Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Mandrake Mechanism-(How the Fed Creates Money)
The Creature from Jekyll Island -Book Excerpt ^ | May 1998 | G. Edward Griffin

Posted on 04/09/2003 8:05:10 AM PDT by AdamSelene235

 

Chapter Ten

THE MANDRAKE 
MECHANISM

The Method by which the Federal Reserve creates money out of nothing; the concept of usury as the payment of interest on pretended loans; the true cause of the hidden tax called inflation; the way in which the Fed creates boom-bust cycles.

 

In the 1940s, there was a comic strip character called Mandrake the Magician. His specialty was creating things out of nothing and, when appropriate, to make them disappear back into that same void. It is fitting, therefore, that the process to be described in this section should be named in his honor.

In the previous chapters, we examined the technique developed by the political and monetary scientists to create money out of nothing for the purpose of lending. This is not an entirely accurate description because it implies that money is created first and then waits for someone to borrow it. On the other hand, textbooks on banking often state that money is created out of debt. This also is misleading because it implies that debt exists first and then is converted into money. In truth, money is not created until the instant it is borrowed. It is the act of borrowing which causes it to spring into existence. And, incidentally, it is the act of paying off the debt that causes it to vanish.1  There is no short phrase that perfectly describes that process. So, until one is invented along the way, we shall continue using the phrase "create money out of nothing" and occasionally add "for the purpose of lending" where necessary to further clarify the meaning.

So, let us now...see just how far this money/debt-creation process has been carried -- and how it works.

The first fact that needs to be considered is that our money today has no gold or silver behind it whatsoever. The fraction is not 54% nor 15%. It is 0%. It has traveled the path of all previous fractional money in history and already has degenerated into pure fiat money. The fact that most of it is in the form of checkbook balances rather than paper currency is a mere technicality; and the fact that bankers speak about "reserve ratios" is eye wash. The so-called reserves to which they refer are, in fact, Treasury bonds and other certificates of debt. Our money is pure fiat through and through.

The second fact that needs to be clearly understood is that, in spite of the technical jargon and seemingly complicated procedures, the actual mechanism by which the Federal Reserve creates money is quite simple. They do it exactly the same way the goldsmiths of old did except, of course, the goldsmiths were limited by the need to hold some precious metals in reserve, whereas the Fed has no such restriction.

the federal reserve is candid

The Federal Reserve itself is amazingly frank about this process. A booklet published by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York tells us: "Currency cannot be redeemed, or exchanged, for Treasury gold or any other asset used as backing. The question of just what assets 'back' Federal Reserve notes has little but bookkeeping significance."2

Elsewhere in the same publication we are told: "Banks are creating money based on a borrower's promise to pay (the IOU)...Banks create money by 'monetizing' the private debts of businesses and individuals."3

In a booklet entitled Modern Money Mechanics, the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago says:

In the United States neither paper currency nor deposits have value as commodities. Intrinsically, a dollar bill is just a piece of paper. Deposits are merely book entries. Coins do have some intrinsic value as metal, but generally far less than their face amount.

What, then, makes these instruments -- checks, paper money, and coins -- acceptable at face value in payment of all debts and for other monetary uses? Mainly, it is the confidence people have that they will be able to exchange such money for other financial assets and real goods and services whenever they choose to do so. This partly is a matter of law; currency has been designated "legal tender" by the government -- that is, it must be accepted.4

In the fine print of a footnote in a bulletin of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, we find this surprisingly candid explanation: 

Modern monetary systems have a fiat base -- literally money by decree -- with depository institutions, acting as fiduciaries, creating obligations against themselves with the fiat base acting in part as reserves. The decree appears on the currency notes: "This note is legal tender for all debts, public and private." While no individual could refuse to accept such money for debt repayment, exchange contracts could easily be composed to thwart its use in everyday commerce. However, a forceful explanation as to why money is accepted is that the federal government requires it as payment for tax liabilities. Anticipation of the need to clear this debt creates a demand for the pure fiat dollars.5

money would vanish without debt

It is difficult for Americans to come to grips with the fact that their total money supply is backed by nothing but debt, and it is even more mind boggling to visualize that, if everyone paid back all that was borrowed, there would be no money left in existence. That's right, there would not be one penny in circulation -- all coins and all paper currency would be returned to bank vaults -- and there would be not one dollar in any one's checking account. In short, all money would disappear.

Marriner Eccles was the Governor of the Federal Reserve System in 1941. On September 30 of that year, Eccles was asked to give testimony before the House Committee on Banking and Currency. The purpose of the hearing was to obtain information regarding the role of the Federal Reserve in creating conditions that led to the depression of the 1930s. Congressman Wright Patman, who was Chairman of that committee, asked how the Fed got the money to purchase two billion dollars worth of government bonds in 1933. This is the exchange that followed.

ECCLES: We created it.
PATMAN: Out of what?
ECCLES: Out of the right to issue credit money.
PATMAN: And there is nothing behind it, is there, except our government's credit?
ECCLES: That is what our money system is. If there were no debts in our money system, there wouldn't be any money.

It must be realized that, while money may represent an asset to selected individuals, when it is considered as an aggregate of the total money supply, it is not an asset at all. A man who borrows $1,000 may think that he has increased his financial position by that amount but he has not. His $1,000 cash asset is offset by his $1,000 loan liability, and his net position is zero. Bank accounts are exactly the same on a larger scale. Add up all the bank accounts in the nation, and it would be easy to assume that all that money represents a gigantic pool of assets which support the economy. Yet, every bit of this money is owed by someone. Some will owe nothing. Others will owe many times what they possess. All added together, the national balance is zero. What we think is money is but a grand illusion. The reality is debt.

Robert Hemphill was the Credit Manager of the Federal Reserve Bank in Atlanta. In the foreword to a book by Irving Fisher, entitled 100% Money, Hemphill said this:

If all the bank loans were paid, no one could have a bank deposit, and there would not be a dollar of coin or currency in circulation. This is a staggering thought. We are completely dependent on the commercial banks. Someone has to borrow every dollar we have in circulation, cash, or credit. If the banks create ample synthetic money we are prosperous; if not, we starve. We are absolutely without a permanent money system. When one gets a complete grasp of the picture, the tragic absurdity of our hopeless situation is almost incredible -- but there it is.6

With the knowledge that money in America is based on debt, it should not come as a surprise to learn that the Federal Reserve System is not the least interested in seeing a reduction in debt in this country, regardless of public utterances to the contrary. Here is the bottom line from the System's own publications. The Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia says: "A large and growing number of analysts, on the other hand, now regard the national debt as something useful, if not an actual blessing....[They believe] the national debt need not be reduced at all."7  

The Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago adds: "Debt -- public and private -- is here to stay. It plays an essential role in economic processes.... What is required is not the abolition of debt, but its prudent use and intelligent management."8

what's wrong with a little debt?

There is a kind of fascinating appeal to this theory. It gives those who expound it an aura of intellectualism, the appearance of being able to grasp a complex economic principle that is beyond the comprehension of mere mortals. And, for the less academically minded, it offers the comfort of at least sounding moderate. After all, what's wrong with a little debt, prudently used and intelligently managed? The answer is nothing, provided the debt is based on an honest transaction. There is plenty wrong with it if it is based upon fraud.

An honest transaction is one in which a borrower pays an agreed upon sum in return for the temporary use of a lender's asset. That asset could be anything of tangible value. If it were an automobile, for example, then the borrower would pay "rent." If it is money, then the rent is called "interest." Either way, the concept is the same.

When we go to a lender -- either a bank or a private party -- and receive a loan of money, we are willing to pay interest on the loan in recognition of the fact that the money we are borrowing is an asset which we want to use. It seems only fair to pay a rental fee for that asset to the person who owns it. It is not easy to acquire an automobile, and it is not easy to acquire money -- real money, that is. If the money we are borrowing was earned by someone's labor and talent, they are fully entitled to receive interest on it. But what are we to think of money that is created by the mere stroke of a pen or the click of a computer key? Why should anyone collect a rental fee on that?

When banks place credits into your checking account, they are merely pretending to lend you money. In reality, they have nothing to lend. Even the money that non-indebted depositors have placed with them was originally created out of nothing in response to someone else's loan. So what entitles the banks to collect rent on nothing? It is immaterial that men everywhere are forced by law to accept these nothing certificates in exchange for real goods and services. We are talking here, not about what is legal, but what is moral. As Thomas Jefferson observed at the time of his protracted battle against central banking in the United States, "No one has a natural right to the trade of money lender, but he who has money to lend."9

third reason to abolish the system

Centuries ago, usury was defined as any interest charged for a loan. Modern usage has redefined it as excessive interest. Certainly, any amount of interest charged for a pretended loan is excessive. The dictionary, therefore, needs a new definition. Usury: The charging of any interest on a loan of fiat money.

Let us, therefore, look at debt and interest in this light. Thomas Edison summed up the immorality of the system when he said:

People who will not turn a shovel of dirt on the project nor contribute a pound of materials will collect more money...than will the people who will supply all the materials and do all the work.10

Is that an exaggeration? Let us consider the purchase of a $100,000 home in which $30,000 represents the cost of the land, architect's fee, sales commissions, building permits, and that sort of thing and $70,000 is the cost of labor and building materials. If the home buyer puts up $30,000 as a down payment, then $70,000 must be borrowed. If the loan is issued at 11% over a 30-year period, the amount of interest paid will be $167,806. That means the amount paid to those who loan the money is about 2 1/2 times greater than paid to those who provide all the labor and all the materials. It is true that this figure represents the time-value of that money over thirty years and easily could be justified on the basis that a lender deserves to be compensated for surrendering the use of his capital for half a lifetime. But that assumes the lender actually had something to surrender, that he had earned the capital, saved it, and then loaned it for construction of someone else's house. What are we to think, however, about a lender who did nothing to earn the money, had not saved it, and, in fact, simply created it out of thin air? What is the time-value of nothing?

As we have already shown, every dollar that exists today, either in the form of currency, checkbook money, or even credit card money -- in other words, our entire money supply -- exists only because it was borrowed by someone; perhaps not you, but someone. That means all the American dollars in the entire world are earning daily and compounding interest for the banks which created them. A portion of every business venture, every investment, every profit, every transaction which involves money -- and that even includes losses and the payment of taxes -- a portion of all that is earmarked as payment to a bank. And what did the banks do to earn this perpetually flowing river of wealth? Did they lend out their own capital obtained through investment of stockholders? Did they lend out the hard-earned savings of their depositors? No, neither of these were their major source of income. They simply waved the magic wand called fiat money.

The flow of such unearned wealth under the guise of interest can only be viewed as usury of the highest magnitude. Even if there were no other reasons to abolish the Fed, the fact that it is the supreme instrument of usury would be more than sufficient by itself.

who creates the money to pay the interest?

One of the most perplexing questions associated with this process is "Where does the money come from to pay the interest?" If you borrow $10,000 from a bank at 9%, you owe $10,900. But the bank only manufactures $10,000 for the loan. It would seem, therefore, that there is no way that you -- and all others with similar loans -- can possibly pay off your indebtedness. The amount of money put into circulation just isn't enough to cover the total debt, including interest. This has led some to the conclusion that it is necessary for you to borrow the $900 for interest, and that, in turn, leads to still more interest. The assumption is that, the more we borrow, the more we have to borrow, and that debt based on fiat money is a neverending spiral leading inexorably to more and more debt.

This is a partial truth. It is true that there is not enough money created to include the interest, but it is a fallacy that the only way to pay it back is to borrow still more. The assumption fails to take into account the exchange value of labor. Let us assume that you pay back your $10,000 loan at the rate of approximately $900 per month and that about $80 of that represents interest. You realize you are hard pressed to make your payments so you decide to take on a part-time job. The bank, on the other hand, is now making $80 profit each month on your loan. Since this amount is classified as "interest," it is not extinguished as is the larger portion which is a return of the loan itself. So this remains as spendable money in the account of the bank. The decision then is made to have the bank's floors waxed once a week. You respond to the ad in the paper and are hired at $80 per month to do the job. The result is that you earn the money to pay the interest on your loan, and -- this is the point -- the money you receive is the same money which you previously had paid. As long as you perform labor for the bank each month, the same dollars go into the bank as interest, then out of the revolving door as your wages, and then back into the bank as loan repayment.

It is not necessary that you work directly for the bank. No matter where you earn the money, its origin was a bank and its ultimate destination is a bank. The loop through which it travels can be large or small, but the fact remains all interest is paid eventually by human effort. And the significance of that fact is even more startling than the assumption that not enough money is created to pay back the interest. It is that the total of this human effort ultimately is for the benefit of those who create fiat money. It is a form of modern serfdom in which the great mass of society works as indentured servants to a ruling class of financial nobility.

understanding the illusion

That's really all one needs to know about the operation of the banking cartel under the protection of the Federal Reserve. But it would be a shame to stop here without taking a look at the actual cogs, mirrors, and pulleys that make the magical mechanism work. It is a truly fascinating engine of mystery and deception. Let us, therefore, turn our attention to the actual process by which the magicians create the illusion of modern money. First we shall stand back for a general view to see the overall action. Then we shall move in closer and examine each component in detail.

the mandrake mechanism: an overview

The entire function of this machine is to convert debt into money. It's just that simple. First, the Fed takes all the government bonds which the public does not buy and writes a check to Congress in exchange for them. (It acquires other debt obligations as well, but government bonds comprise most of its inventory.) There is no money to back up this check. These fiat dollars are created on the spot for that purpose. By calling those bonds "reserves," the Fed then uses them as the base for creating 9 additional dollars for every dollar created for the bonds themselves. The money created for the bonds is spent by the government, whereas the money created on top of those bonds is the source of all the bank loans made to the nation's businesses and individuals. The result of this process is the same as creating money on a printing press, but the illusion is based on an accounting trick rather than a printing trick. The bottom line is that Congress and the banking cartel have entered into a partnership in which the cartel has the privilege of collecting interest on money which it creates out of nothing, a perpetual override on every American dollar that exists in the world. Congress, on the other hand, has access to unlimited funding without having to tell the voters their taxes are being raised through the process of inflation. If you understand this paragraph, you understand the Federal Reserve System.

Now for a more detailed view. There are three general ways in which the Federal Reserve creates fiat money out of debt. One is by making loans to the member banks through what is called the Discount Window. The second is by purchasing Treasury bonds and other certificates of debt through what is called the Open Market Committee. The third is by changing the so-called reserve ratio that member banks are required to hold. Each method is merely a different path to the same objective: taking IOUs and converting them into spendable money.

THE DISCOUNT WINDOW

The Discount Window is merely bankers' language for the loan window. When banks run short of money, the Federal Reserve stands ready as the "bankers' bank" to lend it. There are many reasons for them to need loans. Since they hold "reserves" of only about one or two per cent of their deposits in vault cash and eight or nine per cent in securities, their operating margin is extremely thin. It is common for them to experience temporary negative balances caused by unusual customer demand for cash or unusually large clusters of checks all clearing through other banks at the same time. Sometimes they make bad loans and, when these former "assets" are removed from their books, their "reserves" are also decreased and may, in fact, become negative. Finally, there is the profit motive. When banks borrow from the Federal Reserve at one interest rate and lend it out at a higher rate, there is an obvious advantage. But that is merely the beginning. When a bank borrows a dollar from the Fed, it becomes a one-dollar reserve. Since the banks are required to keep reserves of only about ten per cent, they actually can loan up to nine dollars for each dollar borrowed.11 

Let's take a look at the math. Assume the bank receives $1 million from the Fed at a rate of 8%. The total annual cost, therefore, is $80,000 (.08 X $1,000,000). The bank treats the loan as a cash deposit, which means it becomes the basis for manufacturing an additional $9 million to be lent to its customers. If we assume that it lends that money at 11% interest, its gross return would be $990,000 (.11 X $9,000,000). Subtract from this the bank's cost of $80,000 plus an appropriate share of its overhead, and we have a net return of about $900,000. In other words, the bank borrows a million and can almost double it in one year.12  That's leverage! But don't forget the source of that leverage: the manufacture of another $9 million which is added to the nation's money supply.

THE OPEN MARKET OPERATION

The most important method used by the Federal Reserve for the creation of fiat money is the purchase and sale of securities on the open market. But, before jumping into this, a word of warning. Don't expect what follows to make any sense. Just be prepared to know that this is how they do it.

The trick lies in the use of words and phrases which have technical meanings quite different from what they imply to the average citizen. So keep your eye on the words. They are not meant to explain but to deceive. In spite of first appearances, the process is not complicated. It is just absurd.

THE MANDRAKE MECHANISM: A DETAILED VIEW

                                                        Start with...

GOVERNMENT DEBT

The federal government adds ink to a piece of paper, creates impressive designs around the edges, and calls it a bond or Treasury note. It is merely a promise to pay a specified sum at a specified interest on a specified date. As we shall see in the following steps, this debt eventually becomes the foundation for almost the entire nation's money supply.13  In reality, the government has created cash, but it doesn't yet look like cash. To convert these IOUs into paper bills and checkbook money is the function of the Federal Reserve System. To bring about that transformation, the bond is given to the Fed where it is then classified as a...

SECURITIES ASSET

An instrument of government debt is considered an asset because it is assumed the government will keep its promise to pay. This is based upon its ability to obtain whatever money it needs through taxation. Thus, the strength of this asset is the power to take back that which it gives. So the Federal Reserve now has an "asset" which can be used to offset a liability. It then creates this liability by adding ink to yet another piece of paper and exchanging that with the government in return for the asset. That second piece of paper is a...

FEDERAL RESERVE CHECK

There is no money in any account to cover this check. Anyone else doing that would be sent to prison. It is legal for the Fed, however, because Congress wants the money, and this is the easiest way to get it. (To raise taxes would be political suicide; to depend on the public to buy all the bonds would not be realistic, especially if interest rates are set artificially low; and to print very large quantities of currency would be obvious and controversial.) This way, the process is mysteriously wrapped up in the banking system. The end result, however, is the same as turning on government printing presses and simply manufacturing fiat money (money created by the order of government with nothing of tangible value backing it) to pay government expenses. Yet, in accounting terms, the books are said to be "balanced" because the liability of the money is offset by the "asset" of the IOU. The Federal Reserve check received by the government then is endorsed and sent back to one of the Federal Reserve banks where it now becomes a...

GOVERNMENT DEPOSIT

Once the Federal Reserve check has been deposited into the government's account, it is used to pay government expenses and, thus, is transformed into many...

GOVERNMENT CHECKS

These checks become the means by which the first wave of fiat money floods into the economy. Recipients now deposit them into their own bank accounts where they become...

COMMERCIAL BANK DEPOSITS

Commercial bank deposits immediately take on a split personality. On the one hand, they are liabilities to the bank because they are owed back to the depositors. But, as long as they remain in the bank, they also are considered as assets because they are on hand. Once again, the books are balanced: the assets offset the liabilities. But the process does not stop there. Through the magic of fractional-reserve banking, the deposits are made to serve an additional and more lucrative purpose. To accomplish this, the on-hand deposits now become reclassified in the books and called...

BANK RESERVES

Reserves for what? Are these for paying off depositors should they want to close out of their accounts? No. That's the lowly function they served when they were classified as mere assets. Now that they have been given the name of "reserves," they become the magic wand to materialize even larger amounts of fiat money. This is where the real action is: at the level of the commercial banks. Here's how it works. The banks are permitted by the Fed to hold as little as 10% of their deposits in "reserve." That means, if they receive deposits of $1 million from the first wave of fiat money created by the Fed, they have $900,000 more than they are required to keep on hand ($1 million less 10% reserve). In bankers' language, that $900,000 is called...

EXCESS RESERVES

The word "excess" is a tipoff that these so-called reserves have a special destiny. Now that they have been transmuted into an excess, they are considered as available for lending. And so in due course these excess reserves are converted into...

BANK LOANS

But wait a minute. How can this money be loaned out when it is owned by the original depositors who are still free to write checks and spend it any time they wish? The answer is that, when the new loans are made, they are not made with the same money at all. They are made with brand new money created out of thin air for that purpose. The nation's money supply simply increases by ninety per cent of the bank's deposits. Furthermore, this new money is far more interesting to the banks than the old. The old money, which they received from depositors, requires them to pay out interest or perform services for the privilege of using it. But, with the new money, the banks collect interest, instead, which is not too bad considering it cost them nothing to make. Nor is that the end of the process. When this second wave of fiat money moves into the economy, it comes right back into the banking system, just as the first wave did, in the form of...

MORE COMMERCIAL BANK DEPOSITS

The process now repeats but with slightly smaller numbers each time around. What was a "loan" on Friday comes back into the bank as a "deposit" on Monday. The deposit then is reclassified as a "reserve" and ninety per cent of that becomes an "excess" reserve which, once again, is available for a new "loan." Thus, the $1 million of first wave fiat money gives birth to $900,000 in the second wave, and that gives birth to $810,000 in the third wave ($900,000 less 10% reserve). It takes about twenty-eight times through the revolving door of deposits becoming loans becoming deposits becoming more loans until the process plays itself out to the maximum effect, which is...

BANK FIAT MONEY = UP TO 9 TIMES GOVERNMENT

The amount of fiat money created by the banking cartel is approximately nine times the amount of the original government debt which made the entire process possible.14  When the original debt itself is added to that figure, we finally have...

TOTAL FIAT MONEY = UP TO 10 TIMES GOVERNMENT

The total amount of fiat money created by the Federal Reserve and the commercial banks together is approximately ten times the amount of the underlying government debt. To the degree that this newly created money floods into the economy in excess of goods and services, it causes the purchasing power of all money, both old and new, to decline. Prices go up because the relative value of the money has gone down. The result is the same as if that purchasing power had been taken from us in taxes. The reality of this process, therefore, is that it is a...

HIDDEN TAX = UP TO 10 TIMES THE NATIONAL DEBT

Without realizing it, Americans have paid over the years, in addition to their federal income taxes and excise taxes, a completely hidden tax equal to many times the national debt! And that still is not the end of the process. Since our money supply is purely an arbitrary entity with nothing behind it except debt, its quantity can go down as well as up. When people are going deeper into debt, the nation's money supply expands and prices go up, but when they pay off their debts and refuse to renew, the money supply contracts and prices tumble. That is exactly what happens in times of economic or political uncertainty. This alternation between period of expansion and contraction of the money supply is the underlying cause of...

BOOMS, BUSTS, AND DEPRESSIONS

Who benefits from all of this? Certainly not the average citizen. The only beneficiaries are the political scientists in Congress who enjoy the effect of unlimited revenue to perpetuate their power, and the monetary scientists within the banking cartel called the Federal Reserve System who have been able to harness the American people, without their knowing it, to the yoke of modern feudalism.

Reserve Ratios

The previous figures are based on a "reserve" ratio of 10% (a money-expansion ratio of 10-to-1). It must be remembered, however, that this is purely arbitrary. Since the money is fiat with no previous-metal backing, there is no real limitation except what the politicians and money managers decide is expedient for the moment. Altering this ratio is the third way in which the Federal Reserve can influence the nation's supply of money. The numbers, therefore, must be considered as transient. At any time there is a "need" for more money, the ratio can be increased to 20-to-1 or 50-to-1, or the pretense of a reserve can be dropped altogether. There is virtually no limit to the amount of fiat money that can be manufactured under the present system.

NATIONAL DEBT NOT NECESSARY FOR INFLATION

Because the Federal Reserve can be counted on to "monetize" (convert into money) virtually any amount of government debt, and because this process of expanding the money supply is the primary cause of inflation, it is tempting to jump to the conclusion that federal debt and inflation are but two aspects of the same phenomenon. This, however, is not necessarily true. It is quite possible to have either one without the other.

The banking cartel holds a monopoly in the manufacture of money. Consequently, money is created only when IOUs are "monetized" by the Fed or by commercial banks. When private individuals, corporations, or institutions purchase government bonds, they must use money they have previously earned and saved. In other words, no new money is created, because they are using funds that are already in existence. Therefore, the sale of government bonds to the banking system is inflationary, but when sold to the private sector, it is not. That is the primary reason the United States avoided massive inflation during the 1980s when the federal government was going into debt at a greater rate than ever before in its history. By keeping interest rates high, these bonds became attractive to private investors, including those in other countries.15  Very little new money was created, because most of the bonds were purchased with American dollars already in existence. This, of course, was a temporary fix at best. Today, those bonds are continually maturing and are being replaced by still more bonds to include the original debt plus accumulated interest. Eventually this process must come to an end and, when it does, the Fed will have no choice but to literally buy back all the debt of the '80s -- that is, to replace all of the formerly invested private money with newly manufactured fiat money -- plus a great deal more to cover the interest. Then we will understand the meaning of inflation. 

On the other side of the coin, the Federal Reserve has the option of manufacturing money even if the federal government does not go deeper into debt. For example, the huge expansion of the money supply leading up to the stock market crash in 1929 occurred at a time when the national debt was being paid off. In every year from 1920 through 1930, federal revenue exceeded expenses, and there were relatively few government bonds being offered. The massive inflation of the money supply was made possible by converting commercial bank loans into "reserves" at the Fed's discount window and by the Fed's purchase of banker's acceptances, which are commercial contracts for the purchase of goods.

Now the options are even greater. The Monetary Control Act of 1980 has made it possible for the Creature to monetize virtually any debt instrument, including IOUs from foreign governments. The apparent purpose of this legislation is to make it possible to bail out those governments which are having trouble paying the interest on their loans from American banks. When the Fed creates fiat American dollars to give foreign governments in exchange for their worthless bonds, the money path is slightly longer and more twisted, but the effect is similar to the purchase of U.S. Treasury Bonds. The newly created dollars go to the foreign governments, then to the American banks where they become cash reserves. Finally, they flow back into the U.S money pool (multiplied by nine) in the form of additional loans. The cost of the operation once again is born by the American citizen through the loss of purchasing power. Expansion of the money supply, therefore, and the inflation that follows, no longer even require federal deficits. As long as someone is willing to borrow American dollars, the cartel will have the option of creating those dollars specifically to purchase their bonds and, by so doing, continue to expand the money supply.

We must not forget, however, that one of the reasons the Fed was created in the first place was to make it possible for Congress to spend without the public knowing it was being taxed. Americans have shown an amazing indifference to this fleecing, explained undoubtedly by their lack of understanding of how the Mandrake Mechanism works. Consequently, at the present time, this cozy contract between the banking cartel and the politicians is in little danger of being altered. As a practical matter, therefore, even though the Fed may also create fiat money in exchange for commercial debt and for bonds of foreign governments, its major concern likely will be to continue supplying Congress.

The implications of this fact are mind boggling. Since our money supply, at present at least, is tied to the national debt, to pay off that debt would cause money to disappear. Even to seriously reduce it would cripple the economy.16  Therefore, as long as the Federal Reserve exists, America will be, must be, in debt.

The purchase of bonds from other governments is accelerating in the present political climate of internationalism. Our own money supply increasingly is based upon their debt as well as ours, and they, too, will not be allowed to pay it off even if they are able. 

EXPANSION LEADS TO CONTRACTION

While it is true that the Mandrake Mechanism is responsible for the expansion of the money supply, the process also works in reverse. Just as money is created when the Federal Reserve purchases bonds or other debt instruments, it is extinguished by the sale of those same items. When they are sold, the money is given back to the System and disappears into the inkwell or computer chip from which it came. Then, the same secondary ripple effect that created money through the commercial banking system causes it to be withdrawn from the economy. Furthermore, even if the Federal Reserve does not deliberately contract the money supply, the same result can and often does occur when the public decides to resist the availability of credit and reduce its debt. A man can only be tempted to borrow, he cannot be forced to do so.

There are many psychological factors involved in a decision to go into debt that can offset the easy availability of money and a low interest rate: A downturn in the economy, the threat of civil disorder, the fear of pending war, an uncertain political climate, to name just a few. Even though the Fed may try to pump money into the economy by making it abundantly available, the public can thwart that move simply by saying no, thank you. When this happens, the olds debts that are being paid off are not replaced by new ones to take their place, and the entire amount of consumer and business debt will shrink. That means the money supply also will shrink, because, in modern America, debt is money. And it is this very expansion and contraction of the monetary pool -- a phenomenon that could not occur if based upon the laws of supply and demand -- that is at the very core of practically every boom and bust that has plagued mankind throughout history.

In conclusion, it can be said that modern money is a grand illusion conjured by the magicians of finance in politics. We are living in an age of fiat money, and it is sobering to realize that every previous nation in history that has adopted such money eventually was economically destroyed by it. Furthermore, there is nothing in our present monetary structure that offers any assurances that we may be exempted from that morbid roll call.

Correction. There is one. It is still within the power of Congress to abolish the Federal Reserve System.

Summary

The American dollar has no intrinsic value. It is a classic example of fiat money with no limit to the quantity that can be produced. Its primary value lies in the willingness of people to accept it and, to that end, legal tender laws require them to do so. It is true that our money is created out of nothing, but it is more accurate to say that it is based upon debt. In one sense, therefore, our money is created out of less than nothing. The entire money supply would vanish into the bank vaults and computer chips if all debts were repaid. Under the present System, therefore, our leaders cannot allow a serious reduction in either the national or consumer debt. Charging interest on pretended loans is usury, and that has become institutionalized under the Federal Reserve System. The Mandrake Mechanism by which the Fed converts debt into money may seem complicated at first, but it is simple if one remembers that the process is not intended to be logical but to confuse and deceive. The end product of the Mechanism is artificial expansion of the money supply, which is the root cause of the hidden tax called inflation. This expansion then leads to contraction and, together, they produce the destructive boom-bust cycle that has plagued mankind throughout history wherever fiat money has existed.

Back to top

To purchase "The Creature from Jekyll Island," click here.


1. Printed Federal Reserve Notes that sit in the Treasury's vault do not become money until they are released into circulation in exchange for checkbook money that was created by a bank loan. As long as the bills are in the vault with no debt-based money to replace them, they technically are just paper, not money.  [Return]

2. I Bet You Thought, Federal Reserve Bank of New York, p. 11  [Return]

3. Ibid., p. 19  [Return]

4. Modern Money Mechanics, Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago, revised October 1982, p. 3.  [Return]

5. "Money, Credit and Velocity," Review, May, 1982, Vol. 64, No. 5, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, p. 25.  [Return]

6. Irving Fisher, 100% Money (New York: Adelphi, 1936), p. xxii.  [Return]

7. The National Debt, Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia, pp. 2, 11.  [Return]

8. Two Faces of Debt, Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago, p. 33.  [Return]

9. The Writings of Thomas Jefferson, Library Edition (Washington: Jefferson Memorial Association, 1903), Vol XIII, p. 277-78.  [Return]

10. As quoted by Brian L. Bex, The Hidden Hand (Spencer, Indiana: Owen Litho, 1975), p. 161.  [Return]

11. This 10% figure (ten-to-one ratio) is based on averages. The Federal Reserve requires a minimum reserve of 10% on deposits over $46.8 million but only 3% on deposits up to that amount. Deposits in Eurodollars and nonpersonal time deposits require no reserves at all. Reserves consist of vault cash and deposits at the Federal Reserve. See Regulation D; Reserve Requirements of Depository Institutions, Federal Reserve document 12 CFR 204; as amended effective December 22, 1992, p. 23.  [Return]

12. The banks must cover these loans with bonds or other interest-bearing assets which it possesses, but that does not diminish the money-multiplier effect of the new deposit.  [Return]

13. Debt obligations from the private sector and from other governments also are used in the same way, but government bonds are the primary instruments.  [Return]

14. That is a theoretical maximum. In actual practice, the banks can seldom loan out all of the money they are allowed to create, and the numbers fall short of the maximum.  [Return]

15. Only about 11 to 15 per cent of the federal debt at that time was held by the Federal Reserve System.  [Return]

16. With the Fed holding only 7% of the national debt, the effect would still be devastating. Since the money supply is pyramided ten times on top of the underlying government bonds, each $1 eliminated from the federal debt would cause the money supply to shrink by 70 cents (1.00 X .07 X 10 = .70).  [Return]


Back to top


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Extended News
KEYWORDS: capital; fed; federalreserve; history; mandrake; money
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-178 next last

1 posted on 04/09/2003 8:05:10 AM PDT by AdamSelene235
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: bvw; Tauzero; robnoel; kezekiel; ChadGore; Harley - Mississippi; Dukie; Matchett-PI; Moonman62; ...
bump !
2 posted on 04/09/2003 8:06:25 AM PDT by AdamSelene235 (Like all the jolly good fellows, I drink my whiskey clear....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All

I'M BACK!!!

SUPPORT FREE REPUBLIC

Donate Here By Secure Server

Or mail checks to
FreeRepublic , LLC
PO BOX 9771
FRESNO, CA 93794

or you can use

PayPal at Jimrob@psnw.com


STOP BY A BUMP THE FUNDRAISER THREAD (It's in the Breaking News sidebar!)

3 posted on 04/09/2003 8:10:49 AM PDT by Support Free Republic (Your support keeps Free Republic going strong!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AdamSelene235
Aaah, yes, another fiat money/gold standard/federal reserve article here at Free Republic, brought to you by the good men who get paid by the word.
4 posted on 04/09/2003 8:19:10 AM PDT by egarvue (Martin Sheen is not my president...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: egarvue
Gold bug alert.
5 posted on 04/09/2003 8:36:35 AM PDT by MineralMan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: AdamSelene235
That our money is by being fiat and debt-pillared, debit-foundationed is the greatest wall to our liberty. It is at best a benign socialist's wall, at worst a tyrant's. In the US that we have always been closer to the former is a blessing. It's not a blessing we best count on, or should rely on, or come to accept as the best of all worlds. It is a degraded state of affairs. Not one we should accept forever.

Hard money, like fulsome Liberty, full Liberation, is state of existance that quickly and harshly marks all moral and ethical accounts to market. Fiat money, soft money, is never so harsh -- while it can be the whip of tyrants and the wall of a slave's prison, fiat money doesn't cut through or hammer to bits and dust like hard money does when used by the selfish, the theives, the delusional.

Only a few generations of our Nation knew this full Liberty -- but full Liberty was scary. We were too corrupt to stick with it in good use, and yet not heartless enough to stick with it anyway. So we dropped back to this slave's condition, less responsible, and less harsh in accounts for that. Let us have strength, seek good and mercy and be honest in all dealings, and then we may again achieve that higher state, over the walls, once again returning to the City of Liberty.

6 posted on 04/09/2003 9:26:58 AM PDT by bvw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AdamSelene235
In the United States neither paper currency nor deposits have value as commodities. Intrinsically, a dollar bill is just a piece of paper.

And intrinsically, gold is just a heavy yelowish metal that looks pretty, conducts electricity well, and is much to soft to make tools from. So what?

Isn't value, in the end, a human construction?

7 posted on 04/09/2003 9:29:00 AM PDT by fourdeuce82d
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: egarvue
If you don't like it, don't read it, my friend.

With respect to Federal Reserve Notes, here's an interesting site I recently found - http://www.wheresgeorge.com/ - it allows you to track the FRNs you spend through various holders.
8 posted on 04/09/2003 9:30:12 AM PDT by mvpel (Michael Pelletier)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: fourdeuce82d
And intrinsically, gold is just a heavy yelowish metal that looks pretty, conducts electricity well, and is much to soft to make tools from. So what?

It takes 2 supernovas to get gold distrubution found on this planet.

Its a good deal harder to fake than paper. That is its only value. I think uranium futures would work nicely as well.

I would argue for a repeal of legal tender/forced tender laws. There is no need threaten people with violence over their choice of currency.

Nor is there any reason to force gold upon people.

9 posted on 04/09/2003 9:40:02 AM PDT by AdamSelene235 (Like all the jolly good fellows, I drink my whiskey clear....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: AdamSelene235
I am STILL trying to figure out what the author is getting at.

While the salient points offered are true, there is much interpretation going along with the stated points. The main reason that money has value (fiat of not) has to do with the availability of it for loans, the ability of said loans to be paid back, and the confidence that the money will be available to pay it back. To strip the value from the current system WILL cause economic collapse worldwide. The coin of the realm in the world is the mighty US buck. To return to a "hard currency" (like gold) would place money out of reach from the average citizen, and price volitility for comodities would prevent a stable economic situation from developing for a long time, if ever.

You can post 1000 word chapters outlining the situation (sort of), but the truth is, a stable currency is what helps keep the price of comodities reasonably stable. Before the current situation, economic depressions were commonplace. The price of oil is a good example: talk of war, and the price jumps $10. Without the mediating effects a stable currency, that price jump might be $50-$100. Enough to bankrupt every airline, and most bulk carriers around the world. Without those, other businesses then can't do business, and the cascade continues until: economic depression.

But this is just my .00002 oz of gold's worth.
10 posted on 04/09/2003 10:12:37 AM PDT by Mr. Quarterpanel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AdamSelene235
Its a good deal harder to fake than paper.

DOH- hadn't thought of that, good point.

That is its only value.

well, false teeth made from it look and last better than paper...*grin*

11 posted on 04/09/2003 10:47:54 AM PDT by fourdeuce82d
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: AdamSelene235
"It takes 2 supernovas to get gold distrubution found on this planet. Its a good deal harder to fake than paper."

Nonsense.

Only someone who has NEVER traded gold in the wild would make such an absurd statement. Many a gold-plated watch has been marketed as "solid gold", and electroplated jewelry fools dillettantes time and again.

To guard against such counterfeits, real gold traders actually insist that gold be melted down and tested before each trade, something that I ran into when dealing with a certain Swiss bank some years ago when I simply wanted to park some of the ugly yellow metal there.

Likewise, compare the effects of standing on a street corner holding up a gold bar versus holding up a $100 bill.

The C note will get you a cab or into your favorite club time and again, whereas people will actively *AVOID* your gold bar like the plague.

If you want "intrinsic" value, then BUY something intrinsic with your paper currency, such as guns, ammo, food, water, clothes, oil, or land.

But don't try to use intrinsic value as a currency. That's called "bartering", and that system was surpassed millenia ago as the superior medium of exchange.

Nor is money "created" with or by debt. Money is two things: a store of value and a medium of exchange. In other words, currency is *labor* stored in an easily transferable form.

If money could simply be created by borrowing, then Africa would be the wealthiest continent on the planet right now!

But money isn't simply created by borrowing, but rather, money represents all of the productive labor for a nation. The more productive a nation, the more the sum of all the nation's currency becomes worth, which in turn dictates the feasibility parameters of being ABLE to borrow, loan, exchange, store, etc.

12 posted on 04/09/2003 12:10:17 PM PDT by Southack (Media bias means that Castro won't be punished for Cuban war crimes against Black Angolans in Africa)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Southack
Many a gold-plated watch has been marketed as "solid gold", and electroplated jewelry fools dillettantes time and again.

Sheesh, any moron with a scale and a glass of water can determine density in 60 seconds. 19.3 g/cm^3 is hard to fake.

Aqua Regia works nicely as well.

13 posted on 04/09/2003 12:21:46 PM PDT by AdamSelene235 (Like all the jolly good fellows, I drink my whiskey clear....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Quarterpanel
a stable currency is what helps keep the price of comodities reasonably stable.

Actually, exactly the opposite is true. Compare commodities prices before and after 1972 when we finally abandoned all pretense of a gold standard. Commodity prices have been significantly more volitile in the past 30 years than in all previous history.

[z]
14 posted on 04/09/2003 12:35:29 PM PDT by zechariah (Dangerous Jesus Lover)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Southack
That's called "bartering", and that system was surpassed millenia ago as the superior medium of exchange.

Oh, I always thought "millenium" meant 1000 years. But all of the world's major powers were on honest-to-goodness gold standards 100 years ago.

[z]
15 posted on 04/09/2003 12:36:42 PM PDT by zechariah (Dangerous Jesus Lover)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: AdamSelene235
"Sheesh, any moron with a scale and a glass of water can determine density in 60 seconds. 19.3 g/cm^3 is hard to fake."

And dropping a gold-plated watch into water and calculating density is performed just *how* often?!

Please, don't make me laugh.

16 posted on 04/09/2003 12:39:20 PM PDT by Southack (Media bias means that Castro won't be punished for Cuban war crimes against Black Angolans in Africa)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: zechariah
"Oh, I always thought "millenium" meant 1000 years. But all of the world's major powers were on honest-to-goodness gold standards 100 years ago."

A "gold standard" for a currency is NOT bartering.

How far back in time do you have to go before BARTERING was the preferred medium of exchange instead of currency/coins?!

Surely more than 100 years...

17 posted on 04/09/2003 12:41:27 PM PDT by Southack (Media bias means that Castro won't be punished for Cuban war crimes against Black Angolans in Africa)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Southack
And dropping a gold-plated watch into water and calculating density is performed just *how* often?!

We were talking about monetary gold.

18 posted on 04/09/2003 12:42:01 PM PDT by AdamSelene235 (Like all the jolly good fellows, I drink my whiskey clear....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: AdamSelene235

No, your claim was that gold was harder to fake than paper due to it taking two super novas to create gold.

But gold is easy to fake (electroplating, et al). You can buy 1 ounce "gold" U.S. double eagle coins today for $20, and those coins would fool many a gold bug, as would gold plated watches and various faux jewelry.

19 posted on 04/09/2003 12:46:47 PM PDT by Southack (Media bias means that Castro won't be punished for Cuban war crimes against Black Angolans in Africa)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Southack
But gold is easy to fake (electroplating, et al). You can buy 1 ounce "gold" U.S. double eagle coins today for $20, and those coins would fool many a gold bug, as would gold plated watches and various faux jewelry.

Aqua Regia or a simple density test will catch both cases in under 60 seconds with very little cost.

20 posted on 04/09/2003 12:48:39 PM PDT by AdamSelene235 (Like all the jolly good fellows, I drink my whiskey clear....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: AdamSelene235
"Aqua Regia or a simple density test will catch both cases in under 60 seconds with very little cost."

Neither of those methods has widespread "buy in" acceptance by the public, and both of those methods present time and financial transaction costs in front of ever using gold as a currency again (as in, the strippers who are lap dancing and pouring my drinks aren't going to accept anything that takes time and more money/effort to verify than what they've already got in play).

That's NOT the direction that our world is moving. We aren't going to SLOWER and more costly mediums of exchange, but rather, we are moving towards ever faster, ever more efficient mediums (e.g. cash, credit cards, wire transfers, digital cash, etc.).

21 posted on 04/09/2003 12:55:50 PM PDT by Southack (Media bias means that Castro won't be punished for Cuban war crimes against Black Angolans in Africa)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Southack
That's NOT the direction that our world is moving. We aren't going to SLOWER and more costly mediums of exchange, but rather, we are moving towards ever faster, ever more efficient mediums (e.g. cash, credit cards, wire transfers, digital cash, etc.).

Sure, that doesn't mean we have to leave currency in the hand of the government.

Electronic gold is just as fast as Paypal.

22 posted on 04/09/2003 12:57:51 PM PDT by AdamSelene235 (Like all the jolly good fellows, I drink my whiskey clear....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: egarvue
The real question is why can't we issue our own currency interest free?
23 posted on 04/09/2003 1:34:22 PM PDT by jd777
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Southack
A "gold standard" for a currency is NOT bartering.

Whew! For a second there I thought you were arguing against a gold standard.

[z]
24 posted on 04/09/2003 3:38:50 PM PDT by zechariah (Dangerous Jesus Lover)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: zechariah
Gold is dead, kid. Gold is dead.
25 posted on 04/09/2003 5:25:49 PM PDT by Southack (Media bias means that Castro won't be punished for Cuban war crimes against Black Angolans in Africa)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Southack
Gold is dead, kid. Gold is dead.

Oh, so you are a socialist. I guess I suspected as much when I saw some of your responses in the GSE threads defending FNM. At least you are consistent: without nationalized money we couldn't have a nationalized financial system, nor is there any way we could continue to have nationalized schools, nationalized medicine, nationalized retirement, nationalized housing, nationalized farming, etc, etc.

Long Live Socialism!!

[z]
26 posted on 04/09/2003 5:40:56 PM PDT by zechariah (Dangerous Jesus Lover)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: jd777
why can't we issue our own currency interest free?

Who do you mean by "we" and what do you mean by "issue"?

That money is issued and distributed by a banking system that lends it out at interest is only one part of the problem.

As long as new money can be costlessly issued and distributed by any issuing authority that the rest of us are legally bound to honor, there will a problem. An honest monetary system must maintain both scarcity integrity and distributional integrity.

27 posted on 04/09/2003 8:36:31 PM PDT by Deuce
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Deuce
I think a constitutional agrument works here. The constitution reserves the right for the coining money and regulation of its value to the CONGRESS. That power was given to the federal reserve in 1913.

What we need to do is bring back the Bank of the United States...

28 posted on 04/09/2003 8:57:34 PM PDT by jd777
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: jd777
The constitution reserves the right for the coining money and regulation of its value to the CONGRESS.

Agreed. Congress fulfilled that role with the Coinage Act of 1792, which has never been repealed, that defined the dollar as 412.5 grains of silver, 90% fine.

What we need to do is bring back the Bank of the United States...

Which bank are you referring to? The Bank of North America (under the Articles of Confederation)? The First United States Bank?

In any event, neither of these banks was publicly owned and heated debates in the H of R over the lack of constitutional basis for the First US Bank was ignored in order to favor special interests---no differently than was the Federal Reserve Act of 1913. For the Constitutional basis (lack thereof) for our money system I highly recommend: Pieces of Eight by Edwin Veiera Jr Esq. This 1600 page, 2 volume set with a 15 page Table of Contents is definitive, to say the least.

29 posted on 04/10/2003 6:44:47 AM PDT by Deuce
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: zechariah; Southack
Oh, so you are a socialist.

No, strictly speaking I'd say he is a Conservative.

Conservatives believe the burden of proof should be on those who wish to change the status quo.

The status quo happens to be designed by Fabian Socialists but this is of little concern to Southack:He defends what he sees as a empiricially viable system.

30 posted on 04/11/2003 9:58:05 AM PDT by AdamSelene235 (Like all the jolly good fellows, I drink my whiskey clear....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: AdamSelene235; Southack
Conservatives believe the burden of proof should be on those who wish to change the status quo.

The status quo in America today is Socialism. To be a "Conservative"--by your definition--is to also be a socialist.

That is the greatest triumph of the Left to date: they've hoodwinked America and her people into believing that the status quo is Freedom when, in fact, it is Socialism.

[z]
31 posted on 04/11/2003 10:07:48 AM PDT by zechariah (Dangerous Jesus Lover)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: zechariah

I'm free. Pity that you aren't.

32 posted on 04/11/2003 10:10:00 AM PDT by Southack (Media bias means that Castro won't be punished for Cuban war crimes against Black Angolans in Africa)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: zechariah; Southack
The status quo in America today is Socialism. To be a "Conservative"--by your definition--is to also be a socialist. That is the greatest triumph of the Left to date: they've hoodwinked America and her people into believing that the status quo is Freedom when, in fact, it is Socialism.

Spot on.

33 posted on 04/11/2003 10:11:55 AM PDT by AdamSelene235 (Like all the jolly good fellows, I drink my whiskey clear....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: AdamSelene235

IF indeed *you* aren't free, please explain what *you* are forbidden to do or say.

34 posted on 04/11/2003 10:15:04 AM PDT by Southack (Media bias means that Castro won't be punished for Cuban war crimes against Black Angolans in Africa)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Southack
IF indeed *you* aren't free, please explain what *you* are forbidden to do or say.

I am not free to go to the pharmacy and buy medicine of my own choosing.

[z]
35 posted on 04/11/2003 10:24:27 AM PDT by zechariah (Dangerous Jesus Lover)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Southack
IF indeed *you* aren't free, please explain what *you* are forbidden to do or say.

I am not free to wear a gun at all times.

[z]
36 posted on 04/11/2003 10:25:02 AM PDT by zechariah (Dangerous Jesus Lover)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Southack
IF indeed *you* aren't free, please explain what *you* are forbidden to do or say.

I am not free to keep the money earned by working for clients/employers.

[z]
37 posted on 04/11/2003 10:26:00 AM PDT by zechariah (Dangerous Jesus Lover)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Southack
IF indeed *you* aren't free, please explain what *you* are forbidden to do or say.

I am not free to invest my money as I'd like.

[z]
38 posted on 04/11/2003 10:27:14 AM PDT by zechariah (Dangerous Jesus Lover)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: zechariah

That's odd because I've never had that problem (re: pharmaceuticals).

39 posted on 04/11/2003 10:29:31 AM PDT by Southack (Media bias means that Castro won't be punished for Cuban war crimes against Black Angolans in Africa)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: zechariah

Regarding your freedom to wear a gun, you certainly don't live here in Alabama, where open carry is the legal law of the land throughout our fine state. Pity that your state prohibits the same.

40 posted on 04/11/2003 10:31:10 AM PDT by Southack (Media bias means that Castro won't be punished for Cuban war crimes against Black Angolans in Africa)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: zechariah

I've never had a problem keeping my earnings, nor do I have a problem paying the legal taxes due on said profits. If I don't want to pay taxes, I can either stop working or else move somewhere else (not bloody likely).

41 posted on 04/11/2003 10:33:19 AM PDT by Southack (Media bias means that Castro won't be punished for Cuban war crimes against Black Angolans in Africa)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: zechariah

What specific investment have you been prohibited from making? That's certainly never happened to me.

42 posted on 04/11/2003 10:34:04 AM PDT by Southack (Media bias means that Castro won't be punished for Cuban war crimes against Black Angolans in Africa)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Southack
That's odd because I've never had that problem (re: pharmaceuticals).

Only because you presented a government-approved prescription issued by a government-approved doctor to a governement-approved pharmacist. Any thing else is illegal.

[z]
43 posted on 04/11/2003 10:34:12 AM PDT by zechariah (Dangerous Jesus Lover)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Southack
Regarding your freedom to wear a gun, you certainly don't live here in Alabama, where open carry is the legal law of the land throughout our fine state. Pity that your state prohibits the same.

I like to travel. On airplanes. Taking a gun onto an airplane is illegal.

[z]
44 posted on 04/11/2003 10:35:33 AM PDT by zechariah (Dangerous Jesus Lover)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Southack
I've never had a problem keeping my earnings, nor do I have a problem paying the legal taxes due on said profits. If I don't want to pay taxes, I can either stop working or else move somewhere else (not bloody likely).

Serfs in feudal Europe paid a lesser percentage of their crops to the land owners than Americans pay to the government. Government has come to believe that it is entitled to my money. You seem to agree.

[z]
45 posted on 04/11/2003 10:38:01 AM PDT by zechariah (Dangerous Jesus Lover)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: zechariah

Yes, but as I said, I haven't been *denied* any pharaceuticals, thus, I am free in that regard as well as in others.

You seem to be headed towards a very old, long-since disproven argument, so let's get it out in the open so that the temptation to hide behind it subsides.

To wit: you can disingenuously say that you aren't free to drive anywhere that you want because legally, you are forbidden from driving down the wrong way on a 1 way street, but in reality, you can get where ever you want to go by simply following the rules.

You see, having to follow rules does NOT ipso facto mean that you aren't free. Anarchy is not freedom, but rather anarchy binds everyone to the law of the jungle where the strong prey on the weak as they see fit.

46 posted on 04/11/2003 10:40:24 AM PDT by Southack (Media bias means that Castro won't be punished for Cuban war crimes against Black Angolans in Africa)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Southack
IF indeed *you* aren't free, please explain what *you* are forbidden to do

Exercise my 2nd Amendment right to bear arms.

Retain the fruits of my labor.

Engage in commerce or peaceful political activity without being monitored by the police/treasury/irs/etc.

Own property without paying tribute to a political authority.

and so on.

47 posted on 04/11/2003 10:41:14 AM PDT by AdamSelene235 (Like all the jolly good fellows, I drink my whiskey clear....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Southack
What specific investment have you been prohibited from making? That's certainly never happened to me.

Oh, you didn't know that certain investments are illegal if you are not an Accredited Investor?

[z]
48 posted on 04/11/2003 10:42:08 AM PDT by zechariah (Dangerous Jesus Lover)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: zechariah

No, taking a gun on an airplane is NOT illegal. Now, carrying a loaded gun onto an airline's passenger aircraft might fall under numerous laws, but I carry my loaded gun on my private aircraft whenever I feel like it.

Freedom isn't free. If you want to exercise that particular freedom, then save your money and buy your own aircraft.

I certainly did.

49 posted on 04/11/2003 10:42:43 AM PDT by Southack (Media bias means that Castro won't be punished for Cuban war crimes against Black Angolans in Africa)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: AdamSelene235

Your list strikes me as bizarre, as I have all of the freedoms that you seem to be denied, except that you list one item that seems rather out of place: i.e. your desire to engage in public activity (e.g. commerce, banking) without being "observed" by the government.

There is no freedom from being publicly observed, as any highway patrolman will tell you as you blast down a public road.

50 posted on 04/11/2003 10:45:35 AM PDT by Southack (Media bias means that Castro won't be punished for Cuban war crimes against Black Angolans in Africa)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-178 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson