Bill Still's Money Masters

[joewp]

On the whole, real people would profit from the fruits of their labor and there would be no special class granted the privilege of creating money when they make a loan.

Real people don't profit so much during a depression.

At least I understand now that some of your confusion can be blamed on Griffin.
His error filled book still makes me chuckle.

The Great Depression was caused by the Fed. Benanke has acknowledged that fact.

Let me end my talk by abusing slightly my status as an official representative of the Federal Reserve. I would like to say to Milton and Anna: Regarding the Great Depression. You're right, we did it. We're very sorry. But thanks to you, we won't do it again.

FRB Speech, Bernanke -- On Milton Friedman's ninetieth birthday -- November 8, 2002

Error filled? Really? Hey, I want a laugh too. What errors did you find in Creature?

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

inflation that is inherent in FRB.

this is too stupid!! Any system can have inflation or deflation depending on how it is managed. If the Feds only mission was to hold inflation at 0% it would be easy enough to hold inflation at 0%.

That POV has a lot of support and so is worth talking about. Your liberal Nazi-like reinvention of the wheel is not even worth discussion because its not even close to being on the table.

 

[joewp]

inflation that is inherent in FRB.

this is too stupid!! Any system can have inflation or deflation depending on how it is managed. If the Feds only mission was to hold inflation at 0% it would be easy enough to hold inflation at 0%.

Stupid? Are you looking in a mirror or something? Did you forget to take your pills? Or can't you read with comprehension? Or is all you can resort in the face of the evidence I've presented is give up and start name-calling?

That POV has a lot of support and so is worth talking about. Your liberal Nazi-like reinvention of the wheel is not even worth discussion because its not even close to being on the table.

Yep, 'liberal' I'm sure is you name-calling me (I know you're not using it as a compliment, even though it doesn't apply to me), and there's no doubt about 'nazi-like', and wanting sound money without a central bank certainly isn't re-inventing the wheel, considering it was the money system in this country for almost 130 years.

When you get the Fox News brainwashing out of your head and realize that your stupid 'liberal vs. conservative' mindset is nothing more than a game foisted on you so you don't pay attention to the real issues in this country, maybe then you'll have something worthwhile to post.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

inflation that is inherent in FRB.

this is too stupid!! Any system can have inflation or deflation depending on how it is managed. If the Feds only mission was to hold inflation at 0% it would be easy enough to hold inflation at 0%.

Stupid? Are you looking in a mirror or something? Did you forget to take your pills? Or can't you read with comprehension? Or is all you can resort in the face of the evidence I've presented is give up and start name-calling?

That POV has a lot of support and so is worth talking about. Your liberal Nazi-like reinvention of the wheel is not even worth discussion because its not even close to being on the table.

Yep, 'liberal' I'm sure is you name-calling me (I know you're not using it as a compliment, even though it doesn't apply to me), and there's no doubt about 'nazi-like', and wanting sound money without a central bank certainly isn't re-inventing the wheel, considering it was the money system in this country for almost 130 years.

When you get the Fox News brainwashing out of your head and realize that your stupid 'liberal vs. conservative' mindset is nothing more than a game foisted on you so you don't pay attention to the real issues in this country, maybe then you'll have something worthwhile to post.

this is too stupid!! Any system can have inflation or deflation depending on how it is managed. If the Feds only mission was to hold inflation at 0% it would be easy enough to hold inflation at 0%, and many want to switch to that system.

You're Nazi like reinvention of the wheel is pure nut case fantasy!! If our objective is 0% inflation then all we have to do is change the Fed mandate and its done.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

On the whole, real people would profit from the fruits of their labor and there would be no special class granted the privilege of creating money when they make a loan.

Real people don't profit so much during a depression.

At least I understand now that some of your confusion can be blamed on Griffin.
His error filled book still makes me chuckle.

The Great Depression was caused by the Fed. Benanke has acknowledged that fact.

Let me end my talk by abusing slightly my status as an official representative of the Federal Reserve. I would like to say to Milton and Anna: Regarding the Great Depression. You're right, we did it. We're very sorry. But thanks to you, we won't do it again.

FRB Speech, Bernanke -- On Milton Friedman's ninetieth birthday -- November 8, 2002

Error filled? Really? Hey, I want a laugh too. What errors did you find in Creature?

The Great Depression was caused by the Fed. Benanke has acknowledged that fact.

They didn't cause it. By not boosting the money supply, they did make it much, much worse.
That's why Bernanke keeps boosting the money supply, he knows deflation would be really bad.

Error filled? Really?

Really.

What errors did you find in Creature?

Page 26, "...the Federal Reserve System allows commercial banks to create money out of nothing".

Of course banks cannot create money out of nothing.

Page 27, "When a borrower cannot repay and there are no assets which can be taken to compensate, the bank must write off that loan as a loss. However, since most of the money originally was created out of nothing and cost the bank nothing except bookkeeping overhead, there is little of tangible value that is actually lost.

Seriously? It's hard to believe anyone takes this clown seriously.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

inflation that is inherent in FRB.

this is too stupid!! Any system can have inflation or deflation depending on how it is managed. If the Feds only mission was to hold inflation at 0% it would be easy enough to hold inflation at 0%.

Stupid? Are you looking in a mirror or something? Did you forget to take your pills? Or can't you read with comprehension? Or is all you can resort in the face of the evidence I've presented is give up and start name-calling?

That POV has a lot of support and so is worth talking about. Your liberal Nazi-like reinvention of the wheel is not even worth discussion because its not even close to being on the table.

Yep, 'liberal' I'm sure is you name-calling me (I know you're not using it as a compliment, even though it doesn't apply to me), and there's no doubt about 'nazi-like', and wanting sound money without a central bank certainly isn't re-inventing the wheel, considering it was the money system in this country for almost 130 years.

When you get the Fox News brainwashing out of your head and realize that your stupid 'liberal vs. conservative' mindset is nothing more than a game foisted on you so you don't pay attention to the real issues in this country, maybe then you'll have something worthwhile to post.

wanting sound money without a central bank certainly isn't re-inventing the wheel, considering it was the money system in this country for almost 130 years.

You might want to double check your math.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

this is too stupid!! Any system can have inflation or deflation depending on how it is managed. If the Feds only mission was to hold inflation at 0% it would be easy enough to hold inflation at 0%.

Stupid? Are you looking in a mirror or something? Did you forget to take your pills? Or can't you read with comprehension? Or is all you can resort in the face of the evidence I've presented is give up and start name-calling?

That POV has a lot of support and so is worth talking about. Your liberal Nazi-like reinvention of the wheel is not even worth discussion because its not even close to being on the table.

Yep, 'liberal' I'm sure is you name-calling me (I know you're not using it as a compliment, even though it doesn't apply to me), and there's no doubt about 'nazi-like', and wanting sound money without a central bank certainly isn't re-inventing the wheel, considering it was the money system in this country for almost 130 years.

When you get the Fox News brainwashing out of your head and realize that your stupid 'liberal vs. conservative' mindset is nothing more than a game foisted on you so you don't pay attention to the real issues in this country, maybe then you'll have something worthwhile to post.

wanting sound money without a central bank certainly isn't re-inventing the wheel, considering it was the money system in this country for almost 130 years.

You might want to double check your math.

1)except there is no constituency at all to abolish the Fed. No one would take the chance in a million years.

2) before the Fed we had 3000 different currencies and back room deals to save the economy with JP Morgan!!

3) to have instant sound money which many do support all we need to do is change the Fed's mandate to 0% inflation.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Stupid? Are you looking in a mirror or something? Did you forget to take your pills? Or can't you read with comprehension? Or is all you can resort in the face of the evidence I've presented is give up and start name-calling?




Yep, 'liberal' I'm sure is you name-calling me (I know you're not using it as a compliment, even though it doesn't apply to me), and there's no doubt about 'nazi-like', and wanting sound money without a central bank certainly isn't re-inventing the wheel, considering it was the money system in this country for almost 130 years.

When you get the Fox News brainwashing out of your head and realize that your stupid 'liberal vs. conservative' mindset is nothing more than a game foisted on you so you don't pay attention to the real issues in this country, maybe then you'll have something worthwhile to post.

wanting sound money without a central bank certainly isn't re-inventing the wheel, considering it was the money system in this country for almost 130 years.

You might want to double check your math.

1)except there is no constituency at all to abolish the Fed. No one would take the chance in a million years.

2) before the Fed we had 3000 different currencies and back room deals to save the economy with JP Morgan!!

3) to have instant sound money which many do support all we need to do is change the Fed's mandate to 0% inflation.

The Fed doesn't have total power over borrowing, so cannot control money supply.
All they can do is target.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Now, having established a money supply that's actually worth something, we turn to the "banks". We need to split the functions of a bank into at least two distinct parts. One is money storage and distribution(check and ACH clearing), or what people think a bank does. You deposit money and write checks against your balance, and pay a small fee for the service. In the meantime, instead of an 'account', the bank actually holds your physical coins or certificates in a safe, earmarked as your actual money and transfers that money to another bank or customer's safe to satisfy the check.

Why do you feel this is better?

Lots of reasons. For starters, it doesn't give a 'bank' the chance to immediately devalue the real labor put into earning the deposit by turning around and creating new debt money, stealing the value of your labor. Example: You earned the first $100 ever. You put it in a bank for safe keeping. The bank now creates and loans $90 (or more) and loans it to another guy who simply purchases 90%(or more) of the fruit of your labor without having to do anything to deserve it.

And forget about banks runs and FDIC, since the 'bank' would be required to keep your money separate and apart, you can always get it back. FYI, this is exactly what vaults like the NY Fed's vault in underground Manhattan does. It keeps each country's gold separate and apart and transfers physical gold between countries when required to.

Not only that, it would make it so that real, productive labor is the source of the money, rather than some magical doubling, tripling... increasing the money supply by the "Mandrake Mechanism", as G. Edward Griffin puts it. Only honest labor could increase the money supply by mining more silver. Which then would be subject to the laws of supply and demand to adjust prices, no need for government intervention.

On the whole, real people would profit from the fruits of their labor and there would be no special class granted the privilege of creating money when they make a loan. Just that fact should be enough for every individual to want to eliminate FRB.

Example: You earned the first $100 ever. You put it in a bank for safe keeping. The bank now creates and loans $90 (or more) and loans it to another guy who simply purchases 90%(or more) of the fruit of your labor without having to do anything to deserve it.

In your improved banking system, I put my $100 in a CD and "the bank now creates and loans $90 (or more) and loans it to another guy who simply purchases 90%(or more) of the fruit of your labor without having to do anything to deserve it"

How is that better than the way it works now?

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

wanting sound money without a central bank certainly isn't re-inventing the wheel, considering it was the money system in this country for almost 130 years.

You might want to double check your math.

1)except there is no constituency at all to abolish the Fed. No one would take the chance in a million years.

2) before the Fed we had 3000 different currencies and back room deals to save the economy with JP Morgan!!

3) to have instant sound money which many do support all we need to do is change the Fed's mandate to 0% inflation.

The Fed doesn't have total power over borrowing, so cannot control money supply.
All they can do is target.

you may not have noticed they have been given new powers to do anything they want under section 13(3)

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Example: You earned the first $100 ever. You put it in a bank for safe keeping. The bank now creates and loans $90 (or more) and loans it to another guy who simply purchases 90%(or more) of the fruit of your labor without having to do anything to deserve it.

to borrow the money you have to pay it back with interest. That means you have to invest it and get more back than you put in. That is exactly the source of economic growth. If you get less back there is no more investment until you find a profitable way to grow the economy or get an acceptable ROI.

Now you know why a super market and big utility have the same ROI even when one has assets and the other doesn't !

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

1)except there is no constituency at all to abolish the Fed. No one would take the chance in a million years.

2) before the Fed we had 3000 different currencies and back room deals to save the economy with JP Morgan!!

3) to have instant sound money which many do support all we need to do is change the Fed's mandate to 0% inflation.

The Fed doesn't have total power over borrowing, so cannot control money supply.
All they can do is target.

you may not have noticed they have been given new powers to do anything they want under section 13(3)

Doesn't mean they can control borrowing.

 

[joewp]

inflation that is inherent in FRB.

this is too stupid!! Any system can have inflation or deflation depending on how it is managed. If the Feds only mission was to hold inflation at 0% it would be easy enough to hold inflation at 0%.

That POV has a lot of support and so is worth talking about. Your liberal Nazi-like reinvention of the wheel is not even worth discussion because its not even close to being on the table.

this is too stupid!! Any system can have inflation or deflation depending on how it is managed. If the Feds only mission was to hold inflation at 0% it would be easy enough to hold inflation at 0%.

Stupid? Are you looking in a mirror or something? Did you forget to take your pills? Or can't you read with comprehension? Or is all you can resort in the face of the evidence I've presented is give up and start name-calling?

That POV has a lot of support and so is worth talking about. Your liberal Nazi-like reinvention of the wheel is not even worth discussion because its not even close to being on the table.

Yep, 'liberal' I'm sure is you name-calling me (I know you're not using it as a compliment, even though it doesn't apply to me), and there's no doubt about 'nazi-like', and wanting sound money without a central bank certainly isn't re-inventing the wheel, considering it was the money system in this country for almost 130 years.

When you get the Fox News brainwashing out of your head and realize that your stupid 'liberal vs. conservative' mindset is nothing more than a game foisted on you so you don't pay attention to the real issues in this country, maybe then you'll have something worthwhile to post.

this is too stupid!! Any system can have inflation or deflation depending on how it is managed. If the Feds only mission was to hold inflation at 0% it would be easy enough to hold inflation at 0%, and many want to switch to that system.

You're Nazi like reinvention of the wheel is pure nut case fantasy!! If our objective is 0% inflation then all we have to do is change the Fed mandate and its done.

Repeating yourself now? Funny thing is, I was channel surfing the other night and stopped on Fox, and noticed they too repeated themselves within 30 seconds on the newscast. Twice.

I have no ides how you think a sound money system based on a commodity is "nazi like", but I guess Godwin's Law rules supreme no matter what the subject.

 

[joewp]

The Great Depression was caused by the Fed. Benanke has acknowledged that fact.

They didn't cause it. By not boosting the money supply, they did make it much, much worse.
That's why Bernanke keeps boosting the money supply, he knows deflation would be really bad.

I see why you have trouble with this subject. Your knowledge of history is deficient. They didn't just "not boost the money supply", they actively contracted it by 1/3rd.
From Bernanke's speech I linked above:

This action stemmed the outflow of gold but contributed to what Friedman and Schwartz called a "spectacular" increase in bank failures and bank runs, with 522 commercial banks closing their doors in October alone. The policy tightening and the ongoing collapse of the banking system caused the money supply to fall precipitously, and the declines in output and prices became even more virulent.

Ya know, I have the Fed's own facts on my side and you make yours up as you go along. You have to do better than that...

Error filled? Really?

Really.

What errors did you find in Creature?

Page 26, "...the Federal Reserve System allows commercial banks to create money out of nothing".

Of course banks cannot create money out of nothing.

Page 27, "When a borrower cannot repay and there are no assets which can be taken to compensate, the bank must write off that loan as a loss. However, since most of the money originally was created out of nothing and cost the bank nothing except bookkeeping overhead, there is little of tangible value that is actually lost.

Seriously? It's hard to believe anyone takes this clown seriously.

Seriously. Why don't you post something, anything, that backs up your fantasies? I've already posted the Fed's own Modern Money Mechanics, which states banks create money when they lend it, which contradicts your 'opinion'. Who should the dear reader believe, you or the Fed?

It's amazing how you guys have the chutzpah to post anything, considering your opinions are created out of thin air, apparently. Personally, I'd be more inclined to believe someone who posts links to websites run by the very organization he opposes to prove his facts, rather than someone's unsupported 'opinions'.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The Great Depression was caused by the Fed. Benanke has acknowledged that fact.

They didn't cause it. By not boosting the money supply, they did make it much, much worse.
That's why Bernanke keeps boosting the money supply, he knows deflation would be really bad.

I see why you have trouble with this subject. Your knowledge of history is deficient. They didn't just "not boost the money supply", they actively contracted it by 1/3rd.
From Bernanke's speech I linked above:

This action stemmed the outflow of gold but contributed to what Friedman and Schwartz called a "spectacular" increase in bank failures and bank runs, with 522 commercial banks closing their doors in October alone. The policy tightening and the ongoing collapse of the banking system caused the money supply to fall precipitously, and the declines in output and prices became even more virulent.

Ya know, I have the Fed's own facts on my side and you make yours up as you go along. You have to do better than that...

Error filled? Really?

Really.

What errors did you find in Creature?

Page 26, "...the Federal Reserve System allows commercial banks to create money out of nothing".

Of course banks cannot create money out of nothing.

Page 27, "When a borrower cannot repay and there are no assets which can be taken to compensate, the bank must write off that loan as a loss. However, since most of the money originally was created out of nothing and cost the bank nothing except bookkeeping overhead, there is little of tangible value that is actually lost.

Seriously? It's hard to believe anyone takes this clown seriously.

Seriously. Why don't you post something, anything, that backs up your fantasies? I've already posted the Fed's own Modern Money Mechanics, which states banks create money when they lend it, which contradicts your 'opinion'. Who should the dear reader believe, you or the Fed?

It's amazing how you guys have the chutzpah to post anything, considering your opinions are created out of thin air, apparently. Personally, I'd be more inclined to believe someone who posts links to websites run by the very organization he opposes to prove his facts, rather than someone's unsupported 'opinions'.

I've already posted the Fed's own Modern Money Mechanics, which states banks create money when they lend it

Congratulations, you've discovered the money multiplier.
Now start your multiplication with the number zero.
Let me know what you get.

 

[joewp]

wanting sound money without a central bank certainly isn't re-inventing the wheel, considering it was the money system in this country for almost 130 years.

You might want to double check your math.

You might want to effin show me where I'm wrong with some sort of source.
I'm getting sick of your contradictatory posting style with no substance behind it. You're starting to remind me of the argument clinic.
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kQFKtI6gn9Y]Argument Clinic - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The Great Depression was caused by the Fed. Benanke has acknowledged that fact.

They didn't cause it. By not boosting the money supply, they did make it much, much worse.
That's why Bernanke keeps boosting the money supply, he knows deflation would be really bad.

I see why you have trouble with this subject. Your knowledge of history is deficient. They didn't just "not boost the money supply", they actively contracted it by 1/3rd.
From Bernanke's speech I linked above:

This action stemmed the outflow of gold but contributed to what Friedman and Schwartz called a "spectacular" increase in bank failures and bank runs, with 522 commercial banks closing their doors in October alone. The policy tightening and the ongoing collapse of the banking system caused the money supply to fall precipitously, and the declines in output and prices became even more virulent.

Ya know, I have the Fed's own facts on my side and you make yours up as you go along. You have to do better than that...

Error filled? Really?

Really.

What errors did you find in Creature?

Page 26, "...the Federal Reserve System allows commercial banks to create money out of nothing".

Of course banks cannot create money out of nothing.

Page 27, "When a borrower cannot repay and there are no assets which can be taken to compensate, the bank must write off that loan as a loss. However, since most of the money originally was created out of nothing and cost the bank nothing except bookkeeping overhead, there is little of tangible value that is actually lost.

Seriously? It's hard to believe anyone takes this clown seriously.

Seriously. Why don't you post something, anything, that backs up your fantasies? I've already posted the Fed's own Modern Money Mechanics, which states banks create money when they lend it, which contradicts your 'opinion'. Who should the dear reader believe, you or the Fed?

It's amazing how you guys have the chutzpah to post anything, considering your opinions are created out of thin air, apparently. Personally, I'd be more inclined to believe someone who posts links to websites run by the very organization he opposes to prove his facts, rather than someone's unsupported 'opinions'.

I see why you have trouble with this subject. Your knowledge of history is deficient. They didn't just "not boost the money supply", they actively contracted it by 1/3rd.

Wrong.

FDR was inaugurated on March 4, 1933, and two days later he declared a “bank holiday,” allowing banks legally to refuse withdrawals by depositors; it lasted ten days. With his famous phrase, “The only thing we have to fear is fear itself,” he intended to dissuade depositors from running on their banks, but by then it was far too late. In 1929 there were a total of 25,000 banks in the United States. As the bank holiday ended, only 12,000 banks were operating (though another 3,000 were to reopen eventually). The effect on the money supply was equally dramatic. From 1929 to 1933 it fell by 27 percent—for every $3 in circulation in 1929 (whether in currency or deposits), only $2 was left in 1933. Such a drastic fall in the money supply inevitably led to a massive decrease in aggregate demand. People’s savings were wiped out so their natural response was to save more to compensate, leading to plummeting consumption spending. Naturally, total economic output also fell dramatically: GDP was 29 percent lower in 1933 than in 1929. And the unemployment rate hit its historic high of 25 percent in 1933.

Friedman and Schwartz argued that all this was due to the Fed’s failure to carry out its assigned role as the lender of last resort. Rather than providing liquidity through loans, the Fed just watched as banks dropped like flies, seemingly oblivious to the effect this would have on the money supply. The Fed could have offset the decrease created by bank failures by engaging in bond purchases, but it did not. As Milton and Rose Friedman wrote in Free to Choose:

The [Federal Reserve] System could have provided a far better solution by engaging in large-scale open market purchases of government bonds. That would have provided banks with additional cash to meet the demands of their depositors. That would have ended—or at least sharply reduced—the stream of bank failures and have prevented the public’s attempted conversion of deposits into currency from reducing the quantity of money. Unfortunately, the Fed’s actions were hesitant and small. In the main, it stood idly by and let the crisis take its course—a pattern of behavior that was to be repeated again and again during the next two years.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

wanting sound money without a central bank certainly isn't re-inventing the wheel, considering it was the money system in this country for almost 130 years.

You might want to double check your math.

You might want to effin show me where I'm wrong with some sort of source.
I'm getting sick of your contradictatory posting style with no substance behind it. You're starting to remind me of the argument clinic.
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kQFKtI6gn9Y]Argument Clinic - YouTube[/ame]

You might want to effin show me where I'm wrong with some sort of source.

Or you could show the source of your 130 year claim?

Since you're dim, I'll do the work for you.

First US Central Bank, 1791-1811. 20 years
Second US Central Bank, 1816-1836 20 years
Third US Central Bank, 1913-present. 100 years.

A History of Central Banking in the United States | The Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis

I count 140 years where the US had a Central Bank.

Waiting for you to explain the 130 years you claim we didn't.

 

[joewp]

1)except there is no constituency at all to abolish the Fed. No one would take the chance in a million years.

Oh, I guess you missed Ron's Paul's two campaigns for president. Where the heck do you think he got his popularity from, huh? Could it be his book "End the Fed"?

Only someone in the mass media (or brainwashed by it) would say there's no constituency for eliminating the Fed.

2) before the Fed we had 3000 different currencies and back room deals to save the economy with JP Morgan!!

Um, there was only one national currency, gold and silver coins. The fact that the founders neglected to outlaw FRB and banks loaned more than they had and substituted private bank notes doesn't mean they're currency. Anyone, anytime could refused to accept a bank's note for payment and demand gold or silver.

3) to have instant sound money which many do support all we need to do is change the Fed's mandate to 0% inflation.

I guess it's over your head that when money is created with interest attached, there has to be inflation, otherwise all loans would eventually be unpayable because there would be no money to pay the interest.

Or is the simple fact that $100 created as a loan requires $105 paid back with the interest beyond your comprehension? Where the hell does the interest come from?

Huh? Please tell me, O wise one.

 

[joewp]

In your improved banking system, I put my $100 in a CD and "the bank now creates and loans $90 (or more) and loans it to another guy who simply purchases 90%(or more) of the fruit of your labor without having to do anything to deserve it"

How is that better than the way it works now?

Look, if you're going to skip over my posts, especially the one where I explained what system I thought would be good, you might as well find another thread.

What I described isn't fractional reserve banking, it's investment brokerage, and there's no money creation involved. It would be the same coin loaned out as invested.

Get your head out of your TV for a few minutes and think.