Posted on 11/29/2005 1:19:18 PM PST by hubbubhubbub
"All the perplexities, confusion and distresses in America arise not from defects in the Constitution or confederation, nor from want of honor or virtue, as much from downright ignorance of the nature of coin, credit, and circulation." [1]
Abstract
Ignorantia juris non excusat (ignorance of the law does not excuse) is a well established principle dating back thousands of years. Roman and English law, precursors of the American system of jurisprudence, both recognized the maxim.
Be it not forgotten – justice excuses not the law. The laws of the land are to be made in pursuance of the Constitution. The Constitution has precedent. Any law not in pursuance of the Constitution is null and void, as if it never occurred. So the court has ruled.
"And there is virgin Justice, the daughter of Zeus, who is honored and reverenced among the gods who dwell on Olympus, and whenever anyone hurts her with lying slander, she sits beside her father, Zeus the son of Cronos, and tells him of men's wicked heart, until the people pay for the mad folly of their princes who, evilly minded, pervert judgement and give sentence crookedly." [2]
No man is above the law – not even the King. No law is above the Constitution – not even the King’s. All men are created equal. All men are judged accordingly. He without sin cast the first stone.
The ignorance of coin, credit, and circulation is unfortunately, a widespread occurrence – causing perplexities, confusion, and distress, all tearing at the social fabric of our nation. But who is guilty of these defects – who has caused them to be?
Is it the fault of the common man that he cannot understand the complexities of a monetary system that moved Lord Keynes to say that not one man in a million understands money?
No, the common man is not at fault, the blame lies elsewhere: it rests with those who have purposefully made the monetary policy so bizarre that even its keepers have a hard time understanding the delusion they have created.
John Kenneth Galbraith clearly understood the illusionary nature of the elite’s monetary economists when he stated that they:
“use complexity to disguise or to evade the truth, rather than to reveal it.” [3]
Fractional Reserves
The most dishonest monetary illusion is the shadow cast by fractional reserve lending.
"Because of 'fractional' reserve system, banks, as a whole, can expand our money supply several times, by making loans and investments." [4]
Let’s take a closer look at the sword of State the magi use to create their tricks of prestidigitation – the scepter of fractional reserves.
What is meant by fractional reserves? It would seem that reserves are reduced to a fraction, but a fraction of what? Perhaps we should seek the wise counsel of the Federal Reserve, as this is their raison d’etre.
Required Reserve Balances
“Required reserve balances are balances that a depository institution must hold with the Federal Reserve to satisfy its reserve requirement. Reserve requirements are imposed on all depository institutions – which include commercial banks, savings banks, savings and loan associations, and credit unions – as well as U.S. branches and agencies of foreign banks and other domestic banking entities that engage in international transactions.
Since the early 1990s, reserve requirements have been applied only to transaction deposits, which include demand deposits and interest-bearing accounts that offer unlimited checking privileges. An institution’s reserve requirement is a fraction of such deposits; the fraction – the required reserve ratio – is set by the Board of Governors within limits prescribed in the Federal Reserve Act.” [5]
According to the above, the Board of Governors set required reserve balances within limits as prescribed by the Federal Reserve Act that depository institutions must hold on account.
The required reserve ratio is clearly stated to be a fraction of demand deposits and interest-bearing accounts that offer unlimited checking privileges.
Notice the wording “since the early 1990s, reserve requirements have been applied only to transaction deposits”, as such language demonstrates that previous to the early 1990’s reserve requirements were applied to a larger composite – according to the usage of the word “only.”
Which in fact is true, as reserve requirements have been reduced several times since the Fed took control in 1913? A closer look at reserve requirements is in order.
Reserve Requirements
The Federal Reserve has the following to say in regards to reserve requirements:
“Reserve requirements have long been a part of our nation’s banking history. Depository institutions maintain a fraction of certain liabilities in reserve in specified assets. The Federal Reserve can adjust reserve requirements by changing required reserve ratios, the liabilities to which the ratios apply, or both.” [6]
Once again, we see the use of the word “fraction” when discussing reserve requirements, however, we now have the further clarification of reserves in “specified assets.” Obviously, these “specified assets” are critically important, as they are the reserves of our monetary system.
“A depository institution satisfies its reserve requirement by its holdings of vault cash (currency in its vault) and, if vault cash is insufficient to meet the requirement, by the balance maintained directly with a Federal Reserve Bank or indirectly with a pass-through correspondent bank (which in turn hold the balances in its account at the Federal Reserve).” [7]
Now we see that depository institutions satisfy their reserve requirements by holding cash (currency) in their vaults, or if short, they get some help from the Fed or a correspondent bank. The next logical question is: how much cash are they required to have on reserve in their vaults.
From the same Fed publication, we find the following table:
(table didn't come across)
As can be seen from the above chart there isn’t a heck of a lot of reserves on reserve. Three of the five categories listed in the chart have zero (0) reserve requirements. One of the five categories has three (3%) percent reserves, and the remaining category has approximately ten (10%) percent reserve requirements.
So, what are the ramifications of the above listed reserve requirements? From the Fed’s publication, we find the following:
Autonomous Factors
“The supply of balances can vary substantially from day to day because of movements in other items on the Federal Reserve’s balance sheet. These so-called autonomous factors are generally outside the Federal Reserve’s direct day-to-day control.
The largest autonomous factor is Federal Reserve notes. When a depository institution needs currency, it places an order with a Federal Reserve Bank. When the Federal Reserve fills the order, it debits the account of the depository institution at the Federal Reserve, and total Federal Reserve balances decline.
The amount of currency demanded tends to grow over time, in part reflecting increases in nominal spending as the economy grows. Consequently, an increasing volume of balances would be extinguished, and the federal funds rate would rise, if the Federal Reserve did not offset the contraction in balances by purchasing securities. Indeed, the expansion of Federal Reserve notes is the primary reason that the Federal Reserve’s holdings of securities grow over time.” [8]
Federal Reserve notes are those little green pieces of paper we all carry around in our wallet or purse and refer to as cash. A dollar bill is a Federal Reserve note, as are fives, tens, twenties, fifties, and one hundred dollar bills.
From where does the Fed get the Federal Reserve Notes? Good question. Let’s try and find the answer.
Notice in the above quote the last sentence, which reads, “Indeed, the expansion of Federal Reserve notes is the primary reason that the Federal Reserve’s holdings of securities grow over time.”
With the Fed’s holding of securities entering the picture, we now have two questions to answer: Federal Reserve notes come from where; and what securities is the Fed holding due to the expansion of Federal Reserve notes?
The Treasury
The Treasury has a role to play in this monetary game of musical chairs. The Fed has this to say regarding the Treasury:
“Another important factor is the balance in the U.S. Treasury’s account at the Federal Reserve. The Treasury draws on this account to make payments by check or direct deposit for all types of federal spending. When these payments clear, the Treasury’s account is reduced and the account of the depository institution for the person or entity that receives the funds is increased. The Treasury is not a depository institution, so a payment by the Treasury to the public (for example, a Social Security payment) raises the volume of Federal Reserve balances available to depository institutions.” [9]
From this we see that the Treasury has an account at the Federal Reserve, and that the Treasury draws on the account to make payments by check and direct deposit. Where did the Treasury’s account at the Fed come from? Rather than finding answers, we are discovering more questions.
Open Market Operations
“Open market operations are the most powerful and often-used tool for controlling the funds rate. These operations, which are arranged nearly every business day, are designed to bring the supply of Federal Reserve balances in line with the demand for those balances at the FOMC’s target rate.” [10]
The more we look, the greater our task becomes. That is good, as often times its not just the answers that matter, but asking the right questions as well. We are getting warmer by the minute.
“In theory, the Federal Reserve could conduct open market operations by purchasing or selling any type of asset. In practice, however, most assets cannot be traded readily enough to accommodate open market operations. For open market operations to work effectively, the Federal Reserve must be able to buy and sell quickly, at its own convenience, in whatever volume may be needed to keep the federal funds rate at the target level. These conditions require that the instrument it buys or sells be traded in a broad, highly active market that can accommodate the transactions without distortions or disruptions to the market itself. The market for U.S. Treasury securities satisfies these conditions.” [11]
United States Treasury securities are the main market the Fed uses to conduct open market operations. As the money supply continually grows, the buying of Treasury securities by the Fed occurs more often then selling.
Summary To Date
Fractional Reserves refers to monetary reserves required to be on deposit in banks. The reserve requirements go from zero, to 3%, to 10%. Federal Reserve notes (cash) are the predominant reserve deposit. When banks need cash, they go to the Fed. The Fed holds U.S. government securities in its accounts. The U.S. Treasury has an account at the Fed. The Fed conducts open market operation of buying or selling Treasury securities. The remaining questions before us are:
Where does the Fed get the ever-increasing supply of Federal Reserve notes? Where did the Treasury account at the Fed come from? Where The Money Comes From
Trillions of dollars are said to be everywhere. I remember as a kid that a million was a big number. Today billions of dollars are tossed around from computer to computer without the blink of an eye. Trillions are now the topic de jour.
Budgets, deficits, and international money flows are all described using trillions or parts thereof. We have come a long way. The financial wizards circle high above the common man. But perhaps the way so chosen is the wrong way, for the good of all of the people – not just the elite few who control the strings of the purse, and profit thereby.
Let’s go within the Temple of the Wizards of Finance, to see what arts the conjuring is done by, to see what potions and spells are cast within fortune’s cauldron, and what strange brew precipitates there from.
The Beginning
On that fateful day when Federal Reserve Notes were first issued, it is obvious that a huge number of dollar bills had to be printed. Now, the printing press is pretty much obsolete; the only money that actually gets printed is used to replace old and worn Federal Reserve notes already in circulation. In vogue today is electronic money – fast food style.
The process actually begins with the Treasury Department printing a piece of paper called a bond, which is done electronically. Treasury bonds are debt obligations (liability) of the government to repay a loan - with interest.
The Treasury sells bonds to the public. The bonds the public does not buy, the Treasury deposits with the Federal Reserve. When the Fed accepts the bond from the Treasury, it lists the bond on its books as an asset.
The Fed assumes the government will make good on its promise to pay back the loan. This is based on the belief that the government’s power to tax the people is sufficient collateral.
Because the Fed now has an asset that it didn't have before receiving the Treasury bond, the Fed can now create a liability that is offset by its new asset.
The liability that the Fed creates is a Federal Reserve check. It gives the Treasury the check in payment for the Treasury bond.
THERE IS NO EXISTING MONEY IN THE FED'S ACCOUNT TO COVER THIS CHECK.
The Federal Reserve check is endorsed by the Treasury and is deposited in one of the government's accounts at the Federal Reserve. The government can use the deposits to write checks against, to pay for government expenses.
This is the first new money flow to enter the system. Various government contractors, vendors, etc. receive these checks as payment for services rendered, and they take the checks and deposit them in their commercial banks.
The Second Step
This is when the wizards of finance perform their greatest feats of magic. The deposits in the commercial banks take on a sort of split personality or dementia, brought on by a preponderance of delusional thinking.
On the one hand, the deposits are the bank’s liabilities, as they owe the total sums to their depositors.
However, because of FRACTIONAL RESERVE lending, the bankers get to lend out 9 times what they have on deposit.
The commercial banks get to list the deposits as RESERVES.
In other words, FRACTIONAL RESERVE lending allows the commercial banks to create 9 times more money then they have on reserve. The banks lend money they don’t have, and:
They get to charge interest on it.
As the newly issued money is put to work by borrowers, they then spend it and the receiver then deposits it in their bank account, and the bank starts the reserve lending policy all over again. This is why the
Money supply must expand by the amount of interest owed on the debt.
If it didn't, the debt would not be able to be serviced. There is no money created without creating debt, they are one and the same. Wealth is not created by creating money by fiat – only debt. As the Fed has admitted:
"Commercial banks create checkbook money whenever they grant a loan, simply by adding new deposit dollars in accounts on their books in exchange for a borrower's IOU." [12]
Conclusion
Fractional reserve lending invokes the moral hazard of fidelity of contract. Banks have on deposit (reserve) at most 10% of the “money supply.”
This means that if more than 10% of depositors go to the bank at one time to withdraw “our” money – there isn’t any money to withdraw beyond the 10% reserves.
Which means that 90% of the money supply is non-existent, nothing more than a fleeting illusion.
The bank’s solvency stands on the faith that no more than 10% of depositors will want their money at the same time. This means that although
Banks may appear to be solvent – they are without question illiquid.
Fractional reserve lending insures and guarantees that banks cannot possibly be liquid.
Banking is the only type of business that is allowed to function this way. If any other business used a similar modus operandi it would be subject to censor, arrest, court, and possibly imprisonment. Banks cannot fulfill all of their contracts if demand occurred at the same time. Thus, the banks are illiquid.
Why the double standard? Why the dishonesty? Why are they afraid of gold and silver money as the Constitution mandates? Because it would make them tow the line or go bankrupt. Less they forget - be ever mindful - even Zeus cannot deny Destiny.
Coming Soon – Open Letter To Congress Seeking Redress For The Return To Honest Money
[1] John Adams in a letter to Thomas Jefferson [2] Hesiod, Works and Days [3] John Kenneth Galbraith Money: Whence It Came, Where It Went [4] Federal Reserve Bank, New York The Story of Banks, p.5. [5] The Federal Reserve System Purposes and Functions The Implementation of Monetary Policy [6] Same as above [7] Same [8] Same [9] Same [10] Same [11] Same [12] Federal reserve Bank of New York, I Bet You Thought, p.19
"We're smarter now! Our grand parents were idiots! We have beaten boom and bust credit cycles forever! It's different this time!"
Such hubris. Amazing.
I don't mean to bother you, but you have made it to post 101 without posting any sort of links to economists or modern authors of any kind who might back up your claims. Mockery is fun and all, but if you actually had anything other than your feelings to indicate your economic views were more accurate than those of, say, the Chicago School, you might at least have the courtesy to provide evidence thereof.
Woodrow Wilson was Colonel House's puppet.
The worst president in our nation's history.
LOL. Your the first person I've ever heard that maintains the Gold Standard caused the great depression. Where did you get your self proclaimed wisdom?
Not even close. If we started to sell our collecive wealth (real estate, stocks, etc) its value would collapse and we wouldn't have nearly enough to pay future fed obligations (60 trillion or so). So the real collateral for that debt is our future earnings ultimately derived from selling goods and services abroad (to the extent that the debt is foreign owned) and domestically (to the extent that we owe it to ourselves). Without substantial growth (e.g. immigration) we will end up in tax slavery.
Quoting Thomas Jefferson on economics and finance is like quoting Mohammed on morality. He was clueless and being wholly owned by British banks caused him to go a little nuts.
Look to his greatest enemy, Hamilton, for wisdom in those areas.
It has alread told only some of us cannot recognize reality because of ideological blinders.
German inflation was the result of deliberate and knowing policy designed to undermine the financial demands of the Treaty of Versailles. It was not the result of not knowing what those actions would do.
It is also completely false that there was no inflation under the Gold Standard. The importation of the metals of the New World set off a century of inflation which wrecked the Spanish economy. In fact, discovery of new sources always resulted in price rises because it expanded the money supply.
There are NO positive features of a Gold Standard and those claiming to be on one were never able to maintain it for long.
The Monopoly example is specious since prices are fixed for properties and rents. Increasing the money supply would not cause inflation in this case.
Sounds like a radical Leftist. Ole Tom was not the sharpest knive in the drawer when it came to financial matters. He was clueless in fact.
All this would do is increase the liquidity of gold. So when I mail in my mortgage payment what do I write on the check? 3.6 oz gold? If the price of gold is not fixed in dollar terms the note will fluctuate in value as the price of gold fluctuates. Unless you want every item for sale and every loan to be denominated in oz of gold. Seems a little clunky.
So many falsehoods, so little time. Is this an attempt at humor maybe?
Domestic policy had a bigger effect: wage and price controls and underwriting inefficient domestic industry produced stagflation which was fought with hyperinflation.
I'm being fa·ce·tious.
I've always been interested in how the Fed works but this article is too difficult to follow. Call me stupid..call me anything but, late for dinner.
I wish there were a simpler was to educate the simple minded among us (ME) without being so overly verbose as to the inner workings of the *evil* establishment called the Federal Reserve.
I'd seriously enjoy any links you economists suggest.
Less money chasing the same amounts of goods means leads to decreasing prices. We're still talking Econ 101 stuff here. Suggest you go to the library and get Thomas Sowell's book titled, Basic Economics. Read it and you would not get tripped up so often on the most elementary economic principles.
377 posted on 11/29/2005 8:04:15 AM CST by hubbubhubbub
1. Everything they buy is cheaper.
2. Their money is worth more.
3. Their debts owed are paid back in more valuable money.
65 posted on 11/29/2005 8:36:23 PM CST by hubbubhubbub
Hmmmm, it seems I've heard these ideas before.
If the economy produces 10% more goods this year than last but the gold supply only increases 2%, prices will decline 8%. Kinda makes it hard to make a profit, expand your business and pay back your debts.
268 posted on 11/26/2005 8:00:07 PM CST by Toddsterpatriot
You're only 3 days late. We agree that a shrinking money supply reduces prices. We agree it makes it harder to pay back debt.
I think it's bad for the economy because it causes people to defer purchases. It stops producers from expanding output. Why borrow and build a new facility if your output gets cheaper every year and your loan payments get more expensive. Unless in your scenario it's okay to reduce employee salary every year?
Sounds like these things don't bother you since you only gave supposed benefits to deflation. I think you need to go back and reread your Thomas Sowell, it obviously didn't sink in.
Without the deliberate decision to run the printing presses there would have been no hyperinflation. They even went out and bought new higher speed presses. There is no inflation without major increases in the money supply.
Deflation is such a problem that many policy makers prefer inflation. We have had no periods of deflation since the Depression so people forget its costs.
But the farmers from the MidWest in the 1870s and 80s knew very well its crushing impact. When money was called by the Money Centers they lost everything.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.