The Federal Reserve; US Debt; and the Deficits means a POWERFUL UNITED STATES

You are appropriately(maybe) being very kind. But why would you pet a poor lil' old rattlesnake. Methinks many posters above are not
'not economists' and give these thugs the benifit of the doubt.

But, I have learned to throw rocks at coyotes as soon as they come on my property, or else they begin to think that it's OK to eat my animals.

So I'm sticking to my rocks here... this fellow is just out to pollute your ideas on how the economy is doing.

I just came across an article after posting my firsts rock above. It's on Rense.com, listed on the home page, the title in yellow letters on a blue background "The Present Situation Made Simple", written by Dick Eastman 4-13-7. It's a good metaphor on our economic mess. In the 27th paragraph, last sentence, he says the bankers have an...

"army of shills constantly selling people on the rightness of all that the banker does and the glorious patriotic system the banker has set up and blesses everything the banker's agents running the government are doing or trying to do."

Tada. You can waste your time petting snakes and feeding coyotes, or avoid these shills and read Dick Eastman's essay.

Ok i dont understand how it is better for our govt to give private banks the right to print our currency (which is unconstitutional in the first place) and then take interest payments for printing the currency. Interest that is paid for through income taxes.

There was little to no inflation before The Federal Reserve System other than after the civil war which was due to war spending.

Somehow i am to believe that the Federal Reserve is helping the U.S. make money? You gotta be kidding me.

W
A
K
E

U
P

A
M
E
R
I
C
A
!!
!!

[edit on 4/17/2007 by Frank Black]

[edit on 4/17/2007 by Frank Black]

Originally posted by k4rupt
So your trying to tell me that being $9 trillion in debt is a good thing for the U.S.? That it makes us "powerful?"

You're right about China selling off parts of their U.S. currency holding - it would make the rest of their reserves lose a LOT. HOWEVER, you're forgetting one thing - WHAT IF China decides to SELL ALL of it's dollars and switch to euros?

How can China sell all its US Bonds? If it did a massive sell off the value would collapse no one would want to buy...

Originally posted by bprintz1
I think "TheIntelligentInvestor", and quite possibly "etotheitheta", is a Government Schill coming onto the this web site to 'talk-up" the gov's rediculous amount of debt, supporting a house of cards. I suggest that if ya'll would step back, you'd see the arrogant little game that "TheIntelligentInvestor" is playing, with....

"I am deeply disappointed in the trash presented in this thread - but it's not worth my time to explain how it is all wrong."

What arrogant hogwash, from an intellectual bully.

THEINTELLIGENTIVESTOR joined ATS today. His ploy is transparent, and etotheitheta is his tag team member, who joined in February. Gonna poop out a little propaganda for us...

"and the Deficits means a POWERFUL UNITED STATES"...

right. As long as the rules don't change. You make it sound like that the Weimar Government in Germany screwed-up by not printing ENOUGH money. Wrong! They had no gold to back up the perception of value of their PAPER RECEIPTS... called "money".

This all works until you can't stuff anymore Dollars into China. What happens when/if they won't play anymore? We will then have a serious problem, because there IS no real or percieved wealth (precious metals) behind all that paper. And don't tell me I don't get it. It is that simple. It's a house of cards, AND YOU AND YOUR BUDDY ARE OUT PLANTING SEEDS OF DECEPTION, AS PROPAGANDISTS.

B.

Interesting response - but substanceless.

1) I did not argue Germany needed to print more money I argued it needed to inflate at 20% a month instead of 322%.

2) What would China do to stop playing the game? They can't be self-sufficient.

3) Debt is not a bad thing as long as you can pay it off within 3 years and the US can pay off its Debts within half a year. So what's the problem with debt?

Can someone...ANYONE...make a good argument against debt?

The concept of Seigniorage is still not properly addressed.

People are still wondering how the Fed is a good thing - the Fed allows a merger of Private and Public interests to control the flow of money by determining what the market needs. Doing so allows the Fed to attempt to maximize profit from printing money - this goes back to the government in a form of a rebate which the government uses as a deficit.

Here's some basic resources for this thread topic.

en.wikipedia.org...

www.unimaas.nl...://www.fdew%20b.unimaas.nl/algec/block/framespages/1203/Seignorage.htm

wfhummel.cnchost.com...

en.wikipedia.org...

finance.yahoo.com... -epic-proportions (Concerns how a weaker dollar means a stronger edge on domestic industries).

[edit on 17-4-2007 by TheIntelligentInvestor]

China cannot sell off its US dollars all at once or in a timely manner. Forty years ago the US refused to trade dollar for gold, this created the artificial need for foreign national banks to keep American assets and retain loans between themselves, the debtor, and the United States. This made certain that no one may renegotiate their debt with the United States without consent.


[edit on 17-4-2007 by etotheitheta]

Originally posted by TheIntelligentInvestor

3) Debt is not a bad thing as long as you can pay it off within 3 years and the US can pay off its Debts within half a year. So what's the problem with debt?

Excuse me, but you are wrong beyond reason. The US federal debt is over eight billion dollars. The US federal government takes in less than two billion each year. They cannot pay off the debt in less than a year. They cannot pay it off in four years if they end all federal spending.

In the future you should try to find some sources to back up your claims. What you have said so far is....Beyond belief.

Originally posted by etotheitheta
China cannot sell off its US dollars all at once or in a timely manner. Forty years ago the US refused to trade dollar for gold, this created the artificial need for foreign national banks to keep American assets and retain loans between themselves, the debtor, and the United States. This made certain that no one may renegotiate their debt with the United States without consent.


[edit on 17-4-2007 by etotheitheta]

They certainly may renegotiate, by selling their securities and their dollars on the open market.

And as soon as America refuses to honor these debts the dollar is in the toilet. It only has value as long as people believe they can use it for purchases, or can sell it on the markets.

Originally posted by Malichai

Originally posted by TheIntelligentInvestor

3) Debt is not a bad thing as long as you can pay it off within 3 years and the US can pay off its Debts within half a year. So what's the problem with debt?

Excuse me, but you are wrong beyond reason. The US federal debt is over eight billion dollars. The US federal government takes in less than two billion each year. They cannot pay off the debt in less than a year. They cannot pay it off in four years if they end all federal spending.

In the future you should try to find some sources to back up your claims. What you have said so far is....Beyond belief.

That is not how debt is measured it's measured against the GDP because the Bond holders have the options to sell their debts to another holder...they do not need to be "reclaimed" as debt. Because the GDP is the net income of the entire nation the entire nation can buy back its debt in under a year.

In the future - you should really just know something instead of parrott something you heard on TV.

Originally posted by Malichai

Originally posted by etotheitheta
China cannot sell off its US dollars all at once or in a timely manner. Forty years ago the US refused to trade dollar for gold, this created the artificial need for foreign national banks to keep American assets and retain loans between themselves, the debtor, and the United States. This made certain that no one may renegotiate their debt with the United States without consent.


[edit on 17-4-2007 by etotheitheta]

They certainly may renegotiate, by selling their securities and their dollars on the open market.

And as soon as America refuses to honor these debts the dollar is in the toilet. It only has value as long as people believe they can use it for purchases, or can sell it on the markets.

Why would the US ever default?

We should listen to the words of wisdom and stop listening to the voice of illusionist that their only job is to divert the American population from the real state of our economical affairs while our nation is swimming in the debt chaos.

”In place economy among the first and most important virtues and public debt as the greatest dangers to be feared. To preserve our independence, we must not let our rulers load us with perpetual debt. If we can prevent the government from wasting the labor of the people, under the pretense of caring for them they will be happy”.

Thomas Jefferson.

Originally posted by marg6043
We should listen to the words of wisdom and stop listening to the voice of illusionist that their only job is to divert the American population from the real state of our economical affairs while our nation is swimming in the debt chaos.

”In place economy among the first and most important virtues and public debt as the greatest dangers to be feared. To preserve our independence, we must not let our rulers load us with perpetual debt. If we can prevent the government from wasting the labor of the people, under the pretense of caring for them they will be happy”.

Thomas Jefferson.

Thomas Jefferson wasn't an economist or financier.

Do you know what he was? A PLANTATION OWNER.

And no one was dumber when it came to money than a bunch of hillbilly slave owning pricks.

Hamilton - Tanning - Morriss - Madison. These were the men who knew what they were talking about.

Jefferson was a fool when it came to economics compared to those guys...he was certainly a prudent and wise man but realize his minister of finance was Hamilton - during his successful Presidency he had Alexander Hamilton handling his finances.

How's your portfolio?

I would be glad to hear some worthwhile suggestions about how to pull my investments out of the crapper, since last year about this time, my stock holdings have dropped to less than half their value, and I'm not talking about penny-ante nonsense, but previously strong companies with great management reputations. All your theory is hot air as far as I'm concerned, unless you back it up with investment strategies you yourself engage in and have profited by.

Sincerely,
Pilot

[edit on 17-4-2007 by Pilot]

Originally posted by TheBandit795
The U.S. government has $9 trillion in debt. The U.S. population has $48 trillion in debt.

mwhodges.home.att.net...
www.financialsense.com...

[edit on 17-4-2007 by TheBandit795]

Originally posted by Pilot
How's your portfolio?

I would be glad to hear some worthwhile suggestions about how to pull my investments out of the crapper, since last year about this time, my stock holdings have dropped to less than half their value, and I'm not talking about penny-ante nonsense, but previously strong companies with great management reputations. All your theory is hot air as far as I'm concerned, unless you back it up with investment strategies you yourself engage in and have profited by.

Sincerely,
Pilot

[edit on 17-4-2007 by Pilot]

Since the end of last quarter my long term investments are up 7.339% over the S&P Index which is up 4.291%.

Since last year this time...briefly...27% abouts.

I wouldn't know where you are going wrong I'm not sure of what your positions are exactly - a large portion of gain is from the Energy sector which took a hit in 2001/2002 and is now recovering - but all my stocks are up from a year ago and only one is down since I bought it this year and only a little and that's temporary I bought it to hold.

I'm doing very well with what I'm managing so you can take your negativity elsewhere. Feel free to U2U if you want some better advice.

some of the OP's areas of conversation, made a bit more easy to swallow:

Inflation

en.wikipedia.org...

vs Seigniorage

en.wikipedia.org...

Gross Domestic Product (GDP)
en.wikipedia.org...

federal reserve
en.wikipedia.org...


Rather than spout your textbook language type posts, tying in everything from econ 101 into a nice neat little post, why not take the time to explain the various components of your original post, making it a bit easier for people to understand your point(s).

Also, don't be offended or upset when someone questions you or disagrees with you. If someone raises a point that is contra to your thoughts, it's ok to explain yourself so that the folks reading along can see both sides of the equation and they can then make their own inferences.

Originally posted by Crakeur
some of the OP's areas of conversation, made a bit more easy to swallow:

Inflation

en.wikipedia.org...

vs Seigniorage

en.wikipedia.org...

Gross Domestic Product (GDP)
en.wikipedia.org...

federal reserve
en.wikipedia.org...


Rather than spout your textbook language type posts, tying in everything from econ 101 into a nice neat little post, why not take the time to explain the various components of your original post, making it a bit easier for people to understand your point(s).

Also, don't be offended or upset when someone questions you or disagrees with you. If someone raises a point that is contra to your thoughts, it's ok to explain yourself so that the folks reading along can see both sides of the equation and they can then make their own inferences.

I agree with you but here few people bothered to raise good questions they merely spouted opinions when confronted with facts did nothing to debate the issue.

"The Fed is evil" and I'm apparently a spy for the Government

I already included a list of resources I think on page 3.

are you a spy for the gov't?

if not, why be bothered by the accusation? I've been called cointelpro, disinfo, psyops, and a few other lovely names. Having not noticed your name in the registry of gov't spooks, I'm assuming you aren't working with the feds so don't let it bug you when someone brings it up. If you are working for someone and posting here as a means of getting their message across, getting upset about being caught makes you look more guilty.

The things you're posting about are complicated and many people don't understand it. Rather than join the site and immediately take a smarter than you so I don't need to explain myself approach to posting, try toning down the posts so that those of us who haven't memorized econ 101 thru econ 201 text book chapters can better understand what you are trying to say.

Originally posted by Crakeur
are you a spy for the gov't?

if not, why be bothered by the accusation? I've been called cointelpro, disinfo, psyops, and a few other lovely names. Having not noticed your name in the registry of gov't spooks, I'm assuming you aren't working with the feds so don't let it bug you when someone brings it up. If you are working for someone and posting here as a means of getting their message across, getting upset about being caught makes you look more guilty.

The things you're posting about are complicated and many people don't understand it. Rather than join the site and immediately take a smarter than you so I don't need to explain myself approach to posting, try toning down the posts so that those of us who haven't memorized econ 101 thru econ 201 text book chapters can better understand what you are trying to say.

No merely my point is that it's very difficult to keep on target with such comments...just by nature of argument - where to go to next? Explaining it as you said yourself is pretty involved - you were pointing out differences in Seigniorage and in Inflation Tax correct? And if the link works I did post a good source on how Seigniorage works - why it works.

Whether or not the link worked (because it had a space so I included a %20) is another question.