Posted on 04/12/2007 7:28:36 AM PDT by EternalVigilance
As the nation's central bank, the Federal Reserve derives its authority from the U.S. Congress. It is considered an independent central bank because its decisions do not have to be ratified by the President or anyone else in the executive or legislative branch of government, it does not receive funding appropriated by Congress, and the terms of the members of the Board of Governors span multiple presidential and congressional terms. However, the Federal Reserve is subject to oversight by Congress, which periodically reviews its activities and can alter its responsibilities by statute. Also, the Federal Reserve must work within the framework of the overall objectives of economic and financial policy established by the government. Therefore, the Federal Reserve can be more accurately described as "independent within the government."
The twelve regional Federal Reserve Banks, which were established by Congress as the operating arms of the nation's central banking system, are organized much like private corporations--possibly leading to some confusion about "ownership." For example, the Reserve Banks issue shares of stock to member banks. However, owning Reserve Bank stock is quite different from owning stock in a private company. The Reserve Banks are not operated for profit, and ownership of a certain amount of stock is, by law, a condition of membership in the System. The stock may not be sold, traded, or pledged as security for a loan; dividends are, by law, 6 percent per year.
Now you have no excuse to make your silly claims.
Running away, yet again? What's the matter, can't you stand a few facts being introduced?
You really should stop being an unpaid shill for tripe. Call Russo and demand to be paid for promoting his hogwash.
That won't stop him, he's a nut-ball.
You forgot to mention that the Fed coughs up any net operating profit to the U.S. Treasury.
Damn those furriners! It's one a them thar conspiracies!
Yeah, I love the guys who say we should eliminate the Fed, because they charge us for the money they print. If we printed it without the Fed, the taxpayers would save ....... they never say what we'll save.
Math is hard, especially when you're stupid. And he's the proof.
Must be those evil gubmint minions at the GPO.
The apocolyptic losers like Hostage will never get it. They think Russo, an idiot who exploits their gullibility and tendency to believe anything and everything which is anti-government, is a hero. They'll never be convinced otherwise, they're so smart, don't you know?
I await yet another baseless accusation that I work for the IRS or some other part of the tax "business."
MACVSOG68 to Zon: Posters such as you are a dime a dozen. I see them on threads where their response to a well thought out post was to criticize the failure to use spell check, or some other meaningless error having nothing at all to do with the thread. 111, 219 and 226
And if you notice, I said "well thought out post". Your posts were anything but.
You're obfuscating. As though Alan Keyes, the author of the article that this thread is about, which in your esteemed intellectual capacity you completely missed. Nor did you have the "tad bit of logic"65 to use the find function on your Web browser to locate how Alan Keyes was entered into the discussion. You wrote, How did Keyes get into this discussion? 68 -- Since I didn't criticize your spelling you can only mean that you thought I criticized "some other meaningless error having nothing at all to do with the thread." But Alan Keyes has very much to do with this thread.
In the red quote above you refer to two parties/persons. 1), a critic, and 2) person being criticized. In short, Zon criticized your post. Zon is person #1 and you are person #2.
Then you infer to Philman_36 that in your well thought out post to him you criticized his spelling. Thus, in your post to Philman_36 you referred to yourself as both person #1 and person #2. You wrote to Philman_36, "I think you forgot the part about the response to a well thought out post." 220 I suppose to your way of thinking (deceiving) that' it's okay to criticize spelling so long as the post that contains the spelling error isn't a well thought out post.
You boasted about "bottom feeders" (your words) who resort to criticizing other people's spelling errors. Then, you turn around and criticize other people's spelling errors.
I can continue, as I have, to unravel your deceptions for as long as you keep making them.
Courtesy ping.
You want to obsess on spelling when there are idiots on this thread who think Russo's movie deserves anything other than a loud guffaw?
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B00008NNPK/immaculate-books
This film lays out how the IMF operates.
The people that have the gold know that those that come asking for it are putting their heads on the chopping block. They are in effect saying please make me a slave.
Banana Republics cannot compete and cannot take care of their people so they go to the World Bank or the IMF. Some years later they lose everything and the land is taken over in receivership after the local militias have been defanged and replaced. Then if it’s a pretty place, corporate chains move in and set up shop.
The IMF is a predator looking for easy marks. The World Bank is the same but carries the insulting mission statement that their aim is to relieve global poverty.
Anyways, I like to travel and rough it sometimes but I don’t like to be around locals that have grown to hate Americans because of perceived ties with perceived ills caused by the banking cartels.
Why do you hate yourself?
Finally you are catching on. My responses to both of you do not fit the model I set forth, because both of you were the original attackers, neither of you responded to the arguments in the thread, and neither of you posted a well thought out argument. So when someone criticizes me for a structural as opposed to a substantive "error", they have reset the rules of the game, and should not whine because I throw it right back in their faces.
I know you want to believe you are thinking logically, but you have violated a number of the rules of logic. Several of you initiated ad hominem attacks, you in particular are guilty of moving the goalpost, arguing by gibberish, arguing by changing the facts, pigheadedness, arguing the same thing ad nauseum, using selective observation, using this red herring to change the discussion, and a few more to boot.
So if you actually want to learn something about debate and logic, first try and understand yourself and what your motives are. If you spent half as much time researching the topic of the thread, which I assume you agree with, you might actually be able to put on a fairly reasoned debate. As it is, you are merely pi$$ing on the fringe of the topic hoping to leave some lasting impression, by splattering all those you can't effectively argue with.
As I said before, bottom feeders galore here on FR.
Yes, we all understand that you were engaged in self-description by quoting me. What's your point?
The IMF or the World Bank repossess the land? LOL!
They killed JFK, don't you know? Because he printed United States notes. The foreign owners of the Fed struck back. LOL!
But nobody 'owns' it.
However, owning Reserve Bank stock is quite different from owning stock in a private company. The Reserve Banks are not operated for profit, and ownership of a certain amount of stock is, by law, a condition of membership in the System.
... and ownership of a certain amount of stock is...but nobody 'owns' it.
The stock may not be sold, traded, or pledged as security for a loan; dividends are, by law, 6 percent per year.
Uh huh... those with 'ownership' get a 6 percent dividend in a 'nonprofit' company they don't 'own'.
So who best to ask about 'ownership' of the 'Federal' Reserve than the 'Federal' Reserve itself from their own website?
Orwellian doublespeak anyone?
This unadulterated pablum falls in the same category of "I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Ms. Lewinsky" or Ken Lay's September 2001 announcement to Enron's stakeholders and employees that Arthur Anderson had certified the company was on a sound financial footing.
The 'Fed' Reserve is 'within government'? There are fools and lemmings and people that believe such tripe.
And you sir probably believe that the poweful never lie.
6% dividend? Wow, not much considering they get to print all the money. What about a share of the profits left over after the dividend is paid? Where does the rest of the money go?
So who best to ask about 'ownership' of the 'Federal' Reserve than the 'Federal' Reserve itself from their own website?
A clown like you who said it's owned by private individuals? LOL!
A clown like hosepipe who said it's majority owned by foreign bankers? LOL!
However, owning Reserve Bank stock is quite different from owning stock in a private company. The Reserve Banks are not operated for profit, and ownership of a certain amount of stock is, by law, a condition of membership in the System. The stock may not be sold, traded, or pledged as security for a loan; dividends are, by law, 6 percent per year.
My favorite kind of stock to own, one that I'm forced to buy, one that I can't sell, trade or pledge as security.
That depends on the federal reserve bank (percentage of foreign ownership)
My point is that federal reserve Banks are NOT FEDERAL AT ALL.. but of private ownership.. Whoever owns the federal reserve OWNS America..
Thats why Central Banking Systems were fought tooth and nail most of this countrys history..
Depends on the KIND of stock(6% or so).. some kinds of stock in those Banks YOU CANNOT BUY..
"As you know, I am entirely sympathetic with the objectives of your Monetary Reform Act...You deserve a great deal of credit for carrying through so thoroughly on your own conception…I am impressed by your persistence and attention to detail in your successive revisions... Best wishes. Milton Friedman," Nobel Laureate in Economics; Senior Fellow, Hoover Institution on War, Revolution and Peace -- http://www.themoneymasters.com/reviews.htm
The Money Masters - Part 1 of 2 -- 1 hr 43 min
The Money Masters - Part 2 of 2 -- 1 hr 46 min
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.