Raise Taxes and Reduce Spending

[Stoked]

I wanted to follow this topic but Frank and Spazz starting writing novels and my brain shut down.

 

[franklin]

I wanted to follow this topic but Frank and Spazz starting writing novels and my brain shut down.

You're right. I should have taken things one at a time and went back and forth for 17 pages like you and OB.

 

[Jazz Spazz]

I wanted to follow this topic but Frank and Spazz starting writing novels and my brain shut down.

Sorry we hurt your brain. I hope it's able to reboot after that blue screen.
Maybe restart from safe mode and make some adjustments in the Bios.

 

[Stoked]

You're right. I should have taken things one at a time and went back and forth for 17 pages like you and OB.

hahaha. Well when you have two people wanting to understand maybe you should have. It's not like you are a proffesional at this like Zulu or Gyb.

Stupid amateurs.

 

[Stoked]

Sorry we hurt your brain. I hope it's able to reboot after that blue screen.
Maybe restart from safe mode and make some adjustments in the Bios.

I got to your posts and didn't even read it.

Ain't nobody got time for that.

 

[Jazz Spazz]

I got to your posts and didn't even read it.

Ain't nobody got time for that.

Says the guy with 9200 posts in less than a year. Yea, I believe you.

It's not about "time"

 

[spycam1]

If we dump the federal reserve and print our own money we will get ourselves out of debt and be a free and unburdened country faster than anything else. The only problem is the secret people running the Federal Reserve (some think it is the royal family of England) would get angry and do whatever they could to get rid of anyone that tries it.

Andrew Jackson shut down the Second Bank of the United states, the equivalent of the Federal Reserve in those days. He was fought on this on all sides but he was able to shut it down by vetoing the recharter as it was only chartered for 20 years. (Incidentally so is the current Fed, but it seems to live on without a recharter I believe) After this he was able to completely remove the national debt, and that was the only time it has happened. He once said to Van Buren "The Bank is trying to kill me, but I will kill it" After the recharter was vetoed, there was an assassination attempt on him, but both guns misfired. Afterwards both guns were tested and they worked fine.

Lincoln went to the bank to get some money to help fund the Civil War, and the banks wanted to charge him 24-28%. He wouldn't do it, so he worked with Congress to print the Greenbacks and fund the war themselves. They didn't like that and tried to get involved and split the country. France and England tried to side with the south despite the slavery issue, but at the time the war was not a moral war, but about keeping the union intact. After Lincoln saw those controlling the banks pushing England and France to help in the war, and knowing their people would not support the war if it was about slaver, delivered the Emancipation Proclamation. He also had backing from Russia who sent some of their fleet to both the West Coast and the East coast. Some think it was a show of support to the North, but there was selfishness involved there. They were headed to war with them, and wanted their fleet free of ice in their own ports, but a unified US was a buffer from the European countries that were controlling the money through the banks. Once the US was divided up, Russia would have been the next target as they would not allow the banks to control their currency. "luckily" for the banks the whole Russian royal family was killed around WWI so they eventually got what they wanted. Strangely the communist revolution was funded with European money. Anywho, with France and England now unable to get involved on the slavery side of the now moral war on slavery, they stayed out and the North ended up winning the war and keeping the United states... united. Towards the end of the war Lincoln could not get the support of Congress for the printing of more money to finish the war, so he accepted the banks push for the National Bank Act, but planned on fighting it and repealing it after his reelection. 45 days after reelection, he was killed, and the National Bank Act lived on, and so did the Banks with funding from European puppet masters.

After the Civil War, and Lincoln's death the country went to the Gold Standard, which was easy to control because of the scarcity of Gold at the time. The banks (JP Morgan was a main one) caused depressions by removing money from circulation slowly. They created the crash in 1907 and then offered to save the day by bringing in some money that they printed.

President Garfield said in 1881 "Whosoever controls the volume of money in any country is absolute master of all industry and commerce... And when you realise that the entire system is very easily controlled, one way or another, by a few powerful men at the top, you will not have to be told how periods of inflation and depression originate." Within weeks of this statement he was assassinated.

JFK had Congress printing money and was to abolish the Federal Reserve. JFK was assassinated.



In response to Lincoln printing greenbacks:














There's a ton of info out there about the Banks and the Fed, and all that. Basically they own whoever they want to, and if they can't own them they will discredit them or kill them. They own the media, oil, railroads, and probably everything else. They use the Federal Reserve for whatever they want to. There was another quote from a senator or congressman about the Fed pumping money into Germany after WWII and that they own about everything there. One of the leaders of Russia after WWI said things about not being in charge, and not driving the car so to speak. Another US senator or congressman said things about the banks and that they had evil designs, and he died in a 747 that was "accidentally" shot down over Russia at some point.

Why do I post all of this? Freaking out about cutting spending and reducing taxes don't get to the heart of the problem. Income taxes didn't really begin in earnest until 1913, which just happens to be the same year of the Federal Reserve Act. Coincidence? The income taxes were primarily to be used to pay the interest on the debt incurred from the nation with the Federal Reserve. We would not even have to pay an income tax if we didn't have the Federal Reserve doing for us something we can constitutionally do for ourselves free of interest and burden.

Again, the heart of the issue is not spending and/or taxes. Those are distractions. Those truly in charge of all of us are the ones really in charge of both Republican and Democratic parties and are just playing games to distract us. Back to the Gary Allen Quote, both parties are really on board with the socialism agenda historically despite what is said. These puppet masters pull the strings, and they are the few with everything while everyone else is at their whim. They know people historically are not smart enough to see them for what they are and rise up as one to stop them. They just go along their merry way and endure whatever happens. They continue to make money during depressions, during good times, they crash housing markets, they crash stock markets, they do whatever they want because they are all united and they control the flow of the cash.

Blame it all on the Fed, that's who is holding Burks hostage.

FREE BURKS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1!!!!!!!!11!!!!!!!!!!!

The only part I read was "FREE BURKS!!!!!!!!", so I totes agree.

 

[franklin]

hahaha. Well when you have two people wanting to understand maybe you should have. It's not like you are a proffesional at this like Zulu or Gyb.

Stupid amateurs.

Sir, how dare you question my intellect? I am a board certified genius. A GENIUS! You mental maggots are lucky that I ever put up with you talking at me. It makes me feel really dirty and I have to do a thorough Jack Daniels brain washing every night because of it.....it's the only way to clean the brain you know.

Ahem, the things I have to put up with to save humanity ... & to think you'll never be smart enough to respect us for it.

 

[Stoked]

Sir, how dare you question my intellect? I am a board certified genius. A GENIUS! You mental maggots are lucky that I ever put up with you talking at me. It makes me feel really dirty and I have to do a thorough Jack Daniels brain washing every night because of it.....it's the only way to clean the brain you know.

Ahem, the things I have to put up with to save humanity ... & to think you'll never be smart enough to respect us for it.

You like to feel dirty. Don't lie.

Also that be "me" instead of "us" since the rest of your post is singular. Furthermore if you were trying to save humanity you should be over on the boards of Lakers, Nuggets and Rockets fans. Trying to clean up the blight that they are to humanity.

 

[Jazz Spazz]

Commodity backed currencies are a nice idea in principle but horrible in practice. They weaken sovereignty by making the system subject to external influence and manipulation. They're also prone to runs on the treasury as Americans have found out the hard way every time we've tried implementing such systems. This was the reason Benjamin Franklin was so adamantly anti-gold standard. Once the gold gets spent out of a community it falls apart as the economic system becomes destroyed. If we were to go back to such an archaic system we'd quickly collapse and be too weak to defend ourselves from countries with modern economies.

The point was not about endorsing a gold based system, that was just part of the illustration. I don't have a problem with a fiat based system, or even a hybrid. My problem is with handing over the government's power over currency to another entity, and then having that money that should be free of debt and burden loaned to us. It is not United States notes, it is Federal Reserve notes lent to us with interest. I would rather our Country be the "company" taking the raw materials and batching it into our currency vs having the Federal Reserve take the raw materials batching it into currency, and then invoicing us for that currency for more than the value of the currency.

You're complaining about paying interest on the national debt & not about what the Federal Reserve does. If you were to refine this as the Federal Reserve being an enabler to congressional stupidity then that's a very valid concern. However, the problem is in congressional budgeting & blame should be placed accordingly.

Sure, plenty of blame to go around, but in the blame game it's easy to get distracted from the key issue or issues that are at the heart of the problems. Go ahead and take swings at the head of the Hydra, but until the body is dead the problems just get worse.

Every bank I've ever seen pays interest to hold my money.

Missing the point again. This was not about me putting money into the bank to earn some tiny amount of interest. This is about me (our country and citizens) being loaned currency that should be theirs and then having to pay interest on that money. Paying interest for the privilege of having money in circulation in our banking system.

You won't be able to stop people from lending money at a profit and have a functional economy at the same time. Even worse, if you have a gold based system then you'll still have multiple claims to the same gold nugget without a release valve to let off the pressure when the inevitable deflationary collapse of such a system sets in.

Again, you are stuck on this gold based system stuff. That is not the point, so try not to get stuck on it please.

Believe it or not, people in high finance prefer a stable system to one prone to systemic shock and collapse. Business people are very win-win.

Again, missing the point. I as a citizen of this country am charged interest to have use of our currency, then if I want to borrow money for personal use I am charged interest again. I get a double dose of interest when it should only be one if I choose to get a loan. Of course Bankers want a stable system where they can make tons of money without any risk at all. That's what we all want, easy money and zero risk. Do we as citizens really want to be on the other side of that zero risk equation though?

An understandable concern. Our hubris will always get us into trouble no matter what system we implement. That's why it's important to constantly stay on top of regulations and refining according to knew knowledge learned. Letting idiots run the system instead while knowing they will shortly collapse everything is a damn good way to become China's personal bitch.

I think I still would rather having a chance that some idiot might do something right and help this country, than having a 100% sure chance that some genius will screw us over for his/her own good.

The conspiracy theorists have taken a few snippets from each message and painted a wild picture with them. Kennedy sought to move us further away from precious metals backed currency, saying silver was useless as money.

Possibly, but I am undecided as of yet. I will look into it more and form my own conclusions.

No. I have no problem with the government printing money in times of crisis (plenty of caveats on how Lincoln did it but that's not really pertinent to this discussion.). I celebrate every time a quantitative easing is announced.

So... what, in your opinion would constitute a time of crisis? Are we in a time of crisis? Does it take another civil war to be in a time of crisis? Do we wait until the crisis to do something about it, or do we plan ahead to avoid a crisis?

There's a misconception about the US using the Federal Reserve to pay banks interest on every note ever printed. Every time I've seen this brought up it's linked to the creation of the system and how it was funded. We require member banks to put up some capital and pay them an annual 6% dividend for it. Granted that is the best investment in the world for anyone. However, if there were some conspiracy going on under bank control then the banks would have required the Fed to force them the full amount of funding when the Fed stopped at 1/2 the maximum amount allowable under The Act because they decided they had collected enough to operate safely and stay solvent.

Paying the 6% dividend doesn't amount to all that much money each year and comes from Federal Reserve operations and not the US Treasury. I just did a quick google and it was $3,752,000,000 in 2000. In addition, every single US citizen is free to take advantage of this opportunity just as every other banker. You too can get in on the cabal!

I'll dig more into the Federal Reserve and how it works and it's history. I've looked into the Federal Reserve Bank, the Federal Reserve Act and those that wrote and adjusted it, The Second Bank of the United States, The First Bank of the United States, The Bank of North America as well as those that have been for a Central Bank as well as those that were against a Central Bank. I know they all were based very closely on how the Bank of England worked and works and that many of the people involved in pushing for this went to Europe to learn about the Bank of England and the central bank in Germany to see how things were done. Alexander Hamilton was the first Secretary of the Treasury and before that was a clerk for Robert Morris who founded the first central bank in the United States history (The Bank of North America). He continued from that time to be a strong supporter of having a central bank.

Banks always seem to be "needed" during and after wars, which is quite interesting to me. Banks make money off of wars. We seem to have a lot of "wars" lately don't we?
I can understand both sides of this topic and am planning on digging into it to find out for myself what I believe.

Someone I respect much more than anyone here has an opinion on this and has researched it extensively, which piqued my interest. I'll let you know when I have some sort of conclusions formed, not that it matters. I can see what you (franklin) thinks about it, but I don't know how much you looked into both sides of the story.

 

[franklin]

My problem is with handing over the government's power over currency to another entity, and then having that money that should be free of debt and burden loaned to us. It is not United States notes, it is Federal Reserve notes lent to us with interest. I would rather our Country be the "company" taking the raw materials and batching it into our currency vs having the Federal Reserve take the raw materials batching it into currency, and then invoicing us for that currency for more than the value of the currency.

This is fallacious, a myth, simply not true.

The vast majority of "money" is created with debt, and the US Treasury seems king of that hill. The US Treasury issues US Treasury notes, not the Federal Reserve. They don't borrow them from the Fed first.

The only money the Fed creates is a small amount of base money. All the interest paid on this base money is returned to the US Treasury.

I can see what you (franklin) thinks about it, but I don't know how much you looked into both sides of the story.

I started out with all the conspiracy stuff first. I used to be entertained by the narrative you're telling. It's interesting and easy to relate to.

 

[TheSilencer1313]

I am curious who you see as "stuck in the left/right paradigm".

Anyone who plays along with the political chess board as it is actually how the real world works. Also, anyone who continues to blame the political faces for the problems in this country. This includes puppet Obama.