Replies

Thanks for your thoughts. It's refreshing to see a poster that understands the issues. But we need a Fredrich Hayek to explain it to the average Joe.

I'm curious why you think our government would want or need to buy out the 'Fed'. I haven't read all the details of the original Federal Reserve Act law but I don't recall it saying that a rescission of that law would necessitate a buyout of the 'Fed'.

I agree that our federal government has a good deal and that they can pass on interests costs to the taxpayer. Russo basically concludes (and mostly correctly IMO) that the 1040 taxes are to pay the 'Fed' bills. But they would also have a good deal if they just printed or created the money themselves under a Department of Treasury Monetary Service. The 1040 income taxes would continue on for the purpose of paying the remaining 'Fed' debt. After a generation or two those taxes would no longer be necessary.

So the question remains 'Why do we permit our federal government to pay interest to a private company calling itself the 'Fed' when our feds can do the same that the 'Fed' is doing?'. It really is an intriguing question and I think you hit on it with your 'servitude' 'slavery' notions. They basically want everyone in debt and loving it. As Russo's film says we are going to love driving that red Corvette while we are in debt up to our eyeballs.

So a thought experiment would be this: Assume the American people wise up and cause passage of a law to overturn the Federal Reserve Act of 1913. Despite the implausibility of that happening quickly or soon, assume that if it were to happen, what then?

All of a sudden a huge cash stream of interest on new debt would be foreclosed on and the 'Fed' beneficiaries would have an adjustment shock.

But here is a thought question, how would similar international central banks react to the US dollar in such a situation? Assuming again that they are all tied together in our 'global village', they would suddenly view the American worker as no longer a cash cow for future revenue projections. Because it is the American worker that is paying the bill in those 1040 returns and such workers would only continue to pay on the existing debt, not new debt. (Already I am making it too wordy to keep an attention span.) But the conclusion would be that other financial banks would change their currency base from US dollar to something else as they are attempting to do now because of inflation and other concerns. In other words the dollar would collapse? Maybe yes or maybe no. It depends on the resultant psychology of financial markets.

Excellent comments.

Although I wasn't there at the time, the theory is that Roosevelt declared the US was defacto bankrupt when in 1933 he forced all US citizens to sell their all their gold in exchange for Federal Reserve Notes. This was a vast liquidation of national wealth in exchange for paper money. It makes the UN Oil for Food scandal look like kids stuff.

The Federal Reserve Corporation is a stock company owned by National Banks with shares owned in proportion to their capital. I read a Federal Reserve statement that stated the corporation gives the profit it makes on the interest it charges back to the Government after taking out what it costs to run the Fed. Needless to say, they have very high costs. I have not seen any recent numbers as to how much their "donation" amounts to.

I don't want the US Government to assume the same role as the Federal Reserve. We have descended even further into tyranny through its functions. When this country was founded, money was private property. If I had a gold coin, it belonged to me. Today, all money that is not in the form of currency, actually exists in a sub-account of the Federal Reserve. Federal Reserve Notes are owned by the Federal Reserve. But we do not only not own the FRNs in our own wallet, with the recent emergency rule banning the melting of pennies, we do not own our own coinage. It is now illegal to buy pennies and do with them as you please.

Of course, the real crime is that government has so debased the currency that the last 'bullion' coin, the penny, now has more value in metal than it has as a coin.

These are not trivial concerns. They have everyday implications. If government owns the money, it has the right to tell us what usage, and purchases, are legal and what are not. They have, for example, forbidden credit card companies from processing charges relating to internet gambling, but not for example, for buying state powerball tickets.

The next step is far worse: just as felons are "debilitated" from being able to legally possess a firearm, will we come to the point where some criminals, such as drug dealers, and other unpopulars will be "debilitated" from legally possessing US currency?

So, money itself, something that government used to have to get from the citizen in taxes, now the citizen has to get it from government. And with the passage of the 16th Amendment, every dollar a person has in his wallet, no matter how he came to have it, is potentially a taxable event! It is only exempt from taxation when government decides to make it so, and of necessity every citizen is now in the position of having to prove the tax status of every penny he has.

If he fails to pay the tax and buys something with the funds, he is not only guilty of tax evasion, but of money laundering.

Thus money itself has become one of the many ways that government can keep control over citizens and insure itself an income stream from taxation. That is why I do not want the Fed to just be purchased and replaced by the US Treasury. I want the whole monster slain and for us to return to the Constitution in Exile.