News:

Welcome to week4paug.net 2.1 - same as it ever was! Most features have been restored, but please keep us posted on ANY issues you may be having HERE:  https://week4paug.net/index.php/topic,23937

Main Menu

9/11> a discussion

Started by susep, June 18, 2006, 01:10:55 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

sophist

The mini-documentary is severely flawed in how it draws its premises and conclusion.  The choice of language is intentionally inflammatory and misleading in certain ways.  The first clip introduces the concept of no-interest money printing and proceeds to lay out how the government (specifically the Central Bank) has a monopoly on printing money.  The interest is an incentive to keep the amount of money in circulation in check, if you print too much money, then the dollar will devalue.  Its a built in system of checks.  See Zimbabwe as a prime example of why a country needs this system.  To remove the federal reserve is akin to switching to a barter system.   

Two, its not private banks that print money, so the video attacks private organizations rather than bad bureaucratic decisions (you see this in the Jefferson quote).    So this premise is an outright distortion of reality.  It next proceeds to layout how the money supply has increased since the beginning of the Federal Reserve Act, and falsely does so by assuming that such expansion is unethical.  If one thinks about it for a moment, it is obvious that expansion of the money supply is due to expansion of an economy.  The 1900's saw the USA economy grow drastically, such growth with no increase in the money supply is counterintuitive to basic macroeconomics.  The money supply has a direct correlation with supply and demand of the markets.  If the number of businesses increases, then more money is required for that business to operate, as not creating new money would imply some businesses may have to wait to acquire the money in circulation before they may operate. 

Three, the argument against removing the gold standard is incredibly short sighted and inaccurate.  Having a tangible asset as a means to back up money is foolish.  Gold is a limited supply, and thus the possibility exists where the value of paper money is dependent on a constant circulation of gold.  If the supply of gold decreases, then the value of the dollar decreases, which is far more detrimental to the American economy than how the video describes the gold standard as keeping "value" in the pockets of Americans.  A country also defines the "value" of gold, and thus could value gold at zero, making it worthless. 

This particular point in the documentary is nothing more than a weak conspiracy theory, which makes the "god" argument via private organizations.  The notion that banks want to "enslave" the population is whimsical at best.  Can people make money off of tragedy?  Yes; however, more money can be made from success, which is what the federal reserve strives for at all times.  Remember the employees of the fed are ELECTED by an independent board, so a shitty job output equals termination.  Let us get back to the "god" argument:  the argument is as follows:

(i) entity is omnipotent
(ii) entity is omniscient
------------------------
Therefore, entity controls "environment"

This strain of thinking is also similar to that of many 09/11 conspiracy theories as well.  The fault of premises lies in the assumption that such entities are all powerful and such capitalistic institutions are always intrinsically malign.  This is a huge logical fallacy to assume the parts represent the agenda and ideology of the whole.  Further, the argument assumes the Modus Ponens format, but wrongly presents "Q" to be present rather than "P." 

If "P," then "Q"
Q
----------------
Therefore P

The implication wrongly asserts the conditions and thus is illogical and an invalid premise.  This false premise can also be presented in the false dilemma format, which is still invalid.   


We see this in the documentary as an argument as to how the bankers came to "power."  The argument in the documentary also incorporates (no pun intended) several straw man arguments, which deflect the viewer from sound reasoning.  The first straw man is the "fed is a corporation " argument, a simple google debunks this myth.  The federal reserve exists outside the normal realm of government, so it will not be influenced by the extended realm of special interests groups in Washington and/or any part of the USA government.  The reserve isn't in the business of making money like a corporation, and the documentary attempts to paint it that way.  The use of interest allows the bank to cover its overhead, a concept the documentary completely ignores.  The federal reserve has the same pay grade as any other branch of the government, and again the video ignores this fact. 

   
The high salary is 300,000 plus, but ask yourself what does the president make? 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/President_of_the_United_States#Salary
QuoteTraditionally, the president is the highest-paid public employee. President Bush currently earns $400,000 per year, along with a $50,000 expense account, a $100,000 nontaxable travel account, and $19,000 for entertainment

So as I stated, the federal reserve pay rate is similar to the government pay rate.  Another article on federal pay rates: 
     
http://www.fedsmith.com/article/1023/
QuoteAnd, in response to the numerous readers who said that the average salary figure was misleading and that we should use the median figure rather than the average figure, we contacted the Office of Personnel Management for the information. The public affairs office was very helpful and quickly provided the information. So, according to OPM, here is the median adjusted base pay for Executive branch (non-postal) employees as of March 2006:$60,636.


The second straw man presented is that of the "Us versus Them" implication, which the documentary attempts to demonstrate through loosely based quotes and out of context facts.  Dividing people is an easy way to distract the viewer from actually analyzing the topic at hand.  Further, the documentary also contains an Ad Hominem approach to the topic, and as a result any attempt to fix the current failures of the federal reserve is lost, and one is left to incorrectly question the existence of the federal reserve. 

I'll throw out an inductive argument to prove my point.  If the federal reserve didn't exist, how would this country manage its currency?  Letting one of the three branches manage it is tantamount to shifting the equal balance of checks to that of unequal balance of checks.  Congressman and Senators can't even pass a bill without pork, do want that approach to printing more money and thus devaluing the currency?  Private organization(s) would lead to discrepancies in overall value, and create nothing but confusion amongst the public: which institution should I trust? 

The fed, while not perfect, is essential to our economy and pursuit of being economically competitive in today's ever changing global market. 
Can we talk about the Dead?  I'd love to talk about the fucking Grateful Dead, for once, can we please discuss the Grateful FUCKING Dead!?!?!?!

susep

Quote from: Sophist on March 30, 2008, 05:22:12 PM
I'll throw out an inductive argument to prove my point.  If the federal reserve didn't exist, how would this country manage its currency? 

not sure, I'm sure we could think of something.

Quote from: Sophist on March 30, 2008, 05:22:12 PM
Letting one of the three branches manage it is tantamount to shifting the equal balance of checks to that of unequal balance of checks.  Congressman and Senators can't even pass a bill without pork, do want that approach to printing more money and thus devaluing the currency? 

I'm into the idea we can evolve out of "money" yet retaining a value system that is based on more then straight greed.

Quote from: Sophist on March 30, 2008, 05:22:12 PM
Private organization(s) would lead to discrepancies in overall value, and create nothing but confusion amongst the public: which institution should I trust? 

I thought the fed was, essentially a private organization?


Quote from: Sophist on March 30, 2008, 05:22:12 PM
The fed, while not perfect, is essential to our economy and pursuit of being economically competitive in today's ever changing global market. 

phan, how will the fed change if the Amero is introduced?  Will it morph into part of a Amero fed?

sophist

Quote from: susep73 on March 31, 2008, 11:11:36 PM
I'm into the idea we can evolve out of "money" yet retaining a value system that is based on more then straight greed.
Values are subjective, a currency is objective (it is quantified).  Money and its value is that of a social contract, as we all consent to the set value.  Removing such a contract is tantamount to allowing asymmetrical knowledge of worth to create an unfair market place.  How do you know you got a good deal on a house, the latest cd, etc?  The worth of similar products measured against a standard.  If no such standard exists, then the value becomes relative.  This puts the seller and the consumer and risk of being abused.  Also, I don't see how the the concept of money is evil, as an inanimate object can't be evil, or do evil.  Only human beings commit evil acts.     

Quote from: susep73 on March 31, 2008, 11:11:36 PM
I thought the fed was, essentially a private organization?
Your original conclusion was a faulty syllogism.  Just because an entity has the properties of a definition, it doesn't make it that defined entity.  The narrator of the video presents that "claim," but he is wrong.  A simple wikipedia search revealed that it isn't a private organization. 

QuoteThe Federal Reserve System (also the Federal Reserve; informally The Fed) is the central banking system of the United States. Created in 1913 by the enactment of the Federal Reserve Act, it is a quasi-public (part private, part government) banking system[1] composed of (1) the presidentially-appointed Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System in Washington, D.C.; (2) the Federal Open Market Committee; (3) 12 regional Federal Reserve Banks located in major cities throughout the nation acting as fiscal agents for the U.S. Treasury, each with its own nine-member board of directors; (4) numerous private U.S. member banks, which subscribe to required amounts of non-transferable stock in their regional Federal Reserve Banks; and (5) various advisory councils. Currently, Ben Bernanke serves as the Chairman of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System.


Quote from: susep73 on March 31, 2008, 11:11:36 PM
phan, how will the fed change if the Amero is introduced?  Will it morph into part of a Amero fed?
That's a good question.  First, I'd like to clarify a few points about the Euro.  The Euro is an accounting and reserve currency, that is you need the local currency of countries in order to partake in local economic activities.  Even though the Euro exists, I can still partake in arbitrage using British and Italian currency.  As a single currency, its intent was to promote an environment of fair trade, versus that of free trade.  Here is a site which does currency conversion: http://www.xe.com/ucc/   
and here is the current list of countries who use the Euro: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union

Notice that all the countries in the EU also list their individual currencies on the exchange site.  The Euro does stabilize the economic inequalities to a certain degree, but it also limits the potential for countries of lesser economic strength to prosper during certain market conditions.  It also removes the ability of an individual state to dictate its monetary policy, which I feel to be very important. 

Now, on to your question.  The fed will still exist if we adopt the EU model and create an Amero.  If we took it a step further, then the possibility does exist that the fed would be removed and replaced by an American bank (one which prints currencies for all involved in the American union). 

Can we talk about the Dead?  I'd love to talk about the fucking Grateful Dead, for once, can we please discuss the Grateful FUCKING Dead!?!?!?!

Marmar

#303
all I want to add is this:

Yes, the Fed is a Privately owned corporation...Look up this case stated below....

QuoteLewis v. United States, 680 F.2d 1239 (1982)
John L. Lewis, Plaintiff/Appellant,
v.
United States of America, Defendant/Appellee.

No. 80-5905
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted March 2, 1982.
Decided April 19, 1982.
As Amended June 24, 1982.

Plaintiff, who was injured by vehicle owned and operated by a federal reserve bank, brought action alleging jurisdiction under the Federal Tort Claims Act. The United States District Court for the Central District of California, David W. Williams, J., dismissed holding that federal reserve bank was not a federal agency within meaning of Act and that the court therefore lacked subject-matter jurisdiction. Appeal was taken. The Court of Appeals, Poole, Circuit Judge, held that federal reserve banks are not federal instrumentalities for purposes of the Act, but are independent, privately owned and locally controlled corporations.

Affirmed.

So....why is it that the only time before the Fed the US ever had a recession was during the civil war.....? Ever since the Fed, look at the craziness.....You also understand that with the coming of the Amero, it means the end of national sovereignty for Mexico, Canada, and the US? NAFTA was the first step....the SPP was part 2.....this economic crisis is part 3......The Fed engineered this.....Did you know that JP Morgan Chase is a primary shareholder of the Fed? Think about that with the Bear Sterns fiasco.....research it....you'll be amazed.

Google some things about the European Union and you'll see they are ramming it down the member states throats against the wishes of the inhabitants of the countries......Same thing will happen here.....How would you like someone in Mexico making laws that will ultimately affect you here in the US or Canada? Not cool.

Back to the Fed for a moment....

Ok...so written in our constitution is something that states that Congress has the right to coin and print our money (to paraphrase)......So wait.....our own government can make it's own money without the need to borrow it from a central bank (which is what the Fed is), therefore forgoing the need to repay any interest......interesting to say the least......IF Congress abolished the Fed, and restored the printing and coining responsibilities back to the Dept. of Treasury......WOW.....no more borrowing money from our central bank.....You are aware that the instant a single penny, nickel, dime, quarter, half-dollar, $1, $5, $10, etc...is coined/printed and placed into circulation we begin paying interest on it? WTF is up with that? It's OUR money.....OUR wealth.....Did you know the Fed doesn't even release to anyone how much money they print and put into circulation? It's called M3. It's "privately estimated". So how bad is it that the bank that is in control of our money supply (which ultimately determines its value since it is a fiat currency) doesn't even know how much money we have in circulation? Do you know what backs our currency? All of our land, infrastructure, and natural resources.....Think about what would happen if any one country we borrow from to pay our $1,000,000 a day operating costs made a margin call on us.....OR....decided to dump our currency as their reserve currency........that's right.....total takeover......

This, along with the IRS, is the biggest hoodwink ever pulled on the American people.

**edit**
Here's an interesting read....it is where my quote came from...fully sourced, and you can look up each case stated to read the rulings......

http://www.save-a-patriot.org/files/view/frcourt.html


This is the conclusion if you wish to not read the entire page:

QuoteIt is clear from this that in some circumstances, the Federal Reserve Bank can be considered a government "instrumentality", but cannot be considered a "federal agency", because the term carries with it the assumption that the federal government has direct oversight over what the Fed does. Of course it does not, because most people who know about this subject know that the Fed is "politically independent."

The only area where one might disagree with the judge's decision is where he states that the Fed furthers the federal government's fiscal policy, and therefore performs an important governmental function. While we would like to think that the federal government and the Fed work cooperatively with each other, and they may on occasion, the Fed is by no means required to do so. One example is where Rep. Wright Patman, Chairman of the House Banking Committee, said in the Congressional Record back in the '60s, that depending on the temperament of the Fed's Chairman, sometimes the Fed worked with the government's fiscal policy, and other times either went in the complete opposite direction, or threatens to do so in order to influence policy.

The common claim that the Fed is accountable to the government, because it is required to report to Congress on its activities annually, is incorrect. The reports to Congress mean little unless what the Chairman reports can be verified by complete records. From its founding to this day, the Fed has never undergone a complete independent audit. Congress time after time has requested that the Fed voluntarily submit to a complete audit, and every time, it refuses.

Those in the know about the Fed, realize that it does keep certain records secret. The soon-to-be-former Chairman of the House Banking Committee, Henry Gonzales, has spoken on record repeatedly about how the Fed at one point says it does not have certain requested records, and then it is found through investigation that it in fact does have those records, or at least used to. It would appear that the Fed Chairman can say anything he wants to to Congress, and they'll have to accept what he says, because verification of what he says is not always possible.
Who's the Marmar? I'm the Marmar!!!

Phish doesn't write beautiful music...the beautiful music happens after the written parts.

<gainesvillegreen> now, if they could get their sound to be as good as the lights, we'd have a band hee-yah!!

Music is what feelings sound like.

sophist

Quote from: Marmar on April 02, 2008, 01:34:39 AM
So....why is it that the only time before the Fed the US ever had a recession was during the civil war.....? Ever since the Fed, look at the craziness.....You also understand that with the coming of the Amero, it means the end of national sovereignty for Mexico, Canada, and the US? NAFTA was the first step....the SPP was part 2.....this economic crisis is part 3......The Fed engineered this.....Did you know that JP Morgan Chase is a primary shareholder of the Fed? Think about that with the Bear Sterns fiasco.....research it....you'll be amazed.
The laws of statistical probability dictate otherwise, its a coincidence at best.  What your arguing is like that of the numerologists, who claim the truth to 09/11 can be found within the number of letters in names, dates, and places. 

Quote from: Marmar on April 02, 2008, 01:34:39 AM
IF Congress abolished the Fed, and restored the printing and coining responsibilities back to the Dept. of Treasury......WOW.....no more borrowing money from our central bank.....You are aware that the instant a single penny, nickel, dime, quarter, half-dollar, $1, $5, $10, etc...is coined/printed and placed into circulation we begin paying interest on it? WTF is up with that? It's OUR money.....OUR wealth.....Did you know the Fed doesn't even release to anyone how much money they print and put into circulation?
You really want to put congress in charge of printing money?  Have you seen the recent approvel ratings?

Quote from: Marmar on April 02, 2008, 01:34:39 AM
It's called M3. It's "privately estimated". So how bad is it that the bank that is in control of our money supply (which ultimately determines its value since it is a fiat currency) doesn't even know how much money we have in circulation? Do you know what backs our currency? All of our land, infrastructure, and natural resources.....Think about what would happen if any one country we borrow from to pay our $1,000,000 a day operating costs made a margin call on us.....OR....decided to dump our currency as their reserve currency........that's right.....total takeover......
You have the wrong name for m3 and the wrong definition (the money supply is measured in M0), it is called the "broadest measure of money," as it includes m1+m2 in its definition. 
The formula for M3:
M2 + all large time deposits, institutional money-market funds, short-term repurchase agreements, along with other larger liquid assets

Remember, M2= M1 + all time-related deposits, savings deposits, and non-institutional money-market funds. M2 is a broader classification of money than M1. Economists use M2 when looking to quantify the amount of money in circulation and trying to explain different economic monetary conditions.

and M1= M0 + demand deposits, which are checking accounts. This is used as a measurement for economists trying to quantify the amount of money in circulation. The M1 is a very liquid measure of the money supply, as it contains cash and assets that can quickly be converted to currency.

and finally M0= Physical currency. A measure of the money supply which combines any liquid or cash assets held within a central bank and the amount of physical currency circulating in the economy. M0 (M-zero) is the most liquid measure of the money supply. It only includes cash or assets that could quickly be converted into currency. This measure is known as narrow money because it is the smallest measure of the money supply 


M0 is calculated every year. 

Quote from: Marmar on April 02, 2008, 01:34:39 AM
Here's an interesting read....it is where my quote came from...fully sourced, and you can look up each case stated to read the rulings......

http://www.save-a-patriot.org/files/view/frcourt.html

The site you cited is ideologically biased if you ask me, as the language used contains an abundance of libertarian like buzz words.  The first line is a tautology:
 
QuoteIt is clear from this that in some circumstances, the Federal Reserve Bank can be considered a government "instrumentality", but cannot be considered a "federal agency"
An instrument is used by entities, and agencies act on behalf of entities. 

QuoteThe only area where one might disagree with the judge's decision is where he states that the Fed furthers the federal government's fiscal policy, and therefore performs an important governmental function. While we would like to think that the federal government and the Fed work cooperatively with each other, and they may on occasion, the Fed is by no means required to do so.
If the government controlled the fed, then the government would continue to print money for its pork barrel projects.  Giving the government an outright license to print money is a bad idea, and it seems to be argument of this article.  As I have stated, the interest rate keeps us in check, and keeps us from having to peg our currency, which is the result of governments that print too much money






Can we talk about the Dead?  I'd love to talk about the fucking Grateful Dead, for once, can we please discuss the Grateful FUCKING Dead!?!?!?!

Marmar

You have been hoodwinked....

THE FED IS A PRIVATELY OWNED BANK THAT USES THE GOVERNMENT FOR ENFORCEMENT OF ITS POLICIES.

Just google " FED Privately Owned"

Just answer this one simple question.....Why is our government, which was given the authority to coin/print its own money via the constitution, forced to borrow money from a privately owned central bank?

Fiat currency is a BAD idea....it's always vulnerable to inflation....which is devaluing of the currency. The FED, ie- the Central Bank of the US, creates money out of THIN AIR with no attached value.....and for every note printed, we (the american people) are forced to pay interest on it......If that isn't a rigged system in favor of the banks, I don't know what is.

The Creature From Jekyll Island: A Second Look At The Federal Reserve. Find a copy and read it.....read their charter....The only reality is that HARD CURRENCY is the only stable form of money.

Who's the Marmar? I'm the Marmar!!!

Phish doesn't write beautiful music...the beautiful music happens after the written parts.

<gainesvillegreen> now, if they could get their sound to be as good as the lights, we'd have a band hee-yah!!

Music is what feelings sound like.

sophist

You just reposted the same shit except worded differently, which has been debunked already in my last two posts in this thread.  Don't waste your time dressing up the same argument.   

 


Can we talk about the Dead?  I'd love to talk about the fucking Grateful Dead, for once, can we please discuss the Grateful FUCKING Dead!?!?!?!

susep

I agree with Mar that the Fed is bad news for the United States.  Lets go back to the gold standard.  The framers were adamant about the dangers of a centralized bank.  Franklin said it was a major force as to why the American revolution began, breaking free from England's Central Bank. 
Phan I'd like to hear some candid ideas as to why you think the Fed is a good thing? 

Marmar

Exactly....

Why is it good to pay interest on something that is OURS to begin with?

Look through history at all the fights within our government against centralized banking.....when we gave in, in 1913, we effectively handed control of our government over to the bankers.

Speaking of gold....anyone looked into the gold connection and 9/11?
Who's the Marmar? I'm the Marmar!!!

Phish doesn't write beautiful music...the beautiful music happens after the written parts.

<gainesvillegreen> now, if they could get their sound to be as good as the lights, we'd have a band hee-yah!!

Music is what feelings sound like.

sophist

#309
Quote from: susep73 on April 09, 2008, 11:26:50 PM
Phan I'd like to hear some candid ideas as to why you think the Fed is a good thing? 

Congress can't even balance a budget and you want them to print money.  That is a horrible idea, due to the fact they would only print more money to pay off the deficit.  The fed isn't perfect, but it is a necessary entity to avoid more bad decisions by our government.  The people at the central bank all have economic/finance backgrounds.  Congress will only do what is needed to get reelected each term, while the fed isn't limited to time periods for employment.   

Quote from: Marmar on April 10, 2008, 01:39:10 AM
Exactly....

Why is it good to pay interest on something that is OURS to begin with?
Have you ever borrowed money from a bank for free?  I'll answer that for you: no.  The bank does the government a service, and the charge for the service is the interest rate.  Governments that print their own money are unstable, this is a fact.  So this continued talking point is moot.  You have about 350 years of financial history that contradicts this silly little theory you keep perpetuating.   Look at countries like Zimbabwe, Communist Russia, etc.  Here is a link, scroll down and look at the currency rankings, you'll notice a common theme of the bottomed ranked currencies, at one time they printed their own money, and are now in a state of financial distress/bankruptcy.     

Quote from: Marmar on April 10, 2008, 01:39:10 AM
Look through history at all the fights within our government against centralized banking.....when we gave in, in 1913, we effectively handed control of our government over to the bankers.

Speaking of gold....anyone looked into the gold connection and 9/11?
More unprovable conspiracy theories.  Just because you perceive a connection doesn't equate to an actual connection.  Further, the best thing for a bank is to loan at high interest rates, AND THE FED'S RATE HAS BEEN CONSTANT since its creation.  The facts continue to contradict this perceived inside job of the "evil" capitalist bankers.  Using the rudimentary concepts of logic we can debunk this theory.  I'll quote myself:

Quote...which makes the "god" argument via private organizations.  The notion that banks want to "enslave" the population is whimsical at best.  Can people make money off of tragedy?  Yes; however, more money can be made from success, which is what the federal reserve strives for at all times.  Remember the employees of the fed are ELECTED by an independent board, so a shitty job output equals termination.  Let us get back to the "god" argument:  the argument is as follows:

(i) entity is omnipotent
(ii) entity is omniscient
------------------------
Therefore, entity controls "environment"

This strain of thinking is also similar to that of many 09/11 conspiracy theories as well.  The fault of premises lies in the assumption that such entities are all powerful and such capitalistic institutions are always intrinsically malign.  This is a huge logical fallacy to assume the parts represent the agenda and ideology of the whole.  Further, the argument assumes the Modus Ponens format, but wrongly presents "Q" to be present rather than "P."

If "P," then "Q"
Q
----------------
Therefore P

The implication wrongly asserts the conditions and thus is illogical and an invalid premise.  This false premise can also be presented in the false dilemma format, which is still invalid.   

Take a second to really think about how many people would be involved and stay involved in order to keep this "operation" quite.  Pascal's triangle also debunks this as it shows the introduction of more units (aka people) involved equates to a higher probability of failure. 
Can we talk about the Dead?  I'd love to talk about the fucking Grateful Dead, for once, can we please discuss the Grateful FUCKING Dead!?!?!?!

sophist

#310
I have some more free time now, so I can really elaborate on why I feel the U.S. government must use a centralized bank.  I'm going to assume neither of you is familiar with financial engineering, so I will briefly explain the concept and how it relates to banking and examples of how it gets misused, which results in financial misfortune.  The most obvious examples of misuse is Enron, and a close second is the current sub-prime mortgage situation.  Both events occurred because of circumventing banks. 

Financial Engineering- is a concept that involves minimizing the risk of an investment by circumventing the normal factors that produce risk, and using a non-bank source as a way to store and distribute money to other parties. 

The problem with this concept is that eventually it becomes so watered down that the entities involved can no longer be monitored to ensure proper execution.  This is how Enron was able to make profits for its CEO's and bankrupt the company.  An accurate audit becomes incredibly difficult and time consuming, since the money is spread out through an abundance of financial entities.  This is made possible by asset securitization, which is defined as:

"A structured finance process, which involves pooling and repackaging of cash-flow producing financial assets into securities that are then sold to investors. The name "securitization" is derived from the fact that the form of financial instruments used to obtain funds from the investors are securities.  All assets can be securitized so long as they are associated with cash flow. Hence, the securities, which are the outcome of securitiztion processes, are termed asset-backed securities (ABS). From this perspective, securitization could also be defined as a financial processes leading to an emission of ABS."

This process relies heavily on tangible assets (i.e. cash flow); however, we can replace cash flow with say gold as you have suggested, and now have a situation where a bank is no longer involved (like the fed).  What if the value of gold decreases?  The company is screwed if gold is their main ABS.  The supply of gold isn't infinite, nor do we know with certainty that it would maintain, increase, or decrease in value.  These factors make for a slippery slope for a country to back its currency with gold.  Fiat currency is defined at a certain rate and then subject to relative market conditions.  The U.S. has one of the more stable economies in the world, and as a result many countries have purchased the dollar and made it a reserve currency, thus ensuring its stability.  The euro is another currency which is fiat, just as the Chinese and Japanese currency are also fiat.  Hard currency has an abundance of disadvantages:

QuoteFirst, since a note has no intrinsic value, there was nothing to stop issuing authorities from printing more of it than they had specie to back it with.

Second, because it created money that did not exist, it increased inflationary pressures, a fact observed by David Hume in the 18th century. The result is that paper money would often lead to an inflationary bubble, which could collapse if people began demanding hard money, causing the demand for paper notes to fall to zero. The printing of paper money was also associated with wars, and financing of wars, and therefore regarded as part of maintaining a standing army.

For these reasons, paper currency was held in suspicion and hostility in Europe and America. It was also addictive, since the speculative profits of trade and capital creation were quite large. Major nations established mints to print money and mint coins, and branches of their treasury to collect taxes and hold gold and silver stock.

The creation of the central bank did several important things:
01) reduced number of vendors able to print money and thus reduced risk of possible inflation
02) secured value of currency on the world market, and preventing huge fluctuations in the relative value of the U.S. dollar
03) Provided the proof that improper valuation of the dollar leads to economic chaos domestic and abroad. 

Another point to made is Gresham's law which was created in 1896 and how it is a two way street:
"Money overvalued by the State will drive money undervalued by the State out of circulation."

This point was part of the collapse of Communist Russia, as the state overvalued its dollar and failed to utilize fiat money concepts.  Gold can be overvalued if its defined to be overvalued.  The currency of other countries keeps the American dollar at its real value (i.e. we allow our currency to float).  A tangible asset backed system (like gold) is a sure fire way to peg a currency and the result will eventually be a massive devaluation of said currency. 

-------------------------------------
Links to scholarly studies:
The use of inputs by the Federal Reserve System:
An extended model*


Research activities and budget allocations among Federal
Reserve Banks: Comment


A theory of the bureaucratic value of Federal Reserve
operating procedures



 

The studies range from the early 80's - 2000.  All have a common theme, the fed is necessary for monetary policy, and the fed is influenced by the federal government, which debunks the Fed is controlling the government myth.   
Can we talk about the Dead?  I'd love to talk about the fucking Grateful Dead, for once, can we please discuss the Grateful FUCKING Dead!?!?!?!

susep

Quote from: Marmar on April 10, 2008, 01:39:10 AM
Look through history at all the fights within our government against centralized banking.....when we gave in, in 1913, we effectively handed control of our government over to the bankers.

Speaking of gold....anyone looked into the gold connection and 9/11?


sophist

So Aaron Russo's whole "theory" comes from an encounter that cannot be confirmed.  That sales me  :roll: 

This sounds like a bad movie plot to me.  To take this at face value is no different than accepting any other propaganda at face value.  Further, a quick search on wikipedia reveals that Russo was deep within the libertarian party.  A party than yearns to push the country towards Anarcho-capitalism.  An ideology that furthers the concept of social and economic injustice.  It seems Russo started this crusade because he failed to pay income taxes:
QuoteThe film was made after Russo had over $2 million of tax liens filed against him by the Internal Revenue Service, the state of California, and the state of New York for unpaid taxes. In an interview with the New York Times, however, Russo refused to discuss the liens, saying they were not relevant to his film

For those that don't know, a lien is:
Quotea lien imposed on property by law to secure payment of taxes. Tax liens may be imposed for delinquent taxes owed on real property or personal property, or as a result of failure to pay income taxes or other taxes.

Sounds to me like it was a personal quest against the IRS rather than a mission to reveal the truth to the public.  He got caught withholding taxes and it appears everything afterward was either revenge or some perpetuated form of paranoia.  I'd hardly call any of this credible, and I raise the question:  If this was so secret and the bankers are so powerful, why would they allow him to publicly speak about their plan? 
I guess they gave him cancer, that has to be the only feasible explanation.   :roll:   
Can we talk about the Dead?  I'd love to talk about the fucking Grateful Dead, for once, can we please discuss the Grateful FUCKING Dead!?!?!?!

susep

Quote from: Sophist on April 12, 2008, 01:57:35 PM
I'd hardly call any of this credible, and I raise the question:  If this was so secret and the bankers are so powerful, why would they allow him to publicly speak about their plan? 
I guess they gave him cancer, that has to be the only feasible explanation.   :roll:   

Russo had cancer because of poor genetics.  The bankers whole idea according to Russo is, to have everybody chipped.  Personally I don't see the idea of chipping going very far, only those who are easily brainwashed.

Marmar

#314
fiat currency always ends up blowing out....a crucial point is when the increase in money supply or the drop in basic money stock makes it impossible for a government to improve its financial position so everyone has less buying power.....my youtube post pointed that out....hyperinflation effectively wipes out the purchasing power of private and public savings, distorts the economy in favor of extreme consumption and hoarding of real assets....and take a look at what's going on right now......try and find silver bullion (19 major suppliers are OUT OF STOCK).....look at the price of gold/silver/platinum vs. the dollar.....banks folding.....no investment.....higher taxes....etc....it's happening right now.


Hungary...
Yugoslavia....
Mexico....
Greece...
Russia....
Germany.....

All their economies blew out.....fiat currency is BAD, BAD, BAD......and it's one of the main reasons I moved ALL my assets into private gold/silver and their related holdings.....my ass is protected from losing ALL my savings as the currency devalues more and more with each passing day.....it's private, and non-taxable.....so the government can kiss my lilly white ass as they try and destroy the middle class.

Who's the Marmar? I'm the Marmar!!!

Phish doesn't write beautiful music...the beautiful music happens after the written parts.

<gainesvillegreen> now, if they could get their sound to be as good as the lights, we'd have a band hee-yah!!

Music is what feelings sound like.