OT: US Pres election

[lch]

Originally Posted by JimMorrison

Because what happens when we are low on money? The "Federal Reserve" prints more, and "loans" it to us. Where do they get it? It's paper. Who are they? The heads of the largest banks in the world.

Eventually we will owe the Federal Reserve so much money, that they could declare the nation bankrupt, and attempt to seize the "hard assets" of the nation, in order to recoup their "losses" (of "paper" that they "loaned" us). We already gave them Fort Knox to "hold onto".

I don't think it can be summarized to something so easy as that. Money is actually not as easy as most people think, since as you already understand it has no real value in itself, it only has a value attributed to it. How and why money works, and what to make of it, that's a science on itself I'd say.

[Edratman]

Azelendor,

I agree entirely. But I do not think Marx would be very proud of us. I believe that he intended for the working man to reap some benefit. The G. Bush version has privitized profit and socialized the risk and burden.

[JimMorrison]

Originally Posted by lch

I don't think it can be summarized to something so easy as that. Money is actually not as easy as most people think, since as you already understand it has no real value in itself, it only has a value attributed to it. How and why money works, and what to make of it, that's a science on itself I'd say.

Until the creation of the Federal Reserve, all US currency was backed and valued with hard assets - gold and silver. The US government was the only body who could print more currency, and I would agree that I am mystified by what process they determined the value of gold and silver, and how much money could circulate based on that.

However, what I am not so confused about, is the creation of the Federal Reserve. It is a private organization, that was handed the right and responsibility of printing all US currency. They also have the right and responsibility to alter interest rates, and other economic factors - with the express purpose of NOT allowing this sort of thing to happen. But you know what? 16 years after the creation of the Fed, in 1929, we entered the darkest financial times in our nation's history - the precise situation that the creation of the Fed was supposed to preclude.

I am no conspiracy theorist. But, it doesn't take a lot of imagination to guess that if some people knew there was about to be a horrible economic downturn, they could liquify their assets, and gobble up enormous amounts of property when the market crashed.

I am not saying that happened - all I am saying is that with humanity's penchant for greed and thirst for power, it is entirely unreasonable and irresponsible to give this sort of power to the richest people in the world, without 100% transparency and oversight. But, they meet in private, and do not release any of their discussions to the public - only their conclusions and economic manipulations.

Also, I may not fully understand all of the ins and outs of our current corporate financial juggernaut - but I do know that we will always be better off with currency being based on something real and tangible, rather than an arbitrary currency that is manipulated by private hands, behind closed doors.


Possibly a $trillion bailout occurring right now. How many people have actually read the text of the bailout plan? How many people have any idea what it will actually accomplish - WHERE all of that money will end up? You see, high finance is a lot like the shell game. Once things start moving around, and things are rapidly changing hands, and there's a $trillion being tossed around - who is going to account for where that money ultimately goes?

If we can unload $13billion in unmarked, untraceable US currency on a forklift in Iraq and then lose track of it, then I would have to sadly say that we are in a position to make some disgustingly wealthy people even more money right now - just because they can slide those shells around the table so deftly.

[lch]

Originally Posted by JimMorrison

Until the creation of the Federal Reserve, all US currency was backed and valued with hard assets - gold and silver.

And horse-drawn carriages were still a common sight on the streets. Just saying. Pssst, when I was talking about "no real value", that included things like gold and silver, too. Or pebbles or shells or whatever else you use for your monetary system.

Originally Posted by JimMorrison

However, what I am not so confused about, is the creation of the Federal Reserve. It is a private organization, that was handed the right and responsibility of printing all US currency. They also have the right and responsibility to alter interest rates, and other economic factors - with the express purpose of NOT allowing this sort of thing to happen. But you know what? 16 years after the creation of the Fed, in 1929, we entered the darkest financial times in our nation's history - the precise situation that the creation of the Fed was supposed to preclude.

Which only shows the complexity of the system, to me. I have confidence that the people that print money are doing their job correctly of making some sense out of this and provide some working system for us. Which I considered extremely difficult after thinking about it for a while. Nowadays, all the money you have is just some data blip on some bank server. Not that it's to be expected, but ever considered what it would mean and what would happen if some disaster would take out all of these records? Only regarding monetary values, not any kind of chaos that might start, I mean. You seem to be under the impression that money is something that is real and can just be counted.

[Skirmisher]

Here's something for you all to chew on.

http://www.prolognet.qc.ca/clyde/illumin.htm

[lch]

I assume that was a joke.

I didn't read anything on that page because it was displayed in an unreadable way. I force-forwarded through http://www.prolognet.qc.ca/clyde/money.htm instead but it was already quite obvious that the site was built by lunatics.

[Skirmisher]

OK maybe this then.

http://www.rense.com/general83/ilum.htm

[JimMorrison]

I like that crazy emote.

Again, I'm not a conspiracy theorist, I just feel that the current system IS far too open to exploitation by people with more power than wisdom, and that many events have very much appeared to be at least minor exploitation of the system by those in control of it.


Horse drawn carriages can't perform the tasks necessary for the efficient execution of modern life. But while it is easy to see the glaring difference between legs and wheels, I do not see the same difference in transferring the currency of our monetary system from something tangible, to something intangible. Furthermore, even if we could magically agree that at the time it made sense, and that it ultimately helped our economy become what it is today (crumbling?), it is obviously not sufficient to deal with our current modern situation. It seems to me readily apparent that we have to attach our currency to something real again, so that we are not at the mercy of 7 untouchable bankers who could suddenly stumble on accident, or on purpose.

[lch]

Well, how real do you want your money to become again? Back to exchanging real goods and resources? Those three eggs and the hen in your purse could become a bit unhandy. Money has always been just a token. The simple principle is that you can give it to somebody and he gives you something in return, a good or a service. The wonder is that he actually does accept that you give him just that mere token. That only works because of trust. Trust, that this token is worth something. That's the principle on how labor can be traded. Banks only work on trust, too. No bank is able to pay back all the money of its customers if they'd all come, because that money is inaccessible, it's been given out in loans that run for years, lots of years, thirty years or more. The problem is partly because the banks started trading those debts, yes, but on the other hand it's because people were living way over what they were possibly able to pay back, too. The fun thing to consider: what we see right now is only the beginning.

[Atrocities]

Just a quick show of hands.

How many of you were for this bail out rescue bill? I was against it. Felt it wouldn't do anything to help the economy but convince people that our economy is weak. Whenever you need the government, by extension us, to bail a market out of trouble, your stating that that market is weak. Rapid sell off shall ensue.

Those fat cat rat bastards on wall street took our 401k funds, money we invested, and retired on it laughing all the way to the bank to cash their 20 million plus dollar bonus checks, then leave their company to cry wolf and beg for government help.

This bail out bill was just some scam to rip us off even more so that fat cats from AIG could go on some half a billion dollar retreat after being bailed out. WTF?? I say again, WTF!!!

HEADS NEED TO ROLL!