Right now the Federal Reserve is above scrutiny, criticism or penalty. Its a kingdom of banking, trust us or else.

Thats all you need to know.

I MEANT TO, BRIGHT BOY.

Did you have something for us or did you really want us to read some other Liebertarian’s opinion?

Good posts. I disagree with your statement that the FED is not a bank. True, it isn’t in the classical sense that I could open an account. Instead, it is a Central Bank.

Every country (except a few floundering dictatorships) has a Central Bank. To the best of my knowledge, all other Central Banks are much closer controlled by their governments than is the FED, yet they also have a greater degree of independence than does a private bank.

The FED is created by Congress and may be dissolved, altered, or whatever else by Congress too. It reports to Congress. Yet, we want the FED to retain its independence so it is not influenced by politics or the whims of Congress. Congress already controls fiscal policy, they shouldn’t also have the monetary policy control too.

(oops, I used fiscal and monetary policy. That will really confuse the hell out of the Liebertarians)

But your comments are smack on. It is really too bad that the ijits have no idea what the hell they are whining about.

Obviously you have no idea how stupid you really are. You have no idea what you are writing about and yet you want us to think you are an expert. Shit, with all due respect to ‘JimR’, your English comprehension is better than your economics comprehension.

The answer is NO, money is NOT the same today as it was 200 years ago. Economics, besides not even being a discipline then, is much different for the same reason.

Ron Paul is right. The Federal Reserve needs to go away and the power to create and regulate the country’s money supply needs to return to its rightful place – Congress, as the Constitution mandates.

Shining a little light on the Fed will make the cockroaches scurry for the exits. This is long overdue and just the first step in America taking back its monetary system from the banker created monopoly that is the Federal Reserve Bank.

But, money & the basics of economics is the same. So, you have no point…

I’m sorry you cannot ascertain the relevance of Jackson’s misgivings about the 2nd U.S. bank and how they may apply to the current Federal Reserve.

I’m sorry you insist upon using the doings of 160 years ago over a different institution to what is happening today. Have you ever heard the expression “apples and oranges”?

When there is no transparency, an oft used construct of Obama BTW, in an institution one has to question why.

WOW, a twofer! You managed to slam your favorite whipping boy and get in a point. If you had bothered to read my previous posts then you would know I am very much in favor of auditing the Fed.

It would seem by your response that you could care less about the details of what the Federal Reserve is doing and why.

Where did I write anything even remotely suggesting that?

Instead you choose to call Jefferson and Jackson dumb ‘ol farmers who like other Southerners long for free trade, …

No, I didn’t call them “dumb ol farmers”. I pointed out 200 years ago agrarian statesmen had a different agenda. It would appear that your knowledge of history is extremely limited if you suggest either Jefferson or Jackson were economic experts or ever worked for the expansion of America’s industrial base. Their policies were more in tune with expanding agriculture and contrasted with the Northern States push for more money.

… which is ironic since Clinton, Bush and Obama have no problems with free trade.

Which is to be expected among those who view is larger than either Jefferson or Jackson. It has been America’s industrial base which made her strong. Since Presidents Grant, all American Presidents have worked to expand the economy. Some more so and some better than the others.

All one need do is look at the number of people employed in each sector to get an indication of the strength and importance of each.

As far as teetering on the verge of bankruptcy, …

Another ad hominem which has nothing to do with the issue.

Given the power of the N.Y. Fed, it is time to ask some very hard questions about its recent performance. The first question to ask is: Who is the New York Fed? Who exactly has been running the show? Yes, we all know that Tim Geithner was the president and CEO of the N.Y. Fed from 2003 until his ascension as treasury secretary. But who chose him for that position, and to whom did he report? The N.Y. Fed president reports to, and is chosen by, the Fed board of directors.

So who selected Geithner back in 2003? Well, the Fed board created a select committee to pick the CEO. This committee included none other than Hank Greenberg, then the chairman of AIG; John Whitehead, a former chairman of Goldman Sachs; Walter Shipley, a former chairman of Chase Manhattan Bank, now JPMorgan Chase; and Pete Peterson, a former chairman of Lehman Bros. It was not a group of typical depositors worried about the security of their savings accounts but rather one whose interest was in preserving a capital structure and way of doing business that cried out for – but did not receive – harsh examination from the N.Y. Fed.

http://tinyurl.com/raqwfz

No, we don’t need transparency . . .

People may think he supports the Fed but he doesn’t. If anything, he blames the Great Depression on the Fed for not doing what it was supposed to do — injecting the reserve cash on hand to banks who were failing. He thinks they depression could have been avoided if the Fed wasn’t in existence because the problem would have resolved itself the same way it did in 1907.

My pet CT is that the Fed let the small non-Fed banks fail, thus leaving only themselves in control of the money.

What the Fed does now is not injecting reserve cash, but printing it and injecting it (thus inflating the supply). Very Bad.

My head is in a pitcher of Kool Aid, while you guys go out every day and use dollars, buy things on credit, and put your money in the very system you claim to be fraudulent and a complete farce. Or do you have bricks of gold buried in your backyard and trade those when you want to put fuel in your car?

Yeah It’s obvious I don’t know anything about global finance. OK fine. How about read Milton Friedman and Anna J. Schwartz’ A Monetary History of the United States, 1867-1960 and then get back to me.

Only if the dollar has no inherent value due to it being fraudulent in the 1st place…

I could go on but it is clear that you don’t understand the basic principles of money…