Serious question about Auditing the Fed.

[TakeAStepBack]

Yep. We're finding this out the very interesting and hard way with paper and digits. That doesn't mean "so it is" works the best. We did salt, and a host of other stores of values throughout our timeline. Some worked great and others were blundering mistakes.

Digits can just keep adding a new binary, so there is that I suppose.

Looking forward to a trillion dollar bill.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

I wonder how much salt a trillion dollar bill will afford us in the future. Maybe a pack of gum or a news paper?

 

[Toro]

I wonder how much salt a trillion dollar bill will afford us in the future. Maybe a pack of gum or a news paper?

People don't want salt and chewing gum as currencies. So they're not.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

LOL. I didn't say they were or imply the idea. Im asking how much salt a trillion dollar bill will buy me in the future. Along with maybe the worth against gum or a newspaper.

Just imagine though, having an income of 200 trillion dollars a month. That's pretty cool. If it swings that way, I'll be sure to feel extra rich daily as I spend 20 trillion a week on groceries.

 

[Toro]

Maybe. I don't know. I doubt it but you might be right.

 

[Paulie]

As far as Nancy Pelosi...if she would have directly had anything to do with the money supply and the value of the dollar up to this point, I would think she'd have been voted out a long time ago.

Sure. Just like a politician who voted to drive us $10,000,000,000,000 into debt would be voted out of office. Right?

People don't recognize what the really means though. That debt doesn't directly affect their daily life and their wallet. Not to mention, democrats are fine with that debt for the most part. But if you could tie your purchasing power to direct congressional votes on the money supply then you would have accountability. Right now, congress gets to abdicate that and turn it over to the Fed where the voters have no recourse.

 

[Toro]

As far as Nancy Pelosi...if she would have directly had anything to do with the money supply and the value of the dollar up to this point, I would think she'd have been voted out a long time ago.

Sure. Just like a politician who voted to drive us $10,000,000,000,000 into debt would be voted out of office. Right?

People don't recognize what the really means though. That debt doesn't directly affect their daily life and their wallet. Not to mention, democrats are fine with that debt for the most part. But if you could tie your purchasing power to direct congressional votes on the money supply then you would have accountability. Right now, congress gets to abdicate that and turn it over to the Fed where the voters have no recourse.

People will vote for what benefits them. Most people benefit from lower interest rates. So there will always be pressure on politicians to goose the economy, at least until they get inflation.

Hyperinflations around the world first and always start with political pressure and politically dependent central banks. There is empirical evidence that the more independent the central bank, the lower the long term real interest rate and higher real growth.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Sure. Just like a politician who voted to drive us $10,000,000,000,000 into debt would be voted out of office. Right?

People don't recognize what the really means though. That debt doesn't directly affect their daily life and their wallet. Not to mention, democrats are fine with that debt for the most part. But if you could tie your purchasing power to direct congressional votes on the money supply then you would have accountability. Right now, congress gets to abdicate that and turn it over to the Fed where the voters have no recourse.

People will vote for what benefits them. Most people benefit from lower interest rates. So there will always be pressure on politicians to goose the economy, at least until they get elected.

Hyperinflations around the world first and always start with political pressure and politically dependent central banks. There is empirical evidence that the more independent the central bank, the lower the long term real interest rate and higher real growth.

great post. Look at the history of the banana republics to the south

 

[PredFan]

Who has the constitutional authority to issue currency? The federal government, right? Who do they answer to? The people, right? Who represents the people in our government? Congress right? So who should monitor our currency and the policies surrounding it? Congress in thier role as representatives of the people. It's very simple. This idea that congress is a separate entity from us is what causes a lot of the issues we have today. We need to make them remember what their role is and it is not to be a member of an elite class of self serving politicians.

The very fact that the fed is resisting the audit should be the first clue that it is absulutely necessary.

Look at our Congressmen. You want them looking into the Fed? They'll be looking through the prism of "How do I get more power?" and "How can this help my re-election chances". I'm pretty sure I don't like that idea.

 

[8537]

Because the mining industry, and market participants who were unable to secure silver as a mode of exchange. It was the german empires discontinued minting of thalers, because Otto Von got a huge sum of gold from France and felt it no longer needed, led to the coinage act of 1873. That act, demonetized silver. Forcing participants into gold only. It seems fairly obvious that this would cause economic calamity.

And in 1893, the free silver campaign began. because silver was the exchange tool of the lesser fortunate class. Where goods and services were not able to procure a gold amount as a price point. There was silver. Then govt. decided silver shouldn't be a unit of exchange as legal tender. Government, not a free market place, created this depression. 1893 saw silver come back in a round about way.

So from this reading of the economic history, the 1873 US crisis was the result of an international (and exogenous) demand shock, correct?

Only to the degree that government intruded on an otherwise fine economic condition. Namely the removal of an already widely circulated and useful means of exchange. But, you could very well look at it from that standpoint. It's just not a natural phenom of demand shock. Instead an imposed one.

Which was my entire point. That most, if not all of these types of crisis begin with government meddling.

Let's use a counterexample: When Spain experienced dramatic inflation from gold a couple hundred years prior, was that a supply shock that drove down the price of gold? If so, what role did government play?

My point is that demand shocks in the commodity of a currency aren't necessarily or even most often related to government. On the flipside, a demand shock in another part of the world could lead to an exodus of a commodity without government interfering. THe result would be the same - a dramatic change in an economy (either through prices or production) not related to the actions of that government.

 

[LibertyForAll]

Here is a recent relevant TV newsreport done on this very subject:

Reality Check: Is auditing the Federal Reserve really necessary - FOX19.com-Cincinnati News, Weather & Sports

 

[Shelzin]

Here is a recent relevant TV newsreport done on this very subject:

Reality Check: Is auditing the Federal Reserve really necessary - FOX19.com-Cincinnati News, Weather & Sports

Holy shit... Wouldn't expect that kind of straight out truth from Fox...

*ponders*

If Fox is such a conservative leaning source of information... Why aren't more republicans jumping up and down supporting this?

 

[Interpol]

What the teabaggers want is less government, so they passed a bill saying Congress should have even more power to politicize America's monetary policy.

Write your local teabagger and tell them to audit themselves for a change!

Fucking baggers, always blaming everyone else, meanwhile ass-clowns like Bachmann made 17 requests for Stimulus money.

The "audit the Fed" bill is pointless. Sorry, Ron Paul, the Fed is already audited, you just want to control their decisions, not to "audit" them.

 

[LibertyForAll]

Here is a recent relevant TV newsreport done on this very subject:

Reality Check: Is auditing the Federal Reserve really necessary - FOX19.com-Cincinnati News, Weather & Sports

Holy shit... Wouldn't expect that kind of straight out truth from Fox...

*ponders*

If Fox is such a conservative leaning source of information... Why aren't more republicans jumping up and down supporting this?

From what I understand this particular station is independently owned so they can run whatever stories they want, He has a lot of stuff you won't see anywhere else.

 

[Paulie]

Sure. Just like a politician who voted to drive us $10,000,000,000,000 into debt would be voted out of office. Right?

People don't recognize what the really means though. That debt doesn't directly affect their daily life and their wallet. Not to mention, democrats are fine with that debt for the most part. But if you could tie your purchasing power to direct congressional votes on the money supply then you would have accountability. Right now, congress gets to abdicate that and turn it over to the Fed where the voters have no recourse.

People will vote for what benefits them. Most people benefit from lower interest rates. So there will always be pressure on politicians to goose the economy, at least until they get inflation.

Hyperinflations around the world first and always start with political pressure and politically dependent central banks. There is empirical evidence that the more independent the central bank, the lower the long term real interest rate and higher real growth.

Most people THINK they benefit from lower interest rates, ignoring the fact that it entices malinvestment and financial irresponsibility. People don't typically try and educate themselves about something they think the "experts" have under control.

A lot more people are starting to take notice these days of what the Fed does and how much they can affect the economy. More people than ever are questioning them now. But they're accountable to practically no one, so there's not much anyone can do about it.

Even you yourself say they're out of control and you don't hesitate to put them at the top of the list of culprits in this latest economic crash. If you don't think something drastic needs to change then what do you propose we do about a situation where were held hostage to their disastrous decision making?

 

[Paulie]

What the teabaggers want is less government, so they passed a bill saying Congress should have even more power to politicize America's monetary policy.

Write your local teabagger and tell them to audit themselves for a change!

Fucking baggers, always blaming everyone else, meanwhile ass-clowns like Bachmann made 17 requests for Stimulus money.

The "audit the Fed" bill is pointless. Sorry, Ron Paul, the Fed is already audited, you just want to control their decisions, not to "audit" them.

While your hyper partisan ranting, I'll point out that it has already been covered in this thread that the Fed's open market operations are NOT included in their audits, which pretty much renders the audit useless, as we have no idea what exactly they're actually DOING with the money they're creating.

 

[LibertyForAll]

Can someone please explain how the current system isn't politicised? THe Board is appoint by the executive branch and the banks involved are free to donate to politicians. Do you think they don't jockey for control? Do you think they are above trying to bribe their way into a position of power to ensure they are first in line for the handouts of free money?

Every single time the fed increases the money supply they are taking money directly from US since our money will buy less. Then they lend this money out at interest and keep the profits. Maybe some of it makes it back to the treasury but regardless I will never see it. There never comes a time when they add the value back either. That value is just gone. This is an issue of accountability and holding Congress to their constitutional mandate. They never should have given it away and now they need to take it back. What possible reason could the Fed have for not want to be audited if it is doing everything on the up and up? If you feel the need to hide something you did then chances are you did something wrong.

 

[Shelzin]

While your hyper partisan ranting, I'll point out that it has already been covered in this thread that the Fed's open market operations are NOT included in their audits, which pretty much renders the audit useless, as we have no idea what exactly they're actually DOING with the money they're creating.

Normally I would thank the post... Instead I'll make the words bigger... *shrugs* Sometimes that helps. But not usually.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

Here is a recent relevant TV newsreport done on this very subject:

Reality Check: Is auditing the Federal Reserve really necessary - FOX19.com-Cincinnati News, Weather & Sports

It's all too late is the problem.

 

[Shelzin]

Here is a recent relevant TV newsreport done on this very subject:

Reality Check: Is auditing the Federal Reserve really necessary - FOX19.com-Cincinnati News, Weather & Sports

Holy shit... Wouldn't expect that kind of straight out truth from Fox...

*ponders*

If Fox is such a conservative leaning source of information... Why aren't more republicans jumping up and down supporting this?

From what I understand this particular station is independently owned so they can run whatever stories they want, He has a lot of stuff you won't see anywhere else.

If they are smart, and maybe they are, they'd have a Youtube channel. I'm going to go look.

Thanks for the heads up.