Skip to comments.Nightmare Scenario: The Fed Outlives the US Federal Government
Posted on 10/03/2010 8:17:48 PM PDT by tired1
Many assume that the Fed would not survive a dissolution of the US Federal Government. However, that is not true: The Fed will only dissolve when its intellectual property (e.g., the "dollar") no longer has value, and the Fed shareholders decide to liquidate assets. If people still want dollars, the Fed exists. Since the dollar is an unsecured claim on Fed assets, even if people do not want dollars, the Fed remains one of the largest real property owners in the United States (through its mortgage securities and stock market holdings).
(Excerpt) Read more at zerohedge.com ...
Yup, and one of them has eaten this author’s brain.
They don’t own MY house.
Try explaining this to the average dolt.
It could perhaps survive as a corporation. But the Fed wouldn’t last a day as a bank, let alone a central bank, without the governments legal tender laws.
One of the founders of the Rothschild dynasty is supposed to have said something like “Give me the power to control a nation’s money system, and it doesn’t matter who writes or controls its laws...”
“Give me control of a nation’s money
and I care not who makes the laws.”
A govt somewhere has first dubs on it. It could never be paid off.
A simple switch to silver coins would end the fed. not too complicated.
I can see people implementing such solutions on a local scale in the iimediate future. In fact, I’ve been trying to figure ways to implement such practices.
It already is a private corporation and always has been since its founding.
Here's an idea: have Congress de-authorize the Fed, and pull its corporate charter, so that the shell entity, asset-less Fed whose US debt was all denominated in Federal Reserve Notes is stuck with the obligation to pay all the debt it then holds.
The US re-asserts its abrogated Constitutional power to coin money (silver) and regulate the value thereof backed by a basket of assets to include national (now also completely de-regulated in this scenario) oil wealth, et. al.
World bankers are on the hook for the phony value of all the phony fiat paper the Fed ever issued. Those assholes could charge themselves paper asset interests til the cows come home, or more likely the Fed just declares insolvency and folds.
America's backed dollar becomes the bed rock world reserve currency as fiat money around the globe collapses.
Sound like a plan?
Imagine the look on Soros and all the Rothschild remnant family bankers faces.
Andrew Jackson de-chartered the euro-controlled Bank of the United States in 1832. A recession happened in 1837, but we made it through that and dealt with Barbary pirates at the same time and the Mexicans shortly thereafter.
The euro bank houses tried to get their money back by financing the trade to support the South in the Civil War, split the Union and re-claim all then assets -- a divide and conquer strategy -- and they failed because Lincoln financed his end of the war with United States Notes, better known as "Lincoln Greenbacks."
History can repeat, and indebtedness to this current cabal who trade on margins and practice theivery-through-currency-debasement. Perpetual indebtedness need not be our gandchildrens' fate.
And the President brave enough to stand up to them, like Lincoln (or even Kennedy who wanted to declaw the Fed -- and I am no Kennedy fan either), may take a bullet for it too.
Do you know how much those coins are worth in today’s silver valuation?
A thousand dollars ($1000.00) face value worth of American silver coinage costs thirteen thousand dollars ($13,000.00) today when purchased as junk silver!
Nopw. No loans on it.
The "dollar" isn't a claim on anything. This article is wrong. (And it's not a dollar either.)
ML/NJ (in Jerusalem)
The Federal Government itself will exist until the dollar loses all value, so it and the Fed are lashed to the same mast.
For the last hundred years we've all been paying interest on money which banks create out of thin air and loan into circulation. Governments could as easily create money them self and no interest would be due. The biggest problem which US governments have had in the past with fiat money was the British counterfeiting it and in todays age when 97% of all money exists as computer entries, that would be a lot harder.
Banks don't create money out of thin air. Every loan is fully funded. Deposits are larger than loans.
Governments could as easily create money them self and no interest would be due.
Is interest due on the $20s in your wallet? Who do you pay? How much?
Don’t you ever get tired of exposing yourself as an idiot?
What I don’t understand is why you think you made any kind of point whatsoever.
You are right: the tea tax was just a poster child for the unrest "brewing" over here.
There were also the Townshend Act and the Intolerable Acts all exrtracted for the purpose of propping up the East India Company and the BofE who financed them.
Franklin has often been credited with observing: "The colonies would gladly have borne the little tax on tea and other matters had it not been that England took away from the colonies their money, which created unemployment and dissatisfaction."
The Stamp tax and Tea tax were as emblematic of the plight of colonists back then as is the Income tax for us today.
The bank at issue then was the Bank of England, chartered as it was a mere 60-70 years before (in 1694 actually) the American revolution.
The story is still the same: currency manipulation now as then.
Rothschilds made a killing through short selling and insider trading on the outcome of Napoleaon's defeat and Britain's subsequent war indebtedness. Jackson saw the same thing would happen here and killed the BofUS charter. War in Mexico indebted Maximillian to the Rothschilds, who was became a menace to Lincoln. they failed to permanently divide the US.
The last attempt to control US indebtednes from Europe was opposed by the "free silver" movement. It's what William Jennings Byran's 1896 "Cross of Gold" speach was all about. He like Kucinich today was overcome by political progressivism in the name of independent populism -- though I will give him credit for winning the debate against John Scopes -- though Hollywood doen't recount the story that way.
I don't know what Bryan's position was on the Federal Reserve Act.
I never get tired of pointing out your errors.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.