Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Not at all... The point is the actual federal reserve banks have the power.. and the banks themselves are led from the new york bank...Yes I mean something different.. I dont mean the "Board of Governors" I mean "Banks"What do you mean? Are you meaning something different when you say chairman of the "Federal Reserve Banks?" If you mean "Chairman of the Federal Reserve Board of Governors," i.e. Ben Bernanke, he is chosen by the President.
There are 12 Federal Reserve Banks
And the Presidents, CEOs, etc. of these banks are NOT picked by POTUS. They are all private companies that elect their own officers like any other private corporation.
The real power in the Federal Reserve System is in these 12 banks.. not in the Board of Governors.
Hmm, so which is it?The New York Fed is the ultimate seat of power in the whole system. It always has been back to when Benjamin Strong was in charge.
In any case the NY Fed head is appointed by the board of directors with approval from the board of governors.
You seem to be not only failing to make your case that the Fed is not part of the Federal government, but morphing into a bizarre conspiracy theory.
Not at all... The point is the actual federal reserve banks have the power.. and the banks themselves are led from the new york bank...Yes I mean something different.. I dont mean the "Board of Governors" I mean "Banks"
There are 12 Federal Reserve Banks
And the Presidents, CEOs, etc. of these banks are NOT picked by POTUS. They are all private companies that elect their own officers like any other private corporation.
The real power in the Federal Reserve System is in these 12 banks.. not in the Board of Governors.
Hmm, so which is it?The New York Fed is the ultimate seat of power in the whole system. It always has been back to when Benjamin Strong was in charge.
In any case the NY Fed head is appointed by the board of directors with approval from the board of governors.
You seem to be not only failing to make your case that the Fed is not part of the Federal government, but morphing into a bizarre conspiracy theory.
Why else do you think competitors of the ny boys are allowed to go bankrupt whereas other "friends" are "too big to fail."
The board of governors sounds all fine and dandy but theyre just icing to look pretty.
Do you have a shred of proof for this assertion? At all?There are private commercial banks that have equity stake in the Fed member banks. Let's not pretend that ONLY the board of governors and the FOMC operations are what run the Fed's overall policy.
I would certainly expect that private commercial banks have some equity stake in the Fed Member Banks.Do you have a shred of proof for this assertion? At all?There are private commercial banks that have equity stake in the Fed member banks. Let's not pretend that ONLY the board of governors and the FOMC operations are what run the Fed's overall policy.
Do you have a shred of proof for this assertion? At all?There are private commercial banks that have equity stake in the Fed member banks. Let's not pretend that ONLY the board of governors and the FOMC operations are what run the Fed's overall policy.
Here's what I think. Goldman has more stake in the Fed than any other bank. SOMEONE had to fall in this financial collapse, otherwise if they were all bailed out, the public would be gathering pitchforks. Lehman took the fall, and since then, Goldman has been profiting like crazy in a time when most of us have never seen such profit vs. this kind of current economic environment.
There are private commercial banks that have equity stake in the Fed member banks. Let's not pretend that ONLY the board of governors and the FOMC operations are what run the Fed's overall policy.
FOMC ops are what are released to the public as information. Who exactly has controlling interest in the various Fed banks and their stakeholders, is certainly NOT symmetrically provided information.
There is plenty of reason to assume that there are things going on behind the scenes with our money that may not be in the best interest of the people at large.
Money makes the mother fucking WORLD go 'round. Having complete blind faith in the Fed, or ANYTHING in the government for that matter, is naive to say the absolute very least.
Our founders gave us plenty of reason to feel the way I feel about government. Should we ignore history even in spite of what we all know happens if we do?
Do you have a shred of proof for this assertion? At all?There are private commercial banks that have equity stake in the Fed member banks. Let's not pretend that ONLY the board of governors and the FOMC operations are what run the Fed's overall policy.
Your link actually pretty much disproves your own contention.
Sorry.
Q: Who owns the Federal Reserve Bank?
A: There are actually 12 different Federal Reserve Banks around the country, and they are owned by big private banks. But the banks don't necessarily run the show (we'll get to that in a second). Nationally, the Federal Reserve System is led by a Board of Governors whose seven members are appointed by the president and confirmed by the Senate.
The stockholders in the 12 regional Federal Reserve Banks are the privately owned banks that fall under the Federal Reserve System. These include all national banks (chartered by the federal government) and those state-chartered banks that wish to join and meet certain requirements. About 38 percent of the nation's more than 8,000 banks are members of the system, and thus own the Fed banks.
The concept of "ownership" needs some explaining here, however. The member banks must by law invest 3 percent of their capital as stock in the Reserve Banks, and they cannot sell or trade their stock or even use that stock as collateral to borrow money. They do receive dividends of 6 percent per year from the Reserve Banks and get to elect each Reserve Bank's board of directors (all of which I mentioned in my previous post).
The private banks also have a voice in regulating the nation's money supply and setting targets for short-term interest rates, but it's a minority voice. Those decisions are made by the Federal Open Market Committee, which has a dozen voting members, only five of whom come from the banks. The remaining seven, a voting majority, are the Fed's Board of Governors who, as mentioned, are appointed by the president. (you'll also notice in my previous post that I mentioned this. I said that not ALL of the decisions are made by the FOMC)
There are private commercial banks that have equity stake in the Fed member banks. Let's not pretend that ONLY the board of governors and the FOMC operations are what run the Fed's overall policy.
The New York Fed is the ultimate seat of power in the whole system. It always has been back to when Benjamin Strong was in charge.
The New York Fed is the ultimate seat of power in the whole system. It always has been back to when Benjamin Strong was in charge.
How can this be? The New York Fed implements the decisions of the FOMC. It is the FOMC that sets policy. It tells the New York Fed what to do and the New York Fed does it.
Timothy Geithner was not more powerful than either Alan Greenspan nor Ben Bernanke.
The New York Fed is the ultimate seat of power in the whole system. It always has been back to when Benjamin Strong was in charge.
How can this be? The New York Fed implements the decisions of the FOMC. It is the FOMC that sets policy. It tells the New York Fed what to do and the New York Fed does it.
Timothy Geithner was not more powerful than either Alan Greenspan nor Ben Bernanke.
You do know that the private banks that are shareholders in the 12 regional Fed banks have a minority stake in FOMC operations, right?
The 7 presidentially appointed board of gov's have the majority stake, but it would be somewhat naive to think the the big boys at JP, or Goldman, or Citi, or any of the other top commercial banks aren't getting what they want out of FOMC ops.
And when I say big boys of those commercial banks, I'm talking about their majority shareholders. The majority shareholders of the Fed's various member banks, have a MINORITY stake in the Fed's 12 regional banks.
Just something that ought to make you at least wonder.
How can this be? The New York Fed implements the decisions of the FOMC. It is the FOMC that sets policy. It tells the New York Fed what to do and the New York Fed does it.
Timothy Geithner was not more powerful than either Alan Greenspan nor Ben Bernanke.
You do know that the private banks that are shareholders in the 12 regional Fed banks have a minority stake in FOMC operations, right?
The 7 presidentially appointed board of gov's have the majority stake, but it would be somewhat naive to think the the big boys at JP, or Goldman, or Citi, or any of the other top commercial banks aren't getting what they want out of FOMC ops.
And when I say big boys of those commercial banks, I'm talking about their majority shareholders. The majority shareholders of the Fed's various member banks, have a MINORITY stake in the Fed's 12 regional banks.
Just something that ought to make you at least wonder.
I never said that the commercial banks did not have influence on the Fed. However, Alan Greenspan ran a one man show whereby members of the FOMC were expected to fall in line. If Greenspan expected the FOMC to fall in line, what do you think he expected the regional bank President's to do?
Hey, I'm not one to argue against the potential power of one man over many via coersion. But I'm also not one to question the possibility of it not being the case, as well.
Greenspan is one man, afterall, and the shareholders who have much more to gain or lose are greater than could probably be counted. No one really knows what goes on behind the scenes at the Fed, and it's all the more reason for there to be as much sunlight as possible.
I can't STAND the fact that our money is handled in secrecy. Inflationary or deflationary moves FIRST benefit those who stand to gain or lose the most IMMEDIATELY, and the rest of us get the scraps that the wolves were too full to finish.
I can't trust a system that somehow manages itself in secrecy. My votes indirectly put most of those people in the positions they're in, along with the rest of our votes as the electorate. How do we NOT deserve to know every single possible detail, so that in case of shenanigans, we can vote in a way that could root the bastards out?
Yeah Ron Paul. That explains a lot. What a failure, total dim bulb. And that's just among conservatives.
An 11-term Congressman is a failure? Interesting.
Theres no way this Rabbi dude is legit. He's either banker or politico.
Yay lets pay a private company big bucks to make our money for us. Instead of making it ourselves debt and interest free!! Yeah thats good for America.
/SARCASM OFF
More likely he simply believes that the market goes through cycles and that the Fed is the only institution capable of handling these swings. It's better, I think, to simply try to correct this assumption rather than trying to malign the person who believes this.
Theres no way this Rabbi dude is legit. He's either banker or politico.
Yay lets pay a private company big bucks to make our money for us. Instead of making it ourselves debt and interest free!! Yeah thats good for America.
/SARCASM OFF
More likely he simply believes that the market goes through cycles and that the Fed is the only institution capable of handling these swings. It's better, I think, to simply try to correct this assumption rather than trying to malign the person who believes this.
Do you seriously think you'll change Rabbi's mind? I doubt it. He didn't even make his case until like page 10.
More likely he simply believes that the market goes through cycles and that the Fed is the only institution capable of handling these swings. It's better, I think, to simply try to correct this assumption rather than trying to malign the person who believes this.
Do you seriously think you'll change Rabbi's mind? I doubt it. He didn't even make his case until like page 10.
No, I don't. Do you think ridiculing him will make him "see the light" any more than a reasoned discussion would?
Hey, I'm not one to argue against the potential power of one man over many via coersion. But I'm also not one to question the possibility of it not being the case, as well.
Greenspan is one man, afterall, and the shareholders who have much more to gain or lose are greater than could probably be counted. No one really knows what goes on behind the scenes at the Fed, and it's all the more reason for there to be as much sunlight as possible.
I can't STAND the fact that our money is handled in secrecy. Inflationary or deflationary moves FIRST benefit those who stand to gain or lose the most IMMEDIATELY, and the rest of us get the scraps that the wolves were too full to finish.
I can't trust a system that somehow manages itself in secrecy. My votes indirectly put most of those people in the positions they're in, along with the rest of our votes as the electorate. How do we NOT deserve to know every single possible detail, so that in case of shenanigans, we can vote in a way that could root the bastards out?
Fair enough. I don't see a reason to have a public/private central banking system. Every other nation in the world has a nationalized central bank, and many if not most countries in the western world have done a better job at conducting monetary policy than the Fed IMHO.
