Scared Monkeys Discussion Forum

Current Events and Musings => Political Forum => Topic started by: WhiskeyGirl on August 05, 2009, 11:52:04 AM

Title: "...US economy would be better off without the Federal Reserve."
Post by: WhiskeyGirl on August 05, 2009, 11:52:04 AM
End the Fed? A not-so-crazy idea.

Congressman Ron Paul's bill may never pass, but history suggests the US economy would be better off without the Federal Reserve.

By George Selgin
from the August 3, 2009 edition

Athens, Ga. - Since it was introduced in February, Representative Ron Paul's "Audit the Fed" bill (H.R. 1207) has gained 282 congressional cosponsors. If adopted, the bill would allow the Government Accountability Office to review, not only the Federal Reserve's balance sheet, but its recent monetary policy deliberations and transactions.

Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke opposes the plan, saying it would undermine the Fed's hallowed independence.

But consider: the US economy has actually grown less rapidly since 1914 than it did before. And inflation has been much worse, despite both the Civil War, which featured the nation's worst inflation, and the Great Depression, which featured its severest deflation!

But the Federal Reserve plan proved to be a poor substitute for deregulation. By granting monopoly privileges to the Federal Reserve banks, it allowed them to inflate recklessly: By 1919, the US inflation rate, which had cleaved close to zero ever since the Civil War, was close to 20 percent! Yet the Fed was also capable of failing to supply enough money to avert crises. The first downturn over which it presided – that of 1921 – was among the sharpest in US history. Still it was nothing compared to the unprecedented monetary contraction of 1929-1933.

So a call to end the Fed would have been anything but crazy in 1934. Three-quarters of a century and a dozen crises later, there are plenty of grounds for insisting that it hasn't gotten any crazier.

George Selgin is a senior fellow at the Cato Institute and a professor of economics at the University of Georgia. (

I think ending the job rotation among the Federal Reserve, Treasury, Wall Street, and Congress would go a long way in ending any conflicting interestests. 

Title: Re: "...US economy would be better off without the Federal Reserve."
Post by: WhiskeyGirl on August 05, 2009, 11:59:52 AM
Fox News Loses Suit Demanding Federal Reserve Loan Information

In his decision, U.S. District Judge Alvin Hellerstein said that publicizing the information sought by Fox News would deter borrowing and cause investors to panic, which might result in “great damage to the national economy.” Fox lawyers argued that Americans had a right to know which banks were propped up by the Fed using taxpayer dollars.
The 28-page ruling states that Federal Reserve loans through its so-called Discount Window expanded from $1 million a day in the first week of August 2007 to $188 billion in the last week of 2008.
Fox lawyers said they will probably appeal Hellerstein’s decision. In addition to this FOIA request, Bloomberg News has its own lawsuit seeking the same information from the Fed. That case is in the same court, but before Judge Loretta Preska, who is still deciding how to rule. Also, Fox has a lawsuit against the Treasury Department to gain access to bailout records, and The New York Times is suing both the Fed and the Treasury Department for similar documents. (

Why isn't this loan information on  Or, some other billion dollar website?

Are these foreign banks?  Banks that are owned by member of Congress, the Treasury, and Federal Reserve? 

Nothing for Main Street, no trickle down economics at work, just another Obama mystery.

Title: Re: "...US economy would be better off without the Federal Reserve."
Post by: WhiskeyGirl on August 05, 2009, 12:04:44 PM
Poll: Three in Four Americans Want a Federal Reserve Audit

By Andrew Moran.

A new Rasmussen telephone poll suggests that 75 per cent of Americans support the Federal Reserve System being audited. 9 per cent of respondents oppose any effort to audit the nation’s central bank. 15 per cent are unsure.

Another Rasmussen poll shows that 26 per cent of Americans have a somewhat favorable opinion of the Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke. The poll also shows that 33 per cent have an unfavorable opinion of the Fed Chairman, while 42 per cent do not know.

read more here - (

Why doesn't transparency about bank accounts and activities start in the White House's backyard?

Why not investigate the doings of the Federal Reserve?

Title: Re: "...US economy would be better off without the Federal Reserve."
Post by: WhiskeyGirl on August 05, 2009, 12:30:55 PM
Consumers missing in US recovery story

 Jeff Bater | August 05, 2009

THE income of Americans took the largest tumble in four years during June, reflecting the rising unemployment that threatens the economy's struggle out of its worst slump since World War II.

"Accumulating job losses have generated wage losses which, combined with household deleveraging, is (weighing on) spending," Insight Economics analyst Steven Wood said.

"Consumers remain a missing link in hopes for strong recovery," said Nigel Gault, an economist at IHS Global Insight. "Reduced wealth, high debt, tight credit, and a weakening labour market are all weighing on consumers."

Since its December 2007 debut, the recession has cost 6.5 million jobs, including 467,000 in June. How much payrolls got slashed in July is due to be reported by the Labour Department on Friday.

read more here -,24897,25885088-643,00.html (,24897,25885088-643,00.html)

No jobs, no recovery for Main Street.  Maybe a few tempory 32 hours jobs that cost taxpayers $300,000 each, but nothing to support a family. 

How much did that 32 hour temporary job pay?    Was there an employment agency to be paid the balance?  Maybe $299,500?

Title: Re: "...US economy would be better off without the Federal Reserve."
Post by: WhiskeyGirl on August 05, 2009, 12:36:26 PM
Federal Reserve chairman's asset values eroded in stockmarket crisis

Brian Blackstone, Sudeep Reddy | July 29, 2009

Article from:  The Wall Street Journal

THE stockmarket meltdown last year hit US Federal Reserve chairman Ben Bernanke, whose asset values fell sharply.

As of the end of 2008, Mr Bernanke's asset holdings were between $US850,000 ($1.03 million) and $US1.9m, compared with $US1.2m to $US2.5m the year before.

read more here -,28124,25851985-643,00.html (,28124,25851985-643,00.html)

There are more details at the link of others.

How much vital information is missing on other Americans due to 'Dark Pool' trading?  If they have secret trading, does that mean they have secret accounts too?  Accounts that wouldn't show up on disclosure forms?

Title: Re: "...US economy would be better off without the Federal Reserve."
Post by: WhiskeyGirl on August 05, 2009, 12:43:41 PM
Job horrors

[quote]..."The typical bank has only 4 cents of tangible equity for every dollar of assets. That means a 4% drop in asset value wipes out the equity - making the bank insolvent."

A drop of a lousy 4% will wipe them out! No wonder the Federal Reserve pumped about US$60 billion into reserves at the banks last week, bringing the total to a whopping $805.772 billion in total reserves, and it added about $76 billion in non-borrowed reserves, bringing that total to $417.9 billion, last week alone!

This seems like a lot of money when you realize required reserves, the money held in cash by the bank as an insurance cushion against many trillions of dollars in loans and deposits, is still only a laughably pitiful $61.9 billion, although up from the ridiculous less than $50 billion in reserves that prevailed since 2000! Hahaha! [/quote]

As if to prove me right, although nobody can quite remember what I was talking about, for some reason it led to Byron King writing at Whiskey and Gunpowder that, last week, "the Fed made a shocking prediction. It forecast that the US economy would add NO NET NEW JOBS over the next five years!"

"No net new jobs?" he asks. "That ought to scare you. The Census Bureau predicts that the US population will grow over five years. But the numbers of new jobs will remain static. That is, for every job gain there will be a loss."

And then - get this! - my bosses get all upset when I do manage to get to work on time, and use it as an perfect opportunity to greet my fellow employees merrily clocking in and give them - absolutely free! - the Best Financial Advice (BFA) they ever got by telling them to buy gold, silver and oil because their stupid government is allowing the creation of excess money and credit, which is doing exactly what they should NOT be doing, which is why the Founding Fathers, who were men who had the wherewithal and inclination to look into history to discover that a fiat currency in the hands of a government determined to spend more than it should got destroyed Every Freaking Time (EFT). (

How can the president get on TV this morning and talk about all the new and saved jobs one moment, when at other times, he talks about jobs lagging? 

The trickle down economy doesn't work.

Audit the Federal Reserve and hold our leadership accountable.

I don't know about the '4%' but it has the ring of truth.  To many conflicting interests and greed in our financial system.  Time to decentralize.


Title: Re: "...US economy would be better off without the Federal Reserve."
Post by: WhiskeyGirl on August 05, 2009, 12:50:30 PM
YESTERDAY was a good day for those looking for economic "green shoots" around the world.

It began with the news that the Federal Reserve Board had upgraded its forecasts for the US economy and continued with the news that Chinese economic growth had accelerated from 6.1 per cent, year on year, in the March quarter to 7.9 per cent in the June quarter.,28124,25792421-30538,00.html (,28124,25792421-30538,00.html)

No green shoots or jobs for YOU America.

Notice how well the Chinese are doing?  For some reason, iirc, when someone in China screws up (dog food protein, baby formula, etc.) they end up in prison or dead.  There are REAL consequences for doing a bad job at a high level.  The buck stops somewhere.

What does our government do?  They bail our banks.  They reward failure. 

There is nothing illegal about destroying our financial system, trading anonymously with special knowledge (unless your name is Martha Stewart)...

The buck stops with taxpayers in the U.S. and the burden is getting heavier every day.

Title: Re: "...US economy would be better off without the Federal Reserve."
Post by: WhiskeyGirl on August 05, 2009, 01:01:06 PM
Bernanke's shell games

U.S. lenders bailed out by the government are returning the favor by stepping up purchases of Treasuries

Phoney stock rally?

What does it mean?

It means the revered professor Bernanke figured out a way to circumvent Congress and dump more than a trillion dollars into the stock market by laundering the money through the big banks and other failing financial institutions. As Kessler suggests, Bernanke knew the liquidity would pop up in the equities market, thus, building the equity position of the banks so they wouldn't have to grovel to Congress for another TARP-like bailout. Bernanke's actions demonstrate his contempt for the democratic process. The Fed sees itself as a government-unto-itself.

Over at Zero Hedge, Tyler Durden did the math and figured that the recent 45 per cent surge in the S&P 500 had nothing to do with the fictional economic "recovery", but was just more of the Fed's hanky panky. Durden noticed that the money that's been sluicing into stocks hasn't (correspondingly) depleted the money markets. That's the clue that led him to the truth about Bernanke's 6 month stock rally.

Where, may we ask, did the balance of $2.3 trillion in purchasing power come from? Why the Federal Reserve of course, which directly and indirectly subsidized U.S. banks (and foreign ones through liquidity swaps) for roughly that amount. Apparently these banks promptly went on a buying spree to raise the all important equity market, so that the U.S. consumer whose net equity was almost negative on March 31, could regain some semblance of confidence and would go ahead and max out his credit card.

Phoney rising 'consumer confidence'?

This is from Bloomberg (August 3):

"U.S. lenders bailed out by the government are returning the favor by stepping up purchases of Treasuries, helping to temper a rise in borrowing costs.

Bank holdings of U.S. government securities are up 15.6 per cent from a year ago, almost double the average annual growth rate of about 8 per cent since the Federal Reserve began tracking the data in 1973, according to the Greenwich, Connecticut-based trading and research firm MKM Partners LP. Purchases may accelerate as lenders look for places to park rising deposits as sales of federal agency debt of companies such as Fannie Mae and corporate bonds slow." (Bloomberg)

One hand washes the other. Funny how that works.

A reason there is no money for Main Street or Donald Trump?  NO money for the folks that CREATE jobs and wealth? 

Is anyone in Congress watching or is this shell game going to go on forever?

read more here -'s+shell+games ('s+shell+games)

Healthcare is a distraction?

Title: Re: "...US economy would be better off without the Federal Reserve."
Post by: WhiskeyGirl on August 05, 2009, 01:03:05 PM
What is the Federal Reserve REALLY Trying to Hide in Fighting an Audit?

75% of Americans and at least 276 Congress members and 19 Senators want to audit the Fed, but the Fed is fighting tooth and nail to keep everything hidden.

Most assume that the Fed wants to keep secret the list of banks which received bailout money. You know something along the lines of “we gave Goldman Sachs $100 billion”.

However, what the Fed is really struggling to keep hidden is the fact that the entire financial system is based on massive manipulation, and fraud by the Fed, and its primary dealers. (

Add the 'Dark Pools' to the mix...anyone see a problem?