Who owns the Federal Reserve Bank?

[palerider]

Shetland pony rider, you are so far in denial it's pathetic. A discussion with you is virtually pointless since you're living in some kind of delusional dream world. Dodge??? ROTFLMAO!!!! I've dodged nothing. You're the ***** throwing up Ad Hominem's, Straw Men, and non sequiturs and pretending they're legitimate. I've exposed your fallacies and your distortions numerous times over. YET YOU WON'T STICK TO ONE POINT AND YOU INSTEAD START JUMPING AROUND ALL OVER THE FORUM RUNNING FROM ME. You have nothing but distortions, falsehoods, obfuscation and outright lies. You are one seriously delusional fool.

What exactly have I denied? I have simply asked repeatedly for one of you libertarians to discuss this issue in your own words and so far, it hasn't happened.

Question - are you scared to just stay in one thread and debate me? Why all this elusiveness? Why can't you stay on point? Is it because you know you're a fraud?

I am perfectly willing to debate you but it seems that you don't know what debate means. Debate is individuals speaking on a topic in a back and forth manner expressing their ideas and thoughts in an attempt to either reach an agreement or come to an understanding. You call names, hurl insults, and cut and paste information that does not answer questions put to you. T

That does not constitute debate.

 

[palerider]

And you may deride my posted articles all you like - but that's simple-mindedness. Again, I'm sorry I don't have time to type up pages of original material for you, Shetland Pony Rider, as I'm sure you'd read every word of what I type...

In case you haven't noticed at this point, I don't want pages of text from someone else who obviously understands what he or she is talking about and has a clear vision in his or her mind what point they were trying to make with all their words. It has become clear that you have little more than a vague idea of what the words that you bring from other people actually mean in your day to day life.

For example, explain in detail, using your own words how and why decision to stop publishing the M3 Money Multiplier is important to you in your daily life and how it effects your ability to live as you have become acustomed.

 

[Truth-Bringer]

Since I can show you photos of a crater where the trade towers used to be, I am able to show clear evidence of an attack on the us.

Another Straw Man. Changing the terms of your original argument... Tsk, tsk... Again, your original argument was "if I can't see it happening in my immediate vicinity, there's no danger." So now your argument is "but if someone can show you evidence that it happened in a different neighborhood, then it should concern you." Ok, by your own terms then, I'll show you evidence that government central banking and fiat currency wrecked another country and devastated its economy. Take a look at the details of what happened during a hyperinflationary cycle in Germany in the 1920's:

http://www.usagold.com/GermanNightmare.html

Describe the harm in your own words. Stating that the government has lied, doesn't mean that there is potential for great danger. That, my dear, is by definition, constitutes an ad hominem attack. You like to throw that phrase around, but clearly you don't know what it means. I asked you what the danger was, and you respond that the government has lied before as if pointing out that the government has lied in the past is evidence of potential for great financial harm.

LOL. I produced and presented evidence that government lied in your reply to Rokerijdude. Your implication seemed to be that lies by the government can't harm our economic situation. IF THAT WASN'T YOUR MEANING, then fine. Since that was my only point in posting those quotes, and since the quotes were accurate - it therefore does not constitute an Ad Hominem attack.

But I would definitely say such lies can harm people because those lies can prompt them not to be more cautious or to save money/buy gold/diversify assets to prepare for a financial crisis. Government lies could potentially have a HUGE impact on an economy.

I don't live in france, and the us economy, governmental structure, and legal system are quite different than those found in france.

By your terms above, I'm "showing you a picture" of severe economic damage done in other countries. Our economy is not "vastly different" from other industrialized nations. We are not depression-proof and we are susceptible to changes in other countries. Look at the amount of our debt and our currency that China is holding. Did you notice the reaction from the slight drop in their stock market on our markets? The weaknesses in any country who relies on fiat currency and central banking are very similar, especially in a "fiat world."

No one has said that it is. Please describe, in your own words, how you believe the information you have cut and pasted from other sources demonstrates that we might be entering a depression.

Oh, I don't believe we are entering a depression at the present time - and a depression is not the only potential danger by the way. Our real troubles are probably 20 to 30 years down the road, unless the other G8 nations continue to work to force our government to devalue the dollar more rapidly - and that is definitely a possible danger. The Fed will definitely work for a "soft landing," but at some point it's going to be too little, too late - mainly because of our national debt and entitlement programs that are constantly growing out of control.

And this brings up two other potential dangers that you've been asking us to describe in our own words. Again, here are two that concern me:

(1) our entitlement programs - social security, etc. - are ran as pyramid/ponzi schemes. THERE IS NO INVESTMENT. CURRENT RECIPIENTS ARE PAID BY CURRENT WORKERS. Since the retiring baby boomers are a larger segment of the population, there will be a larger number of payments going out. The ONLY thing holding those programs up, keeping them afloat, is a growing population. If our population were to become stagnant or decline for just even 5 years, that would be the end of the story. And even with a population that continues to grow, the burden on future generations is still exceeding even rapid population growth projections. There is a coming entitlement meltdown, no matter how you look at it. And, with our fiat currency/central banking system, if the government prints money to cover the bills coming due - you're looking at hyperinflation.

(2) and the national debt... At some point, interest payments on the national debt will exceed tax revenue taken in. At that point, you will either have a massive tax increase, or the government will print money to cover the short fall and, again, we're looking at hyperinflation.

Of course it is fine to copy and paste information, I have done it myself.

Ah, so you're a hypocrite too for criticizing me for it...

BUT. I am prepared to have a dialogue with anyone about the information that I brought here, or anywhere else.

As I've said before, you are one arrogant tool. You are the one refusing to have an honest debate, as evidenced by your numerous lies, distortions and fallacies on the following thread:

https://www.houseofpolitics.com/forum/showthread.php?t=899

I understand the information and can speak in my own words about it. Cutting and pasting "2+2=4" is fine but if someone asked what you believe the infomation means, you better well be prepared to discuss why you believe it is accurate. In other threads you have cut and pasted "2+3=4" when the question was not name two numbers when when added together equal 4. Cutting and pasting information that does not answer a specific question is not ok.

Again, you're in denial!!!!! Put down the Kool Aid!!!!! You are the one posting fallacies and then denying it ever happened. Everyone can see that in the thread I just posted. Denying it happened, doesn't change it, Shetland pony rider. Do you always try to "pull a Clinton" whenever you get cornered on your lies?

I have asked for either one of you to describe what your initial post and his subsequent post mean to you personally in your own words expressed with your own ideas.

I have described two such scenarios above. The main danger is potential hyperinflation. While Central bankers have learned from some of their mistakes - they admitted to creating the Great Depression for example:

http://www.federalreserve.gov/boarddocs/speeches/2002/20021108/default.htm

- there is still an inherent weakness in the system due to the access to potential manipulation that a small group of people has on the entire monetary system.

Since the is not whether the government has ever lied or not, your posts represent you cutting and pasting "2=2=4" in response to a question that has no bearing on either the numbers two or four or the process of addition.

Straw Man again. My only point was that the act of copying and pasting does not, in and of itself, constitute a problem with the information being presented. Your statement: "Truth bringer, once again, cut and pasted information" seems to imply that you have a problem with my copying and pasting information. Now you're saying that the information I used in proving that information can be copied and pasted isn't accurate because it deals with numbers???? I can't even follow your convoluted nonsense anymore. You seem to rely on obfuscation more than anything else..that and outright lies.

I could counter by cutting and pasting quote after quote where truthful information came from the governemtn but they would not prove that the government always tells the truth any more than yours prove that the government always lies.

Another Straw Man!!!! ROTFL. My point was not that the government "always" lies - just that they have the potential to lie, and that those lies can be potentially very harmful to the general public.

I love it how you desperately change the terms on all the arguments once you've been cornered. The funny thing is, you either have no problem with your deception, or you're too stupid to notice. Which is it, Shetland pony rider?

That was because of policies that were instituted by a president with socialist leanings. Not because of the depression itself.

ROTFL. What President in our system isn't going to have socialist leanings now? You've admitted Bush isn't a conservative? We know he has:

Government spending has gone up every single year under Bush.
The size of government has grown larger every single year under Bush.
The national debt has grown larger every single year under Bush.
The number of federal employees has increased under Bush.
The number of entitlement programs has increased under Bush.
The number of federal regulations has increased every year under Bush.

So it looks like we're going to move closer to socialism under either Republicans or Democrats. So I'd say my original point stands.

Continued...

 

[Truth-Bringer]

I am not arguing for or against federal reserve bankers.

If it makes no difference either way to you, why are you spending so much time in this thread then?

OK. I won't argue that point.

Why not? You present fallacies and lies against all my other points...why stop here?

Again, what do you believe is the danger to you or the US economy. In your own words.

I just told you two points above. I'll give you another potential problem - China. As I stated earlier, look at what happened to our stock market (dropped over 500 points) when China's Shanghai Composite fell nearly 9%. The sell off spread to the European markets and continued on to the U.S. The bottom line is that they're a potential enemy, holding enough of our currency and our debt to fasciliate a problem should they decide to dump massive amounts of dollars or refuse to continue financing us:

"Since World War II, the United States' biggest economic and trading partners have also been our closest political and military allies. China breaks that pattern." - The Washington Post, Jan. 30, 2004

"As for the United States, for a relatively long time, it will be absolutely necessary that we quietly nurse our sense of vengeance. We must conceal our abilities and bide our time..." - General Mi Shenyu, Vice Commandant Beijing Academy of Military Sciences, 1996

"The first rule of unrestricted warfare is that there are no rules, with nothing forbidden." - Col. Qiao Liang and Col. Wang Xiangsui, China's People's Liberation Army, co-authors of "Unrestricted Warfare"

"The bond and securities markets are the mother lode of American finance capital. If Beijing taps that, there will be no end to the funds she can raise and almost no control over how they are used." - Pat Buchanan, Fmr. White House advisor, Apr. 4, 1997

"The big sword overhanging the U.S. economy...is the willingness of foreign bond holders (China) to hold U.S. debt." - The Vancouver Sun, Jan. 29, 2004

"All Beijing has to do is to mention the possibility of a sell order going down the wires. It would devastate the U.S. economy more than any nuclear strike." - Asia Times, Jan. 23, 2004

"We are beholden to the Chinese by our Treasury. That worries me." - Carla Hills, Fmr. U.S. Trade Representative

I am none of those.

Oh, I forgot to add, "are you a lying *****?" Which is self-evident so you don't have to bother answering that one.

 

[Truth-Bringer]

What exactly have I denied?

Again, PUT DOWN THE KOOL AID!!!!!!

I am perfectly willing to debate you

No, you are perfectly willing to lie and use fallacious arguments.

 

[palerider]

Another Straw Man.

Clearly, in addition to not knowing what constitutes an ad hominem attack, you don't know what a straw man is either. And you have yet to state in your own words what the information you cut and pasted means to you.

There is inherent danger in any economic system so that statement neither proves your point, or suggests that our present one holds more inherent danger than any other.

I believe what has happened is that you have brought information here that is over your head and that you do not understand and that is why you refuse to discuss it in your own words.

 

[Truth-Bringer]

For example, explain in detail, using your own words how and why decision to stop publishing the M3 Money Multiplier is important to you in your daily life and how it effects your ability to live as you have become acustomed.

See, one may present something called EVIDENCE as a means of supporting their argument. And that's why I copy and paste sources. Again, you're a hypocrite for criticizing it when you admitted you've done it in the past. This obsession with "one's own words" denotes your arrogance and your own perceived brilliance. You can keep believing that delusion, but I've pretty much destroyed the last shred of credibility you had on this forum.

To describe my point in my own words as to why failing to publish the M3 Money Multiplier constitutes a danger sign:

In a fiat currency system, such currency only has value due to two things - domestically due to the legal tender laws - which force people, at gunpoint if necessary, to use such currency to pay all public and private debts. If the legal tender laws were repealed tomorrow, NOBODY with half a brain would use federal reserve notes because they're intrinsically worthless.

Internationally, a fiat currency only has value so far as foreign governments or citizens desire it. Since the U.S. was once seen as strong, stable and financially sound, the dollar became the international currency of choice. Now, those perceptions are slowly vanishing. Everyone knows we're leveraged to the hilt, and they know foreign debt and currency holders are propping us up.

Inflation is created solely by government action, as Milton Friedman proved prior to winning the Nobel Prize in economics. The Fed governors when once vehemently opposed to his findings, but now they agree with and have accepted his conclusions. (They're willing to compromise since they want to keep this system that's profiting them so greatly going indefinitely...) Since the value of the dollar in such a system is determined in part by how many dollars are in circulation, by refusing to publish the M3 money multiplier, our government is telling other governments "We're not going to tell you how much money we're printing anymore." Obviously, the implication is "we're going to have to print a lot more money that we don't want you to know about." Such an implication does not breed confidence among foreign central banks. They will slowly begin to sell off their dollar holdings in favor of more stable currencies.

 

[palerider]

I just told you two points above. I'll give you another potential problem - China. As I stated earlier, look at what happened to our stock market (dropped over 500 points) when China's Shanghai Composite fell nearly 9%. The sell off spread to the European markets and continued on to the U.S. The bottom line is that they're a potential enemy, holding enough of our currency and our debt to fasciliate a problem should they decide to dump massive amounts of dollars or refuse to continue financing us:

And how is the federal reserve to blame for that? And do you credit the federal reserve for the quick rebound? If they aren't responsible for the rebound, how were they responsible for the drop?

The cut and paste quotes are no substitute for your own thoughts. If they don't answer the questions being put to you, they are of no use.

 

[Truth-Bringer]

Clearly, in addition to not knowing what constitutes an ad hominem attack, you don't know what a straw man is either.

Clearly, it is you who does not understand either, because you cannot refute my arguments that you used them. Changing the terms of my statement and arguing against those changed terms is a Straw Man:


"The Straw Man fallacy is committed when a person simply ignores a person's actual position and substitutes a distorted, exaggerated or misrepresented version of that position. This sort of "reasoning" has the following pattern:

1. Person A has position X.
2. Person B presents position Y (which is a distorted version of X).
3. Person B attacks position Y.
4. Therefore X is false/incorrect/flawed.

This sort of "reasoning" is fallacious because attacking a distorted version of a position simply does not constitute an attack on the position itself. One might as well expect an attack on a poor drawing of a person to hurt the person."

http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/straw-man.html

 

[palerider]

In a fiat currency system, such currency only has value due to two things - domestically due to the legal tender laws - which force people, at gunpoint if necessary, to use such currency to pay all public and private debts. If the legal tender laws were repealed tomorrow, NOBODY with half a brain would use federal reserve notes because they're intrinsically worthless.

OK. Now describe any economic system that is not a fiat currency system. Gold? Gold coins have value because someone says they have value, not because a gold coin has any intrinsic value. There is no difference between a person or an entity stating that a gold coin has X value and a person or entity stating that a piece of paper has X value.

Again I ask you, how and why decision to stop publishing the M3 Money Multiplier is important to you in your daily life and how does it effect your ability to live as you have become acustomed.

 

[palerider]

Clearly, it is you who does not understand either, because you cannot refute my arguments that you used them. Changing the terms of my statement and arguing against those changed terms is a Straw Man:


"The Straw Man fallacy is committed when a person simply ignores a person's actual position and substitutes a distorted, exaggerated or misrepresented version of that position. This sort of "reasoning" has the following pattern:

1. Person A has position X.
2. Person B presents position Y (which is a distorted version of X).
3. Person B attacks position Y.
4. Therefore X is false/incorrect/flawed.

This sort of "reasoning" is fallacious because attacking a distorted version of a position simply does not constitute an attack on the position itself. One might as well expect an attack on a poor drawing of a person to hurt the person."

OK. Now describe exactly what argument I have made that you believe constitutes a straw man argument.

 

[Truth-Bringer]

And how is the federal reserve to blame for that? And do you credit the federal reserve for the quick rebound? If they aren't responsible for the rebound, how were they responsible for the drop?

Another Straw Man. My position was not that the Federal Reserve caused that change in the stock market, you *****. I presented that statement as evidence that Chinese markets already have a huge, potentially negative influence over our own.

The Federal Reserve has created a danger for us in this situation because it has usurped our Constitutional monetary system. China would not be a financial threat to dump our dollars if our money had intrinsic value, because there would be no threat of a sell off. Nor would our markets rely on floating currency overseas to bolster the value of it - it would have intrinsic value, as precious metals have always historically had.

The cut and paste quotes are no substitute for your own thoughts. If they don't answer the questions being put to you, they are of no use.

They are evidence to support my claims that China is an economic threat. I'm sorry you don't like the evidence.

 

[Truth-Bringer]

OK. Now describe exactly what argument I have made that you believe constitutes a straw man argument.

I've already done that numerous times. I've specifically pointed it out multiple times in this thread. I'm not going to hold your hand through all of this and point at the pretty pictures, *****. You need to work on your reading comprehension skills.

 

[palerider]

Another Straw Man. My position was not that the Federal Reserve caused that change in the stock market, you *****. I presented that statement as evidence that Chinese markets already have a huge, potentially negative influence over our own.

Any market can have an adverse effect on another no matter what their respective economys are based on.

This thread is about the federal reserve. You brought in the effect that the chinese economy had on our own. In a thread about the federal reserve, it stands to reason that you believe the federal reserve had someting to do with the drop as a result of the change in the chinese economic picture. If you mentioned the chinese effect on our economy, but don't think that the fed (the topic of this thread) has anything to do with the reaction of the US economy to the chinese economy, then your mention of the chinese economy constitutes a strawman argument.

The Federal Reserve has created a danger for us in this situation because it has usurped our Constitutional monetary system. China would not be a financial threat to dump our dollars if our money had intrinsic value, because there would be no threat of a sell off. Nor would our markets rely on floating currency overseas to bolster the value of it - it would have intrinsic value, as precious metals have always historically had.

Metals have no intrinsic value. Intrinsic - belonging to a thing by its very nature. Gold doesn't have worth because it is gold, gold has worth because someone says it has worth.

They are evidence to support my claims that China is an economic threat. I'm sorry you don't like the evidence.

They are evidence of nothing. They are just someone's words with nothing to support whether they are true or not and they certainly don't constitute any argument on your part to support your position.

 

[palerider]

I've already done that numerous times. I've specifically pointed it out multiple times in this thread. I'm not going to hold your hand through all of this and point at the pretty pictures, *****. You need to work on your reading comprehension skills.

Then humor me. Bring forward a point that you made and my response and describe how it constitutes a strawman argument.

Saying a thing doesn't make it true. If you want to make the claim, be prepared to prove it.