The legality of the Fed and income tax

And so, it is not difficult to see that the solution to our economic woes should begin with the willingness to address this illegal ponzi scheme. To ignore it, deny it, or to just plain refuse to call it a crime--when even a child can see that it is--has got to be the epitome of irrational reasoning! It's like owning a business and deciding to ignore the employee whom you know is embezzling enough money to seriously affect your profit margin and lifestyle while going on with your ranting and raving about the pittance lost to a petty shoplifter. Highly irrational.

 

Here is the Executive Order which allowed for the theft of the people of the U.S. by their president:

Executive order: By virtue of the
authority vested in me by Section 5(B) of
The Act of Oct. 6,
1917, as amended by section 2 of
the Act of March 9, 1933, in which
Congress declared that
a serious emergency exists, I as
President, do declare that the national
emergency still exists;
That the continued private hoarding
of gold and silver by subjects of the United
States poses a
grave threat to the peace, equal
justice, and well-being of the United
States; and that appropriate
measures must be taken immediately
to protect the interests of our people.

"Therefore, pursuant to the above
authority, I herby proclaim that such gold
and silver holdings
are prohibited, and that all such
coin, bullion or other possessions of gold
and silver be tendered within fourteen days
to agents of the Government of the United
States for compensation at the
official price, in the legal tender of
the Government. All safe deposit boxes in
banks or financial
institutions have been sealed,
pending action in the due course of the
law. All sales or purchases
or movements of such gold and
silver within the borders of the United
States and its territories,
and all foreign exchange
transactions or movements of such metals
across the border are herby prohibited.

"Your possession of these
proscribed metals and/or your maintenance
of a safe-deposit box to
store them is known to the
Government from bank and insurance
records. Therefore, be advised
that your vault box must remain
sealed, and may only be opened in the
presence of an agent of
The Internal Revenue Service.

"By lawful Order given this day,
the President of the United States."

 

Thank you Mr. Wilson (D) and Mr. Roosevelt (D).

Storch, I only wish you were a school teacher, or at least we still had some teachers like you.

 

Well, I appreciate that, Individual. But you know, it could be seen that this site and this thread is a sort of school, when you think about it. After all, school is all about learning things you didn't know before.

 

Yet another glaring example of the benefits of the Federal Reserve:



The Largest U.S. Banks Have Repeatedly Gone Bankrupt Due to Wild Speculation. The Fed Blessed the Speculation then Helped Cover Up the Bankruptcies

Posted on October 5, 2009 by WashingtonsBlog

As I have previously pointed out, the New York Times wrote in February:

In the 1980s, during the height of the Latin American debt crisis, the total risk to the nine money-center banks in New York was estimated at more than three times the capital of those banks. The regulators, analysts say, did not force the banks to value those loans at the fire-sale prices of the moment, helping to avert a disaster in the banking system.
​

In other words, the nine biggest banks were all insolvent in the 1980s.
​

Richard C. Koo – former economist at the Federal Reserve Bank of New York and doctoral fellow with the Fed’s Board of Governors, and now chief economist for Nomura – confirmed last year in a speech to the Center for Strategic & International Studies that most of the giant money center banks were insolvent in the 1980s.





Specifically, Koo said:

• After the Latin American crisis hit in 1982, the New York Fed concluded that 7 out of 8 money center banks were actually “underwater”

• All the foreign banks (especially the Japanese banks) had to keep their lending facilities open to American banks so the American banking system didn’t collapse overtly and out in the open

• The Fed knew that virtually all of the American banks were “bankrupt”, but could not publicly discuss how bad the situation was. If went out and said the “American banks are bankrupt”, the next day they will go overtly go bankrupt. So the Fed had to come up with a lot of stories like “its good debt on their books”

• Then-chairman Volcker instructed the banks to keep lending to the Mexican dictator so that the Mexican economy didn’t totally collapse, because – if Mexico collapsed – it would become obvious that all of the U.S. banks were underwater, and they would immediately collapse

• It took 13 years to manage the crisis (at another point in the talk, Koo says 15 years).
  The way that Volcker approached the problem was that he allowed U.S. banks to keep their lending rates relatively high, while the central bank brought short-term rates down. The spread between the two (the “fat spread”) became revenue for the banks, and the banks used the high fat spread to gradually write off problem loans and to repair their balance sheets.

• Volcker’s covert rescue of the American banks using secrecy and a high fat spread didn’t cost U.S. taxpayers a cent

• Koo points out that you can’t use the fat spread approach where there are no borrowers

 

The Federal Reserve's role in the confiscation of the people's gold:

___________________________________________________

It is amazing the Federal Reserve even went as far as informing the President that his power and authority was provided in Section 5(b) of the "Act" of October 6, 1917. When Roosevelt followed "the unscrupulous money-changers" proposed Executive Order to confiscate our gold, what did the American people do? They fell for the con-game hook, line and sinker. They quietly marched down to their local bank and turned in their gold. Just like good little sheep do when the herder herds them up to be fleeced. If you still believe in anything a politician says, you need to have your head examined to see if there is any gray matter between your ears.

http://maxexchange.com/ybj/chapter6.htm

 

The irony here is the gold was only seized because of the gold standard and the fact gold was currency, governments have final control over currency since they are the ones who promised payment in specie, and they needed right now. The good news is, now that we're off the gold standard, you can hoard all the gold you want!

 

So, if govenment has final control over currency, why is the Federal Reserve in charge of money creation?

 

And as far as the true nature of the Federal Reserve, why do you suppose that, after signing the bill, President Wilson said:

“I am a most unhappy man. I have unwittingly ruined my country. A great industrial nation is controlled by its system of credit. Our system of credit is concentrated. The growth of the nation, therefore, and all our activities are in the hands of a few men. We have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled and dominated Governments in the civilized world - no longer a Government by free opinion, no longer a Government by conviction and the vote of the majority, but a Government by the opinion and duress of a small group of dominant men.”

 

Well for starters, like many quotes, there's no actual evidence Woodrow Wilson ever said that
http://www.salon.com/2007/12/21/woodrow_wilson_federal_reserve/

As for the Fed, that's because it's their job. Fun fact, leaving money creation solely in the hands of the non independent treasury would be a terrible idea specifically for the fact it can and will bow to the whims of whatever administration is in power.

 

You are correct that he did not say, "I am a most unhappy man. I have unwittingly ruined my country." The website has retracted their statement. However, Wilson did indeed write the rest of it almost verbatim in his book, "The New Freedom." Here is an excerpt containing the spirit of the quote:
THE NEW FREEDOM

A CALL FOR THE EMANCIPATION
OF THE GENEROUS ENERGIES
OF A PEOPLE

BY

WOODROW WILSON

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NEW YORK AND GARDEN CITY
DOUBLEDAY, PAGE & COMPANY
1913

You will notice from a recent investigation that things like this take place: A certain bank invests in certain securities. It appears from evidence that the handling of these securities was very intimately connected with the maintenance of the price of a particular commodity. Nobody ought, and in normal circumstances nobody would, for a moment think of suspecting the managers of a great bank of making such an investment in order to help those who were conducting a particular business in the United States maintain the price of their commodity; but the circumstances are not normal. It is beginning to be believed that in the big business of this country nothing is disconnected from anything else. I do not mean in this particular instance to which I have referred, and I do not have in mind to draw any inference at all, for that would be unjust; but take any investment of an industrial character by a great bank. It is known that the directorate of that bank interlaces in personnel with ten, twenty, thirty, forty, fifty, sixty boards of directors of all sorts, of railroads which handle commodities, of great groups of manufacturers which manufacture commodities, and of great merchants who distribute commodities; and the result is that every great bank is under suspicion with regard to the motive of its investments. It is at least considered possible that it is playing the game of somebody who has nothing to do with banking, but with whom some of its directors are connected and joined in interest. The ground of unrest and uneasiness, in short, on the part of the public at large, is the growing knowledge that many large undertakings are interlaced with one another, are indistinguishable from one another in personnel.

Therefore, when a small group of men approach Congress in order to induce the committee concerned to concur in certain legislation, nobody knows the ramifications of the interests which those men represent; there seems no frank and open action of public opinion in public counsel, but every man is suspected of representing some other man and it is not known where his connections begin or end.

I am one of those who have been so fortunately circumstanced that I have had the opportunity to study the way in which these things come about in complete disconnection from them, and I do not suspect that any man has deliberately planned the system. I am not so uninstructed and misinformed as to suppose that there is a deliberate and malevolent combination somewhere to dominate the government of the United States. I merely say that, by certain processes, now well known, and perhaps natural in themselves, there has come about an extraordinary and very sinister concentration in the control of business in the country.

However it has come about, it is more important still that the control of credit also has become dangerously centralized. It is the mere truth to say that the financial resources of the country are not at the command of those who do not submit to the direction and domination of small groups of capitalists who wish to keep the economic development of the country under their own eye and guidance. The great monopoly in this country is the monopoly of big credits. So long as that exists, our old variety and freedom and individual energy of development are out of the question. A great industrial nation is controlled by its system of credit. Our system of credit is privately concentrated. The growth of the nation, therefore, and all our activities are in the hands of a few men who, even if their action be honest and intended for the public interest, are necessarily concentrated upon the great undertakings in which their own money is involved and who necessarily, by very reason of their own limitations, chill and check and destroy genuine economic freedom. This is the greatest question of all, and to this statesmen must address themselves with an earnest determination to serve the long future and the true liberties of men.
http://www.gutenberg.org/files/14811/14811-h/14811-h.htm#VIII
_______________________________________

I am interested in hearing you explain how you are ok with Congress turning the power to coin money over to a non-government entity in contravention of the Constitution. And especially in light of the fact that this non-government entity charges the people of the U.S. interest on money it creates out of thin air which is backed by nothing. Congress is supposed to print the money, and it would be interest-free. Tell me what you believe the benefits are to have to pay private banks hundreds of billions of dollars in interest every year.

 

And does 15 trillion dollars ring a bell?

 

The Fed is quasi independent, much like NASA. It's allowed to set its own policy but its board of directors and chairmen are appointed by the federal government. Do tell me the logic behind having congress, which has the problem of being near constantly in an election cycle, controlling the flood of funds into the economy, nothing could possibly go wrong with that.(hint, things go terribly wrong with that, and that's why just about every nation has an independent central bank, obviously independent is loosely used depending on a country's current political status). There's no difference between The Fed printing some money or the treasury doing it vs The Fed has a scarier name, and is also not beholden to election year politics. One can be trusted to try to maintain a steady rate of inflation and have a pragmatic hold over the money supply irregardless of national political demand, one can not.

and $15 trillion what? The national debt? Who cares, the deficit is an issue, the debt is a non issue. Going back to paying interest to banks, one thing that never gets mentioned is how cheap the US can borrow money, we literally get paid by people for the privilege of taking our debt. In the past couple of years bonds after often fell to a negative yield rate, which means investors expect to lose money on their investment in treasury bonds given what the yield rate on them is combined with expected nominal inflation. In fact France earlier this week had the same thing happen for the first time, and they do have their credit rating downgraded this year. Shows what good the rating agencies are. Plus 30% of our debt is money the government owes to itself, and a majority of publicly held debt is held by institutions or people in the United States.

Also, all of your money is backed by nothing. Though considering I doubt either you or me are going to burn all of our money tonight, it is in fact backed by something, namely the economy of the United States vs some random and abstract piece of metal.

 

Central banks are not controlled by elected governments. They're controlled by "pivate interests" from the world of commercial banking. Banks are businesses out to make profits from the interest on the loans they make. They decide who they will lend to. They decide what is produced, where it will be produced, and who will produce it, all on the basis of profitability to them, and not on the basis of what is beneficial to the community. Entire economies are run for the profit of financial institutions. All of us, including governments, are subject to them; this is rarely recognized or acknowledged.

Instead of being supplied interest-free as a means of exchange, our money now comes as a debt owed to bankers, providing them with vast profits, power, and control; the rest of us are saddled with debt. By supplying credit to those who they approve of, and denying it to those they don't approve of, international banksters can create booms or busts, and support or undermine governments.

There is much less risk for them making loans than investing in a business, and interest is payable regardless of the success of the business. If the business fails or can't meet the interest payments, the bank seizes the borrower’s property.

 

I am still interested in hearing you explain how you are ok with Congress turning the power to coin money over to private banks; that is, explain the benefits of having to pay private banks hundreds of billions of dollars in interest every year when Congress can print it up with no interest attached to it.

 

As for the $15 trillion dollars, have you heard that a partial audit of the Federal Reserve found that that's the amount of money it secretly loaned to the largest banks to bail them out? Where did that money come from, and who do you think will pay for that handout?

 

Sapphire,

A CALL FOR THE EMANCIPATION
OF THE GENEROUS ENERGIES
OF A PEOPLE
BY
WOODROW WILSON
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NEW YORK AND GARDEN CITY
DOUBLEDAY, PAGE & COMPANY
1913

You will notice from a recent investigation that things like this take place: A certain bank invests in certain securities. It appears from evidence that the handling of these securities was very intimately connected with the maintenance of the price of a particular commodity. Nobody ought, and in normal circumstances nobody would, for a moment think of suspecting the managers of a great bank of making such an investment in order to help those who were conducting a particular business in the United States maintain the price of their commodity; but the circumstances are not normal. It is beginning to be believed that in the big business of this country nothing is disconnected from anything else. I do not mean in this particular instance to which I have referred, and I do not have in mind to draw any inference at all, for that would be unjust; but take any investment of an industrial character by a great bank. It is known that the directorate of that bank interlaces in personnel with ten, twenty, thirty, forty, fifty, sixty boards of directors of all sorts, of railroads which handle commodities, of great groups of manufacturers which manufacture commodities, and of great merchants who distribute commodities; and the result is that every great bank is under suspicion with regard to the motive of its investments. It is at least considered possible that it is playing the game of somebody who has nothing to do with banking, but with whom some of its directors are connected and joined in interest. The ground of unrest and uneasiness, in short, on the part of the public at large, is the growing knowledge that many large undertakings are interlaced with one another, are indistinguishable from one another in personnel.

Therefore, when a small group of men approach Congress in order to induce the committee concerned to concur in certain legislation, nobody knows the ramifications of the interests which those men represent; there seems no frank and open action of public opinion in public counsel, but every man is suspected of representing some other man and it is not known where his connections begin or end.

I am one of those who have been so fortunately circumstanced that I have had the opportunity to study the way in which these things come about in complete disconnection from them, and I do not suspect that any man has deliberately planned the system. I am not so uninstructed and misinformed as to suppose that there is a deliberate and malevolent combination somewhere to dominate the government of the United States. I merely say that, by certain processes, now well known, and perhaps natural in themselves, there has come about an extraordinary and very sinister concentration in the control of business in the country.

However it has come about, it is more important still that the control of credit also has become dangerously centralized. It is the mere truth to say that the financial resources of the country are not at the command of those who do not submit to the direction and domination of small groups of capitalists who wish to keep the economic development of the country under their own eye and guidance. The great monopoly in this country is the monopoly of big credits. So long as that exists, our old variety and freedom and individual energy of development are out of the question. A great industrial nation is controlled by its system of credit. Our system of credit is privately concentrated. The growth of the nation, therefore, and all our activities are in the hands of a few men who, even if their action be honest and intended for the public interest, are necessarily concentrated upon the great undertakings in which their own money is involved and who necessarily, by very reason of their own limitations, chill and check and destroy genuine economic freedom. This is the greatest question of all, and to this statesmen must address themselves with an earnest determination to serve the long future and the true liberties of men.

http://www.gutenberg.org/files/14811...811-h.htm#VIII
________________________________________________

Please, Sapphire, exactly what part of that speech convinced you that he was not talking about banks, control of credit monopolies, privately concentrated system of credit, etc.etc.?

Since the Fed didn't exist yet, that would explain why he didn't call it by name, wouldn't it? But the fact remains that, between 1910 and 1913, Wilson certainly knew about the plans for its creation. How could he not have known? He was, after all, aware of it before he signed it into being. Are you aware of the history of central banks in the U.S.? It's not like the Federal Reserve is the first of its kind.

 

Congress needs money. They always need more money. They like spending money because it gets them elected. They don't like to raise taxes because that gets them unelected. So they solve this problem by borrowing the money. That's why we have government bonds and treasury notes and bills, which is why we have the national debt; they borrowed money to pay for current expenses that they don't want to pay for through taxes because that would be unpopular. Then thirty or sixty days after they've borrowed it, they have to pay that money back. Of course, the congressmen and senators are still not taking in as much in taxes as they're spending on benefits, and so they don't have the money to repay the loan. So what do they do? They borrow some more. They borrow enough to pay back the original loan, and a little bit more to keep them in office. And this process goes on an on, and that's why we have an exponentially growing national debt. To deny this is to deny reality.

And that's where the Federal Reserve comes in. There's not enough existing money in the private sector for the government to borrow. So the Federal Reserve agrees to create money to lend to the government. So they're not really lending it. All they're really doing is printing it for the government and calling it a loan. Once this money is created out of nothing, it's fresh money into society and the economy, and that's how it keeps growing. So what's in it for the banking system? Well, for every billion dollars that's put into the banks, the banker can create an additional nine billion dollars (fractional reserve banking) and push it out into the economy as loans. So that nine billion, which is based solely on that one billion dollars--which itself was created out of nothing--is just fiat money created out of nothing. So that money is created out of debt, and that debt creates the need for more money that has nothing behind it.

 

...

 

Congrats on awakening from the 6 1/2 year coma Storch!