Value of the Dollar
- Thread starter nate45
- Start date
My mind is made up...
Please don't confuse me with the facts.
Of course, equally absent from this eeevilll conspiracy is the fact that, if they wanted to, Congress could shut down the Federal Reserve system tomorrow, and take control of the money supply, setting short-term interest rates for banks borrowing money from the Treasury by statute. Or do anything else they wanted to, to replicate the functions that they have delegated to this entity that they created (also by statute.)
Not that it would be a good idea, but they could do it.
It's an interesting question, and one that I doubt there's a perfect answer to:
How do you control something that is entirely fictional (money of any kind), and yet is absolutely vital to the functioning of your society?
At the surface, regulating the value of money is like regulating the size of leprechauns' hats. Go a little deeper, and factor in the fact that almost nobody believes in leprechauns while almost everyone believes in money means that you can do things that actually work, but nobody really understands why.
Life would be much easier if economics was a science. Or even could be one.
--Shannon
Please don't confuse me with the facts.
Of course, equally absent from this eeevilll conspiracy is the fact that, if they wanted to, Congress could shut down the Federal Reserve system tomorrow, and take control of the money supply, setting short-term interest rates for banks borrowing money from the Treasury by statute. Or do anything else they wanted to, to replicate the functions that they have delegated to this entity that they created (also by statute.)
Not that it would be a good idea, but they could do it.
It's an interesting question, and one that I doubt there's a perfect answer to:
How do you control something that is entirely fictional (money of any kind), and yet is absolutely vital to the functioning of your society?
At the surface, regulating the value of money is like regulating the size of leprechauns' hats. Go a little deeper, and factor in the fact that almost nobody believes in leprechauns while almost everyone believes in money means that you can do things that actually work, but nobody really understands why.
Life would be much easier if economics was a science. Or even could be one.
--Shannon
Ok lets suppose the 'facts' you give are correct.
The monetary policy of the United States is the domain of the Federal Reserve Bank and not the government. This process is in direct contradiction of the U.S. Constitution that reposes the responsibility of the monetary system with the Congress of the United States.
FOREIGN BANKERS OWN MAJORITY OF FEDERAL RESERVE
More that half the shareholdings in the Federal Reserve Bank are controlled by large New York City banks, including National City Bank, National Bank of Commerce, First National Bank, Chase National Bank, and Marine National Bank. When Rockefeller's National City Bank merged with J.P. Morgan's First National Bank in 1955, the Rockefeller group owned 22 percent of the shares of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, which in turn holds the majority of shares in the Federal Reserve System - 53 percent. But who really owns what? Here are the top controllers of the Federal Reserve Bank
1. Rothchild banks of London and Berlin.
2. Lazard Brothers Banks of Paris.
3. Israel Moses Seif Banks of Italy.
4. Warburg Bank of Hamburg and Amsterdam.
5. Lehman Brothers Bank of New York.
6. Kuhn, Loeb bank of New York.
7. Chase Manhattan Bank of New York, which controls all of the other 11 Federal Reserve Banks.
8. Goldman, Sachs Bank of New York.
This ownership combination has been challenged by the Federal Reserve Bank, but a study of Standards and Poors will verify the ownerships. This means that the controlling interest of our national monetary system is foreign. In 1797, John Adams wrote to Thomas Jefferson, "All the perplexities, confusion and distress in America arise, not from defects of the Constitution or Confederation; not from any want of honor or virtue, as much as downright ignorance of the nature of coin, credit and circulation." In simple terms, the United States Government borrows money from the Federal Reserve Bank with interest. Here is how it works: The Government wants $1 billion. The Federal Reserve prints $1 billion - based upon no hard asset - and lends it to the Government at a high interest rate. The bank did not have the original money, it created it and made a bookkeeping entry - like you writing yourself a check without funds and cashing it. The Federal Reserve controls the flow of money, making it tight and creating unemployment or printing more than actually exists and creates inflation. It is, in escense, a paper corporation, which controls the entire economic well-being of the nation.
KENNEDY TRIED TO CHANGE IT
In 1963, President John Kennedy wanted an end to the Federal Reserve System, which had a strangle-hold on the United States and virtually the world. By a simple stroke of the pen, President Kennedy dismissed the Federal Reserve System and ordered the U.S. government to restore its Constitutional-mandate of controlling the money. President Kennedy was dead three weeks later. When President Lyndon Johnson took office, he immediately rescinded Kennedy's order and the Federal Reserve won another round. I'm not saying that he was killed because he wanted to eliminate the Federal Reserve, but those are the facts of the way it happened.
No Congress, no President has been strong enough to stand up to the foreign-controlled Federal Reserve Bank. Yet there is a catch - one that President Kennedy recognized before he was slain - the original deal in 1913 creating the Federal Reserve Bank had a simple backout clause. The investors loaned the United States Government $1 billion. And the backout clause allows the United States to buy out the system for that $1 billion. If the Federal Reserve Bank were demolished and the Congress of the United States took control of the currency, as required in the Constitution, the National Debt would virtually end overnight, and the need for more taxes and even the income tax, itself. Thomas Jefferson was concise in his early warning to the American nation, "If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issuance of their currency, first by inflation and then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the people of all their property until their children will wake up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered."
The monetary policy of the United States is the domain of the Federal Reserve Bank and not the government. This process is in direct contradiction of the U.S. Constitution that reposes the responsibility of the monetary system with the Congress of the United States.
FOREIGN BANKERS OWN MAJORITY OF FEDERAL RESERVE
More that half the shareholdings in the Federal Reserve Bank are controlled by large New York City banks, including National City Bank, National Bank of Commerce, First National Bank, Chase National Bank, and Marine National Bank. When Rockefeller's National City Bank merged with J.P. Morgan's First National Bank in 1955, the Rockefeller group owned 22 percent of the shares of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, which in turn holds the majority of shares in the Federal Reserve System - 53 percent. But who really owns what? Here are the top controllers of the Federal Reserve Bank
1. Rothchild banks of London and Berlin.
2. Lazard Brothers Banks of Paris.
3. Israel Moses Seif Banks of Italy.
4. Warburg Bank of Hamburg and Amsterdam.
5. Lehman Brothers Bank of New York.
6. Kuhn, Loeb bank of New York.
7. Chase Manhattan Bank of New York, which controls all of the other 11 Federal Reserve Banks.
8. Goldman, Sachs Bank of New York.
This ownership combination has been challenged by the Federal Reserve Bank, but a study of Standards and Poors will verify the ownerships. This means that the controlling interest of our national monetary system is foreign. In 1797, John Adams wrote to Thomas Jefferson, "All the perplexities, confusion and distress in America arise, not from defects of the Constitution or Confederation; not from any want of honor or virtue, as much as downright ignorance of the nature of coin, credit and circulation." In simple terms, the United States Government borrows money from the Federal Reserve Bank with interest. Here is how it works: The Government wants $1 billion. The Federal Reserve prints $1 billion - based upon no hard asset - and lends it to the Government at a high interest rate. The bank did not have the original money, it created it and made a bookkeeping entry - like you writing yourself a check without funds and cashing it. The Federal Reserve controls the flow of money, making it tight and creating unemployment or printing more than actually exists and creates inflation. It is, in escense, a paper corporation, which controls the entire economic well-being of the nation.
KENNEDY TRIED TO CHANGE IT
In 1963, President John Kennedy wanted an end to the Federal Reserve System, which had a strangle-hold on the United States and virtually the world. By a simple stroke of the pen, President Kennedy dismissed the Federal Reserve System and ordered the U.S. government to restore its Constitutional-mandate of controlling the money. President Kennedy was dead three weeks later. When President Lyndon Johnson took office, he immediately rescinded Kennedy's order and the Federal Reserve won another round. I'm not saying that he was killed because he wanted to eliminate the Federal Reserve, but those are the facts of the way it happened.
No Congress, no President has been strong enough to stand up to the foreign-controlled Federal Reserve Bank. Yet there is a catch - one that President Kennedy recognized before he was slain - the original deal in 1913 creating the Federal Reserve Bank had a simple backout clause. The investors loaned the United States Government $1 billion. And the backout clause allows the United States to buy out the system for that $1 billion. If the Federal Reserve Bank were demolished and the Congress of the United States took control of the currency, as required in the Constitution, the National Debt would virtually end overnight, and the need for more taxes and even the income tax, itself. Thomas Jefferson was concise in his early warning to the American nation, "If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issuance of their currency, first by inflation and then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the people of all their property until their children will wake up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered."
The Federal Reserve System is made up of 12 Federal Reserve Banks in Boston, New York, Philadelphia, Cleveland, Richmond, Atlanta, Chicago, St. Louis, Minneapolis, Kansas City, Dallas, and San Francisco.
12 USC 287 - The Federal Reserve Act, Section 5 — Stock Issues; Increase and Decrease of Capital; the law is both clear and specific about Federal Reserve Bank stock ownership. Nevertheless, here is a summary of who owns the Federal Reserve Banks.
Overview of the Federal Reserve System (page 12) - "As of March 2004, of the nation’s approximately 7,700 commercial banks approximately 2,900 were members of the Federal Reserve System—approximately 2,000 national banks and 900 state banks. Member banks must subscribe to stock in their regional Federal Reserve Bank in an amount equal to 6 percent of their capital and surplus, half of which must be paid in while the other half is subject to call by the Board of Governors. Stock in Federal Reserve Banks is not available for purchase by individuals or entities other than member banks."
Sorry, 'Rothschilds of London' is not even a US bank and is not eligible to own Federal Reserve Bank stock. About 2,900 US banks collectively own all Federal Reserve stock.
Overview of the Federal Reserve System (page 11) - "The income of the Federal Reserve System is derived primarily from the interest on U.S. government securities that it has acquired through open market operations. Other major sources of income are the interest on foreign currency investments held by the System; interest on loans to depository institutions; and fees received for services provided to depository institutions, such as check clearing, funds transfers, and automated clearinghouse operations. After it pays its expenses, the Federal Reserve turns the rest of its earnings over to the U.S. Treasury. About 95 percent of the Reserve Banks’ net earnings have been paid into the Treasury since the Federal Reserve System began operations in 1914."
Income and expenses of the Federal Reserve Banks from 1914 to the present are included in the Annual Report of the Board of Governors to Congress (see Table 11).
Nate is right. Here is the video to prove it!
Not our uranium. We're gonna make ours black, and I mean midnight black. Black as the night is dark. The dollar will be backed by processed, high-grade uranium, the EBR-type black. Which will magically make our economy perfect. Because if you look at a the chart, the correlation clearly proves causation.
Nah, I'm just kidding. Actually, the value of the dollar didn't start to significantly drop until Ron Paul began his campaign to be the President. I can't believe that nobody here noticed this clear correlation. If Ron Paul would simply stop campaiging, the value of the dollar would drastically improve. Because the prospect of a possible Ron Paul administration has resulted in financial insecurity in the market. If Ron Paul would simply stop appearing in public, the dollar would recover quite quickly.
Like I can't go to the Fed web site and read their claims. I understand it is a complex matter and many would prefer to believe the public releases of the Fed or the press releases of the oil companies or the official government version of everything.
Well, here is a government chart for you of who actually has a controlling interest in the Fed from the House Banking Committee Staff Report of August, 1976.
Chart of who "owns" the Federal Reserve
Once again I say to all of you doubters and nay sayers who suppose you are 100% correct as you believe yourselves to be.
That still does not change the fact that ...
The Constitution does not give Congress the authority to delegate control over monetary policy to a central bank. Article I, Section 8 of the U. S. Constitution, only Congress has the right to issue money and regulate its value.
Furthermore, the Constitution certainly does not empower the federal government to erode the American standard of living via an inflationary monetary policy.
If you content with your hard earned savings being eroded away by inflation and a select few benefiting from the current system which is counter to our constitution well good for you.
You are legally incorrect. If you don't agree, and really believe that the delegation is unconstitutional, or that a monetary policy is unconstitutional, all you have to do is go down to your local federal district court and file a lawsuit. Which won't even survive a Motion to Dismiss for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.
No, it is not a complex matter; the ownership of the Federal Reserve Banks is a matter of federal law (12 USC 287) and that ownership is limited to United States banks.
nate45: Whatever credibility your underlying arguments about the US monetary system might have is shredded when you post clips from goofy secret-rulers-of-the-world conspiracy websites.
As economics is not something I have much interest in, and thus don't know much about, I'll stay out of the discussion, other than to say:
Does it seem like a REALLY bad idea to anyone else to let a bunch of private businessmen, whose profession it is to make a profit through the manipulation of money, be the ones in charge of all our money and our economy?
It just seems insanely ripe for abuse and general shadiness, and seems like that would be obvious even to politicians and bureaucrats.
Does it seem like a REALLY bad idea to anyone else to let a bunch of private businessmen, whose profession it is to make a profit through the manipulation of money, be the ones in charge of all our money and our economy?
It just seems insanely ripe for abuse and general shadiness, and seems like that would be obvious even to politicians and bureaucrats.
Now comes Fremmer constitutional law authority par excellence. Well Fremmer the fact that the SCOTUS has never ruled on the constitutionality of the Fed doesn't change the fact that the U.S. Constitution, states in Article 1, Section 8: `The Congress shall have the power to coin money and regulate the value thereof. Nowhere is there the slightest hint of authorization to delegate that power even to another governmental institution — much less to a private banking system. That is absolutely outside the most broad interpretation possible
This is a simplistic and inaccurate view of the Federal Reserve. The Federal Reserve is actually two things rolled into one - a bank service business and the US central bank.
The 12 Federal Reserve Banks provide services such as check clearing, wire transfers, etc. to other banks. Since they act as a co-op for bank services, it is reasonable that the banks using the services own and control the Federal Reserve Banks.
The Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System directs monetary policy. The seven members of the Board of Governors are appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate to serve 14-year terms of office. Only one member of the Board may be selected from any one of the twelve Federal Reserve Banks. The majority of Governors have been economists. As far as monetary policy, it is directed by these politial appointees. (Whether entrusting our money and economy to political appointees is a good idea is another question.)
Last edited:
That might be reasonable if it were true, this chart from the House Banking Committee Staff Report of August 1976 clearly shows who owns the majority of stock in the Fed. OWNERSHIP OF THE FEDERAL RESERVE
Even the House Banking Committee itself acknowledges the ultimate power of the Fed, saying that, "the Federal Reserve is, in practice, independent of that body [Congress] in its policy making The Federal Reserve neither requires nor seeks approval of any branch of government for its policies.
The system itself decides at what ends its policies are aimed, and then takes whatever actions it sees fit to reach those ends!
They create the inflation and recession cycles.
Every effort has been made by the Federal Reserve Board to conceal its powers, but the truth is: The Fed has usurped the government! It controls everything here, and it controls all our foreign relations! It makes or breaks governments at will!"
The Federal Reserve is held by powerful banks, owned or largely controlled by the Rothschilds. The banks are:
Rothschild Banks of London and Berlin
Lazard Brothers Bank of Paris
Israel Moses Sieff Bank of Italy
Warburg Batiks of Hamburg and Amsterdam
Lehman Brothers Bank of New York
Kuhn Loeb Bank of New York
Chase Manhattan Bank of New York (controlled by the Rockefellers)
Goldman Sachs Bank of New York
These, then, are effectively the owners of not only the Federal Reserve, but also the entire United States of America.
Regurgitating the official line put out by the the Federal Reserve does not make it true and even if it is true....
I again will state that even if what you say about the Federal Reserve is 100% accurate that doesn't change the constitution.
US Constitution, states in Article 1, Section 8: The Congress shall have the power to coin money and regulate the value thereof. Nowhere is there the slightest hint of authorization to delegate that power even to another governmental institution — much less to a private banking system. That is absolutely outside the most broad interpretation possible.
Last edited:
OK Nate, you show me the United States Supreme Court, Court of Appeals, or Federal District Court decision holding that the Federal Reserve Act is unconstitutional. After all, you're the one asserting that it is unconstitutional. So please cite the decision so that we can all see it. Please.
Edited to add: Here ya go, Nate. Please cite the United States Supreme Court case which overrules the following federal cases:
U.S. v. Rickman, 638 F.2d 182, C.A.Kan. 1980:
Federal Reserve Notes in which the defendant, charged with failure to file federal income tax returns, was paid were lawful money within the meaning of the United States Constitution. 26 USCA §7203; USCA Const. Art. 1, §8, cl. 5. U.S. v. Wangrund, 533 F.2d 495; C.A.Cal. 1976
The statute establishing Federal Reserve Notes as legal tender for all debts, public and private, including taxes, is within the constitutional authority of Congress; thus the defendant could not overturn his conviction on two counts of wilful failure to make an income tax return on the theory that he did not receive money since checks he received as compensation for his services could be cashed only for Federal Reserve Notes which were not redeemable in specie. 26 USCA (IRC 1954) §§61, 7203; USCA Const. art. 1, §8; Coinage Act of 1965, §102; 31 USCA §392.
Nixon v. Individual Head of St. Joseph Mortgage Company, 615 F.Supp. 890, affirmed 787 F.2d 596. D.C.Ind. 1985. Federal Reserve notes are legal tender.
Ginter v. Southern, 611 F.2d 1226, certiorari denied 100 S.Ct 2946, 446 US 967, 64 L.E.d.2d 827. C.A.Ark. 1979.
Tax protestor's claims concerning the constitutionality of the Federal Reserve System, Internal Revenue Code and establishment of tax court were so frivolous as not to require discussion and detail. USCA Const. Amends. 5, 13; 28 USCA §1346(a)(1); 26 USCA (IRC 1954) §6532(a), 7422(a).
U.S. v. Schmitz, 542 F.2d 782 certiorari denied 97 S.Ct. 1134, 429 US 1105, 51 L.Ed.2d 556. C.A.Cal. 1976.
Federal Reserve Notes constitute legal tender and are taxable dollars. USCA Const. Art. 1, §10.
Milam v. U.S., 524 F.2d 629. C.A.Cal. 1974.
The statute which delegates to the Federal Reserve System the power to issue circulating notes for money borrowed and the power to define the quality and force of those notes as currency is valid ... Although golden eagles, double eagles, and silver dollars were lovely to look at and delightful to hold, the holder of a $50 Federal Reserve Bank Note, although entitled to redeem his note, was not entitled to do so in precious metal. Federal Reserve Act, §16, 12 USCA §411; Coinage Act of 1965, §102, 31 USCA §392
Good golly, miss Molly -- I really am a Constitutional expert!!!
Edited to add: Here ya go, Nate. Please cite the United States Supreme Court case which overrules the following federal cases:
U.S. v. Rickman, 638 F.2d 182, C.A.Kan. 1980:
Federal Reserve Notes in which the defendant, charged with failure to file federal income tax returns, was paid were lawful money within the meaning of the United States Constitution. 26 USCA §7203; USCA Const. Art. 1, §8, cl. 5. U.S. v. Wangrund, 533 F.2d 495; C.A.Cal. 1976
The statute establishing Federal Reserve Notes as legal tender for all debts, public and private, including taxes, is within the constitutional authority of Congress; thus the defendant could not overturn his conviction on two counts of wilful failure to make an income tax return on the theory that he did not receive money since checks he received as compensation for his services could be cashed only for Federal Reserve Notes which were not redeemable in specie. 26 USCA (IRC 1954) §§61, 7203; USCA Const. art. 1, §8; Coinage Act of 1965, §102; 31 USCA §392.
Nixon v. Individual Head of St. Joseph Mortgage Company, 615 F.Supp. 890, affirmed 787 F.2d 596. D.C.Ind. 1985. Federal Reserve notes are legal tender.
Ginter v. Southern, 611 F.2d 1226, certiorari denied 100 S.Ct 2946, 446 US 967, 64 L.E.d.2d 827. C.A.Ark. 1979.
Tax protestor's claims concerning the constitutionality of the Federal Reserve System, Internal Revenue Code and establishment of tax court were so frivolous as not to require discussion and detail. USCA Const. Amends. 5, 13; 28 USCA §1346(a)(1); 26 USCA (IRC 1954) §6532(a), 7422(a).
U.S. v. Schmitz, 542 F.2d 782 certiorari denied 97 S.Ct. 1134, 429 US 1105, 51 L.Ed.2d 556. C.A.Cal. 1976.
Federal Reserve Notes constitute legal tender and are taxable dollars. USCA Const. Art. 1, §10.
Milam v. U.S., 524 F.2d 629. C.A.Cal. 1974.
The statute which delegates to the Federal Reserve System the power to issue circulating notes for money borrowed and the power to define the quality and force of those notes as currency is valid ... Although golden eagles, double eagles, and silver dollars were lovely to look at and delightful to hold, the holder of a $50 Federal Reserve Bank Note, although entitled to redeem his note, was not entitled to do so in precious metal. Federal Reserve Act, §16, 12 USCA §411; Coinage Act of 1965, §102, 31 USCA §392
Good golly, miss Molly -- I really am a Constitutional expert!!!
Judge Martin Mahoney wrote the following about a case he ruled over, The First National Bank of Montgomery v. Jerome Daly, December 7, 1968: (See 17 Am. Jur. 85, 215, and 1 Mer. Jur. 2nd on Actions, Section 550)
"There is no lawful consideration for these Federal Reserve Notes to circulate as money. The banks actually obtained these notes for the cost of printing. A lawful consideration must exist for a note...
"The activity of the Federal Reserve Banks...and the First National Bank of Montgomery, is contrary to public policy and contrary to the Constitution of the United States, and constitutes an unlawful creation of money and credit for no valuable consideration. Activity of said banks in creating money and credit is not warranted by the Constitution of the United States.
"The Federal Reserve Banks and National Banks exercise an exclusive monopoly and privilege of creating credit and issuing notes at the expense of the public, which does not receive a fair equivalent. This scheme is obliquely designed for the benefit of an idle monopoly to rob, blackmail, and oppress the producers of wealth [you and me and our ability to work and be productive].
"The Federal Reserve Act and the National Bank Act are, in their operation and effect, contrary to the whole letter and spirit of the Constitution of the United States, for they confer an unlawful and unnecessary power on private parties; they hold all of our fellow citizens in dependence; they are subversive to the rights and liberation of the people.
"These Acts have defied the lawfully constituted Government of the United States. The Federal Reserve Act and National Banking Act are not necessary and proper for carrying into execution the legislative powers granted to Congress [See Article 1, Section 8, Clause 5 of the Constitution of the United States] or any other powers vested in the government of the United States, but on the contrary, are subversive to the rights of the People in their rights to life, liberty, and property...
"No rights can be acquired by fraud. The Federal Reserve Notes are acquired through the use of unconstitutional statutes and fraud. The law leaves wrongdoers where it finds them. Slavery and all its incidents, including peonage, thralldom, and the debt created by fraud is universally prohibited in the United States. This case represents but another refined form of slavery by the bankers. Their position is not supported by the Constitution of the United States."
Two weeks after Judge Mahoney ruled in favor of Daly, and wrote the above, he was assassinated.
And so was his judicial opinion, which was rendered moot by the cases referenced in my last post. So, once again, your claim that the Federal Reserve Act is unconstitutional is legally incorrect. Federal precedent proves that your claim is legally incorrect. Please stop asserting that the Act is unconstitutional. Your remedy lies with the legislature; namely, to repeal the Act.
Those cases are interesting Fremmer let me add to one if I may be so bold.
... Although golden eagles, double eagles, and silver dollars were lovely to look at and delightful to hold, the holder of a $50 Federal Reserve Bank Note, although entitled to redeem his note, was not entitled to do so in precious metal.
Because your paper money has been so depreciated by inflation that it does not have the purchasing power to buy its old gold and silver equivalent.
... Although golden eagles, double eagles, and silver dollars were lovely to look at and delightful to hold, the holder of a $50 Federal Reserve Bank Note, although entitled to redeem his note, was not entitled to do so in precious metal.
Because your paper money has been so depreciated by inflation that it does not have the purchasing power to buy its old gold and silver equivalent.