PDA

View Full Version : It's a Wonderful Lie - 100 Years of the Federal Reserve




Anti Federalist
12-23-2018, 07:01 PM
Just re-posted after being chucked down the memory hole.

Merry Christmas.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tlSr88Ga--U

Anti Globalist
12-23-2018, 07:52 PM
And it won't be gone anytime soon.

acptulsa
12-24-2018, 07:58 AM
Still no Zippy? They gave him Christmas off this year?

Anti Federalist
12-24-2018, 10:39 AM
Economist Stephen Moore: Trump Ready to Fire Fed Chief Powell for ‘Wrecking Our Economy’

https://www.breitbart.com/video/2018/12/23/economist-stephen-moore-trump-ready-to-fire-fed-chief-powell-for-wrecking-our-economy/

23 Dec 2018

President Donald Trump economic advisor Stephen Moore said the president was “infuriated” with Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell and is considering firing him.

Moore suggested the Federal Reserve Board Sunday in his appearance on New York AM 970 radio’s “The Cats Roundtable” should be “thrown out for economic malpractice,” adding that Powell is “wrecking our economy.”

“I believe the people on the Federal Reserve Board should be thrown out for economic malpractice,” he told host John Catsimatidis. “What they did on Wednesday when the Fed chairman was speaking and telling the world that they were going to raise the interest rates – the stock markets just in the 45 minutes he was speaking dropped by 600 points. There is no inflation in the economy right now. They’re sucking the oxygen out of this booming economy that Trump has created. I don’t see any rationale for what the Fed did. We need to be putting more dollar-liquidity into the economy because there’s such a demand for dollars now all over the world. Everybody wants to invest in the United States and at the same time the world wants more dollars. The Fed is sucking them out of the economy. And it has really hurt the stock market.”

Zippyjuan
12-24-2018, 03:03 PM
"Interest rates are too low! Savers being hurt and stock market being inflated."

"Interest rates are too high! Stock market is deflating!"

Swordsmyth
12-24-2018, 03:07 PM
"Interest rates are too low! Savers being hurt and stock market being inflated."

"Interest rates are too high! Stock market is deflating!"
Maybe the Fed just shouldn't be.
Let the market decide what interest rates should be and how fast they should change.

Zippyjuan
12-24-2018, 03:10 PM
Maybe the Fed just shouldn't be.
Let the market decide what interest rates should be and how fast they should change.

The Fed only sets what rates banks can borrow overnight at. Other rates are set by the market. Most rates are based off Treasury rates which are determined by auctions (the market).

Who would you put in charge of the money supply? Congress? The President?

Swordsmyth
12-24-2018, 03:15 PM
The Fed only sets what rates banks can borrow overnight at. Other rates are set by the market. Most rates are based off Treasury rates which are determined by auctions (the market).
:sleeping:
Sure.




Who would you put in charge of the money supply? Congress? The President?
A1S8:

The Congress shall have Power To...coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;

A1S10:

No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts;


The Market can handle the money supply just fine.

Zippyjuan
12-24-2018, 03:25 PM
:sleeping:
Sure.




A1S8:

The Congress shall have Power To...coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;

A1S10:

No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts;


The Market can handle the money supply just fine.

So Congress- who can never have too much money to spend- should be put in charge of deciding how much money they need. Brilliant!

Swordsmyth
12-24-2018, 03:26 PM
So Congress- who can never have too much money to spend- should be put in charge of deciding how much money they need. Brilliant!
They can create gold or silver out of thin air?

acptulsa
12-24-2018, 03:33 PM
They can create gold or silver out of thin air?

Only the states are under that restriction.

And no, they can't. But it has been proven they aren't above confiscating stuff.


So Congress- who can never have too much money to spend- should be put in charge of deciding how much money they need. Brilliant!

You'll have to take that one up with the people who wrote and ratified the Constitution. A document with which your employers at the Fed aren't strictly in compliance.

Swordsmyth
12-24-2018, 03:37 PM
Only the states are under that restriction.
Whatever they COIN it must be metal.


And no, they can't. But it has been proven they aren't above confiscating stuff.
That is a different problem.

acptulsa
12-24-2018, 03:39 PM
Whatever they COIN it must be metal.

Then how do you explain the phrases they've coined over the years?

Swordsmyth
12-24-2018, 03:39 PM
Then how do you explain the phrases they've coined over the years?
That is a metaphor.

UWDude
12-24-2018, 03:39 PM
So Congress- who can never have too much money to spend- should be put in charge of deciding how much money they need. Brilliant!

That's what the constitution says.

So Banksters - who can never have too much money to spend- should be put in charge of deciding how much money they need?

That's not what the constitution says.


The Fed only sets what rates banks can borrow overnight at

Oh thats all? well since you used the word "only", I am quite convinced this is an insignificant and useless power.
Therefore, it should be no problem at all taking that power away from them, and giving it back to the US Government.

After all, it is only what rates banks can borrow overnight at. No big deal.

acptulsa
12-24-2018, 03:46 PM
That is a metaphor.

And Congress is not above claiming "coin" is a catchall phrase. Besides, even you will admit the people who drafted the Constitution didn't expect Congress to load the metal discs in the stamping dies personally.

Not that it matters. Wood, plastic and cardboard have all been coined. Literally. Look up mills.

Anti Federalist
12-24-2018, 03:50 PM
The Fed only sets what rates banks can borrow overnight at. Other rates are set by the market. Most rates are based off Treasury rates which are determined by auctions (the market).

Who would you put in charge of the money supply? Congress? The President?

I miss the days when this "movement" was in favor of abolishing The Federal Reserve.

Swordsmyth
12-24-2018, 03:52 PM
And Congress is not above claiming "coin" is a catchall phrase. Besides, even you will admit the people who drafted the Constitution didn't expect Congress to load the metal discs in the stamping dies personally.

Not that it matters. Wood, plastic and cardboard have all been coined. Literally. Look up mills.
If Congress debases the currency they can be voted out and the fact that they may tend to be more extreme about it means that the people will be more likely to react.

We should however pass a Constitutional Amendment to restrict Congress to either gold or silver.

Swordsmyth
12-24-2018, 03:54 PM
I miss the days when this "movement" was in favor of abolishing The Federal Reserve.
We are.

Why zippy is allowed to post here as an active opponent of the movement I don't know.
Bryan why is being a white nationalist more worthy of a ban than being a pro-Fed warmonger?

acptulsa
12-24-2018, 03:56 PM
If Congress debases the currency they can be voted out and the fact that they may tend to be more extreme about it means that the people will be more likely to react.

We should however pass a Constitutional Amendment to restrict Congress to either gold or silver.

Make up your mind. Do you want to give Congress enough rope to hang themselves, or do you want to cut off their rope supply via amendment?

In any case, I don't like either of your authoritarian proposals. Ron Paul is right. People can make up our own minds what we want to use as money.

Swordsmyth
12-24-2018, 04:02 PM
Make up your mind. Do you want to give Congress enough rope to hang themselves, or do you want to cut off their rope supply via amendment?
I'd rather cut it off but at least if they are given enough to hang themselves the public can do something about it and will be more likely to.


In any case, I don't like either of your authoritarian proposals. Ron Paul is right. People can make up our own minds what we want to use as money.
Where did I say that the public should be required to use government coined money or be restricted from using anything else?

acptulsa
12-24-2018, 04:10 PM
If Congress debases the currency they can be voted out and the fact that they may tend to be more extreme about it means that the people will be more likely to react.

We should however pass a Constitutional Amendment to restrict Congress to either gold or silver.


Where did I say that the public should be required to use government coined money or be restricted from using anything else?

So when you said the currency you meant their currency? And when you talked about boobus being incensed at the debasement of their currency, you were envisioning a world where boobus could be motivated to act over the manipulation of something they aren't even required to use? And you feel that Congress has a reason to enter a contestant among competing currencies because...?

Swordsmyth
12-24-2018, 04:18 PM
So when you said the currency you meant their currency?
Yes.


And when you talked about boobus being incensed at the debasement of their currency, you were envisioning a world where boobus could be motivated to act over the manipulation of something they aren't even required to use? And you feel that Congress has a reason to enter a contestant among competing currencies because...?
The government currency would as a matter of convenience most likely dominate the marketplace if for no other reason than taxes would need to be paid in it. (The government must set some standard for taxes to be paid in)

The existence of alternatives would allow people to avoid using the government currency if it became debased and that would make the likelihood of debasement much lower.

It would be best if the Constitutional Amendment specified a given weight and purity of either gold or silver for the Dollar as well, that would make debasement even harder.

DamianTV
12-24-2018, 06:06 PM
And Congress is not above claiming "coin" is a catchall phrase. Besides, even you will admit the people who drafted the Constitution didn't expect Congress to load the metal discs in the stamping dies personally.

Not that it matters. Wood, plastic and cardboard have all been coined. Literally. Look up mills.

Slightly off topic, but the Perception of what is Money and what is Currency affects what and how much people spend. By using the term "COIN", we know that this means that can be two things: Currency, or Money. Currency is equivalent of paper, thus, the coin would not have any actual precious metals in it what so ever. Money does not lose its value over time, and is redeemable for precious metals. Since precious metals can not be "simply printed", or as several posts about what Zippy was saying using the word "only" implies "simple" the implication alters perception, which is Zippy's intended result, as well as those who prosper from the corrupt system.

Back to "COIN". Many of us know and understand the difference. Children of today will think "Coin" means things like Bitcoin. Topic, again, is Perception. Notice the clever use of their terms. Words like "Debit" and "Debt" are far too frequently misused, and intentionally repeated in order to alter perceptions and entirely alter belief systems. Those who are unaware associate Debt with Wealth, thus, "Debit Card" is used in place of ATM, because it affects the Subconscious in such a way to create the dissociative association with the term Debit. Same thing as "Coin". Bitcoin is not a coin. Its backed by nothing. However, like Gold, Bitcoin is given its value by its scarcity.

Zippy and others "simply" exploit the psychology of the way the human mind interprets its language.

Belief, Money, Violence

DamianTV
12-24-2018, 08:09 PM
I miss the days when this "movement" was in favor of abolishing The Federal Reserve.

The Federal Reserve Bank AND the IRS. Both MUST be eliminated because both were created at the same time by design.

If Trump is truly a threat to the FED, they WILL make an assassination attempt on his life.

UWDude
12-24-2018, 08:27 PM
The Federal Reserve Bank AND the IRS. Both MUST be eliminated because both were created at the same time by design.

If Trump is truly a threat to the FED, they WILL make an assassination attempt on his life.

I think calling down all the globalist assassins for his withdrawal from Syria will be enough for one term.

Swordsmyth
12-24-2018, 08:30 PM
I think calling down all the globalist assassins for his withdrawal from Syria will be enough for one term.
It's not enough unless he pulls out of more wars and/or NATO.

KEEF
12-24-2018, 11:48 PM
I miss the days when this "movement" was in favor of abolishing The Federal Reserve. I second that!

seapilot
12-25-2018, 12:00 AM
I wish the founders had put an amendment in the constitution forbidding the government from borrowing money. That would have been a big stumbling block to a central bank.

timosman
12-25-2018, 12:03 AM
I wish the founders had put an amendment in the constitution forbidding the government from borrowing money. That would have been a big stumbling block to a central bank.

A balanced budged amendment? :confused:

Swordsmyth
12-25-2018, 12:04 AM
I wish the founders had put an amendment in the constitution forbidding the government from borrowing money. That would have been a big stumbling block to a central bank.
You can "thank" Hamilton that they didn't.
He claimed that public debt was good and would be a restraint against excessive spending.

donnay
01-01-2019, 01:48 PM
No, No, No: ‘It’s A Wonderful Life’ Isn’t Socialist, Okay?

In the Boston Herald, Michael Graham argues both that 'It's a Wonderful Life' is a bad film on a technical level and that its message is bad.
There seems to be a blooming holiday tradition in certain circles to attack “It’s a Wonderful Life.” This year we have Michael Graham in the Boston Herald taking up the ill-considered assault on Frank Capra’s masterpiece.

By David Breitenbeck
DECEMBER 28, 2018

Graham argues both that “It’s a Wonderful Life” is a bad film on a technical level and that its message is bad. His reason for saying it’s a bad film hinges on a claim that the plot makes no sense (“makes about as much sense as Alexandria Oscasio-Cortez explaining the defense budget” are Graham’s exact words) because Clarence didn’t simply tell George where his missing $8,000 went.

That’s his entire critique of the film from a technical perspective. The idea that the missing money is merely a catalyst for deeper matters amply established throughout the film, and that these issues of regret, self-loathing, and blindness might be considered more important to an angel sent from God, apparently didn’t occur to Graham. As we shall see, this is part and parcel of his whole perspective.

Having dismissed “It’s a Wonderful Life” on a technical level with a single ill-informed paragraph, he proceeds to tackle the film’s message. Graham’s position is that George’s life is “pretty awful” because he endures a lot of suffering, is unable to go to college or even on his honeymoon, and “his kids wear second-hand clothes and get sick from the cold…because George can’t afford nice things for his family.” Graham then claims the film’s vindication of George’s life “fails” because “his life still stinks. He’s not, in fact, rich or even financially secure…and on top of that, Potter gets to keep the eight grand!”

Thus, apparently, Graham’s definition of a good life is one in which we are “rich, or even financially secure,” able to do what we like, able to avoid suffering as much as possible, and perhaps one in which evil people are punished as well. He then rather absurdly goes on to claim that “It’s a Wonderful Life” represents socialist, New Deal-style economics, and that it was intended for “the workers at a Soviet collective circa 1949,” with the message “who cares that you have no shoes? Back to the factory for Mother Russia.”

Ironically, Graham’s view of the good life as defined primarily by material security and wellbeing is far closer to a socialist perspective than anything in the film. The foundational idea of Marxism is that the world is purely material, and therefore creating material security and equality for the most people is the highest good.

Judging by this op-ed, Graham would agree, but only dispute with a Marxist whether socialism or capitalism creates the most good for the most people. One thing with which a Marxist would never agree is that a man’s happiness is far more dependent on family, community, virtue, and so on than by his material well being.

This is a fundamental flaw in modern discourse for both conservatives and liberals: we focus so much on material issues, trying to work out a system that will make, as Graham says, “the best world for the most people,” that we don’t stop to ask what we mean by “the best world” or a “good life.” Both sides are making the exact same mistake even as they draw different conclusions: both accept the same basic philosophy, but disagree on its application.

Aristotle recognized this mistake 2,000 years ago, and so has every competent philosopher since. Yes, we need a certain baseline of material wellbeing to live, but that is not what makes a good life. A good life means living well— individual virtue, familial and communal harmony, meaningful occupation, and religious worship are the main points.

This harmonizes with Christianity, which added the elevation of self-sacrificial love as both the supreme individual virtue and a means to guard that material baseline of wellbeing and communal harmony. But a man doesn’t need to be rich or even “financially secure” (in truth such security is mostly illusionary anyway) in order to have a wonderful life.

This is traditional, Christian morality, and once upon a time it was this that was set in opposition to Marxism (as well as to the “Darwinist” form of capitalism espoused by Potter). This is the philosophy of “It’s a Wonderful Life,” and indeed of all Capra’s films. It’s also the philosophy that conservatives ought to be advocating. Our focus on economic and material matters obscures our fundamental philosophical dispute with leftism, and it is precisely on the point that immaterial matters are far more important to a man’s life than his material wellbeing or social status.

Something Graham and others who describe the film as “socialist” seem to miss is that the Building and Loan is not a government organization supporting people in idleness, but a business offering loans to working men funded by the voluntary support of their neighbors. Charity is not socialism, and I beg conservatives to stop parroting the socialist lie that it is.

The message of the film is that a “wonderful life” is one spent in service to others, sacrificing oneself to help those in need. This, as the film demonstrates, not only makes their lives better, but strengthens and sustains the entire community. Men who are able to live with dignity, raise families, and operate businesses in peace create a community in which it is good to live, which in turn improves everyone’s lives, producing “a good life for the most people.” One wonderful life creates more wonderful lives.

Pottersville, meanwhile, is an image of the world selfish greed creates. That’s not the same thing as the kind of entrepreneurship that leads George’s friend Sam to become a millionaire plastics manufacturer, or that supports the likes of Mr. Martini in his small restaurant. It’s one where people’s interactions with each other are purely commercial, or else laced with suspicion and hostility.

The point isn’t that wealth or business is bad. The point is that making it the chief occupation and guiding hand of life leads to a dark and joyless world, and that the proper way to counteract it is through love, charity, and self-sacrifice. The contrasting goal is not an ordered, planned society, but a community of people pursuing their own lives in freedom and choosing to help each other along out of friendship and compassion.

George Bailey is “the richest man in town” because he has an abundance of what really matters: a loving family, loyal friends, a happy and healthy community, and meaningful work. And he has all of that because he chose time and again to sacrifice his desires for others. That’s the opposite of a socialist message— it is a Christian one, and we ought to be proclaiming it.
http://thefederalist.com/2018/12/28/its-a-wonderful-life-isnt-socialist-its-christian/?utm_referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fzen.yandex.com

Ender
01-01-2019, 02:19 PM
http://thefederalist.com/2018/12/28/its-a-wonderful-life-isnt-socialist-its-christian/?utm_referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fzen.yandex.com


In the Boston Herald, Michael Graham argues both that 'It's a Wonderful Life' is a bad film on a technical level and that its message is bad.

There seems to be a blooming holiday tradition in certain circles to attack “It’s a Wonderful Life.” This year we have Michael Graham in the Boston Herald taking up the ill-considered assault on Frank Capra’s masterpiece.

Well, that's the biggest bunch of shit I've read in a while- and I've certainly read a ton, lately. :speaknoevil:

A Wonderful Life is a masterpiece, both story-wise & technically. Some of the shots are amazing.

Ender
01-01-2019, 02:24 PM
And Congress is not above claiming "coin" is a catchall phrase. Besides, even you will admit the people who drafted the Constitution didn't expect Congress to load the metal discs in the stamping dies personally.

Not that it matters. Wood, plastic and cardboard have all been coined. Literally. Look up mills.

And "money" today is key strokes on a computer- real money does not exist.