem of the current Federal Reserve system is that they have multiple mandates and only one lever to push. Having to to deal with inflation, political pressure, a recession, crashing stocks and failing banks all at once usually leads to bad monetary policy. IMO, the first step in solving that problem is narrowing the Fed goals to one explicit task, i.e. keep a stable level of inflation at 2% per year.

I don’t think that a central bank which is only tasked with keeping a stable level of inflation and nothing else is economic tyranny.

The other things you mention are fiscal policies and not related to the issue.


The Fed is responsible for Teaser Rate (s).

Anything which influences an economy can be.

[libertybrewcity]

Yes, it's the kind of interest rate which is deemed to be "too good to be true". A lot of people bought houses they could only afford with these kinds of rates during the bubble and couldn't pay their mortgages anymore once the rates went up.

Some would say that much of the current US debt is basically financed in the same way; the government sells a great deal of short-term bonds with 0% interest or very close to it and rolls them over every few months.



1-Every western country issues fiat currency. Are they all economic tyrannies as well?

2-Inflation or deflation for that matter, is not necessarily a bad thing if it is widely known. The bad kind of inflation/deflation is the kind which comes by surprise and distributes wealth from borrowers to lenders or vice-versa; if consumers are aware of the trend, then they can adjust to it.

In an ideal fiat-currency world, the central bank targets a certain level of inflation which is explicit and everyone in the economy adjusts. Stable inflation over the long run is better than no inflation with high levels of volatility. See this chart:

http://img716.imageshack.us/img716/1701/800pxushistoricalinflat.png

Sure, the dollar lost most of its value since the Fed was created, but it has also enjoyed its most stable century in American history.

A large problem of the current Federal Reserve system is that they have multiple mandates and only one lever to push. Having to to deal with inflation, political pressure, a recession, crashing stocks and failing banks all at once usually leads to bad monetary policy. IMO, the first step in solving that problem is narrowing the Fed goals to one explicit task, i.e. keep a stable level of inflation at 2% per year.

I don’t think that a central bank which is only tasked with keeping a stable level of inflation and nothing else is economic tyranny.

The other things you mention are fiscal policies and not related to the issue.



Anything which influences an economy can be.

LOL, that looks stable to you? That looks like constant inflation for the past century. That looks like my grandmas savings throughout her life going down the drain.

If I had 1k dollars in 1960 imagine what I could buy then. You could easily afford health care, medicine, food, bills, and comfortable living. That is about what my grandma retired on. Now she can barely afford her prescription drugs.

And wonder why the currency was inflated? It was inflated to pay off debts, pay for war, prop up companies, fund MASSIVE social programs. 1 dollar today should be worth 1 dollar tomorrow and 1 dollar in 10 years. The dollar today is worth about 23 dollars in 1913 value.

It needs to be tightly regulated, audited, and stripped of the majority of its powers. You say, well congress would do a worse job than the federal reserve. Of course they would, and that is why the free market should set interest rates and not a small group of people.

[Kludge]

LOL, that looks stable to you? That looks like constant inflation for the past century. That looks like my grandmas savings throughout her life going down the drain.

If I had 1k dollars in 1960 imagine what I could buy then. You could easily afford health care, medicine, food, bills, and comfortable living. That is about what my grandma retired on. Now she can barely afford her prescription drugs.

And wonder why the currency was inflated? It was inflated to pay off debts, pay for war, prop up companies, fund MASSIVE social programs. 1 dollar today should be worth 1 dollar tomorrow and 1 dollar in 10 years. The dollar today is worth about 23 dollars in 1913 value.

It needs to be tightly regulated, audited, and stripped of the majority of its powers. You say, well congress would do a worse job than the federal reserve. Of course they would, and that is why the free market should set interest rates and not a small group of people.

To be fair, that chart does actually seem to show The Fed has created stability. The dips and rises are dramatically sharper prior to 1913. I think stable inflation would be far superior to the extreme inflation-deflation cycles illustrated on that chart. If your argument is that $1 should be $1 in 10 years, that chart certainly seems to show you're going about getting there in the wrong manner.

Stable creeping inflation is fine - the markets adjust by favoring investment over simply storing wealth, and this is generally good for the economy. What isn't fine is when the money goes to benefit corporations and the government in secret. It has also, in part, permitted the US Government to exceed any reasonable idea of a sustainable deficit or GDP-to-debt ratio. I think we have bigger issues than The Fed, because I think politicians will eventually realize the price they must pay on unsustainably-large amounts of debt and essentially abolish that role of The Fed - if the government doesn't collapse altogether.

[Teaser Rate]

LOL, that looks stable to you? That looks like constant inflation for the past century. That looks like my grandmas savings throughout her life going down the drain.

If I had 1k dollars in 1960 imagine what I could buy then. You could easily afford health care, medicine, food, bills, and comfortable living. That is about what my grandma retired on. Now she can barely afford her prescription drugs.

And wonder why the currency was inflated? It was inflated to pay off debts, pay for war, prop up companies, fund MASSIVE social programs. 1 dollar today should be worth 1 dollar tomorrow and 1 dollar in 10 years. The dollar today is worth about 23 dollars in 1913 value.

It needs to be tightly regulated, audited, and stripped of the majority of its powers. You say, well congress would do a worse job than the federal reserve. Of course they would, and that is why the free market should set interest rates and not a small group of people.

You missed my point about stability vs volatility entirely, I'll try to explain it again.

Let's say you want to lend me $1000 for 1 year at a 2% interest rate. If the current inflation rate is 2%, then I'll have to pay you back $1000 + 4% next year.

What if inflation skyrockets to 5% during the year? I'll end up paying less value than I agreed to at the beginning of the year. What if it drops to 1% ? Then I'll end up paying more.

An stable inflation rate is not a problem because consumers can adjust to it; if the original rate in my example was 5%, then you'd ask me for 7%, etc. Wages and government benefits can also follow that trend if it is known.

This is why it's much more beneficial for an economy to have a stable trend of inflation than is it to have volatility.

[Carson]

]YouTube - Whitest Kids U Know: It's illegal to say...[/url]

Good one.

[Vessol]

Teaser Rate, looking at your post rate..why are you here? When it comes both to domestic and foreign issues or well..any issue, you have no similar beliefs to Ron Paul.

This isn't a rhetorical question, I'm honestly curious.

I apologize if it comes off in a negative way, we have a lot of trolls around here.

[Carson]

Why is there such animosity towards the Fed on this forum? The Fed is one of a few branches of the Federal government that carries out its mandate effectively and on cost. At the very least it certainly does a better job managing monetary policy than either congress or the executive branch would if the fed were abolished.

I understand that there’s a good theoretical argument for reforming and/or eliminating the Fed and replacing it with free-market money or a gold standard, and that’s a fun debate to have, but I don’t see why it has to bring such strong emotions.


They have two mandates and neither are being carried out.

And the painful reality that without any sort of auditing, it gives some the ability to fire up the fake money presses to print up what ever it takes to get their way.

Have you wondered why so many of our rights are being stripped away at an alarming rate?

Have you wonder what the driving force to corrupt the worlds police to turning a blind eye to illegal immigration world wide.

Have you ever wondered why politicians seem to jump to do things at the beckon call of the reserve banks and clearly have a deaf ear to those they were organized to protect?

http://photos.imageevent.com/stokeybob/followthemoney/SuperDollar502x600.jpg

http://photos.imageevent.com/stokeybob/followthemoney/RobertSahrcurrencyvalue.jpg

Self survival?

[Razmear]

They have two mandates and neither are being carried out.

http://photos.imageevent.com/stokeybob/followthemoney/SuperDollar502x600.jpg



Very cool graphic, the circles rotate counter clockwise while reading the text on the left side. Too bad our fake money isn't as hypnotizing as your fake money. :D

eb

[Carson]

Very cool graphic, the circles rotate counter clockwise while reading the text on the left side. Too bad our fake money isn't as hypnotizing as your fake money. :D

eb


Thanks Razmear.

[Teaser Rate]

Teaser Rate, looking at your post rate..why are you here? When it comes both to domestic and foreign issues or well..any issue, you have no similar beliefs to Ron Paul.

This isn't a rhetorical question, I'm honestly curious.

I apologize if it comes off in a negative way, we have a lot of trolls around here.

I don’t remember posting my views about foreign policy aside from a thread about Iran in which I argued that Ahmadinejad’s inflammatory rhetoric could be a legitimate cause for concern. Aside from that I agree with ending the wars and down-scaling the empire.

On domestic side of things, my stances are usually closer to Milton Friedman than they are to Murray Rothbard. I’m opposed to the state in principle, but I don’t think removing its influence in certain areas right now would make things better, so if I raise an objection against eliminating the authority of government in something, I’m usually hoping that someone can refute it in a way I hadn’t thought of before. i.e. How can free-market money overcome the problem insufficient dissemination of information and keep a stable value without a centralized entity controlling its price ?

That and I’m also easily annoyed by willful ignorance, so I might come off as condescending confronting posts which make silly claims like “the Fed is a private corporation”.


They have two mandates and neither are being carried out.

Actually, the inflation mandate has been accomplished quite well since the late 80s'.


And the painful reality that without any sort of auditing, it gives some the ability to fire up the fake money presses to print up what ever it takes to get their way.

Many of the Fed's fields of operations are regularly audited and they make their balance sheet public. How is the money fake ?


Have you wondered why so many of our rights are being stripped away at an alarming rate?

The ever-expanding growing nature of government and power ?


Have you wonder what the driving force to corrupt the worlds police to turning a blind eye to illegal immigration world wide.

Because illegal immigration is an almost insurmountable problem in a practical sense and even more-so in a political one ?


Have you ever wondered why politicians seem to jump to do things at the beckon call of the reserve banks and clearly have a deaf ear to those they were organized to protect?

They don't. The congress audits and questions the Fed. The Fed doesn't have congressmen over to its building to grill them over policy.


http://photos.imageevent.com/stokeybob/followthemoney/SuperDollar502x600.jpg

Ok, what is a better alternative to FIAT-money ? Also, your solution needs to answer the following question:

How can free-market money overcome the problem insufficient dissemination of information and keep a stable value without a centralized entity controlling its price ?


http://photos.imageevent.com/stokeybob/followthemoney/RobertSahrcurrencyvalue.jpg

See my previous post which explains why a stable inflation rate is more economically beneficial than volatility.

[Knightskye]

Why is there such animosity towards the Fed on this forum? The Fed is one of a few branches of the Federal government that carries out its mandate effectively and on cost.

It's not constitutional. It's secretive. It causes business cycles.

[Baptist]

Why is there such animosity towards the Fed on this forum? The Fed is one of a few branches of the Federal government that carries out its mandate effectively and on cost. At the very least it certainly does a better job managing monetary policy than either congress or the executive branch would if the fed were abolished. .
http://www.threadbombing.com/data/media/2/687fea91677be9103defb8dc0b97e8b7.gif

[Baptist]

I was on vacation and I took a picture of the skyline.



Knightskye (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1270282/Hunt-Jason-Bourne-kept-arms-cache-penthouse-overlooking-U-S-federal-bank.html)?

[TNforPaul45]

I didn't know the us existed in 1650! The federal reserve is so benevolent that it can retroactively extend the existence of the country back in time! Wow!!!!!!!

[james1906]

http://img716.imageshack.us/img716/1701/800pxushistoricalinflat.png



From the looks of this map, from the period between 1776 and 1913, it looks like inflation was only a serious problem when there was a war.

[LibForestPaul]

Ok, what is a better alternative to FIAT-money ?

None - as per Blankfein
Hear, hear - David René de Rothschild

[Knightskye]

Knightskye (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1270282/Hunt-Jason-Bourne-kept-arms-cache-penthouse-overlooking-U-S-federal-bank.html)?


But what really piqued the interest of detectives was a camera tripod and the fact that the penthouse balcony had a perfect view of the building that houses the city's Federal Reserve - the U.S. equivalent of the Bank of England.

Hahahahahaha.

Well, I didn't use a tripod.

[acptulsa]

That and I’m also easily annoyed by willful ignorance, so I might come off as condescending confronting posts which make silly claims like “the Fed is a private corporation”.

This and your first post in this thread are amusing. So, it's strictly a government institution, and has no ties to the private sector, it manages without a stratospheric budget, it 'keeps inflation in check', and you consider these things to be great compliments.

Yet it isn't strictly governmental, is highly controlled by some of the biggest banks in the nation, and this is no secret. Furthermore, every time the value of the dollar sinks even very slightly, this institution makes billions of those newly less valuable bucks. And while in theory its ability to manage the value of the currency makes things more stable, in fact the major reason the previous precious metal standards were as volatile as they were is certain very rich men made them that way so they could play the ripples in the markets for insider profits.

And, as your own chart clearly shows, once upon a time money didn't lose value permenantly. So, if someone who doesn't have the mental advantages you and I have could actually stuff it in a mattress and expect it not to permenantly shrink in value. Now, as the right hand end of your own chart shows, it doesn't lose value at a constant rate but it always--always--loses value. If it didn't, the Fed would lose money. Wouldn't it? Talk about a vested interest.

So, yes, the Fed is a mighty hard sell 'round here. Thanks for asking.

[Jordan]

To be fair, that chart does actually seem to show The Fed has created stability. The dips and rises are dramatically sharper prior to 1913. I think stable inflation would be far superior to the extreme inflation-deflation cycles illustrated on that chart. If your argument is that $1 should be $1 in 10 years, that chart certainly seems to show you're going about getting there in the wrong manner.

Stable creeping inflation is fine - the markets adjust by favoring investment over simply storing wealth, and this is generally good for the economy. What isn't fine is when the money goes to benefit corporations and the government in secret. It has also, in part, permitted the US Government to exceed any reasonable idea of a sustainable deficit or GDP-to-debt ratio. I think we have bigger issues than The Fed, because I think politicians will eventually realize the price they must pay on unsustainably-large amounts of debt and essentially abolish that role of The Fed - if the government doesn't collapse altogether.

Amazing, no one seems to want to reply to this.

[Knightskye]

http://img716.imageshack.us/img716/1701/800pxushistoricalinflat.png

When I looked at that, it looked like the spikes occurred near a war - 1812, 1863, World War I, World War II.

That was my impression.

[Travlyr]

Amazing, no one seems to want to reply to this.
Since Jordan would like a response to Kludge, I'll give my 2 cents.

The definition of inflation has been obfuscated intentionally in my view because re-defining words is an excellent technique to confuse the publicly indoctrinated flock. Inflation is an increase in the money supply, and as a result, prices rise. If the money supply is doubled, then prices will eventually essentially double. Inflation is wealth transfer.

So, I do not agree that stable creeping inflation is fine. In my opinion, centrally planned inflation is theft. What the FED has done is steadily increased the money supply which has steadily increased prices, and steadily transferred wealth from the people to the bankers.

Now, "Teaser Rate's" graph is useless because where is the data to support this picture? Anybody can draw a picture.
These two inflation, and deflation, scenarios are not comparable; one is honest, the second is dishonest.
Prior to 1913, when the monetary system was based on PM, inflation would increase when miners found more PMs. Deflation would occur when a ship loaded with gold sank, or the people saved, hoarded, or whatever. That was inflation, and deflation, in an asset based monetary system.
After the Federal Reserve Act of 1913, inflation is centrally planned with fiat money. Deflation is not allowed because that would be a transfer of wealth from the bankers to the people through default. We endure a debt based monetary system.

Nevertheless, inflation is good for the inflater and the first to enjoy the benefits of the new found supply. But the last people to get the money are the losers because prices have already risen. For example, when gold was used as money, a huge gold find increased the money supply. Whoever found the gold is the first to enjoy the benefit. His purchases are made while prices are lower than they will be when the markets become saturated with his find. Where he spends his new found money is second in line, and they benefit more than the third, the third more than the fourth, and so on, until the last in line sees no benefit because prices are as high as the market will bear.

Again, inflation is wealth transfer, and that is why bankers inflate. Bankers are first in line, then politicians and military contractors, then government workers and government contractors, then the working class, and finally the poor... the last in line... the losers.

Murray Rothbard does a much better job of explaining the effects of inflation in "The Mystery of Banking." - worth the time to read. ;)