What is Digg?143 Comments
- noupsell, on 07/11/2009, -5/+42It's quiet in here... can you hear your pocket being picked?
- MrFunStuff, on 07/11/2009, -3/+39"If a thorough investigation of these events brings to light conclusive evidence that the Federal Reserve has overstepped its authority and abused its power under current law ... it would be inappropriate to grant it sweeping new powers,"
Finally some common senses. - EndouOuto, on 07/11/2009, -5/+31Puhleeze, it's already a done deal. Barry won't go against his masters.
Have a look at his top donors.
http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/contrib.php?cycl ... - SmokeyBBQ, on 07/11/2009, -8/+30http://endthefed.us/
- getlogicated, on 07/11/2009, -1/+22By probe do you mean?.... naaaaah. There's not enough KY in the world for ***** that big.
- jivatmanx, on 07/11/2009, -3/+23Fed Independence = Independence from the will of the people = Undemocratic Tyranny
- method7670, on 07/11/2009, -3/+23I don't think the Fed handled the financial crisis properly, and the Fed has not been doing a good job for the last 8 years. With that being said, they don't need new powers.
- PeppermintPig, on 07/11/2009, -3/+20Some would say it's a foregone conclusion that Barack will remain defensive and/or uncritical of the Federal Reserve's operations. I would never rule out the possibility that Barack would give lip service to an action, but saying you support something and actually supporting it are two different things. I've seen a lot of that so far.
Whether or not there is success in this request, this is an excellent barometer: It advances the interests of those who seek transparency and helps determine where to focus the pressure.
In my opinion, there's no way there will ever be accountability or transparency by the Federal Reserve, as by its very nature it destroys wealth and conceals its activities to preserve its position, therefore any political pressure is only valuable insomuch as it tears away the unwarranted prestige of the Federal Reserve.
There's absolutely nothing pragmatic about assuming any promises of prosperity or transparency will sustain themselves given that these situations arose out of systemic problems not alien to any party or person interested in promising positive political action on behalf of their realization. I've yet to see a rational and consistent approach in any arena of government by Obama, specifically in relation to the financial costs and consequences of actions he's taken or claimed to have taken. - austroLogi, on 07/11/2009, -2/+16Giving more power to the fed? The feds manipulation of interest rates are the root cause of the crisis. Doesn't anyone see the inherent flaw in control the price of money. Ignoring the theory of how it creates bubbles, Do you think you can manipulate the price of something so vital to the economy without causality taking its toll?
- BotchaMcCoola, on 07/11/2009, -0/+13Let’s not forget we still have a war and economy related mystery. It has been long held that international bankers benefit from wars. Many of us were demanding to know what all the wild spending and credit demands for the wars and related contractors, nation building, bribes to the “coalition of the willing”, Sunnis, etc. would have on our economy and financial system. Just when we expected to get the discussion going there was this sudden credit emergency completely out of the blue, and blamed wholly on mortgages and new financial instruments. Then shortly after that, huge amounts of money started being given over by the politicians to the international bankers, not only in the US but among several allies as well. Let’s investigate the Fed and their international friends as closely as we can. Hard telling what kind of interesting facts will come out.
- Kate1240, on 07/11/2009, -2/+15I agree with this investigation but lets not fool ourselves, the white house will NEVER let this happen.
- SouthsideIrish, on 07/11/2009, -1/+13Yeah, LoL, when has the Fed ever done a good job?
- SilverBlade2k, on 07/11/2009, -2/+13Lets hope that this happens.
- Craig304958, on 07/11/2009, -2/+13The problem with the Fed is that it already has too much power over everybody, and its refusal to release information on where considerable amounts of public money go is unforgivable. I don't usually agree with Republicans (I like personal liberty too much) but in this case they're right - a probe is needed. And oversight.
If method7670 has been watching the Fed since 2001 my hat's off to him or her. At 23 I wasn't much aware of the Fed at all (and I'm sure that's how they like citizens to be), far less knowing even that they existed when I was 15. Forget the knee-jerk critics, kid. The more you know, the more they'll fear and loathe you, and there's nothing you can do about it anyway since they're not very reality-based. - Craig304958, on 07/11/2009, -0/+10Actually, I hate it that I agree with you. In my dream world, Obama would eventually prove to have a spine worthy of the candidate he presented himself to be and an honest intent to honor his promises, but so far...
- Craig304958, on 07/11/2009, -1/+11"Populist" is the last term I'd apply to most of those willing corporate tools. Look at their contributors and rethink any idea they represent their voters once they get to Washington.
- L0cKe, on 07/11/2009, -2/+12"Please, please, King, err, President Obama..."
Congress has the power to do this themselves and we could expect a more honest result from them.
Congress, START FULFILLING YOUR CONSTITUTIONAL ROLE! - Kate1240, on 07/11/2009, -1/+10So, with the exception of the last eight years the Fed was perfect? :-/
- humptyz, on 07/11/2009, -2/+11Glad to read this. Whether or not Obama wants to audit the Federal Reserve we have to keep the pressure on. Simply rolling over and going home because the President says, "No", or we expect him to, is only giving lip service to the idea of hating how our government is run. Thanks to all the noise surrounding the actions of the Fed more people are being exposed to alternative viewpoints about them. It is simply illogical to blindly support an organization that goes out of its way to hide its actions, especially when its actions involve public monies. Aren't you even the least bit curious as to what they're doing with our money?
If it were any other organization people would immediately think they had something to hide, but for some reason when the Fed does it people think their actions need to be kept secret. It's quite baffling, really. - method7670, on 07/11/2009, -1/+10No, but I am only 23 right now, I wasn't paying attention to the fed until around 2001, when I decided to be active in my government. Also, with that being said I'm not going to make a judgement on something I don't know enough about.
- L0cKe, on 07/11/2009, -4/+12A dollar from today equates to less than 4 cents from 1913 when the Fed began. As long as the Fed exists this trend will continue and I expect it will accelerate after the 'fast and loose' monetary policy of the past year.
- CeeAyy, on 07/11/2009, -4/+12Looking at who Barack appointed is all you need to know to figure out what he will do when it comes to the Federal Reserve. Appointing a former member of the reserve was all I needed to see to know that the fix is in.
The problem now is... voting is not an option and not voting is not an option. You can't win either way. The source has to be fixed before you can worry about what comes out of the faucet. :( - inactive, on 07/11/2009, -5/+12Audit the Fed, then End it!
- m3arvk, on 07/11/2009, -2/+9So, 17 representatives...out of 435. That's 3% who are actually worth a *****.
Unless there's something I don't know the Federal Reserve should be being investigated for their role in this financial disaster. We should _definitely_ not be trying to give them _more_ power but should probably be dissolving their existing power. - BrapAllgood, on 07/11/2009, -3/+10*****. From our beloved Constitution itself:
"Section. 8.
The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;
To borrow Money on the credit of the United States;
To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;
To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;
To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;" (TO COIN MONEY AND REGULATE THE VALUE THEREOF seems to contradict you in full, yes?)
http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitu ... - kemp34, on 07/11/2009, -2/+9Even if that is the case, rather than an alternative of letting people operate freely and determine their own medium of exchange, we give huge power to an extremely secretive private banking cartel? HUH?!
- inactive, on 07/11/2009, -4/+11Ending the Fed would cause massive inflation? Thats like saying ending the IRS would cause higher income taxes.
The Federal Reserve is the source of inflation through its expansion of the money supply. - jivatmanx, on 07/11/2009, -0/+740x Leverage is impossible without a fiat currency + Fed printing money wildly.
To add more regulations is to increase the complexity and centralization of power our system. To reduce the Federal Reserve's power is to reduce complexity and reduce centralization of power.
I'm not saying we shouldn't regulate, Just that we need to do it smartly and with simply understandable rules, such as not allowing banks to own investment houses. Allowing the fed complete free rein is not a good idea. - kemp34, on 07/11/2009, -1/+7I would rather have folks who are in some way accountable to the People as opposed to secretive private interests that have been granted a cartel monopoly on currency and credit.
Even better would be ending government monopolies altogether and allowing free people to determine what they trade in free exchange.
End the government-sponsored cartel! - whipnet, on 07/11/2009, -8/+14The jewish media will never allow an audit of the jewish federal reserve.
* - PeppermintPig, on 07/11/2009, -0/+6"I'm not saying we shouldn't regulate, Just that we need to do it smartly and with simply understandable rules, such as not allowing banks to own investment houses."
Fraud is already a crime. The 'regulation' is on the books. The will to deal with fraud and corruption on a consistent basis is not there, because the watchdogs have superiors in the chain of command/authority who are often bought and paid for. - apena89, on 07/11/2009, -1/+7@ TheTaoOfBill
Is that why our dollar is currently only worth 4 cents of what we started with? - kemp34, on 07/11/2009, -1/+6@tao: so you are saying productivity gains of the last century are due to the Fed?
Would technological and productive gains not occurred without a privately-owned banking cartel running monetary policy on a debt-based fiat currency that they have been granted a monopoly to run?
Who is to say those gains you note are not IN SPITE of the existence of the Fed? - emmeron, on 07/11/2009, -3/+8I really don't understand why people fear ending the Fed so much. We were whole as a nation, fiscally, before. We have been broken since. The dates and times and bad choices they have made line up perfectly. Yet we want them intact?
Some people just believe that they cannot be good without someone over them telling them "this is the way" and will therefor always apologize for the bad in government. Somehow these same people rant on about how good these systems are.
It's like we've got a religion of the USA. Mass stupidity. - rjey, on 07/11/2009, -5/+10Nice "progressive" left wing site you have there. It sure appears "fair and balanced".
Now instead of partisan drivel how about you read some economic web sites like http://market-ticker.denninger.net/ to get a real picture of just what is really going on in your economic world. - govtdoesnotwork, on 07/11/2009, -0/+5I suspect we'll see manipulation of gold & silver by all of the central bankers. Look how "cheap" it is when they can print 'money' for free!
http://silverstockreport.com/2009/manipulation.htm ... - RedsoxRock, on 07/11/2009, -2/+7"Don't listen to morons. End the Fed if you want massive inflation and a bankrupt nation."
I'm not a fan of ending the Fed, it does have a valuable purpose but I believe you are the moron here. The Fed is what screwed everyone, bankrupted the nation and will most likely bring on inflation (there's a chance that can be avoided but odds are bet on inflation). The Fed shouldn't be ended but rather its power significantly curtailed. It needs to be accountable to The People and shouldn't exist as an undemocratic private corporation if its actions can cause this much destruction. - jivatmanx, on 07/11/2009, -1/+6Both the house and the Senate have problems. The House's problem is that redistricting prevents 99% of districts from ever having competitive elections. This can be solved by using a single mathematical formula to apportion districts for all states, or at least requiring each states to do that.
The Senate's problem is that it is simply one massive circle jerk. There is no easy fix to this as long as corruption, wealth, etc, stay as they are in this country.
And both the house and senate absolutely, critically, need term limits. - kemp34, on 07/11/2009, -3/+8Please explain how ending the Fed would lead to massive inflation?
One alternative is to back the Dollar with silver like JFK was doing before he was assassinated. Do you posit this would lead to more inflation than under the Fed system?
Another semi-related issue is minimal reserve fractional reserve banking. There is a huge house of cards that will be extremely hard to keep in place. This is in major part due to the existence of the Fed. - MrFunStuff, on 07/11/2009, -1/+6Nobody is forgetting about the Jackasses in the Wallstreet houses, just looking at the source of the problem. There wouldn't have been such a big boom is they didn't have so much leverage (i.e there wouldn't have been such a big bust ). Walls street made stupid investments(I.e Subprime) and then our government regulators rated them triple A. It was a domino effect that started at the Fed.
Besides the Fed is a private bank just like the Wallstreet houses and they take care of each-other.
Bernanke: Why are we still listening to this guy?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HQ79Pt2GNJo&fea ...
Ron Paul - Credit Crunch
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=txhabgZF_gE - MrFunStuff, on 07/11/2009, -1/+5"Triple A? Credit ratings don't come from the government."
Sorry i should have been clearer. The rating agencies business is mandated by the government, money market funds , pension funds are required to purchase rated securities. So theirs an artificially created demand.
The Credit Rating Agencies, like Standard and Poor's and Moodys, gave AAA ratings to large numbers of securities that when bad last year. These agencies' ratings were important in part because government regulations required pension plans, insurance companies, etc, only to purchase AAA rated securities. The Credit Rating Agencies were paid by the companies they rated and also paid generous consulting fees by those companies.
The Credit Rating Agencies were thus a government and market failure that were at the center of the financial crisis. Yet, the Obama financial reform plan largely leaves the system in.
http://rightcoast.typepad.com/rightcoast/2009/06/o ...
HappyScrappy You are looking for a Fool Proof system that regulation can't provide. They may always find some way to lose their money. But in this case the government amplified the problem with cheap credit and ***** government mandated rating agencies. - BrapAllgood, on 07/11/2009, -3/+7I'd say the Fed has done a fabulous job! (...of fleecing this country for nearly 100 years...)
- BrapAllgood, on 07/11/2009, -1/+5Hey kemp34! have I mentioned lately that your heart sings with liberty and causes mine own to resonate thusly?
Just sayin'.
;) - RedsoxRock, on 07/11/2009, -0/+4Fannie and Freddie's exposure was in the Alt-A loans not subprime mortgages. These were primarily suburban mortgages whereas subprime is typically in urban areas. The subprimes were primarily held in hedge funds, US Pensions, and overseas banks. I think China held 120 billion in subprime mortgages. The subprime loans originated primarily through brokers and not as much through the banks. Brokers were completely unregulated (thanks to Congress) where there were no rules or guidelines so anything was in play. The name of the game for brokers was to make sure people didn't default within the first 60 days of the loan, after which the loan was securitized. In fact they insured the notes against default from the time they sold it to Wall Street to when Wall Street securitized it to faciilitate the sale of the note to Wall Street. Wall Street didn't want the risk of the loan defaulting from the time they bought it to when it was securitized and moved off their books.
The market for subprimes was driven because of the low interest rates on Treasuries. They were sold as safe as Treasuries (AAA) but with higher yield. That is flat out Greenspan's fault - holding interest artificially low for years created the demand therefore the market for Wall Street to move the product.
Frannie and Freddie stupidly got into the subprime game late because Countrywide refused to sell them Alt-A loans unless they took on some of their riskier loans (subprime). I would guess Wall Street was saturated with subprimes by that point and Countywide was finding the notes harder to move. So they did end up with subprime exposure but it was mimimal compared to their Alt-A exposure. - guntario, on 07/11/2009, -1/+5Really? They've only been around for less than 100 years...
- avengingturnip, on 07/12/2009, -0/+4Whether or not we have inflation is a consequence of the growth of the money supply.
- PeppermintPig, on 07/11/2009, -1/+5Precisely. Voting was, and is never enough to get the ball rolling.
There's a relationship to the size and scope of a politician's promises and the disproportionate belief by people that one man can represent so many millions of others. It causes a calcification, stunting the interest by people to deal with problems on their own, some of which is their own making, and some of which is caused by the politicians... it's actually a gradiation of the two, enabling fewer individuals the 'authority' to make decisions while magnifying the lack of accountability for them. - jbnumba1, on 07/11/2009, -1/+5I'm 22. I've known about how the Fed "works" since I was 19. I'm also more aware of politics (that matter) than anyone I really know in person (ie, Council on Foreign Relations, Bilderberg Group, Bohemian Grove, Trilateral Commission). I thank the internet for the access to information that those before me did not have.
- inactive, on 07/11/2009, -7/+11The House is made up of populist bumpkins. Representatives have become glorified city council members.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 146 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is