The Bare, Naked Truth About The Federal Reserve's Socialist Agenda

Email

The top line story, according to the FDIC's latest Quarterly Banking Review, is that the majority of U.S. banks are in better shape today than they have been in years.

The untold story is that when the Federal Reserve is done transitioning the United States from capitalism to socialism, the few dozen banks that remain in America will all be profitable until they need bailing out again, but will never die and live on in infamy.

Is that just hyperbole or some wild conspiracy theory? It's neither. Unfortunately, it's the bare, naked truth about the Fed.

It doesn't matter that you didn't know the Federal Reserve System was the brainchild of a handful of the world's most powerful bankers.

Or that all of them took a secret train from New Jersey to Jekyll Island, Georgia (owned by J.P. Morgan) in 1910 aboard Rhode Island Senator Nelson Aldrich's private car to devise and orchestrate the creation of the Federal Reserve.

Or that Aldrich was an investment associate of J.P. Morgan, that his son-in-law was John D. Rockefeller, Jr., or that he was the political spokesman for big business and banking interests in Congress.

It doesn't matter if you don't know who the powerful bankers are today that run the Fed's twelve district banks. Or that the Fed's New York Bank conducts all its open market operations with a bunch of favored big banks it protects (Case in point, MF Global).

Or that one former Chairman of the New York Bank's Board, who was also and still is a Goldman Sachs board member, resigned from the Fed when it was discovered he bought $3 million worth of Goldman's stock right before the Fed made sure Goldman wouldn't have to go out of business at the height of the financial crisis.

What matters, is that without the Federal Reserve the banking system in the United States would be more honest, more competitive and less of a risk to the economy than it is now.

And what really matters, is understanding the Federal Reserve could never exist and do what it does in an open democracy, and that its agenda of socializing risks (making taxpayers eat bankers' losses) and privatizing their profits (letting them keep their bonuses) for the benefit of its club members (the banks) means the Federal Reserve has to transform America to a socialist model in order to maintain its own growth and ultimate power.

Of course, it's not a stretch to see how the Fed's socialist agenda will eventually encompass most of the American economy over time.

But to keep it simple, let's look at how the Fed has already done that to the benefit of its primary constituents: banks and bankers.

It's All Thanks To The Federal Reserve…

With the Fed at the helm, the FDIC's Quarterly Banking Review shows aggregated FDIC insured banks' net operating revenues (net interest income plus total noninterest income) in the third quarter of 2012 came to $169.6 billion. That's up 3% from a year ago, or year-over-year (YOY).

Total quarterly aggregate net income was $37.6 billion, up $2.3 billion YOY to the highest level in 6 years.

In all, some 57.5% of FDIC insured banks had higher earnings than a year ago. A year ago, in 2011's third quarter, 62.6% had higher earnings than in the third quarter of 2010.

One thing to watch, is whether the downward move in the percent of banks earning more than in year-earlier periods is an aberration or the beginning of a downtrend.

This quarter, just 10.5% of banks reported losses vs. 14.6% one year ago. Problem banks totaled 694 vs. 732 in Q2 of 2012. That's the sixth consecutive quarter of fewer problem banks and a full three years since the number was less than 700. Still, problem banks are 913% higher since the 2008 crisis. There were only 76 problem banks at the end of 2007.

Total assets of problem banks fell from $282.4 billion to $262.2 billion, an average of $377million in assets per bank. Still, that's a lot of pain if they have to be rescued.

In the meantime, everybody wants to know if banks are making loans. The answer to that is, yes, but not a lot.

FDIC Chairman Martin Gruenberg called the loan picture an "extended period of increasing loan balances. But still relatively modest."

Loans rose 0.9% to $7.8 trillion. Some 55% of banks reported loan growth.

Commercial and industrial loans (C&I) rose 2.2% to $1.45 trillion. But construction and development loans were down 3.2% to $210 billion , that's 18 straight down quarters. One bright spot was the 2.4% increase in auto loans in the quarter.

Loans to individuals rose just 1% to $1.29 trillion and residential mortgage loans rose only 0.8% to $1.89 trillion. Still, total industry assets rose 1.4% from Q2 to $14.2 trillion.

Net gains on assets sold totaled $5.6 billion vs. only $639 million a year ago.
Of that $4.9 billion increase in net gains, $3.9 billion actually came from loan sales.

Banks saw a 7% rise in non-interest income and a 0.7% increase in interest- earning assets (net interest income) to $746 million. That's for all banks, keep that in mind.

Loan loss provisions declined to $14.8 billion , that's down 5.4% sequentially and down 20.6% year- over- year. All in all, loan loss provisions have fallen in 12 straight quarters.

Meanwhile, average net interest margins fell 13 basis points to 3.43%.

So, on the surface the banking picture looks calm. That's thanks to the Fed rescuing banks, most of whom would have been insolvent and gone bankrupt in any other industry.

But here's the real deal….

You only have to look at a few important metrics to see that not everything is as good as the FDIC and the industry will let on.

And as we take quick note of them, understand that it's because banks are still fragile and pretending to be strong that the Fed is continuing its rescue efforts in the form of quantitative easing and other backstopping programs.

Not a lot of loans are being made and net interest margins (the core of banking profitability) are falling to dangerously low levels. Net earnings growth is coming from a long history of reducing loan loss provisions, selling assets, and still a fair amount of trading at the big banks.

How else can banks in the aggregate have managed a 7% rise in non-interest income while only a 0.7% increase in interest earning assets to $746 million for all banks?

Another problem brewing for banks is that they're upping their exposure to the same high octane instruments (collateralized debt obligations, collateralized loan obligations, commercial mortgage-backed securities, and leverage structured finance products in general) that brought them down in the last crisis.

They just bought an additional $48 billion of structured finance "securities" and packaged loans in the latest quarter according to the FDIC report. Their leverage structured holdings are now the highest they've been since mid-2009.

On top of reaching for interest income by grabbing more leveraged products, banks are extending "duration" on their balance sheets. That means they're holding assets with longer maturities because they yield more. But they are also far more prone to losses in a rising rate environment, if and when we get into a period of inflation or rate adjustments.

Of course the Federal Reserve knows all this. And they have given their blessing.

How else are the banks going to make money but take more risks by purchasing leveraged instruments with the Fed's no-interest loans which they use as capital?

There's no rush to make loans when the Fed lets banks go for the quick bucks to look healthy so they can pay back the federal government and pay out dividends again, all to make their stock prices firm up or rise.

Why? To get more stupid investors to buy more of their equity so their options become "in the money" and they can get bigger and bigger bonuses, until they implode again.

So what if they do? The Fed is there to socialize their losses, as they will from now on until the twelfth of never, or until the curtain is pulled back and we see the Fed for what it really is.

Oh, and there's more. The whole socialization thing, it's not just domestic. The Fed has taken it global with the help of the biggest socialist governments on the planet.

Don't believe me? Wait until you hear what I have to say next Tuesday about the Fed.

Unless you're a closet socialist you're going to be very, very mad. Maybe even mad enough to do something.

Related Articles and News:

Join the conversation. Click here to jump to comments…

About the Author

Shah Gilani is the Event Trading Specialist for Money Map Press. He provides specific trading recommendations in Capital Wave Forecast, where he predicts gigantic "waves" of money forming and shows you how to play them for the biggest gains. In Short-Side Fortunes, Shah shows the "little guy" how to make massive size gains – sometimes in a single day – by flipping large asset classes like stocks, bonds, commodities, ETFs and more. He also writes our most talked-about publication, Wall Street Insights & Indictments, where he reveals how Wall Street's high-stakes game is really played.

Read full bio

  1. Robert Stone | December 11, 2012

    we should do a Gandhi on the fed and gov. Complete non violent non compliance. complete opt out of the banks. just stop every thing… starve them out of business

    • Rick | December 11, 2012

      I like your idea Robert. The only problem is that, the people who voted for Obama are so gullible and naive that they think the government is their friend. They are going along thinking that everything is OK, and that king Obama will fix everything. He is going to fix everything all right, but not quite the way they think. Those people wont notice what is happening until they are completely imprisoned in Socialism or possibly worse.

    • Tim | December 11, 2012

      Robert, I believe you have a good idea. I say once Ben is done in 2014, so should the Fed go bye-bye. The whole situation is ridiculous and it is hard for me to even read the word socialist or type it for that matter. I just want to get sick. To allow ourselves to align with our European brethren and the catastrophe they've developed is beyond my comprehension. I don't want to be in the same bed as them at all. We may be helping their next bailout in 2018 or beyond. Why do you think Texas wants to secede from the Union? They see the same thing as Germany found out a couple of years ago. When states or countries keep borrowing more than what is available, everything goes up in flames. They aren't stupid. The rest of us are the dumb boobs. It is ridiculous and if I can stomach next week's article I will. If not, onto the trash pile it gets deleted, too. Sheesh!!!

      • Roger Charlesworth | December 15, 2012

        Tim. The NWO went to great lengths to cobble the EU together. It CANNOT fail! Not as long as Ben Bernanke can do something about it!

  2. Roger Charlesworth | December 11, 2012

    Whatever Ben does he does for the Banksters. After all, he runs the biggest non-government organisation on the planet, accountable only to the Banks. AND he gets to print the money for the US of A, AND to decide where it will go. Who is more powerful : Ben, the Pres, or Congress?

    Anyway, Ben is simply a tool in the hands of the ONW [Opaque NetWork] functioning on behalf of the NWO. Their agenda is to protect and enhance the elite and subject the sheeple to servitude. 100% on Food Stamps plus their mandatory bio-chip must be his secondary goal.

    Ben is no fool. He has trouble persuading the likes of Shah Gilani that he knows what he is doing. That is because Shah STILL has not fully conceded that Ben's agenda is a simple and as cruel as i suggest. Ben is crystal clear what his mandate is, and THAT entails reducing Main Street to rubble.

  3. Roger Charlesworth | December 11, 2012

    AREN'T YOU FED UP? I feel very sorry for all the intelligent economics pundits who rant and rail at Mr Bernanke for all his financial hanky-panky. They think he is too arrogant to listen to reason, and that it will take a major catastrophe for him to see the light. The reason I am sorry for them is that THEY have not seen the light : Mr Bernanke's agenda has got NOTHING to do with the welfare of Main Street, America. His customers are not YOU, they are the Banks and their Banksters. They are not Too-Big-To-Fail, they are simply Not-Going-To-Fail as long as Mr Bernanke holds the purse strings. His agenda is a simple two-pronged fork : 1. to keep his Banks solvent, and 2. to reduce all of Main Street to rubble, figuratively speaking. Representing the NWO, his mission is to reduce the sheeple to the level of being 100% on food stamps so they will HAVE to receive a bio-chip to survive, since this will be a pre-condition of receiving "food stamps". Brave New World is just around the corner. Stop the snowball rolling NOW before it engulfs you.

  4. D. SYMONDS | December 11, 2012

    Shah is correct about the role of the Fed.
    I suggest viewing the set of lectures at the khan academy about how the banking system really works. It clearly explains the mechanism that the FED uses without making moral judgements.

  5. DockyWocky | December 11, 2012

    "We go ours," so the rest of us can go to helll.

  6. SteveM | December 11, 2012

    Not sure if its Ben or Barack, but someone saved us from a deep depression in 2008.

    Just wondering what part of socialism is so offensive to people, police, sidewalks, military, public schools, health care, fire department.

    • fallingman | December 11, 2012

      The Fed pours gasoline on a house, sets it ablaze, tiptoes away from the scene, and then rushes back to the rescue, claiming credit as a savior. Such a slick con.

      In everything they do, the Fed breaks my leg, hands me crutches, and says, "What would do without me?"

      Yeah, sidewalks…that's what so offensive about socialism. Like we never had those before the state went all godzilla on us. It's the rule…by brute force…of an insider elite. that's what's offensive. The state arrogates unto itself the license to do all manner of things that, if done by you or me, would land us in jail.

      Anyone who condone that behavior is nothing more than a thug.

    • DougB | December 11, 2012

      What is offensive is that due to our totally out-of-control FEDERAL government, the wealthiest country that has ever existed is now bankrupt. Government has achieved what should have been IMPOSSIBLE….it took decades….but here we are….and the FEDERAL government does not build sidewalks, does not pay for local fire departments and the local police….thank goodness. The Federal Government is certainly involved in our disastrous public schools and our health care….and Obamacare will make things worse.

      Try reading the US Constitution for the first time….you might learn something….although it isn't followed anymore…..but if we did follow it….we would STILL be the wealthiest country that ever existed.

    • Tim | December 11, 2012

      Honestly, Steve. I never considered those entities part of a social agenda, etc. Those are really important to our society as our public sector. Public needs and services. They need our full attention as well. I appreciate their services, no question and would prefer having 4 police officers around instead of 2, but each city, county and state has to live within their means as best as possible. They all deserve our appreciation, etc. and should not be given any less, but having it grow out of proportion for no reason just isn't acceptable. Neither is a bank, private sector, growing at the rate that they are currently. Helping us in the short term in 2008 was definately necessary, but long term, the ideas and strategy don't really add up. Only to a small few and not the greater whole of the piece. We are the greater whole. Not Ben and BO.

      • DoktorThomas™ | December 13, 2012

        Police are not proactive, they are responsive; ergo, you are in the same danger whether their numbers are 400 or 2. Also, despite misleading department slogans, police have no legal obligation to protect anyone–except politicians and themselves.
        The best protection is provided privately, by Smith & Wesson.
        More dead felons would make the neighborhood more safe. There is nothing precious about a life squandered on criminal behavior.

    • Dutch | December 14, 2012

      The part that is offensive is the part where they use public schools to indoctrinate the gullible masses into believing that sidewalks and health care would be impossible without them, and into hero worship of first responders and soldiers, even though these jobs were done successfully by volunteers for centuries. Volunteers who don't make $300k milking overtime, and who are subject to appropriate punishment when they club innocent people in the face, shoot the wrong guy, violate your rights against illegal search and seizure, torture prisoners, grope children's genitals or take target practice with live puppies.

      Know any people who have been indoctrinated this way? I know one…

  7. Ken Oden | December 11, 2012

    Now that the facts are finally coming into view and the truth finally becoming known–
    let's just follow Ron Paul's plan and program to cooly and calmly END THE FED. First we need
    to End The WarZ, End The Foreign Bribery [Aid], and then End The Fed. Logical and simple.
    It is NOT to late. Simply impeach OurBumma for his treason of abrogating Our Constitution and
    replace him as President with the one and ONLY Champion of Our Constitution, RP. IMO

    • Patricia | December 13, 2012

      Didn't JFK plan on doing that? Ending the Fed? And look what happened to him.
      I was scared if Ron Paul had been elected, he would have met the same fate.

      • Roger Charlesworth | December 17, 2012

        You are dead right Patricia. Either dead, or a lone voice in the wilderness. the troughers are not going to back off from the trough just coz RP sez so…they have too much to lose……………..

    • Roger Charlesworth | December 15, 2012

      Ken. I and a myriad others love your ideas and love Ron Paul. But Ron is a voice in the political wilderness. Surely we have to recognise that to " End The WarZ, End The Foreign Bribery [Aid], and then End The Fed" requires a will and motivation by those empowered to do so. Unfortunately the reverse is true : more or less everyone one of the "empowered" has a massive vested interest in the status quo. ie. feeding at the trough. How else would they all be worth in excess of 7 million dollars apiece?

  8. ph | December 11, 2012

    Here we have the world's richest bankers conspiring to turn America into a socialist state… How does that work out? Are they masochists, or is this just another far-right judeo-maconic conspiracy delirium?

    • AWR | December 12, 2012

      They're not conspiring to turn America into a socialist state. The American government is doing that, but not by design, but because they want to be re-elected. The FED is simply acting to support the banking system which is their mandate. The result, of course, is UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES.

  9. Curtis Edmark | December 11, 2012

    Similar type manipulation corrupts the gas and oil industry too. But what can you do about it? Its been suggested that we go "on strike" for a day and refuse to drive our cars. Whether or not that would work, we will never know because its never going to happen. I believe the same thing is true here with the banking system.

    • DoktorThomas™ | December 13, 2012

      General strikes will become the norm here, just as in Greece. However, as evidenced by the idiots in Michigan they will be patently more violent.

      With exception of checking accounts, there is no reason to use a bank. Not only are US banks a cartel and guilty as proffered above but they are charged with spying on their customers and required to detail reports on a variety personal data. Also "any unusual behavior" whether it relates to banking or not must be reported. Individual bank employees are left to define "unusual behavior" for the purpose of these reports. So wearing a Hawaiian shirt in winter might get you reported… Same for utility companies, USPS, UPS… even Target watches you. Billboards are being equipped with cameras and facial recognition software to scan the general populous walking by.

      As for oil, I went from driving 30K a year to less than 5, usually around 3.5K. Not to hurt oil companies but to return "favor" to the greedy states. We are simply taxed too much. I work too hard to give it to either of those spend thrift governments. No problem with lazy people starving and dying in the streets. They got the same opportunity as the rest of us.

      The list of abuses is endless. Don't merely end the Fed, end the fed.gov and start over. It is providence that all 50 states have petitions from insightful citizens to succeed from the Union. It is an idea that has merit and its time has come. Let DC be on its own; the politicians themselves can pay back the loans they made, supported and signed for. Let the criminals in government be their own fiefdom.

  10. fallingman | December 11, 2012

    Bless you for telling the truth.

  11. Frank B. | December 11, 2012

    As usual, Shah hits the nail on the head. Can't wait for next Tuesdays' missive!

    I keep hearing everyone whine about the banks and banksters, but if everyone got off their asses
    and removed their money from the TBTF banks and go local (credit unions and Community banks) we will vote with our feet!!
    The fed needs to end, period!

    Thank You Shah!
    FB

  12. Edmund K | December 11, 2012

    @ph — look at how the "socialist" states really work.

  13. jake | December 11, 2012

    Shah Gilani writes, ". . .The Fed is there to socialize their losses . . .Oh, and there's more. The whole socialization thing, it's not just domestic. The Fed has taken it global with the help of the biggest socialist governments on the planet." He is saying this semi-private banking corporation that ensures the private banking system won't end up in the toilet is a socialist enterprise. The critics of socialism argue the private sector can do what the government does only more efficiently and more profitably. Unless Gilani is an anarchist, I doubt that, then Gilani has to straighten out his argument as to what constitutes socialism and what constitutes capitalism keeping in mind that pure capitalism is not "free enterprise. A history of 18th and 19th centuries capitalism clearly shows that.

    • fallingman | December 11, 2012

      Don't think Marxism. Think corporatism…as Mussolini preferred to call fascism. Fascism is a form of socialism. Nazi stands for national socialist.

      The Fed is a fascist institution….or "corporatist" if you prefer…stemming from the unholy alliance of government and business. They call it a "partnership" to make it sound better. It's otherwise known as a racket, a cartel, a price fixing scheme.

  14. Tom Paquin | December 11, 2012

    in some countries this behavior would precipitate a coup d'e. tat

  15. Virginia Hammon | December 11, 2012

    Socializing risk and privatizing profit is NOT "socialism." Socialism socializes the means of production—risk and profit. Your message about the role of the FED is important, but when you insist on using definitions that are manipulated through the propaganda of Wall Street to have nearly their opposite meaning, it causes well read and thoughtful people to dismiss your entire message as poorly informed—you're stabbing yourself in the foot.

  16. Kevin Donnelly | December 11, 2012

    Let's be truthful! What the Fed is doing is Capitalism not Socialism. We must know by now that Capitalism and Socialism are like fire and water, necessary for life as long as one does not eradicate the other.

  17. Charles | December 11, 2012

    I'm mad enough to do something now, and I have the Jekyll Island book on order, but what can I do?

  18. DD | December 11, 2012

    Behind the Capitalist façade the US has been a Socialist country for decades, so I am not sure why all the fuss now.
    Boy Bush confirmed Socialism when he bailed out his banker friends at the tax payer’s expense yet few (esp. Republicans) even blinked at this fact. I won’t go into all the outsourcing Boy Bush allowed to happen in addition all the Lies on Terror BS – and again few people even blinked at his deceit (along with the Clinton lies prior).
    In addition when you have someone who has zero health insurance, yet end ups with an exorbitant doctor/hospital bill they simply cannot pay (for example a heart attack will set you back $500K), who do you think ends up paying for that? Main Street does with the ever increasing health cost fees and out of pocket expenses for those lucky to even have health insurance. The hospitals/health industry will get as much of the $500K back as they can, anyway they can.
    What gets me too is what idiot thought it was a good idea to tie health insurance in with one’s job? Probably a Republican! I mean if you lose your job, most often lose their health and dental insurance since few can really afford COBRA – stupidity at its best!
    I am not an Obama supporter, but people who blame Obama alone for this countries demise have been walking around w/their head up their a-hole for decades. The US it is just as much a shared society (socialism) (underneath the façade/charade) as it is in the EU.
    I suggest reading “The Creature from Jekyll Island” by G. Edward Griffin. Here you will read about the biggest ponzi scheme in human history that makes the Madoff ponzi scheme look like (putting it very politely) a picnic in the park.
    Question more and look outside the US for comparisons!

    • fallingman | December 12, 2012

      TRUMAN is the one who linked employment with health insurance. He put wage and price controls in effect, but allowed private employers to enhance overall compensation by covering their employees health care insurance…and the rest is history. How many people hav a clue about this? Idiotic.

      And yet, most people would regard Truman more favorably and give him more respect than they should, given the complete buffoon and moron he actually was.

    • DoktorThomas™ | December 13, 2012

      The socialization of America precedes either Bush by decades.

    • Maestroe | December 29, 2012

      Reading The Creature From Jekyll Island, will put you in the driver's seat…You will no longer be able to skip out for beer during commercial interruptions, because the revolution will not be televised.

  19. H. Craig Bradley | December 11, 2012

    DON'T BOTHER ME

    The truth is most Americans, at least the ones I am acquainted with, could care less and don't want to know. To most of them, this is just all more "politics" and they don't really want to be burdened with it all. Its not a topic of conversation in most circles either.

    Like I've said in previous comments, the majority of voters are apathetic and don't really pay much attention to what is going on around them. Actually, most Americans are oblivious. Instead, local gossip is more interesting and important in the lives of many. Most people are preoccupied (focused) with their own personal affairs ( getting to work on time, paying the loans and bills, keeping the "old lady" happy or paying alimony if they don't, you get it).

    Anotherwords, on many levels, America is becoming more isolationist oriented. This is why the murder of Ambassador to Libya Stevens was largely ignored by voters and the general public. Its simply not their problem. Likewise, legalization of marijuana in Washington State and Colorado reflects a public mood of "tending to one's own business", period.

    • Patricia | December 13, 2012

      I 100% agree with your post. People are exactly as you say. They seem to think they can go about their lives and that "all that stuff" doesn't affect them!
      But it's not only Americans that are like that because I'm Canadian and find the same attitude here.

  20. Cp | December 11, 2012

    Read the book "The Rich and The Super Rich" by Ferdinand Lundberg. Try to get the 1988 revised version of the 1968 original. It explains it all. You will take an entirely different view of the world, and how it operates, from now on. What the "elite" don't have, they don't want!

  21. AWR | December 12, 2012

    I agree completely.

  22. RUSS SMITH | December 12, 2012

    Hi!, Patrons Of Money Morning Et Al:

    The story about the Fed. that Shah wants to tell is decades old. Dr. Ron Paul has been writing/talking about the Fed. too for decades. The punch line is this: to end the Fed. is simple; everyone stops/boycots spending their fiat, I Owe You Nothing, Federal Reserve Notes NOW & forever regardless of pain and/or consequences! Anything short of that tactic is failure to act instead of talk. Where do we go for OUR money or purchasing power then? We sure don't need Ron Pual, the Shah, the Republicans nor the Democrates for example. One document alone shall suffice & that's OUR US Constitution's Article 1; Section 10 requiring of all of US to use specie, US MINT minted gold and silver coins minted for FREE without commissions only as our money with absolute no recoarse to paper money of any kind. That means nobody buys a steak, a lb. of hamberger, a house, a piece of land, an automobile, a plane ticket, a piece of bubble gum, a magazine, fuel, furnature, etc. wthout paying for it with specie gold and or silver coin or Constitutionally mandated money….period! By the way all the repository gold in Fort Knox etc. is the people's gold and when did anyone authorize the hoarding/storing of their gold there? This gold belongs to US and, according to OUR Constitution, belongs in OUR pockets. NOW, please go to the website for The National Inflation Association and watch their almost hour long video MELTUP. Towards the end of this video Dr. Mark Faber tells US that, if the US $ were again pegged to gold, the price of gold would be around $1,000,000 per troy oz. but the Constitution says we are to own the Fort Knox gold etc., by having it in OUR pockets. If we each had 1/4th troy oz. @ $1,000,000 per troy oz. that would give us an immediate $250,000 head start at rebuilding our finances wouldn't it? The gold coins could be circulated in small units of 1/10th oz. which would be $100,000 each plus we could have silver coins back in circulation for making nominal transactions easier plus our present clad change. The Constitution has been provided US by OUR founders for OUR protection. On the issue of OUR money the founders got down to the nitty gritty without any fanfare & provided the guidelines they KNEW would serve everyone's best interests & not only the interests of bankers and their political allies of any political parties and thus keep OUR finances on the straight & narrow path of sound money througout OUR entire monetary system at every level of society. The Constitution of the United States Of America holds the pat answers to OUR totally complex & corrupt monetary problems of today, if we will only turn to it alone and take to heart what we've been provided by our founders so long ago. There you have it folks being a return to OUR US Constitution holding the answers to OUR monetary problems right in front of OUR faces; except nobody wants to face forcing upon themselves the recognition that they have to cease using their Federal Reserve Notes as money now & turn to sound money the Constitution calls specie, I Owe You Something, gold & silver coins only. Otherwise, keep talking Shah, Ron Paul & others huh?

    • Roger Charlesworth | December 17, 2012

      I have been told that the Constitution
      is a contract with the signatory states, not the individual.

    • Maestroe | December 29, 2012

      The Gold (Coin) Standard, with Silver accompanying is the ONLY legal and Constitutionally mandated way Congress has of minting U.S. specie… "Congress has the power to "coin" money," NOT PRINT IT.The Fed (as the creature created by bankers) started to print and circulate counterfeit money the day it started issuing "notes" not backed by gold or any precious metal at equal value. The Bankers at Jekyll Island, planned the construction of the Fed, to circumvent the powers of Congress to coin…More insidiousness is the creation of inflation (printing money to flood the monetary system to de-value the dollar) and cause a raise in prices, wherein the money holders will be the only ones able to absorb the price raise to squeeze and ultimately destroy the middle class. Check history when Roosevelt made it illegal to possess gold, and read more concerning the proposed reasons and punishments for not complying…This scheme has been in effect for a long time..Almost everyone was put to sleep then, and in 2012, almost everyone is in REM, it is time to wake up.

  23. Lady Liberty | December 12, 2012

    Is The Federal Reserve Using Money-Laundering Techniques To Cleanse Banks' Balance Sheets?

    HSBC Report Should Result in Prosecutions, Not Just Fines, Say Critics

    How Bernanke can get banks lending again

    The Fed's hostility toward lowering the interest on excess reserves is almost self-contradictory. When Mr. Bernanke lists the weapons the Fed plans to use when the time comes to tighten monetary policy, he always gives raising the IOER a prominent role. His reasoning is straightforward and sound: If the Fed makes holding reserves more attractive, banks will hold more of them. Why doesn't the same reasoning apply in the other direction?

    But suppose it doesn't work. Suppose the Fed cuts the IOER from 25 basis points to minus 25 basis points, and banks don't lend one penny more. In that case, the Fed stops paying banks almost $4 billion a year in interest and, instead, starts collecting roughly equal fees from banks. That would be almost an $8 billion swing from banks to taxpayers. There are worse things.

  24. Asher | December 13, 2012

    Here's a list of the Bilderbergs carefully look through you will find
    Zoellick, Robert B. President, The World Bank Group etc.etc

    http://www.bilderbergmeetings.org/index.php

    • DD | December 13, 2012

      Asher – Few people even know about the Bilderberg Group and their meetings nor do most want to know or unfortunately even care.
      It seems the people only have themselves to blame in the end!

  25. Ron B 2 | December 13, 2012

    I wonder what would happen if we nationalized the FED, kicked out those special members, and have a freshly elected Congress create a NEW debt-free sound monetary system complete with a NEW dollar design. It could even look partially different between the states…

    I saw the video by Larry Edelson on China's rise to global supremacy and it seems that we would have to break away from the current currency mechanics to make it out of that predicament. That and severely change the way our government works. It shouldn't be too small, like in the AoC's case, but what we have now is way too oversized in the name of greater governance. Well, I don't see their design working for anyone but them. I would call for a SMALLER government with GREATER governance. Something with an advisory role for the executive not an imperial presidency. Our federal government is not it's own entity, it's made of the collection of sovereign states and people. Congress is suppose to keep things in the open so the PUBLIC will know what's going on dictate the direction of government. That was the point of our founders setting up a democratic rePUBLIC right? Government of the public, by the public, and for the public? The action of placing this amount of power into PRIVATE hands is the mark of a socialistic state. Since we've been doing this for years, we've always been socialistic. However, the shift you're seeing may not be a transformation to socialism but a tranferring into a different, left leaning, socialistic economy instead of the near total corporate fascism we've been experiencing.

    @steve- that is the left wing excuse for socialism. Really that could be considered populism since it's the populus creating infrastructure. Better yet, it's the true form of re-PUBLIC-anism. The PUBLIC is using PUBLIC money to create PUBLIC infrastructure, i.e., roads, bridges, railways, schools, hospitals, utilities, etc. Getting the majority of Americans dependent on government for things that they could potentially provide for themselves, putting PUBLIC money in PRIVATE hands through domestic and corporate welfare schemes is bad and IS SOCIALISM. Corporations use the money from the FED to further dominate our economy while the domestic welfare keeps those underfoot from squealing too much.

    FED money is PUBLIC money to, since they create money out of U.S. Dollar Value not actually from private profit it makes, so what happens if the U.S. goverenment declared the old money insolvent and created a new, bimetallic(multiple commodity) backed currency? A currency that would be subject to the actual value of our economy not independently inflated, nor devalued, arbitrarily. Also, taking away the FED's independence and policy making power and make them accountants, only reporting to the government national economic numbers for Congress to analyze, in a fair and VERY open process. Maybe even have those too-big-to-fail banks pay back their debts with those collateralized homes it holds. Could people be able to keep their homes?? Then maybe try to recapitalize our economy to get money to small businesses to get the business cycle running again? Just throwing ideas around, I'm new to this investment and financial stuff… Somebody throw some back..

  26. Ron B 2 | December 13, 2012

    @Steve- One question, is it fair that they get a bail-out, when one they caused this meltdown, but then you couldn't even if you failed through no fault of your own? This special group, or better known as the American Elite, have used our government to direct SOCIETY in their favor according to their agenda. That is REAL SOCIALISM, it happened in Germany, Italy, and Russia. Though they on the surface were enemies, they shared the same political root. European Socialism… The country's chosen elite directing society instead of Public.

    Socialism should be defined as the act of a small body recreating a larger society by acquiesing power through economic or political means.

  27. Melanie | March 6, 2013

    Government SOCIALISM as far as I understand it is a Government helping the poor and not the Rich. It is the Government taking taxpayer money to help the poor people of their nation use taxpayer money for their basic needs free healthcare, free food, free lodging, free education. Government CAPITALISM is defined as far as I am concerned as the rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer and that seems to be exactly what the US Government is doing to the rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer. The US is definitely the most CAPITlIST country in the world. If it was SOCIALIST some of the US banks would have been bankrupt. Some better examples of more SOCIALIST countries are Sweden, France, Canada, Australia. If you don't believe me take a look at some of their government programs that use their taxpayer money to help their poor. In those countries the poor are well taken care of and in the U.S. the Government hardly cares for the poor. That is CAPITALISM!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


+ 2 = eight

Some HTML is OK

© 2014 Money Map Press. All Rights Reserved. Protected by copyright of the United States and international treaties. Any reproduction, copying, or redistribution (electronic or otherwise, including the world wide web), of content from this webpage, in whole or in part, is strictly prohibited without the express written permission of Money Morning. 16 W. Madison St. Baltimore, MD, 21201, Email: customerservice@MoneyMorning.com