TRUMP NOMINATES PRO- GOLD CANDIDATE TO THE FED

[Superfluous Man]

It all really does make sense since without the ownership of an individual's labor (and mind), none of the rest of the current economic system could sustain itself.

I don't deny that the state behaves as though it owns individuals' labor. It certainly does do that. It always has, including before 1913, and it always will. But it doesn't rely on nonexistent legal mumbo jumbo about all-caps names in birth certificates to do that. It relies on illicit violence. And it has proven itself perfectly capable of and willing to use the same violent means against people who try to make the arguments you're making as it uses against everyone else.

[devil21]

I don't deny that the state behaves as though it owns individuals' labor. It certainly does do that. It always has, including before 1913, and it always will. But it doesn't rely on nonexistent legal mumbo jumbo about all-caps names in birth certificates to do that. It relies on illicit violence. And it has proven itself perfectly capable of and willing to use the same violent means against people who try to make the arguments you're making as it uses against everyone else.

Violence used without legal justification is always actionable. Mere threats of violence or fear of prison or the other standard lines used to keep people inside the box do indeed work on most. That is because they are ignorant, fearful and act like cattle and are therefore treated as such. Since the foundations of the system I am describing treats people as mere "property" under a trust, instead of as a living man or woman, the trustees of the system are allowed under papal canon law (which the system is still based on) to use such means generally without consequence if there remains legal justification to do it.

I personally noted how a police officer completely changed his conduct toward me once he knew that I knew how the system worked. He suddenly wouldn't even touch me without my express permission, which he did not receive. This is why I asked if you have personal experiences to share or whether you are posting the standard line found on various comment sections of blog posts. You still haven't answered.

[Superfluous Man]

Violence used without legal justification is always actionable.

Morally, yes. But within the legal system of the state, this is irrelevant.

And morally, the existence of a birth certificate with your name in all-caps on it doesn't change anything. The state behaves immorally. It has no need to come up with a legal out to justify this. And even if it did, claiming that your birth certificate gave it ownership over your labor would not accomplish that.

[devil21]

Morally, yes. But within the legal system of the state, this is irrelevant.

And morally, the existence of a birth certificate with your name in all-caps on it doesn't change anything. The state behaves immorally. It has no need to come up with a legal out to justify this. And even if it did, claiming that your birth certificate gave it ownership over your labor would not accomplish that.

Actually it's not irrelevant. It's the same reason Child Protective Services claims the ability to seize a child from the parent. Ownership! Title! They have it! You gave it to them, mom! It creates the foundation (ahem, the cornerstone) which all else is built upon. I'm not saying that every rank-and-file employee of whatever government bureaucracy knows what I am explaining here (they are just as brainwashed as most) but it is indeed the legal justification that all other uses of force spring from, particularly here where the Bill of Rights does exist.

[devil21]

No it isn't. I just checked.

Pardon, you are correct. Trying to do this from memory mostly to keep the convo moving. It's here, among many other references in this document and elsewhere. Page 141 is a key. The system here is the same system in place in the UK and others.

Lending and Secured Finance
https://thelawreviews.co.uk//digital...iew_4th-Ed.pdf

Upon {birth} registration, the fiduciary registration office will issue a {birth} certificate of fiduciary security to the security holder.

There are multiple holders of the security.

[Zippyjuan]

Why are you so concerned with continuing the conversation if you think it's a myth? Feel free to move on to something more to your liking. Thou doth protest too much, perhaps?

House's quote is just one (big) piece of the puzzle that fits perfectly with the rest of the information. You're doing a terrible deflection job but you are indeed sticking to the plausible deniability part like a champ. It all really does make sense since without the ownership of an individual's labor (and mind), none of the rest of the current economic system could sustain itself. There would be no legal jurisdiction to enforce anything like taxation or force a sovereign individual to abide by arbitrary "codes" and "statutes", especially in light of the original Bill of Rights. Something must bind a living man or woman to the arbitrary system. What most don't realize is that it's their own signatures that voluntarily do it.

Or in the case of the BC, the mother's signature and the signatures of the various other officials. The document then creates a trust. And whaddyaknow? The Hague Convention covers that part too!
https://www.hcch.net/en/instruments/...l-text/?cid=59

Link says nothing about birth certificates.

[Zippyjuan]

Pardon, you are correct. Trying to do this from memory mostly to keep the convo moving. It's here, among many other references in this document and elsewhere. Page 141 is a key. The system here is the same system in place in the UK and others.

Lending and Secured Finance
https://thelawreviews.co.uk//digital...iew_4th-Ed.pdf



There are multiple holders of the security.

"Birth" is not in the actual link. It does describe a qualifying security in that section as a "pledge".

"A pledge is a form of security that can only be taken over movable assets, either tangible assets (such as machinery, equipment, and vehicles) or intangible assets (such as shares, accounts receivable, bonds, debentures, and patent rights) to secure a specific loan."

A birth certificate is none of those.

[devil21]

"Birth" is not in the actual link. It does describe a qualifying security in that section as a "pledge".

"A pledge is a form of security that can only be taken over movable assets, either tangible assets (such as machinery, equipment, and vehicles) or intangible assets (such as shares, accounts receivable, bonds, debentures, and patent rights) to secure a specific loan."

A birth certificate is none of those.

Link says nothing about birth certificates.

Not sure why you insist on the exact terminology being found. I explained clearly that the tangible, movable asset is you. Of course it doesn't expressly say "birth certificates". That would be a little too obvious, don't you think? Refer back to House's quote.

https://thelawdictionary.org/certificate-of-title/

Ownership of real property or a vehicle is certified by this document. An authorized agency will capture a description of the property and of the liens on it, if any, on the issued certificate.

It's a bill of lading evidencing title of cargo delivered, under the legal jurisdiction of the UCC and you only get copies of it, not originals. It then creates a trust relationship (an estate) via the signatures on the document, where the baby is placed in trust as collateral against bank debt extended. The baby becomes the asset of a trust and the state becomes the trustee (owner) until the person named on the document claims the "cargo". It's standard shipping procedure! Hence Bill Gross' quote I added earlier in the thread and House's reference to the "law merchant", which refers to maritime commerce.
Everything you sign is a contract, yes? What's the contract being entered into when mom signed the Certificate of Live Birth along with the other parties? If not, then why does it need signatures?

Btw---
Ya think maybe the doctor that delivered babies for 30 years, Dr. Ron Paul, knows this system and that's why he is so vocal about the Fed? He was the doctor on 4000 of these things

Speaking of delivery. De-livery. What's "livery"?
https://thelawdictionary.org/livery/

1. In English law. Delivery of possession of their lands {property!} to the king’s tenants in capite or tenants by knight’s service. 2. A writ which may be sued out by a ward in chivalry, on reaching his majority, to obtain delivery of the possession of his lands out of the hands of the guardian. 2 Bl. Comm. OS. 3. A particular dress or garb appropriate or peculiar to certain persons, as the mem- bers of a guild, or. more particularly, the servants of a nobleman or gentleman. 4. The privilege of a particular guild or company of persons, the members thereof being called “livery-men.” 5. A contract of hiring of work-beasts, particularly horses, to the use of the hirer. It is seldom used alone in this sense, but appears in the compound, “livery-stable.”

Learn what the words we commonly use really mean. It's right there in the open.

[Zippyjuan]

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...-reserve-board

Trump Fed pick was held in contempt for failing to pay ex-wife over $300,000

Stephen Moore, the economics commentator chosen by Donald Trump for a seat on the Federal Reserve board, was found in contempt of court after failing to pay his ex-wife hundreds of thousands of dollars in alimony, child support and other debts.

Court records in Virginia obtained by the Guardian show Moore, 59, was reprimanded by a judge in November 2012 for failing to pay Allison Moore more than $300,000 in spousal support, child support and money owed under their divorce settlement.

Moore continued failing to pay, according to the court filings, prompting the judge to order the sale of his house to satisfy the debt in 2013. But this process was halted by his ex-wife after Moore paid her about two-thirds of what he owed, the filings say.

In a divorce filing in August 2010, Moore was accused of inflicting “emotional and psychological abuse” on his ex-wife during their 20-year marriage. Allison Moore said in the filing she had been forced to flee their home to protect herself. She was granted a divorce in May 2011.

Moore said in a court filing signed in April 2011 he admitted all the allegations in Allison Moore’s divorce complaint. He declined to comment for this article.

Allison Moore declined to comment during a brief telephone discussion this week. A person close to the Moores said they now had a better relationship and that Allison Moore had a more favourable view of their marriage.

Trump has been criticised for selecting Moore for an influential job at the world’s most powerful central bank. A former economics writer for the Wall Street Journal who has held positions at several conservative thinktanks, Moore was an adviser to Trump’s 2016 campaign and has championed the president on cable television.

Greg Mankiw, an economics professor at Harvard University who was a senior economic adviser to former president George W Bush, has said Moore “does not have the intellectual gravitas” for the job and urged senators to reject him.

The Guardian revealed this week that Moore owes the US government $75,000 according to the Internal Revenue Service (IRS). Moore disputes the government’s claim and blames confusion over tax deductions relating to his child support and alimony payments.

[Swordsmyth]

Trump's proposed nominee to the seven-member Federal Reserve board, Stephen Moore, is planning to challenge the status quo at the US central bank, at a time when it needs continuity and stability the most. Moore said on Bloomberg that he is seeking to debunk the idea that growth causes inflation and that he is also going to "try to demystify monetary policy so it’s not conducted within a temple of secrecy."
Moore said yesterday:"I’ll say that again: Growth does not cause inflation. We know that. When you have more output of goods and services, prices fall. And I think the Fed has been afraid of growth -- there’s "growth-phobiacs" over there and I think they’re wrong.” Whether or not the FOMC committee will agree with that remains to be seen, it would be perhaps more interesting to hear his position on whether debt causes growth, which is far more topical in a world where to "buy" one dollar of GDP, nations have to increase debt by $3, $4 or more.
Last month, President Trump said that he’s planning to nominate Moore for a seat on the Fed’s board of governors. Trump's intentions drew ire and criticism from some circles as a move motivated by politics instead of "sound" economics.

Another of Moore's missions that's sure to be a hit with current Fed governors is his intentions to make the Fed more transparent.
“I’m going to run on an agenda of transparency, openness. Why shouldn’t Bloomberg and C-Span and others be able to cover everything they do? Why does there have to be this temple of secrecy? So, I want openness and sunlight on the Fed,” Moore said, assuring that his future colleagues (assuming he succeeds in the nomination process) isolate him from any off the record, decision-making huddles. He certainly will never be invited to conference room E at the BIS tower in Basel where all the really important decisions are made every few weeks.
Moore further raised eyebrows for pushing the Fed to set monetary policy in response to falling commodity prices and criticizing its rate hikes for undermining Trump’s economy, after slamming it when Barack Obama was in the White House for keeping rates too low. He also called for Fed Chairman Jerome Powell to be fired, though he later said he regretted that remark.
Of course, Moore still has to undergo FBI clearance and financial disclosures before being nominated, a process that usually lasts about a month.
That said, if he's interested in transparency, perhaps he can start by explaining his recent comments, when he referred to himself as a "growth hawk", a term that nobody seems to understand.
“We want wage increases, I want workers to be better off but I’ve said repeatedly when I get at the Fed I’m going to be the growth hawk there. I’m one of these people, I don’t believe in secular stagnation, it’s the stupidest idea I’ve ever heard,” Moore told FOX Business yesterday.
Even if he is nominated, he is certain to get the cold shoulder from his Fed colleagues: as Bloomberg reported today, Fed officials, "in their polite and coded way", have already issued a veiled warning for the political loyalists that President Donald Trump is trying to insert into their ranks: We don’t do flimsy economics, which of course is hilarious for a central bank which last October said the neutral rate was "far away", and just two months later had to make a humiliating U-turn after the market slumped into a very brief bear market.
“There’s a lot of analysis that goes into these decisions and a lot of dispassionate judgment about a variety of matters about the macro economy,’’ St. Louis Fed President James Bullard said Thursday in Tupelo, Mississippi, apparently without a shred of self-referential sarcasm. “Even if somebody comes in with strong political views, they get converted into technocrats pretty quickly.”
And by technocrats, he means people who check the S&P several times every hour, ready to launch QE or issue a dovish soundbite should the "wealth effect" ever be threatened and jeopardize the social order with even a modest correction.
* * *
Providing some perspective on Moore's thought process is Cornell professor, libertarian and self-described gold bug Dave Collum who saw Moore speak earlier this week, and had the chance for a 20 minute one-on-one conversation with the potential nominee. Collum described Moore as a "remarkably genuine person displaying serious humility." He continued, "I didn't detect even a twinge of arrogance":

(3) First, my impressions of Steve Moore. I was certainly ready to disagree with him. What I met was a remarkably genuine person displaying serious humility. I didn't detect even a twinge of arrogance. Quite the opposite.
— Dave Collum (@DavidBCollum) April 11, 2019

Collum note that Moore told students to question authority. "Experts can be dead wrong," Moore said.

(4) He opened urging the students to question authority: "Experts can be dead wrong." Don't we all know THAT one. A kid in Q&A said "I would defer to a professor." I blurted out "Nooooooo!"
— Dave Collum (@DavidBCollum) April 11, 2019

Moore also apparently stressed a goal of zero inflation and holding prices fixed.

(6) In stream of consciousness series of pros and cons, I was hopeful when he stressed the goal of ZERO inflation. Holding prices fixed. Period. I, of course, doubt the Fed's ability to do this but I heard no 2-3% inflation target. cc @McClellanOsc on THAT one.
— Dave Collum (@DavidBCollum) April 11, 2019

Moore also didn't seem to loathe or laugh at the gold standard, like almost every other Fed governor and academic over the past few decades.

(7) Pressed on his support for the gold standard, his answer seemed to back peddle from a strong pro-gold stance years ago, but he finished fairly warm to the idea: "we could do a lot worse."
— Dave Collum (@DavidBCollum) April 11, 2019

He also noted that he "detests corporate welfare" and ended his conversation with a great one liner: "Monetary policy cannot correct for bad economic policy." Moore also called MMT the "most insane concept imaginable".

(21) Great line: "Monetary policy cannot correct for bad economic policy." I'm using that one.
— Dave Collum (@DavidBCollum) April 11, 2019

(23) Moore brought up MMT and denounced it as the most insane concept imaginable. A bunch of us were laughing at mere mention of it.
— Dave Collum (@DavidBCollum) April 11, 2019

You can read Collum's entire interaction with Moore in this thread.




https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-...fed-status-quo

[Swordsmyth]

https://twitter.com/DavidBCollum/sta...51630314000385

[Zippyjuan]

Trump- who once said quantitative easing and low interest rates were terrible- wants Moore and Cain to lower interest rates back to zero and pump up the money supply to boost the stock market. Meanwhile, he is looking at expanding the trade war with Europe which would have the opposite effect.

"Free money for everybody!

[acptulsa]

Trump- who once said quantitative easing and low interest rates were terrible- wants Moore and Cain to lower interest rates back to zero and pump up the money supply to boost the stock market. Meanwhile, he is looking at expanding the trade war with Europe which would have the opposite effect.

"Free money for everybody!

What did you expect?

Please, Federal Reserve, burst that bubble you've been blowing just in time for Reelection Day, said no president ever.

[Zippyjuan]

What did you expect?

Please, Federal Reserve, burst that bubble you've been blowing just in time for Reelection Day, said no president ever.

He wants the biggest bubbles. He measures his own economic success by what the Dow Jones does. But the Fed is supposed to be independent from the President. He wants a Fed to follow his orders.

[acptulsa]

He wants the biggest bubbles. He measures his own economic success by what the Dow Jones does. But the Fed is supposed to be independent from the President. He wants a Fed to follow his orders.

I remember a political cartoon that showed the president du jour in a hot air balloon with Paul Volcker, who was smoking a cigar like a locomotive. The only sources of heat in this balloon were the president's open mouth and that cigar. The president was saying, "Just shut up and keep smoking!"

[Madison320]

So the purpose of the Fed should be to make stocks go higher and higher and higher. Pump up the money supply to infinity to keep it going? Zero or even negative interest rates?

Wait what? What happened to the real Zippy who never complained about 0% rates under Obama's 8 years? The Zippy who says printing money does not cause inflation? Who is this imposter!

[Zippyjuan]

Wait what? What happened to the real Zippy who never complained about 0% rates under Obama's 8 years? The Zippy who says printing money does not cause inflation? Who is this imposter!

Conditions were different. The economy was in recession. We are not in one now.

[Swordsmyth]

Conditions were different. The economy was in recession. We are not in one now.

LOL

[Zippyjuan]

Trump calling for more QE: https://www.cnn.com/2019/04/14/polit...ore/index.html

President Donald Trump renewed his attacks on the Federal Reserve on Sunday, airing his frustration with the central bank.

"If the Fed had done its job properly, which it has not, the Stock Market would have been up 5000 to 10,000 additional points, and GDP would have been well over 4% instead of 3%...with almost no inflation," Trump tweeted.

He added: "Quantitative tightening was a killer, should have done the exact opposite!"

The comments come amid open Senate opposition to his two picks for open seats on the Federal Reserve Board of Governors, former Republican presidential candidate Herman Cain and economic commentator Stephen Moore.

Four Republicans said last week they would not vote to confirm Cain, a former Republican presidential candidate who formerly sat on the Kansas City regional Fed board, because of sexual harassment allegations against him. He has denied the allegations.

Meanwhile, Moore, a former Wall Street Journal editorial board member and CNN analyst, has been sharply criticized for reversing his opposition to low interest rates when President Barack Obama was in office.

Cain has not yet been formally nominated for a position with the Federal Reserve.

[Chester Copperpot]

So the purpose of the Fed should be to make stocks go higher and higher and higher. Pump up the money supply to infinity to keep it going? Zero or even negative interest rates?

The fed should be liquidated and all the supporters, bloggers and propagandists in favor of the fed should be strung up and summarily executed for committing crimes against the people, spirit of America and Constitution.

[Swordsmyth]

The fed should be liquidated and all the supporters, bloggers and propagandists in favor of the fed should be strung up and summarily executed for committing crimes against the people, spirit of America and Constitution.

^^^THIS^^^

[ATruepatriot]

Dad bought a top of the line 1966 Chevelle Super Sport with air conditioning, power steering, and custom color for $3,600 dollars cash brand new...

Who is intelligent enough to decipher the real world economics behind this reality?

Please educate me...

[Swordsmyth]

Stephen Moore is still on track to be nominated to one of the Fed's open board seats.
Driving the news: This week, Moore went on CNN to say that "a gold standard would certainly be better than what we have right now" and that surging oil prices in mid-2008 were caused by loose monetary policy.

CNN's Andrew Kaczynski has found older statements from Moore, including:

• Saying that "hundreds of economists" at the Fed are "worthless" and should be fired.
• Calling for the elimination of both the corporate income tax and the individual income tax.
• Declaring that the 16th amendment, which created the federal income tax, is "the most evil act that has passed in 100 years."
• Saying that "you truly could not come up with a dumber system than Medicaid."

https://www.axios.com/stephen-moores...3b3434479.html

[Madison320]

Conditions were different. The economy was in recession. We are not in one now.

For the whole 8 years under Obama?

[Krugminator2]

Conditions were different. The economy was in recession. We are not in one now.

1. The recession ended March 2009!
2. Adjusting rates has nothing to do with whether monetary policy is loose or tight or goosing the stock market. If markets are forecasting rate cuts or if you use some other benchmark like NGDP that show the economy slowing, not cutting rates is tight policy and cutting rates is neutral policy.

Saying conditions are different is nonsensical. If a rate cut is what is needed, it is what is needed. Realistically rates should change daily by a computer and they should change based on what markets are forecasting. the paradox of cutting rates when they are needed is that it will likely lead to fewer rate cuts in the future on more historically normal interest rates.


Smart person's take who has been right about everything the last 11 years. https://www.econlib.org/cutting-rate...ersing-course/

"One aspect of this problem has not received enough attention—the perception that reversing course on a path of rate increases is in some way an admission of error. And no one likes to admit they were wrong.

But that perception is false, as interest rates are not monetary policy"

In this analogy, fed funds targets are like the steering wheel, and NGDP growth is like the road.

[Superfluous Man]

1. The recession ended March 2009!

Supposedly. But to be fair to his point, the recovery after that point, and for pretty much the rest of Obama's entire tenure, was pretty slow. Overall, the economy has grown faster over the past two years than it did on average from 2009 to 2016. That doesn't mean it wasn't still a bubble in the Obama years. But if it was one then, it's a bigger one now.

[Zippyjuan]

[Zippyjuan]

Moore says he may withdraw his name from consideration for the Federal Reserve.

https://www.foxbusiness.com/politics...ical-liability

Trump Fed pick Stephen Moore will withdraw candidacy if he becomes a political liability

If President Trump’s Federal Reserve board pick Stephen Moore became a political liability for the White House Opens a New Window. and Senate Republicans, he would withdraw from consideration, the Wall Street Journal Opens a New Window. reported Wednesday.

The conservative economic analyst told the Journal during an interview that if “something I said or something I’ve done becomes a political problem” he would bow out from the nomination process.

“I don’t want to be a liability,” Moore told the Journal. “Why should we risk a Senate seat for a Federal Reserve board person, you know? I mean that just doesn’t make any sense.”

Moore came under fire this week for his past writings on women, including several opinion pieces published on the website of the conservative National Review magazine in 2001, 2002 and 2003 in which he wrote that women should be banned from refereeing, announcing or bartending at men’s college basketball games.

More at link.

[devil21]

It looks sorta like they're working their way up to nominating a "reasonable" gold-bug candidate....like, say, Judy Shelton.

[Zippyjuan]

It looks sorta like they're working their way up to nominating a "reasonable" gold-bug candidate....like, say, Judy Shelton.

Trump only picks the best people. Obviously Moore and Cain were the best people for the job. Anybody else would be "working down" the list, not up.