Topic: The Very Worst Thing About the Federal Reserve (Read 2818 times)
The unique aspect is that the Federal Reserve buys bonds, no questions asked, using debased currency.
There is nothing unique about federal reserve when it comes to financing armed conflicts. It is my understanding that almost every major conflict in the past 300 years has resulted in increased public debt. The idea of (city)government issuing bonds to finance battles was evident in medieval Italy.
...snip...
I understand that some people have violent tendencies. My point was that we can reduce the harm of people's violent tendencies by eliminating governments and central banks. If there was no government in China, would Japan still have been just as keen on taking it over? I'm not sure, but a governmental tax structure that can be commandeered is a tempting prize, and a place with no central tax collection agency would make it much harder to plunder a nation's resources and exploit their wealth.
...snip...
I understand that some people have violent tendencies. My point was that we can reduce the harm of people's violent tendencies by eliminating governments and central banks. If there was no government in China, would Japan still have been just as keen on taking it over? I'm not sure, but a governmental tax structure that can be commandeered is a tempting prize, and a place with no central tax collection agency would make it much harder to plunder a nation's resources and exploit their wealth.
...snip...
There was no government in China when the Japanese invaded. The country was controlled by local warlords.
The Shankill Butchers were just one unit of the UDA; there were many little armies. Over 3000 were killed. In the US, that would be equivalent to 6 hundred thousand people being killed.
I don't believe in causation where you can say "X happened so Y was inevitable." Ireland has a long history of sectarian hatred. For some reason Libya and North Korea took an interest in Ireland and supplied military grade weapons to Catholics. Protestants got military grade weapons from South Africa. (Look at an atlas and you will be stunned at how insane this was). Both sides were righteous - God was on their side and it was a sin not to fight. The war was profitable; a small militia in control of an area earns incredible cash for knuckle-heads that would otherwise be merely middle-class.
The decision of the British Army to withdraw from "no go areas" was hugely significant. It meant that people effectively left the control of the Crown. Even if you hated the Brits, being at the mercy of the mobs was terrible.
What I can say it that no area was ever without a government. Even areas where the British Army could not go for 20 years had local militias that ran their own taxes, courts and justice. The quality of the "governments" was poor but its the first thing people do once the State disappears. That's why I think blaming the existence of a central bank for the Japanese aggression is missing the point. People are violent by nature; China was nearby and disorganised. The Japanese took it the way a cat takes a mouse.
I don't believe in causation where you can say "X happened so Y was inevitable." Ireland has a long history of sectarian hatred. For some reason Libya and North Korea took an interest in Ireland and supplied military grade weapons to Catholics. Protestants got military grade weapons from South Africa. (Look at an atlas and you will be stunned at how insane this was). Both sides were righteous - God was on their side and it was a sin not to fight. The war was profitable; a small militia in control of an area earns incredible cash for knuckle-heads that would otherwise be merely middle-class.
The decision of the British Army to withdraw from "no go areas" was hugely significant. It meant that people effectively left the control of the Crown. Even if you hated the Brits, being at the mercy of the mobs was terrible.
What I can say it that no area was ever without a government. Even areas where the British Army could not go for 20 years had local militias that ran their own taxes, courts and justice. The quality of the "governments" was poor but its the first thing people do once the State disappears. That's why I think blaming the existence of a central bank for the Japanese aggression is missing the point. People are violent by nature; China was nearby and disorganised. The Japanese took it the way a cat takes a mouse.
I understand that some people have violent tendencies. My point was that we can reduce the harm of people's violent tendencies by eliminating governments and central banks. If there was no government in China, would Japan still have been just as keen on taking it over? I'm not sure, but a governmental tax structure that can be commandeered is a tempting prize, and a place with no central tax collection agency would make it much harder to plunder a nation's resources and exploit their wealth.
Mafias are terrible but are greatly supported by what the state makes illegal. Prohibition in the U.S. helped give rise to underground crime, because of the profit incentives that were created. Just a local example - I'm certainty not qualified to comment on how the Irish mafia came to be.
I don't think it is true. We had some of the worst wars in the 19th century. I remember reading a passage by Henry George in the late 1800s claiming buying national debt bonds is not wealth as the bombs, guns, ships, and bullets have already been fired. Thus, they use national debt to fund wars. The Continental War was paid for with deficit spending which led to the saying, "Not worth a Continental" as it would take a truckload to buy a loaf of bread. Abe Lincoln paid for the civil war by issuing greenbacks out of nothing - extremely inflationary.
Wars are possible with a balanced budget amendment. How it would go down is the government would have to scare the public enough to buy war bonds and increase the income tax to 90%. That is what happened during WWII. The rich people were scared of losing it all so they accepted the terms because paying 90% tax is better than speaking German.
However, the Iraq war probably would have never taken place because if Bush asked every American to pay $1000 a year to support the war. Most would have voted him out.
The first paragraph is reason enough to end the fed. Probably the clearest and accurate paragraph I have seen to the horrible fed.
Wars are possible with a balanced budget amendment. How it would go down is the government would have to scare the public enough to buy war bonds and increase the income tax to 90%. That is what happened during WWII. The rich people were scared of losing it all so they accepted the terms because paying 90% tax is better than speaking German.
However, the Iraq war probably would have never taken place because if Bush asked every American to pay $1000 a year to support the war. Most would have voted him out.
The first paragraph is reason enough to end the fed. Probably the clearest and accurate paragraph I have seen to the horrible fed.
The Shankill Butchers were just one unit of the UDA; there were many little armies. Over 3000 were killed. In the US, that would be equivalent to 6 hundred thousand people being killed.
I don't believe in causation where you can say "X happened so Y was inevitable." Ireland has a long history of sectarian hatred. For some reason Libya and North Korea took an interest in Ireland and supplied military grade weapons to Catholics. Protestants got military grade weapons from South Africa. (Look at an atlas and you will be stunned at how insane this was). Both sides were righteous - God was on their side and it was a sin not to fight. The war was profitable; a small militia in control of an area earns incredible cash for knuckle-heads that would otherwise be merely middle-class.
The decision of the British Army to withdraw from "no go areas" was hugely significant. It meant that people effectively left the control of the Crown. Even if you hated the Brits, being at the mercy of the mobs was terrible.
What I can say it that no area was ever without a government. Even areas where the British Army could not go for 20 years had local militias that ran their own taxes, courts and justice. The quality of the "governments" was poor but its the first thing people do once the State disappears. That's why I think blaming the existence of a central bank for the Japanese aggression is missing the point. People are violent by nature; China was nearby and disorganised. The Japanese took it the way a cat takes a mouse.
I don't believe in causation where you can say "X happened so Y was inevitable." Ireland has a long history of sectarian hatred. For some reason Libya and North Korea took an interest in Ireland and supplied military grade weapons to Catholics. Protestants got military grade weapons from South Africa. (Look at an atlas and you will be stunned at how insane this was). Both sides were righteous - God was on their side and it was a sin not to fight. The war was profitable; a small militia in control of an area earns incredible cash for knuckle-heads that would otherwise be merely middle-class.
The decision of the British Army to withdraw from "no go areas" was hugely significant. It meant that people effectively left the control of the Crown. Even if you hated the Brits, being at the mercy of the mobs was terrible.
What I can say it that no area was ever without a government. Even areas where the British Army could not go for 20 years had local militias that ran their own taxes, courts and justice. The quality of the "governments" was poor but its the first thing people do once the State disappears. That's why I think blaming the existence of a central bank for the Japanese aggression is missing the point. People are violent by nature; China was nearby and disorganised. The Japanese took it the way a cat takes a mouse.
Quote
I'm still amazed at OP's regret that Japan did not win WW2. How on earth does he think a Japanese speaking America would a good thing :S
How on earth did you pull that conclusion out of my post? And yes, central banking is a better term to use than federal reserve, but an even better term for the organization at fault for wars is governments. Not just our government. Governments. However, the ability to spend money you don't have exacerbates government's tendency to war and expand its power.
Put it this way: give a psychopath a gun (a bad idea), and he is limited in who he can harm. Give a psychopath an army (an even worse idea), and he is virtually limitless in the amount of harm he can do.
Get rid of central banking, and wars become more difficult to wage. Get rid of governments, and wars become impossible to wage.
People don't war with other people. Governments war with other governments. The Japanese people were not at war with the American people. Their psychotic emporer and whoever else influencing him behind the curtain were at war with our psychotic president and whoever else influencing him behind the curtain.
You seem hung up on alternate realities, but did this help to clear things up?
"People don't war with other people.". Meet my neighbours: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shankill_Butchers
People certainly do war with other people. No central bank, government or state needed. Pliers for pulling tongues out are handy though.
Just skimming over the wiki, I see the gang killed a total of 30 people. While tragic, I would not consider this war. It may have been 30,000 had the gang had a central bank and a government. Of course there are violent people in the world. My argument was that the violence can be minimized if central banks are abolished, and minimized even more if governments are abolished.
The second factor I think may be worth examining is why this gang began killing in the first place. You probably know more about it than I do, so please tell me. Was it in response to some government action or policy? I see the gang was formed after one or more members were released from prison. Prison does terrible things to a man's mind. As does child abuse, which probably wouldn't be discussed in the Wiki, but maybe you have more insight into these Shankill guys. This is the first I've heard of them, so pardon my ignorance, but if they acted in response to government's initiation of force, then again - the problem is government, not people.
Thanks for the discussion - and sorry I'm a few days late. I though I was subbed to the thread but no.
Quote
I'm still amazed at OP's regret that Japan did not win WW2. How on earth does he think a Japanese speaking America would a good thing :S
How on earth did you pull that conclusion out of my post? And yes, central banking is a better term to use than federal reserve, but an even better term for the organization at fault for wars is governments. Not just our government. Governments. However, the ability to spend money you don't have exacerbates government's tendency to war and expand its power.
Put it this way: give a psychopath a gun (a bad idea), and he is limited in who he can harm. Give a psychopath an army (an even worse idea), and he is virtually limitless in the amount of harm he can do.
Get rid of central banking, and wars become more difficult to wage. Get rid of governments, and wars become impossible to wage.
People don't war with other people. Governments war with other governments. The Japanese people were not at war with the American people. Their psychotic emporer and whoever else influencing him behind the curtain were at war with our psychotic president and whoever else influencing him behind the curtain.
You seem hung up on alternate realities, but did this help to clear things up?
"People don't war with other people.". Meet my neighbours: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shankill_Butchers
People certainly do war with other people. No central bank, government or state needed. Pliers for pulling tongues out are handy though.
[/quote]
I'm still amazed at OP's regret that Japan did not win WW2. How on earth does he think a Japanese speaking America would a good thing :S
[/quote]
How on earth did you pull that conclusion out of my post? And yes, central banking is a better term to use than federal reserve, but an even better term for the organization at fault for wars is governments. Not just our government. Governments. However, the ability to spend money you don't have exacerbates government's tendency to war and expand its power.
Put it this way: give a psychopath a gun (a bad idea), and he is limited in who he can harm. Give a psychopath an army (an even worse idea), and he is virtually limitless in the amount of harm he can do.
Get rid of central banking, and wars become more difficult to wage. Get rid of governments, and wars become impossible to wage.
People don't war with other people. Governments war with other governments. The Japanese people were not at war with the American people. Their psychotic emporer and whoever else influencing him behind the curtain were at war with our psychotic president and whoever else influencing him behind the curtain.
You seem hung up on alternate realities, but did this help to clear things up?
I'm still amazed at OP's regret that Japan did not win WW2. How on earth does he think a Japanese speaking America would a good thing :S
I think I see your mistake."Our two tragic World Wars were NOT possible without the Federal Reserve. The ability for governments to borrow money from thin air and go into debt for war created the largest-scale wars in the history of the planet and tallest pile of corpses in the history of the planet. Central Bank debt gave us aircraft carriers. It gave us submarines. It gave us nuclear weapons. Have we done good with them?"
He should have replaced "the Federal Reserve" with "central banking", considering that the Federal Reserve is a US agency, and central banking is practiced worldwide. replacing that phrase gives us a much clearer statement, one that even you should be able to grasp:
"Our two tragic World Wars were NOT possible without central banking. The ability for governments to borrow money from thin air and go into debt for war created the largest-scale wars in the history of the planet and tallest pile of corpses in the history of the planet. Central Bank debt gave us aircraft carriers. It gave us submarines. It gave us nuclear weapons. Have we done good with them?"
In Japan's case, it was the ability to occupy and exploit the wealth of Korea and China gave them all those things. Adding the US to the list would have made them even more powerful.
Unfortunately, this is EXACTLY how the Federal Reserve is supposed to work. Watch this if you're interested in why things are the way they are and who's really in charge.
I'm still amazed at OP's regret that Japan did not win WW2. How on earth does he think a Japanese speaking America would a good thing :S
I think I see your mistake."Our two tragic World Wars were NOT possible without the Federal Reserve. The ability for governments to borrow money from thin air and go into debt for war created the largest-scale wars in the history of the planet and tallest pile of corpses in the history of the planet. Central Bank debt gave us aircraft carriers. It gave us submarines. It gave us nuclear weapons. Have we done good with them?"
He should have replaced "the Federal Reserve" with "central banking", considering that the Federal Reserve is a US agency, and central banking is practiced worldwide. replacing that phrase gives us a much clearer statement, one that even you should be able to grasp:
"Our two tragic World Wars were NOT possible without central banking. The ability for governments to borrow money from thin air and go into debt for war created the largest-scale wars in the history of the planet and tallest pile of corpses in the history of the planet. Central Bank debt gave us aircraft carriers. It gave us submarines. It gave us nuclear weapons. Have we done good with them?"
"You cannot invade the mainland United States. There would be a rifle behind every blade of grass."
Misattributed to Isoroku Yamamoto and typical libertarian argument, but there is a truth to that or two.
Misattributed to Isoroku Yamamoto and typical libertarian argument, but there is a truth to that or two.
Slightly related and it popped up in the news again: Krugman and his alien invasion thing - http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/21/paul-krugman-alien-invasion_n_1612973.html
The odd thing is that the US seems to be doing this but in the form of preparation for a druggie invasion. The "war on drugs" could be the greatest public boondoggle/"stimulus" in history.
I'm still amazed at OP's regret that Japan did not win WW2. How on earth does he think a Japanese speaking America would a good thing :S
Slightly related and it popped up in the news again: Krugman and his alien invasion thing - http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/21/paul-krugman-alien-invasion_n_1612973.html
Quote
Technically it's not just the Federal Reserve but large-scale capital in general that necessitates a constantly falling population, hence large-scale warfare.
Interesting... how so?
How do bubbles work? They go up and down. They build it up, then pull out the foundation just after selling off and shorting themselves at the peak. They make money on the way up and down. It is pump and dump on a generational scale. You can only buy up real capitol for pennies on the dollar if you drive the prices there first, thru artificial means.
BTW ever look up CODEX ALIMENTARIUS? (semiunrelated)
Interesting... how so?
By automating work and externalizing risk.
...snip...
The most important thing to know about the Federal Reserve, and much more disturbing, is the power that this and other central banks give governments to wage war. Our two tragic World Wars were NOT possible without the Federal Reserve. The ability for governments to borrow money from thin air and go into debt for war created the lar...snip...
The most important thing to know about the Federal Reserve, and much more disturbing, is the power that this and other central banks give governments to wage war. Our two tragic World Wars were NOT possible without the Federal Reserve. The ability for governments to borrow money from thin air and go into debt for war created the lar...snip...
Wait - you think it would have been better if the Japanese won ?
Quote
Technically it's not just the Federal Reserve but large-scale capital in general that necessitates a constantly falling population, hence large-scale warfare.
Interesting... how so?
Technically it's not just the Federal Reserve but large-scale capital in general that necessitates a constantly falling population, hence large-scale warfare. The centralized, government-linked nature of the Federal Reserve definitely promotes large-scale capital and debt-financed wars, but they would both still exist without it.
But obviously the Federal Reserve is a major enabler.
But obviously the Federal Reserve is a major enabler.
Jump to: