• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Who Runs The "Fed"?

Mike

Well-known member
Federal Reserve System
The system was set up so that special interests in congress or the presidency would not abuse the power to create money or abuse the government regulations over banks. In order to achieve this, the Federal Reserve System was organized to be separate from the 3 branches of government. This is supposed to make it impartial to special interests so that it could make policies that are good for the people of the United States and so that it is fair to everyone. The members of its Board of Governors are appointed for long, staggered terms, limiting the influence of day-to-day political considerations.[20] The Fed’s unique structure also provides internal checks and balances, ensuring that its decisions and operations are not dominated by any one part of the system. The system is organized much like private corporations so that it can generate revenue independently without the need for congress. Since it was designed to be independent while also remaining within the government of the United States, it is often said to be "independent within the government". The Federal Reserve explains the independence within government in the Federal Reserve System FAQ:[21]

'The Federal Reserve System is not "owned" by anyone and is not a private, profit-making institution. Instead, it is an independent entity within the government, having both public purposes and private aspects.
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.'
By law, banks in the United States must maintain fractional reserves either as vault cash or on account at the Fed; member banks earn no interest on either of these. The dividends paid by the Federal Reserve Banks to member banks are considered partial compensation for the lack of interest paid on the required reserves. All profit after expenses is returned to the U.S. Treasury or contributed to the surplus capital of the Federal Reserve Banks (and since shares in ownership of the Federal Reserve Banks are redeemable only at par, the nominal "owners" do not benefit from this surplus capital); the Federal Reserve system contributed over $29 billion to the Treasury in 2006.[22]
 

fff

Well-known member
Democrats have been on the Fed's case ever since they took over the various banking committees after last year's election. You can't expect Dems to fix things in a year or even two that the Bushies have been ignoring for eight. Just for the record, Dodd has introduced new legislation that will take some of the Fed's independence.

Democratic congressional leaders do not think the Fed's new mortgage rules go far enough and have indicated that they are considering taking power away from the Fed when it comes to protecting consumers, according to a story in today's Wall Street Journal. Senator Chris Dodd, Chairman of the Senate Banking Committee and one of the key leaders on this issue, told the Journal that the Fed's moves are a "clear signal that legislation is necessary to help protect homeowners from abusive and predatory lending practices." He also indicated that he is considering reexamining legislation he introduced last week to take power away from the central bank when it comes to consumer protection.

Rep. Barney Frank, who is chairman of the House Banking Committee, wasn't any happier with what he heard form the Fed. He told the Journal, "We now have confirmation of two facts we have known for some time. One, the Federal Reserve System is not a strong advocate for consumers, and two, there is no Santa Claus. People who are surprised by the one are presumably surprised by the other."

Bankers, seeing the writing on the wall and hoping that the Fed's changes will pacify critics, primarily supported the new rules. According to the Journal, the American Financial Services Association called the Fed's rules "measured" and the Independent Community Bankers of America said it was "an important step." But, the powerful American Bankers Association still hopes it can sway the Fed to ease the rules. It said some parts of the proposal were too rigid and "could make it harder for bankers to tailor products for their customers."

Well guys, I think you'd better reconsider any opposition to the Fed's rules because what Congress comes up with could be much worse for you. The Fed is caught in a careful balancing act and could lose its control of Regulation Z (which is what the new rules change) if Congress does act as Dodd threatens. Bankers would be wise to get behind the Fed if they want to help the Fed maintain control of the consumer side of the banking rules.

As foreclosures continue to increase next year, an election year, Congress will feel more and more pressure to act. The Fed's rules change may be just enough to persuade some lawmakers to support the Fed and stop changes to the current consumer side of the banking rules. The Fed knows it's under fire and even allowed television cameras to record audio and video during its entire meeting yesterday, which it's never allowed before. The Fed is widely known for its love of secrecy during its deliberations.

http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2007/12/19/lawmakers-hostile-toward-feds-new-mortgage-rules/
 

Mike

Well-known member
Democrats have been on the Fed's case ever since they took over the various banking committees after last year's election. You can't expect Dems to fix things in a year or even two that the Bushies have been ignoring for eight. Just for the record, Dodd has introduced new legislation that will take some of the Fed's independence.
You trying to say there were no Democrats in Congress before the last election? :lol:

Barney Frank has been on the Finance Committee and is ranking member for awhile.

Of course there was no love lost between him and Greenspan either, but I don't remember himmm doing anything.
 

Texan

Well-known member
fff said:
You can't expect Dems to fix things in a year or even two that the Bushies have been ignoring for eight.
Just so they start out with the real important stuff like fixing professional baseball. :lol:
 

MoGal

Well-known member
Actually, the people of the US need to pressure their congressional leaders to do away with the Federal Reserve, they can take it over at anytime.

Here are some links that will help you to understand who the federal reserve is:

The real owners of the Federal Reserve and the Federal Reserve System are:

a) Rothschild Banks of London and Berlin;
b) Lazard Brothers Bank of Paris;
c) Israel Moses Seif Banks of Italy;
d) Warburg Bank of Hamburg and Amsterdam;
e) Lehman Brothers Bank of New York;
f) Kuhn, Loeb Bank of New York;
g) Chase Manhattan Bank of New York;
h) Goldman Sachs Bank of New York; and
i) Approximately three hundred people, known to each other and/or relations of the "owners," who hold stock in the Federal Reserve System. They comprise an interlocking, International Banking Cartel of wealth beyond comprehension.

the link with much more info: http://www.apfn.org/Mind_Control/money/money.htm
-------------------------------------------------------

this is an entire book, which is interesting: http://www.apfn.org/apfn/reserve.htm

__________________________

chart of "who" owns the Federal Reserve:
http://www.save-a-patriot.org/files/view/whofed.html

Chart 1 reveals the linear connection between the Rothschilds and the Bank of England, and the London banking houses which ultimately control the Federal Reserve Banks through their stockholdings of bank stock and their subsidiary firms in New York. The two principal Rothschild representatives in New York, J. P. Morgan Co., and Kuhn,Loeb & Co. were the firms which set up the Jekyll Island Conference at which the Federal Reserve Act was drafted, who directed the subsequent successful campaign to have the plan enacted into law by Congress, and who purchased the controlling amounts of stock in the Federal Reserve Bank of New York in 1914.
 

MoGal

Well-known member
'The Federal Reserve System is not "owned" by anyone and is not a private, profit-making institution.

haha........ some numnut hasn't done their homework...... they are most definitely a private, profit making institution.....
 

MoGal

Well-known member
The "who" of the Federal Reserve receives the interest.

that 3rd link (above) is put out by the House of Representatives in 1976 and that is one of the reasons I don't understand why we're bailing out JP Morgan when they own controlling interest (stock) in the Federal Reserve.

What do they do with all that interest they charge the US people for the money they print?? What do they do with all the money in interest they get from the banks??

This has been going on since 1913 so they've made exorbitant amounts of money.... anytime you hear about the "interest" costs on our debt..... that is what the Federal Reserve is charging the USA for printing our own money......... that's why I think its a scam.
 

Steve

Well-known member
MoGal
What do they do with all the money in interest they get from the banks??

The Federal Reserve System, often referred to as the Federal Reserve or simply "the Fed," is the central bank of the United States.

It is a federal system, composed basically of a central, governmental agency--the Board of Governors--in Washington, D.C.,

The Federal Reserve System is not "owned" by anyone and is not a private, profit-making institution. Instead, it is an independent entity within the government,

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,

The Federal Reserve's income is derived primarily from the interest on U.S. government securities that it has acquired through open market operations. Other sources of income are the interest on foreign currency investments held by the System; fees received for services provided to depository institutions, such as check clearing, funds transfers, and automated clearinghouse operations; and interest on loans to depository institutions (the rate on which is the so-called discount rate). After paying its expenses, the Federal Reserve turns the rest of its earnings over to the U.S. Treasury.
http://www.federalreserve.gov/generalinfo/faq/faqfrs.htm

facts have a way of disproving your theories.. :roll: :wink:
 

MoGal

Well-known member
Steve: 6% of how much??? There has never been an auditing of the Federal Reserve, how do we know what they "claim" is correct??

(2) Is the Federal Reserve System owned by other private banks who are system members?
Yes
Do private banks, for example, purchase equity interests in the Federal Reserve System?
Yes

If so, does the System pay them dividends or interest or what on their equities in the System?
The System pays a dividend of 6% established by law. After paying its expenses, the System turns the rest of its earnings over to the U.S. Treasury.
http://www.choicefinance.net/blog/2008/01/10/who-is-the-federal-reserve
------------------------------------------

Actually here's Congressman's McFaddens claims back during the depression years.......
http://federal-reserve.com/part2.htm
 

MoGal

Well-known member
Actually here's a website that explains quite a bit:
http://www.themoneymasters.com/faqs.htm

The interest total for just the last 20 years – back to 1988 - is well over $6.5 trillion. That is just interest on our debt.....
------------------------------------------------

I found this about Abe Lincoln and the "greenback".
http://www.biblebelievers.org.au/money.htm#The%20Federal%20Reserve%20Act
Eventually President Lincoln was advised to get Congress to pass a law authorizing the printing of full legal tender Treasury notes to pay for the War effort. Lincoln recognized the great benefits of this issue. At one point he wrote:

"...(we) gave the people of this Republic the greatest blessing they have ever had - their own paper money to pay their own debts..."

The Treasury notes were printed with green ink on the back, so the people called them "Greenbacks".

Lincoln printed 400 million dollars worth of Greenbacks (the exact amount being $449,338,902), money that he delegated to be created, a debt-free and interest free money to finance the War. It served as legal tender for all debts, public and private. He printed it, paid it to the soldiers, to the U.S. Civil Service employees, and bought supplies for war.

Shortly after that happened, "The London Times" printed the following"

"If that mischievous financial policy, which had its origin in the North American Republic, should become indurated down to a fixture, then that Government will furnish its own money without cost. It will pay off debts and be without a debt. It will have all the money necessary to carry on its commerce. It will become prosperous beyond precedent in the history of the civilized governments of the world. The brains and the wealth of all countries will go to North America. That government must be destroyed, or it will destroy every monarchy on the globe".

The Bankers obviously understood. The only thing, I repeat, the only thing that is a threat to their power is sovereign governments printing interest-free and debt-free paper money. They know it would break the power of the international Bankers.

In retaliation After this was published in "The London Times", the British Government, which was controlled by the London and other European Bankers, moved to support the Confederate South, hoping to defeat Lincoln and the Union, and destroy this government which they said had to be destroyed.

They were stopped by two things:

First, Lincoln knew the British people, and he new that Britain would not support slavery, so he issued the Emancipation Proclamation, which declared that slavery in the United States was abolished. At this point, the London Bankers could not openly support the Confederacy because the British people simply would not stand for their country supporting slavery.

Second, the Czar of Russia sent a portion of the Russian navy to the United States with orders that its admiral would operate under command of Abraham Lincoln. These ships of the Russian navy then became a threat to the ships of the British navy which had intended to break the blockade and help the South.

The North won the War, and the Union was preserved. America remained as one nation.

Of course, the Bankers were not going to give in that easy, for they were determined to put an end to Lincoln's interest-free, debt-free Greenbacks. He was assassinated by an agent of the Bankers shortly after the War ended.

Thereafter, Congress revoked the Greenback Law and enacted, in its place, the National - Banking Act. The national banks were to be privately owned and the national bank notes they issued were to be interest-bearing. The Act also provided that the Greenbacks should be retired from circulation as soon as they came back to the Treasury in payment of taxes.

In 1972, the United States Treasury Department was asked to compute the amount of interest that would have been paid if that 400 million dollars would have been borrowed at interest instead of being issued by Abraham Lincoln. They did some computations, and a few weeks later, the United States Treasury Department said the United States Government saved 4 billion dollars in interest because Lincoln had created his own money. So you can about imagine how much the Government has paid and how much we owe solely on the basis of interest. .....snip....... If the Government would have continued the policy of Abraham Lincoln, the warnings given in "The London Times" would have come to pass. America would be a debt-free nation, the most prosperous in the world. And the brains and the wealth of the world would have come to America.
 

MoGal

Well-known member
Just in case you missed this article: http://www.financialsense.com/fsu/editorials/deepcaster/2008/0404.html

The Fox Wants More Of Our Chickens
How to Profitably Say "No"
by DeepCaster LLC, deepcaster.com | April 4, 2008
Print
“Explain the logic of this? The Bank of Bernanke takes $29 billion in Bear’s toxic real estate debts, but lets Bear Stearns’ skyscraper go to JPMorgan for a song? Why didn’t the Fed take control of Bear’s one real asset and rent it out to JPMorgan with the proceeds going back into federal coffers?”…American taxpayers are potentially on the hook for $29 billion…yes, $29 billion…

“$66 billion. That is the record amount of money Wall Street’s top five firms…paid out in compensation and bonuses last year to their 186,000 employees…”

“At Merrill Lynch, they paid out $15.9 billion in compensation last year just weeks before the firm went hat-in-hand to secure a $6 billion lifeline investment”…

“Two weeks after Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke masterminded the purchase of Bear by JPMorgan Chase, one thing is crystal clear: JPMorgan shareholders are richer to the tune of $24 billion, Bear shareholders are several billion dollars better off than if the firm went totally bust, and American taxpayers are potentially on the hook for $29 billion”…

Terry Keenan, NY Post, March 30, 2008

That Private-For-Profit “Fox” called the U.S. Federal Reserve and its Allies want more of our Chickens. Thus we describe here a way to profitably say “No.” First, though, the background.

The U.S. Government is drowning in debt, which now totals some $9.4 trillion. This means that annual interest payments to the holders of U.S. Government Securities are nearly one half trillion dollars annually. The Fed itself holds over $719 billion in U.S. Treasury Securities on which it “earns” some $36 billion annually.

And how does The Fed “earn” the $36 billion annually? It prints money out of thin air, which it has used to purchase the $719 billion in Treasury Securities. The U.S. Government (that is, the U.S. taxpayers) is then obligated to pay interest to The Fed (!) to the tune, we reiterate, of over $36 billion annually.

And it is this “U.S.” Federal Reserve to which the Bush Administration (per the Plan released March 31, 2008) wants to give broad new powers to “regulate” the entire financial industry as an ostensible “Market Stability Regulator.” As well, consumer protection entities (in original intent) such as the Securities and Exchange Commission would have their power reduced (in the case of the SEC, it would be merged with the CFTC which regulates futures trading), according to that Plan.

In addition, it appears that the Plan would give The Fed broad Assets Seizure Powers as a consequence of having the power to go in and look at the books of any financial institution that it claimed “threatened the stability of the financial system.”

But consider that this is the same Fed that allowed, and indeed enabled, the massive credit and derivatives excesses which began in the 1990s and led to today’s massive Toxic Bubbles (the Housing Bubble, the Mortgage Bubble, the OTC Derivatives Bubble et. al.) which are now being punctured much to the pain of the average American, and others holding (or affected by) the Toxic Paper around the world.

Indeed, the Bush/Paulson/Fed Plan would not reign in practices like packaging risky sub-prime mortgages into securities carrying the highest ratings.

Nor would it require tighter rules for the largely unregulated “dark liquidity” OTC Derivatives-based markets for risk-sharing and hedging such as e.g. those credit default swaps which are supposed to ensure lenders against loss.

In sum, it appears that the housing and credit bubbles which the Fed created/enabled, plus the powers it now has and would be given by this proposed legislation would not prevent it and its allied institutions from seizing real estate and other assets from those who are now over their heads in debt and defaulting.

This is ominously reminiscent of the 1930s Great Depression-era seizures of all manner of assets including especially prime farmland and Gold. Remember that The Fed allowed/enabled all manner of financial excesses in the 1920s. In so doing The Fed then set the stage well for the 1930s foreclosures on American Assets, and the 25% unemployment rate which inflicted great suffering.

And do not forget to consider the Fed-led Cartel’s* massive and continuing Interventions today in most major markets to the great detriment of Hard Assets Investors, and much to the profit of their International Financial Allies, as the recent (March, 2008) painful Takedowns of Gold and Silver prices graphically demonstrate.

Why is The Cartel so interested in taking down these prices? As we have noted on several occasions, the Monetary Metals and Strategic Commodities are “The Mortal Enemies” of the Fed-led Cartel’s* Fiat Currencies and Treasury Securities because they serve as potential and, but for Intervention, actual Stores and Measures of Value. See Deepcaster’s January, 2008 Letter “Market Intervention, Data Manipulation, Increasing Risks, The Cartel “End Game” and Latest Forecast” at www.deepcaster.com.

__
*We encourage those who doubt the scope and power of Intervention by a Fed-led Cartel of Central Bankers and Allies to read Deepcaster’s January, 2008 Letter containing a summary overview of Intervention entitled “Market Intervention, Data Manipulation - - Increasing Risks, The Cartel End Game, and Latest Forecast” at www.deepcaster.com>LatestLetter. Also consider the substantial evidence collected by the Gold AntiTrust Action Committee at www.gata.org for information on precious metals price manipulation. Virtually all of the evidence for Intervention has been gleaned from publicly available records. Deepcaster’s profitable recommendations displayed at www.deepcaster.com have been facilitated by attention to these “Interventionals.”

__

Even so, by tracking the Cartel’s “Interventionals” in addition to the Fundamentals and Technicals, one can profit. For example, On March 14, 2008, Deepcaster issued a “Forecast Warning: “We believe the probability of a Takedown of precious metals and strategic Commodities prices very soon is high.” Sure enough, from March 18 – 20, 2008, Gold prices were taken down into the low $900s, from the high $900s, and a short play which Deepcaster recommended resulted in over 100% profit in 13 days.

And at the end of that Takedown episode on March 20, 2008, Deepcaster noted that while there might be bounces, the: “Takedown of Gold, Silver…and of Crude Oil and other Strategic Commodities has only just begun.”

That forecast too was fulfilled - - since March 20th, we have seen Crude Oil slammed down to $100/barrel and Gold taken down to below $900.

And on April 2nd Deepcaster issued yet another Forecast because we believe explosive moves in the Precious Metals and Strategic Commodities markets are coming again very soon.

However, even though one can profit from tracking such Interventions (see Deepcaster’s 4/8/07 Alert “Protecting From Dark Liquidity and Other Systemic Risks” at www.deepcaster.com) the Systemic Risks and Ethical Issues raised by such massive Interventions are quite troubling. See also Deepcaster’s article “Increasing Systemic Risk Portends Cartel End Game Attempt” of February 29, 2008.

Indeed, it is not only the Major Markets which are victims of Intervention and Manipulation, but also key economic and financial data.

On April 4, 2008 the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics claimed that non-farm payroll jobs fell by 88,000.

Indeed (since this “low” number was created by statistical chicanery) the actual drop was much larger.

The actual number was “a contraction of 124,000” according to shadowstats.com and 222,000 according to Robert McHugh. This is serious because the U.S. economy needs to create 150,000 jobs a month just to keep up with legal population growth, as McHugh points out.

Given all this, the Fundamental issue is whether or not any of us would benefit from this private-for-profit Cartel known as the U.S. Federal Reserve having the massive new powers which the Bush Administration proposal would grant.

We think giving The Fed more power is NOT a good idea. Our view is that President Kennedy’s idea of having the U.S. Treasury issue U.S. Notes to displace Federal Reserve Notes (which he began in the early 1960s shortly before he was killed) is a far better and, indeed, a Constitutional, approach.

As another first step, to help prevent the Daisy Chain Effect in which a financial disaster in one sector affects several others, thus creating a Systemic Threat, we need to re-pass the Glass-Steagall Act. That Act had separated the banking from the securities industries until the Clinton Administration unwisely, but successfully, lobbied for its repeal.

As a more comprehensive solution, Deepcaster, Presidential Candidate Ron Paul, and legendary investor Jim Rogers all advocate the abolition of the Federal Reserve. There is no need for such a Private-for-Profit “Middleman,” Banking Cartel, particularly one as rapacious as the U.S. Fed has proved to be.

Indeed, abolition of the U.S. Federal Reserve would allow the establishment of a Constitutionally authorized authentic National Bank, as well as the re-linking of the U.S. Dollar to Gold and Silver, and savings of at least $36 billion per year in interest payments to The Fed. We have set out our proposals in this regard in detail elsewhere.

Should we not work to stop the Fox from being the Overseer of our Entire Chicken Coop before it takes most of our Chickens, instead of just some of them?
 

Latest posts

Top