Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich should turn their backs on the Republicans and Democrats and join the Libertarians. They would not merely boost the Libertarians but, for example, Ron Paul is so popular he could split the Republican vote. These are men of integrity, but I'm not sure they've realised the power of their popularity with the people today.
@walkabout16 G'day... Cool, I'll try to get around to checking them out. The Inbox is kinda blossoming... I have Zeitgeist 1 on Disc, an actual Underground Samizdat copy. The bloke who made it sent copies to European Family & found that it's illegal to own Z in Germany ! I have Z.-2 in my Fave's, but have yet to throw that much Browse-Pack at Eyestrain ! It's hard to see how to repair Money as a Barter Substitute without first deconstructing the entire Usurious System.
@walkabout16 G'day... Thanks for this. Have you seen the Movie/Doccumentary "Zeitgeist." ? It explains a huge heap of stuff about the US Federal Reserve Bank, and their Money Supply... The Australian Federal Reserve Bank is a Government Corporation. No Shareholders. Directors Appointed by a Parliamentary Committee, & Stafff by the Public Service Commission. Charter is to keep Unemployment under 5%, and Interest Rates around 3%-5%.
"Paper money will invariably operate in the body of politics as spirit liquors on the human body." George Washington (1787)
Gold standard or fiat?
What is the alternative to the Fed? A fully integrated government body? A fully private company? I would actually go with the latter, publicly list it, and make its books auditable. Don't let the government directly make money. Let them both spend and make our wealth - bad idea.
f yeah RON !!!!! Holy crap. You have been saying this all along since I was a little kid! I'm showing my parents this! Okay, so if everyone seeing this video got 50 people to vote for RON and they all got 50 more people to vote for RON, would that be enough votes? Maybe one more cycle. RON please say something like this on one of the TV debates. Give us a task to do and we will do it, publicly give it on a nationally seen broadcast! Please, you will win if you do!
I have two great uncles that died in WWII as fighter pilots. I consider Ron Paul just as patriotic as my own heritage. Ron Paul has fought for my rights since before I was born. He is my hero. He has my vote and my complete support
So here's the question(s): When the Federal Reserve gets scared of Ron Paul and they back up Romney's campaign, will anyone notice? Will the country be outraged? Will the media talk about it?
He is awsome but if he is real then he will never get anywhere or end up as JFK trying to dislove FED RES control and power so obviously some crazy person on a hill or in bushes or out of sewer drain will stop him as did JFK whom attempted a silver standard then well the next pres repealed it so not looking good only real patriots should protect him Central BANKERS are very dangerous and will find a way to get him!
“History records that the money changers have used every form of abuse, intrigue, deceit, and violent means possible to maintain their control over governments by controlling money and it’s issuance.”
“The Federal Reserve Board and banks are the duly appointed agents of foreign central banks. They are more concerned with their foreign customers than they are with the people of the United States. Their plan is to create a system of financial and political control of every nation and economy of the world.”
AMERICAN PEOPLE WAKE THE FUCK UP. Vote Ron Paul you fucking moronic brainwashed bastards do the rest of the world a massive favor, and we might just forgive you for being a bunch of brain dead muppets for so damn long.
im from Canada and i dont like the deals my government makes with the American!! its all about benefits to corporation and big companies!! small business are dying because of the government stimulus money that he did spend in freaking banks and corporation like GM. what the hell did we, "the people", got of that? nothing!!
we needs the sheeps to realize that mainstream media is OWN by those criminal and kwik!! , and as long the majority keeps watching news on TV, we will be doomed!! the question is not "IF" anymore but "WHEN"
BRAVOOOOOO RON PUAL ! THIS THE TRUTH, THIS WHAT I HAVE TRYING TO EXPLAIN PEOPLE BUT MOST OF THE PEOPLE ARE SHEEP, THEY DO NOT GET IT. THEY ARE BLINDED, BRAIN WASHED BY SOME BULLSHIT HOLLYWOOD ZIONISTS SHOWS AND THEY SIMPLY CANNOT SEE IT. WAKUP SHEEPS ! AMERICA IS GOING DOWN WITH ZIONIST CENTRIC POLICIES WAKEUP BEFORE IT IS TOO LATE. VOTE FOR DR. RON PAUL.
So Dr.Paul can warn us about the Federal Reserve for 30 years and Newt "no morals" Gingrich can talk about it for less than 30 seconds and they both get equal amount of credit for it? How does this make sense mainstream media?
@JanMelet Bank of international settlements, top of the "theft by conversion pyramid" They mandate that we accept debt instruments for our assets(thru courts they control)Sooner or later we only have debt, bankers have the assets. We don't have governments. We have corporations owned by bankers.
Constitutional=government of the united states/public law/public money
Non-constitutional (not un-constitional)/federal government/ private law / private credit(the fed)
And just to point out. Cons theories are exagerations, even if they assert on the federal reserve, they don't assert on why a man like ron paul has had chances to be a president :). Look at him in this video, saying this.
Prior to 1913, there was no inflation. The inflation tax is caused by the willy-nilly printing of money (counterfeiting, essentially) by the FED, which is neither federal nor has a reserve of money. It's a private banking cartel. Wake up, damn it. RON PAUL or bust !!
He didn't lie. The Fed is a private bank. Our Government is not allowed to audit them. Every dollar they print takes away from the value of the money we hold in our pockets. Audit the fed. End the fed. Ron Paul 2012
@cableguy841 While I understand that the Fed is a private institution, where I keep coming up dry is in regards to the question, "Who owns the Fed?" The closest answer I've found is that the Fed is owned by its member banks, but that in itself is incomplete; behind all of these institutional facades are individuals, and a group of people with names ultimately must be the owners - perhaps as shareholders. Do you have any idea which people have majority ownership?
@Tigerpaws9097826 nobody knows for sure who owns it. Thats a huge problem. The fact that you have to search and ask everyone if they who know who owns it and get no definite answer shows the corruption of the fed and how they control our money. Article 1 Section 8 says that it suppose to be the job of the congress. not some secret private bank
@cableguy841 how you gone say our government is not allowed to audit the fed then turn around and say audit the fed at the end? can we really AUDIT the fed? is that shit really possible?
@roygib09 of course its possible. this is not the first time we have had a central bank in our country. this is the third time. we need to end the fed. its time we stand up to the fed and its destructive printing of money (inflation)
This link will show some of their heinous and wicked plots in taking over the world and establishing a New World Order!!! (suggest people to read it all; it's a bit disturbing but very informative!!) rense.com/general76/hiro.htm >
The only evidence you gave was a link to an article by expert Bob Eisenbeis, for which i am grateful. Eisnebeis confirms what I said - at the moment the Fed is not a minus but a plus to the Treasury. You haven't shown that the independent audit (distribution of $79b to Treasury, only $1b to the member banks in 2010) was "cooked". These facts suggest the Government appointed board of governors controls the FED, not the member banks - just as the law says it should.
@cilcannonvryce Yes it confirms what you have denied - that the Fed pays its excess earnings to the Treasury. As for the change in reporting/accounting procedure, I am not yet convinved this is anything more than a change from yearly adjusment to a monthly adjustment. All the author's doom and gloom predictions seem highly speculative. But thanks for the link, I will ponder it further.
@macroman52 It was a policy change! Why can't you find that. The Fed it doing it on purpose. Sorry but Bob up there, is much more qualified than you are. Period.
@cilcannonvryce The change of ACCOUNTING policy, the way the Fed REPORTS its payments of surplus income (i.e. profit) to the Treasury, came into effect Jan1, 2011. You previously denied that the Fed paid $79b to the Treasury in 2010 or any profits in any previous year (if I understand you) before the policy change. Excess income always benifted the Treasury; what has changed is where to find this payment in the accounts and how often the accounts are updated, i.e. accounting policy changed.
@macroman52 No, you are wrong. The Fed decided to start doing this in 2006. You should research this more thoroughly, and why they dit it. I think you are hopelessly lost on this, and are either working for a bank, or the govt.
You can state your case all you like, but I won't back down, and I have credible, and reliable resources to back me up that the Federal Reserve is not only cooking their books to put taxpayers on the hook...but they are fucking us altogether. You'll see friend. Wait.
@macroman52 My book will be coming out. Buy it. And watch the money master, and the secret of oz. read up on Eustace Mullins. You are who you are, and believe what you believe. simple as that. Now troll elsewhere. Or, you can start accepting the truth.
And really, as if what I already gave you wasn't credible enough, and reasonable to state what the FED and the Treasury are doing. Wow. Get some more education on your own. It will help.
@macroman52 And I will stand by my statement as the Federal Reserve themselves does not call this profit either. They call this 'excess capital.' The Board chose in 2006 to start paying interest to the Treasury for a reason, which I will leave you to figure out....because you need to all on your own. But if you don't understand the difference between a non-interest bearing note and a bond - you need an econ class. Lastly get some more education on this topic, you are over your head.
@cilcannonvryce It doesn't matter what they call it. excess income, excess capital, interest, whatever. The important thing is that the FED pays its excess to Treasury and very little to its member banks. You now agree there were payments from 2006 onwards. The press release from the FED in Jan, 2011, that your expert Bob Eisenbeis commented on showed annual payments from the Fed to Treasury back to 2001 (the lowest was $18.1b in 2004).
@macroman52 Again, I can't believe I have to point this out to you. the FED prints FRN's and they are not interest bearing instruments. This is the terrible fraud being allowed by the Treasury Secretary. The FED cannot 'profit' from something it PRINTS!!! Why don't you get that. Its profit come in form of bonds, not notes, there is a difference. Take an econ class. If I was printing money, would it be a profitable instrument for me?? NO! I would have to exchange it for something!!!!!
@cilcannonvryce I see our misunderstanding. Your expert Eisenbeis tried to explain the new terminology. You and I agree it is very strange to call the transfers "interest paid to Treasury on FRNs". Before, they called it capital transfer, as you know. But whatever they CALL it, excess "funds" go to Treasury (and have been since 2001, maybe longer). The funds come from Fed income. I said FED income is mainly from TBonds and MBS, I never said FRNs earned income for the FED.
@cilcannonvryce The policy worrying Mr Eisenbeis is what will happen IF the Fed makes a loss. Who will take the hit? He says Treasury will take the hit, not the member banks. This policy treats Treasury as the real owner: Treasury always takes the excess income in good years, after its commitment to pay a certain return on capital to member banks, so in bad years Treasury will pay the commited return to member banks, and take the loss - just like any true owner must do.
@cilcannonvryce I notice Mr Bob Eisenbeis thinks the Fed is part of the Government, even though he knows as we all do that the member banks paid in the capital and are nominal owners. He writes: "under normal conditions, [Treasury] treats [Fed] earnings as income ... even though those transactions are technically just an intra-government transfer of funds. It is like shifting coins from one pocket to another and recording [it] as income."
The chair of the Fed is appointed by Congress. The Fed pays its profits to the US Treasury. It is only private in that banks are requried to buy a share of ownership in it, and they gte a very small return on that capital they were required to put up. The Fed is controlled by the Fed Reserve Act which congress can change whenever it likes. Please stop this silly scare campaign that the Fed is a private out of uncontrolable monster..
@macroman52 No - we will not you FED shill. all of you FED shills will be exposed. The Federal Reserve pays not one cent of profit to the Treasury - that is a bold lie. The BIS and its Central Banks are coming down. The moebius loop of perpetual debt and taxation is done. I will fight this to my death, will you fight for the Federal Reserve to your death?? Lets see. Who do you want liberty for? Humans, or government and their agencies? Lets see who wins.
@macroman52 - "The Fed pays its profits to the US Treasury." Moreover, if this was a fact, the U.S. would not have any interest payments on loans to the FED, or ND. So look at that claim a little deeper. The treasury purchases FRN's with interest bearing I.O.U.'s - sorta like paying a surcharge for the usage of FRN's.
I think you are a little lost on the actual function of this bank here.
@cilcannonvryce See the Fed's balance sheet prepared by accountants Deloitte. Fed net income is $81b for 2010: $26b is interest on "treasury securities" (i.e. from Treasury) and $44b from Govt. sponsored enterprises (GSEs). The Fed paid $1.5 billion of income to member banks and $79b+ to the US Treasury (Treasury is the real "owner"). Even if Treasury subsidised the GSEs by $443b, it breaks even.
@macroman52 All this proves in the end is the (settlement) of $79b in FRN's for $443b in GSE's. This exchange is most likely military or housing via Fannie or Freddie. I don't even need to look. If it was done electronically, I could find it other ways and prove my point. Like the BIS for one. A settlement - you need to look up the definition, does not make the Treasury the owner. The Fed admits the 'member banks' are the stockholders...and the treasury never made and offering.
@cilcannonvryce Thanks for the discussion, but if you don't even need to look at figures and facts I suggest we have nothing much to talk about. The fact remains that the FED pays most of its profits to the Treasury and a tiny part of its profits to the banks that were required to put up the capital to establish the Fed. In that functional sense the owner/contoller is the US government, not the nominal owners, the member banks.
@macroman52 - post a link to the facts and figures - I will look at them. What I was saying is that I don't need to look at them to understand the math of what you are putting up there. They aren't paying profit to the Treasury. That is the wrong way to look at it. Its improper context. The Fed Prints the FRN - FRN's have no value to the FED. So is the FED give $79b in FRN's to the Treasury - its that, giving. In this case, they got $443b in bonds.
@cilcannonvryce See federalreserve dot gov, + links to financial statements. There were misprints in my previous posts. Round numbers for 2010: Fed holds $1000b Treasury securities +$1000b mortgage backed securities (MBS). FED income is interest paid to it: $26b from Treasury+$44b from MBS+$3b others = $83b total income. Its expenses were $3b, leaving $80b net income. The $80b was distributed: $1b to member banks, $79b to the US treasury.
@macroman52 - I called the Treasury today. I asked a representative if the Treasury owns the Federal Reserve. They said no. The Treasury cannot own anything...it is simple part of the federal govt is what they told me. They have to power to commission an agency or dept. with certain authorities, such as the IRS. See civil no. 93-405-e-EJL |United States' Answer and Claim #4. I was referred directly to this by the treasury themselves. Interesting aye. Quite spreading disinformation.
Also - as I established earlier - the exchange of $79b in FRN's for $443b in bonds does not equate to the Treasury owning the Federal Reserve. As the you well know - this is done everyday - the exchange of bonds and FRN's between these two entities...Treasury owns nothing except the notes, bonds and securities they print. That is right from the Treasury themselves. See this also.
@cilcannonvryce We need to clear up this supposed $443b in bonds. The Fed in 2010, did not give the Treasury $79b in exchange for bonds. Minor point: the Fed buys treasury bonds from the PUBLIC, not directly from the treasury The Fed owns $1000b of Treasury bonds and Treasury paid the Fed $26b as interest on these bonds. The Fed paid $79b in PROFITS to its master the US government (to Treasury) and got nothing in return. Another minor point, most transfers are electronic not via FRNs.
@macroman52 Your theory is nice. But is not holding water. I talked to another rep at the Treasury today. This time - higher level. This transaction you are talking about, I will be coming back to you with great detail about from the Treasury itself. Here is what I understand to be accurate from my years in the profession: Electronic, or physical: transfer from the FED is just that, a transfer and they are allocated on their book-keeping as FRN's. The Treasury and The Fed agree.....
with me. I have called both of them now and verified this. They are quite easy to talk to, and get information from if you know who to ask for, and what to ask about. Anyways. The Fed does not take a single order on monetary policy from the Federal Govt. unless a law is passed by congress and signed by the President. Also - you had it wrong in the beginning...so I will correct you.
A selection of candidates for Chair of the Fed Board is presented to the President of the U.S. The president makes a decision on who he will nominate for Chair. He nominates one, CONGRESS CONFIRMS, not approves...and with this consensus - there is a new Chair of the Federal Reserve Board of Governors. But don't go making more out of it than there really is. Look a little more closely.
@cilcannonvryce Control is the issue: Government chooses to allow the FED to conduct independent monetary policy. The government could change that tomorrow. The government could chage the Fed's goal from stable prices and full employment to either one of these alone or anything else. I am interested in what your firend at the FED says about the line in the auditor's report 2010 : "Payments to Treasury as interest on FRNs $79b". Could the FED independently choose NOT to make that payment?
@macroman52 For the first time, you and I agree. Control is the issue. The power of ISSUANCE is what is being debated here. And congress should be allocating this power do a government agency that they oversee, and that congress is responsible for controlling the quantity of the money supply with. That simple. With the Fed, this can't be done. And the believe of stable prices?? Sure, why doesn't the fed use Core CPI and Food, and gas. What a joke.
I have no friends at the FED. I called the Treasury. You are the one here trying to defend the FED, lets keep that straight. I denounce them fully. And congress, and the Treasury for allowing this manipulation of our money supply.
Can they choose not to make this payment. Call the FED and ask them yourself. See what kind of answer you get.
@cilcannonvryce I agree the legal owners are natioan-wide banks. However, these banks were: required to provide the capital for a bank they do not contol, requried to deposit capital with the Fed and get virtually no return on it. If ownership means control, then the member banks have a nominal ownership only. Congress controls the Fed, congress makes the Fed pay its profits to the treasury. Congress appoints the Chair. Congress has amended the Federal reserve Act about 100 times.
@cilcannonvryce Treasury does indeed pay interest on the national debt (treasury securities). It just so happens that the Fed at the moment owns $1trillion worth of those securities, and the interest paid on those securities forms part of the Fed's profit. Most of the Fed's profit goes back to the Treasury - you can check the Fed auditor's reports if you want. Of course most of the national debt is not owed to the Fed, and you can worry about that part of the debt as much as you like.
You all have to understand that it's not our government that's completely to blame, it's the FED and major corporations running our government that keep making these horrible choices. And the power of money has a much bigger impact on our leaders than morality. The president (in general, not Obama or Bush or any in particular) is just a tool, a pawn for them to use and control. They're just greedy enough to be influenced so easily. WE NEED TO TAKE THE FED DOWN or we will all go as the Dodo bird.
This guy is consistent! He sounds the same then and now. I can trust him! He'd be good for america and good for the rest of the world. A world statesman!
Estimated fortune of the Rothschilds family who control Wall Street and The Fed through relations and puppets and who control the economy of the world:
If you do not SWITCH PARTIES in time, 12 weeks in advance OF THE PRIMARIES IN MOST STATES (starting Late January 2012) your vote does not count! If you are not REGISTERED REPUBLICAN you can not vote Ron Paul in the PRIMARY If Ron Paul does not win the PRIMARY, he has no chance to win the election. Be the "Trojan Horse" be the "mole", infiltrate the system. FIND OUT when your state has its primaries.
Shit makes me so fucking angry how brainwashed America is AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH...ok, now I feel better.
@kardis6 Don't lie, you feel no better than you did. It's a war, between the people, and the global banks. The US has been fighting it sense 1776, and at this point they are winning. Too many people are involved in Football, or aother sports to really look at what the Fed is doing. It's doing a great job of fucking the poor and middle class, but they also get payments through the fed, that prints the Social Security checks, it's a no win situation.
May God Almighty have mercy on America! He is the ONLY ONE WHO CAN truly save the nation! May He allow the next president to be the real instrument of true change..which includes the eradication of the Federal Reserve System!!!
God can only save those who have repented of their evils and who ask to be saved. God cannot save America because America has rejected God. It's unfortunate, but true. It's up to individual people now to see to it that this train is stopped before it goes over the cliff.....
The only man can save us RON PAUL , the rest are poppets and they will destroy our country and grate nation . The only one can help us is us , lets put our hands together and save our grate nation & country , lets help the man can lead us to grateness and set us free , lets put our hope on him no others will do . Please vote for RON PAUL . God bless you and bless America Country of freedom & hopes .
PEOPLE NEED TO SWITCH PARTIES 12 WEEKS IN ADVANCE OF THE PRIMARIES IN MOST STATES.
IF YOU DO NOT SWITCH IN TIME YOU CANNOT VOTE IN PRIMARY.
IF YOU ARE NOT REGISTERED REPUBLICAN YOU CANNOT VOTE IN PRIMARY.
IF RON PAUL DOES NOT WIN PRIMARY, NO GENERAL ELECTION ! REGISTER AS A REPUBLICAN. FIND OUT WHEN YOUR STATE HAS PRIMARIES. FIND OUT WHERE AND VOTE VOTE VOTE ! PLEASE !
WE NEED EVERY LAST VOTE ! Copy and paste this everywhere
Please register as a Republican so that you can vote for Ron Paul in 2012. If you are a Democrat, you are needed, because right now, thanks to them fooling you with Obama, you are probably one of the silenced anti-war spokespeople. You are needed. Stand up for honesty not bipartisanship.
Exactly! Congress is TOOL ! The money Masters dont even tell them what there doing with money. Democratic elected Govt? They cant even audit the mint. The Federal Govt dosnt control its own money.Explains why Obama takes his ques from Goldman anf Sacks who are part onwers of the Federal Reserve. 9/11 why its covered up? If you can cover up the fact of operation of iluminate Dollar, you can cover up anything including JFK assisination order 11110
Wake up America ! Yesterday the major Zionist organizations told us whom we may or may not criticize in Middle East, today they tell us whom we may criticize in the United States, tomorrow they will tell us to bend our heads and submit to their lies and deceptions in order to engage in new wars of conquest at the service of morally repugnant colonial regime. Where is our liberty? when we criticize Zionists, were labeled as "anti-semite", I called that bullshit. Wake up America, stop zionists.
Dr. Ron Paul is the answer four our country. Our country's policies are hijacked by zionist in Washington. We need to get rid of those warmonger zionists and israeli firster. Did you know Fed Reserve is NOT part of government? who are these people? Answer is wealth zionist, they pray on innocent average people tax and money.
PEOPLE NEED TO SWITCH PARTIES 12 WEEKS IN ADVANCE OF THE PRIMARIES IN MOST STATES.
IF YOU DO NOT SWITCH IN TIME YOU CANNOT VOTE IN PRIMARY.
IF YOU ARE NOT REGISTERED REPUBLICAN YOU CANNOT VOTE IN PRIMARY.
IF RON PAUL DOES NOT WIN PRIMARY, NO GENERAL ELECTION! REGISTER AS A REPUBLICAN. FIND OUT WHEN YOUR STATE HAS PRIMARIES. FIND OUT WHERE AND VOTE VOTE VOTE! PLEASE!
WE NEED EVERY LAST VOTE! Copy and paste this everywhere.
@SpicedHammers Well then how about pointing us in the direction of "the facts". Because quite frankly, I'm not going to take the word of SpicedHammers on youtube at face value.
@SpicedHammers Oh yeah. Your "faccs" have won me over alright. They've won me over to the fact that random, anonymous people in a public forum who say "look up the facts" without actually presenting a resource in which to start looking for so-called "faccs", are either children who are up way past their bedtime, or illiterate escapees from a state hospital who gained access to a computer terminal. Either way, enjoy you're green jello, or let it remind you of that failed shock treatment therapy.
@jboyko3 did you not understand that I was kidding? I claimed that a fictional character in children's literature was set up by the federal government
The FED actually owe the taxpayers money. Why? The constitution states only Congress can coin money. Yet that privilege has been passed onto the FED which is not part of our government. The FED is a private institution. So why is the FED allowed to coin money out of thin air and then charge an interest on that debt to the taxpayers. SHOULDN'T WE BE CHARGING THE "FED" a FEE JUST TO HAVE THAT PRIVILEGE TO COIN MONEY?
all u people who say tht ron paul is the only hope for america. THINK AGAIN!!! the only hope for america is YOU!!!! WE MUST RISE UP AND OVER THROW OUR GOVERNMENT!!!!! WE MUST SHOW THT WE WILL NOT BE SLAVES TO THEM!!!! DOWN WITH FASCISM!!! AND DOWN WITH THE NWO!!!! WE MUST START A REVOLUTION AND REVOLT!!!! WAKE UP AMERICA!!!
@AcaRJacKeR WE MUST YOUTUBE OUR WAY TO FREEDOM!! WE MUST TYPE IN ALL CAPS TO SHOW THAT WE MEAN BUSINESS!! EXCLAMATION POINTS WILL FREE YOU FROM YOUR SHACKLES!!!
@InODependanceSyndrom I agree, if the shit does hit the fan, people will just get rolled by the juggernaut. However, I don't agree with the alarmist mentality you find so much here on YouTube. I think there's a slow bleed going on, much like the parable about the frog in the pot of water, slowly being turned up to boil. Before he notices he's dinner, it's far too late.
@AcaRJacKeR you sound like you want something other than free markets and individual liberty. we dont need to overthrow anything, we simple need to follow the perfectly logical and coherent rules in the constitution that we started ignoring a century ago. if we followed the rules our founders set up, we'd be fine. the constitution is not a living breathing document, it's the best document the world has ever produced regarding what a government should do. it doesn't need to be adapted, FOLLOW IT!
@Welsh77 ok let me say this yes i was over reacting. i guess i was just super mad because this was the first day i realized tht our gov lies to us about EVERYTHING. but yes i would most deffinately like to follow the constitution but the problem is that how do we get our gov. to follow it? because obviously they dont.
@AcaRJacKeR you explain to liberals that social security, medicare, medicaid, obamacare, and any other entitlements are unconstitutional and massive ponzy schemes that steal from people. you also don't elect people like obama who claim they want to spread wealth around. try to convey these ideas to as many people as possible, it's all you can do.
@Uncle99B lol bernie madoff's scam paid out every obligation for 30 years, social security is just a much bigger scheme and has the resources to last longer. it's a pyramid scheme, saying it's worked so far ignores the inevitability of the system collapsing and people losing their investments.
@Uncle99B yes, actually i do. it's just like a pyramid scheme, generating income from new investors instead of legitimate enterprises. trusting the government with our retirement money has led to them wasting hundreds of billions of SS surpluses. i also don't think the government should have the ability to take a % of your income and force you to contribute to your retirement, then decide at what age you can get the money back, how often you'll withdraw it, and how big the checks will be.
@Uncle99B no, i think you lack a basic understanding, that's how the system works. when it collapses you won't be praising it anymore. everything i've said is simply true, it's not on the right or the left. government has the ability to forcefully run part of my retirement and i'd like to do it myself. i want the money i put into SS back so i can invest it how i choose, not in treasury bonds. the only reason the govt can't do that is because they have to sustain the pyramid scheme that SS is.
@Welsh77. "collapses, forcefully, pyramid scheme". You write like a frightened child. You haven't the first idea of how a Defined Benefit Pension Plan works.
@Uncle99B yes i do, and social security is not a defined benefit pension plan, it's a defined contribution plan. people are required to give a defined contribution, 6.92%, but what they get out depends on calculations done by the government is by no means "defined". it changes on a year to year basis. stop acting so educated you have no idea what the hell you're talking about. government is forcefully running part of my retirement, you just refuse to acknowledge how outrageous that is.
@Welsh77. You confirm your ignorance. Social Security is precisely a defined benefit Plan. The benefit one receives from the plan is exactly defined by the rules of Social Security. With some COLA adjustments. Hell, there are Soc Sec bft calculators all over the web
Why is it that those who know the least about topics feel they know the most and name call those who actually do know something about the topic? It's a right wing thing, I guess.
@Uncle99B i sent you a message explaining pretty deeply why the middle class is not shrinking, why everyone is much richer than 30 years ago, and why stating that the top 1% take a higher proportion of the total income than 30 years ago really has nothing to do with the size or growth of the middle class. when you track the same real people over time, the people who are poor at the beginning see much higher rises in their income than those who are rich. push your agenda tho, keep ignoring it.
@Uncle99B you clearly know nothing about the current state of our country or our progress, because you insist the poor today are worse off than the poor 30 years ago. based on that, i really shouldn't give any merit to what you have to say about anything, including social security. social security has a defined contribution aspect to it: the government defines how much you contribute. it's common sense. it's more of a defined contribution plan than a defined benefit plan.
@Welsh77 . You have more than adequately displayed your absolute ignorance of Social Security as well as the fate of the poor and the middle class over the past 30 years.
@Uncle99B sure i have, but you haven't offered any evidence to back up your claims. show me ONE study by a legitimate source that shows the poor have lower real incomes than 20 or 30 years ago. show me ONE study that says social security isn't going collapse within 30 years at this rate. or you can just go on spouting your crap. anyone can say things without any evidence. i gave you studies from the treasury, which the CBO concurs with, in my message, showing mobility and real income increases.
@Welsh77 . "i (sic) gave you studies from the treasury, ....". What's scary is that you think you actually did. Do me a favor and re-read all you comments.
@Welsh77 Free Markets and Individual Liberty should not be discussed in the same sentence. They are not the same thing. That statement supports to fullish idea of corporations are people. Free Market is just a fancy word they labeled it but they do the complete opposite. How is free market richer get rich richer and poor get poorer? The middle class gets wiped out in the process. This is some loop hole to support greed! Bible money is the root of all evil. That is the doc we should follow!
@newjeruselem if you think the poor are poorer than they were 30 years ago, you're simply wrong. your argument is based on claims that are not true. the poor are much, much richer than they were 30 years ago. the gap has increased, but when you consider the fact that most of the people in the bottom 20% 30 years ago are no longer in the bottom 20%, that claim falls apart. everyone is better off than 20 years ago, look at the things poor households own now that they didn't then. ex: cell phones
@Welsh77 Nope. The poor are substantially worse off then they were 30 years ago. Less access to education, fewer and lower paying jobs, less help from government, lower income (inflation adjusted), lower net worth (actually higher net debt). This is a fact clearly supported by all measures and not ipen to debate
@Uncle99B lol poor worse off? haha that's funny. ask some poor people what the 70s were like. you'll notice they didn't have cable tv, color television, washing machines, dryers, microwaves, most didn't own their property while now 45% do. 25% of the people the government considers poor had cell phones. sounds like they're a lot poorer...
@Uncle99B please show me the statistics that indicate that real median incomes for poor households have declined over the last 30 years. that's simply not true.
@Uncle99B also, why do you think defined benefit pension plans are nonexistent in the private sector nowadays, and waning out of the public sector? they aren't run properly and they cause companies to go bankrupt. the government is no exception, keep guaranteeing people money and you're going to have problems. with that said, social security looks more like a defined contribution plan every day, as peoples checks are "adjusted" to fit the economy. there have been lots of SS cuts
@Welsh77. They are less frequent (hardly non-existent) in the private sector today, as are post retirement health care plans -- well, except for executives -- as part of the erosion of the middle class that has taken place over the past 30 years. This is all part of the massive transfer of wealth from the poor and middle class to the super rich that has occurred over that time period.
That's a very wrong to look at things. A lot of those things were expensive back then because they were new and could not be brought to market cheaply but now thanks to tech and other things they can be now.. But the real thing you have to look at is the purchasing power of the dollar overall and the overall situation. We have less quality jobs, more on welfare/food stamps. The standard of living is down.. People have NO SAVINGS.
@xMaXiMuSx i agree on the savings, but saying that we should cut out technology and attribute our gains to it and assume it would have happened anyway is foolish. i have the correct way of viewing things, and although the dollar has been devalued, real incomes are higher. it's simply true that someone in the 10th percentile has a much higher real income, and therefore purchasing power, than someone in the 10th percentile in 1970. factor in mobility, and the gains are much larger.
@xMaXiMuSx i guess i can agree to disagree on some of the things, but not on the incomes issue. real incomes are higher, i will send you the data. more people are on food stamps because they know they can get them, our 35 million people the govt consider poor buy televisions with their income, and cable to go with it, and then apply for foodstamps because they know they can get them. the actual number of people who can't afford food is extremely low.
well everyone has cell phones, cable, TV.. Thankfully there is a still free market in those, that's why they are cheap and getting cheaper... If had free market in education,health care, automobile we would have a higher standard of living and of course we need a sound monetary system along with that..
@xMaXiMuSx purchasing power of the dollar is NOT the same thing as purchasing power for individuals. individuals real incomes are higher, they can buy more goods and services now than they could back in the 70s. the dollar is weaker, in regards to international trade. those aren't the same, and you need to distinguish between them. you can't just ignore technology and say "that would have happened anyway" - living standards are up, purchasing power for individual households is up. for everyone
@xMaXiMuSx purchasing power of the dollar is NOT the same thing as purchasing power for individuals. individuals real incomes are higher, they can buy more goods and services now than they could back in the 70s. the dollar is weaker, in regards to international trade. those aren't the same, and you need to distinguish between them. you can't just ignore technology and say "that would have happened anyway" - living standards are up, purchasing power for individual households is up. for everyone
kinda interesting how people who don't even live in this country or have never even been to this country see the need to elect this man Ron Paul.
williamanthony25 1 day ago
Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich should turn their backs on the Republicans and Democrats and join the Libertarians. They would not merely boost the Libertarians but, for example, Ron Paul is so popular he could split the Republican vote. These are men of integrity, but I'm not sure they've realised the power of their popularity with the people today.
Keruaran 4 days ago
FUCK YOU AMERICANS FOR ELECTING BUSH SR, BUSH JR, AND OBAMA INSTEAD OF PAUL.
koreanschweppes 5 days ago
Americans, you should be ashamed that you overslept to elect this fine man as your president 24 years ago. You wouldn’t be in this deep sh$t now.
FreeRussian 1 week ago 6
RON2012!
MrNICCO89 1 week ago 2
@walkabout16 G'day... Cool, I'll try to get around to checking them out. The Inbox is kinda blossoming... I have Zeitgeist 1 on Disc, an actual Underground Samizdat copy. The bloke who made it sent copies to European Family & found that it's illegal to own Z in Germany ! I have Z.-2 in my Fave's, but have yet to throw that much Browse-Pack at Eyestrain ! It's hard to see how to repair Money as a Barter Substitute without first deconstructing the entire Usurious System.
WarblesOnALot 1 week ago
@walkabout16 G'day... Thanks for this. Have you seen the Movie/Doccumentary "Zeitgeist." ? It explains a huge heap of stuff about the US Federal Reserve Bank, and their Money Supply... The Australian Federal Reserve Bank is a Government Corporation. No Shareholders. Directors Appointed by a Parliamentary Committee, & Stafff by the Public Service Commission. Charter is to keep Unemployment under 5%, and Interest Rates around 3%-5%.
WarblesOnALot 1 week ago
@WarblesOnALot
Yes on Youtube /watch?v=jaHD_AJETII&feature=fvst and a slightly longer version on Vimeo 13726978 ,,, As well as Zeitgest 2 /watch?v=1gKX9TWRyfs
walkabout16 1 week ago
our last hope of making america a better place.
streethustla24 2 weeks ago 3
"Paper money will invariably operate in the body of politics as spirit liquors on the human body." George Washington (1787)
Gold standard or fiat?
What is the alternative to the Fed? A fully integrated government body? A fully private company? I would actually go with the latter, publicly list it, and make its books auditable. Don't let the government directly make money. Let them both spend and make our wealth - bad idea.
search by
"A simplified chart of the U.S. Federal Reserve"
climatereview 2 weeks ago
f yeah RON !!!!! Holy crap. You have been saying this all along since I was a little kid! I'm showing my parents this! Okay, so if everyone seeing this video got 50 people to vote for RON and they all got 50 more people to vote for RON, would that be enough votes? Maybe one more cycle. RON please say something like this on one of the TV debates. Give us a task to do and we will do it, publicly give it on a nationally seen broadcast! Please, you will win if you do!
yabaworld 3 weeks ago 2
I have two great uncles that died in WWII as fighter pilots. I consider Ron Paul just as patriotic as my own heritage. Ron Paul has fought for my rights since before I was born. He is my hero. He has my vote and my complete support
spaindavid1125 3 weeks ago 2
So here's the question(s): When the Federal Reserve gets scared of Ron Paul and they back up Romney's campaign, will anyone notice? Will the country be outraged? Will the media talk about it?
vendo233 3 weeks ago
@vendo233 The media is owned by the Fed also. Romney is not just backed by Fed money, he is backed by the propagnda machine (aka MSM).
I'm fearing that this Shadow gov't will now mess with the polls.
cbasallie 3 weeks ago 2
I keep thinking that if people actually UNDERSTOOD this info, there would be blood in the streets.
JenniferWizdom 3 weeks ago
Yeah, Paul has been right all along. Hope they don't shoot him.
JenniferWizdom 3 weeks ago
WOW he has been saying this for that long ....
Do you know what this means ...
He is awsome but if he is real then he will never get anywhere or end up as JFK trying to dislove FED RES control and power so obviously some crazy person on a hill or in bushes or out of sewer drain will stop him as did JFK whom attempted a silver standard then well the next pres repealed it so not looking good only real patriots should protect him Central BANKERS are very dangerous and will find a way to get him!
CaptainZuluGamma 4 weeks ago
Thank YOU AStarSpangledGirl !!! Excellent clip!!!
SANTRECE13 4 weeks ago
ppl need to realize whos behind all this shit. ur getting robbed. big time. have a nice day.
UTChair 4 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
“History records that the money changers have used every form of abuse, intrigue, deceit, and violent means possible to maintain their control over governments by controlling money and it’s issuance.”
- James Madison (1751-1836), President.
silentsnowdog 1 month ago
The fed is indeed a private bank. they are finally getting what they want. control of the world's money. It was what they wanted from the beginning
hatfieldadam 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
“The Federal Reserve Board and banks are the duly appointed agents of foreign central banks. They are more concerned with their foreign customers than they are with the people of the United States. Their plan is to create a system of financial and political control of every nation and economy of the world.”
1931, Rep. Louis T. McFadden
silentsnowdog 1 month ago
AMERICAN PEOPLE WAKE THE FUCK UP. Vote Ron Paul you fucking moronic brainwashed bastards do the rest of the world a massive favor, and we might just forgive you for being a bunch of brain dead muppets for so damn long.
kuruki213 1 month ago 7
ron paul shou say" i told you so" lol
hoqbrothers 1 month ago
well people are asleep and think everything is just cozy wozy, NOT IN AMERICA. WAKEUP!!
2urip 1 month ago
Zionist devil rule television period ..banks ,music,schools ect .....Jewish zionist rats are creating havoc in every corner of the world
vantagesuck 1 month ago
End the fed
tommyk40 1 month ago
Simply amazing. This man has been saying it all along.. Ron Paul 2k12
Oh6Lbz 1 month ago 27
im from Canada and i dont like the deals my government makes with the American!! its all about benefits to corporation and big companies!! small business are dying because of the government stimulus money that he did spend in freaking banks and corporation like GM. what the hell did we, "the people", got of that? nothing!!
billit25 1 month ago 2
we needs the sheeps to realize that mainstream media is OWN by those criminal and kwik!! , and as long the majority keeps watching news on TV, we will be doomed!! the question is not "IF" anymore but "WHEN"
billit25 1 month ago 3
Ron Paul for president...
Alex Jones for Vice
ThePGeraFuckingSucks 1 month ago
1988!!
133839297 1 month ago
BRAVOOOOOO RON PUAL ! THIS THE TRUTH, THIS WHAT I HAVE TRYING TO EXPLAIN PEOPLE BUT MOST OF THE PEOPLE ARE SHEEP, THEY DO NOT GET IT. THEY ARE BLINDED, BRAIN WASHED BY SOME BULLSHIT HOLLYWOOD ZIONISTS SHOWS AND THEY SIMPLY CANNOT SEE IT. WAKUP SHEEPS ! AMERICA IS GOING DOWN WITH ZIONIST CENTRIC POLICIES WAKEUP BEFORE IT IS TOO LATE. VOTE FOR DR. RON PAUL.
southernman1905 1 month ago
How isn't this guy dead?
rsx123 2 months ago
So Dr.Paul can warn us about the Federal Reserve for 30 years and Newt "no morals" Gingrich can talk about it for less than 30 seconds and they both get equal amount of credit for it? How does this make sense mainstream media?
Namso2010 2 months ago
Fuck the Fed,Right in their goat ass!
Warmachine05450 2 months ago
TeeHee his hair is a different colour :D Go get em Ron!
philyB08 2 months ago
@JanMelet Bank of international settlements, top of the "theft by conversion pyramid" They mandate that we accept debt instruments for our assets(thru courts they control)Sooner or later we only have debt, bankers have the assets. We don't have governments. We have corporations owned by bankers.
Constitutional=government of the united states/public law/public money
Non-constitutional (not un-constitional)/federal government/ private law / private credit(the fed)
watch?v=XuimVKWg0fk
ott0Kitam 2 months ago
Wow this is amazing.
And just to point out. Cons theories are exagerations, even if they assert on the federal reserve, they don't assert on why a man like ron paul has had chances to be a president :). Look at him in this video, saying this.
Look at him now
Polovene 2 months ago
Prior to 1913, there was no inflation. The inflation tax is caused by the willy-nilly printing of money (counterfeiting, essentially) by the FED, which is neither federal nor has a reserve of money. It's a private banking cartel. Wake up, damn it. RON PAUL or bust !!
SuperMagnetizer 2 months ago
I do not like this. I get a strange feeling in my stomach. Who is controling the U.S.A. ?????
JanMelet 2 months ago
Some fuckin Democracy ?
grinosmr 2 months ago
He didn't lie. The Fed is a private bank. Our Government is not allowed to audit them. Every dollar they print takes away from the value of the money we hold in our pockets. Audit the fed. End the fed. Ron Paul 2012
cableguy841 2 months ago 49
@cableguy841 - you don't know what you're talking about
the federal reserve is more abundantly audited than any other banks in the country
google: "Federal Reserve Banks Combined Financial Statements" to see the audits for 2009 & 2010
sfiorare 2 months ago
@sfiorare look up who audits them and zho is chairman of this
debbaOfTheFlanders 2 months ago
@debbaOfTheFlanders - i've been looking up who audits the fed for nearly 30 years
there are numerous auditors: internal, external, public, private, independent and gao auditors, to name a few
sfiorare 2 months ago
@cableguy841 While I understand that the Fed is a private institution, where I keep coming up dry is in regards to the question, "Who owns the Fed?" The closest answer I've found is that the Fed is owned by its member banks, but that in itself is incomplete; behind all of these institutional facades are individuals, and a group of people with names ultimately must be the owners - perhaps as shareholders. Do you have any idea which people have majority ownership?
Tigerpaws9097826 3 weeks ago
@Tigerpaws9097826 nobody knows for sure who owns it. Thats a huge problem. The fact that you have to search and ask everyone if they who know who owns it and get no definite answer shows the corruption of the fed and how they control our money. Article 1 Section 8 says that it suppose to be the job of the congress. not some secret private bank
cableguy841 3 weeks ago
@cableguy841 how you gone say our government is not allowed to audit the fed then turn around and say audit the fed at the end? can we really AUDIT the fed? is that shit really possible?
roygib09 3 weeks ago
@roygib09 of course its possible. this is not the first time we have had a central bank in our country. this is the third time. we need to end the fed. its time we stand up to the fed and its destructive printing of money (inflation)
cableguy841 3 weeks ago
The only half-way honest guy in politics!
somethingdiffereable 2 months ago 2
@somethingdiffereable - he's a liar, not even half-way honest
sfiorare 2 months ago
End the FED.
TheWildbill242 2 months ago
Last chance, Ron Paul 2012
urallinsane 3 months ago 2
This link will show some of their heinous and wicked plots in taking over the world and establishing a New World Order!!! (suggest people to read it all; it's a bit disturbing but very informative!!) rense.com/general76/hiro.htm >
iijdgaf 3 months ago
macroman puppet software / flat earther?
martynjhorne 3 months ago
The only evidence you gave was a link to an article by expert Bob Eisenbeis, for which i am grateful. Eisnebeis confirms what I said - at the moment the Fed is not a minus but a plus to the Treasury. You haven't shown that the independent audit (distribution of $79b to Treasury, only $1b to the member banks in 2010) was "cooked". These facts suggest the Government appointed board of governors controls the FED, not the member banks - just as the law says it should.
macroman52 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Of the 12 banks making up the Fed.Resrv. ( Zionist ATM), all are Jewish owned with the Rothschilds on top.
Even the Balfour Declaration was written to a Rothschild...
klscott5 3 months ago
@Macroman52 - you need to read this, and give it a lot of time to sink in. I knew I would find it for you.
financialsense(.)com/contributors/bob-eisenbeis/fed-accounting-is-the-problem-solved
cilcannonvryce 3 months ago
@cilcannonvryce Yes it confirms what you have denied - that the Fed pays its excess earnings to the Treasury. As for the change in reporting/accounting procedure, I am not yet convinved this is anything more than a change from yearly adjusment to a monthly adjustment. All the author's doom and gloom predictions seem highly speculative. But thanks for the link, I will ponder it further.
macroman52 3 months ago
@macroman52 It was a policy change! Why can't you find that. The Fed it doing it on purpose. Sorry but Bob up there, is much more qualified than you are. Period.
cilcannonvryce 3 months ago
@cilcannonvryce The change of ACCOUNTING policy, the way the Fed REPORTS its payments of surplus income (i.e. profit) to the Treasury, came into effect Jan1, 2011. You previously denied that the Fed paid $79b to the Treasury in 2010 or any profits in any previous year (if I understand you) before the policy change. Excess income always benifted the Treasury; what has changed is where to find this payment in the accounts and how often the accounts are updated, i.e. accounting policy changed.
macroman52 3 months ago
@macroman52 No, you are wrong. The Fed decided to start doing this in 2006. You should research this more thoroughly, and why they dit it. I think you are hopelessly lost on this, and are either working for a bank, or the govt.
You can state your case all you like, but I won't back down, and I have credible, and reliable resources to back me up that the Federal Reserve is not only cooking their books to put taxpayers on the hook...but they are fucking us altogether. You'll see friend. Wait.
cilcannonvryce 3 months ago
@cilcannonvryce Can we see these credible and reliable sources?
macroman52 3 months ago
@macroman52 My book will be coming out. Buy it. And watch the money master, and the secret of oz. read up on Eustace Mullins. You are who you are, and believe what you believe. simple as that. Now troll elsewhere. Or, you can start accepting the truth.
And really, as if what I already gave you wasn't credible enough, and reasonable to state what the FED and the Treasury are doing. Wow. Get some more education on your own. It will help.
cilcannonvryce 3 months ago
@macroman52 And I will stand by my statement as the Federal Reserve themselves does not call this profit either. They call this 'excess capital.' The Board chose in 2006 to start paying interest to the Treasury for a reason, which I will leave you to figure out....because you need to all on your own. But if you don't understand the difference between a non-interest bearing note and a bond - you need an econ class. Lastly get some more education on this topic, you are over your head.
cilcannonvryce 3 months ago
@cilcannonvryce It doesn't matter what they call it. excess income, excess capital, interest, whatever. The important thing is that the FED pays its excess to Treasury and very little to its member banks. You now agree there were payments from 2006 onwards. The press release from the FED in Jan, 2011, that your expert Bob Eisenbeis commented on showed annual payments from the Fed to Treasury back to 2001 (the lowest was $18.1b in 2004).
macroman52 3 months ago
@macroman52 Again, I can't believe I have to point this out to you. the FED prints FRN's and they are not interest bearing instruments. This is the terrible fraud being allowed by the Treasury Secretary. The FED cannot 'profit' from something it PRINTS!!! Why don't you get that. Its profit come in form of bonds, not notes, there is a difference. Take an econ class. If I was printing money, would it be a profitable instrument for me?? NO! I would have to exchange it for something!!!!!
cilcannonvryce 3 months ago
@cilcannonvryce I see our misunderstanding. Your expert Eisenbeis tried to explain the new terminology. You and I agree it is very strange to call the transfers "interest paid to Treasury on FRNs". Before, they called it capital transfer, as you know. But whatever they CALL it, excess "funds" go to Treasury (and have been since 2001, maybe longer). The funds come from Fed income. I said FED income is mainly from TBonds and MBS, I never said FRNs earned income for the FED.
macroman52 3 months ago
@cilcannonvryce The policy worrying Mr Eisenbeis is what will happen IF the Fed makes a loss. Who will take the hit? He says Treasury will take the hit, not the member banks. This policy treats Treasury as the real owner: Treasury always takes the excess income in good years, after its commitment to pay a certain return on capital to member banks, so in bad years Treasury will pay the commited return to member banks, and take the loss - just like any true owner must do.
macroman52 3 months ago
@cilcannonvryce I notice Mr Bob Eisenbeis thinks the Fed is part of the Government, even though he knows as we all do that the member banks paid in the capital and are nominal owners. He writes: "under normal conditions, [Treasury] treats [Fed] earnings as income ... even though those transactions are technically just an intra-government transfer of funds. It is like shifting coins from one pocket to another and recording [it] as income."
macroman52 3 months ago
fake
nanocalp 3 months ago
The chair of the Fed is appointed by Congress. The Fed pays its profits to the US Treasury. It is only private in that banks are requried to buy a share of ownership in it, and they gte a very small return on that capital they were required to put up. The Fed is controlled by the Fed Reserve Act which congress can change whenever it likes. Please stop this silly scare campaign that the Fed is a private out of uncontrolable monster..
macroman52 3 months ago
@macroman52 No - we will not you FED shill. all of you FED shills will be exposed. The Federal Reserve pays not one cent of profit to the Treasury - that is a bold lie. The BIS and its Central Banks are coming down. The moebius loop of perpetual debt and taxation is done. I will fight this to my death, will you fight for the Federal Reserve to your death?? Lets see. Who do you want liberty for? Humans, or government and their agencies? Lets see who wins.
cilcannonvryce 3 months ago
@macroman52 - "The Fed pays its profits to the US Treasury." Moreover, if this was a fact, the U.S. would not have any interest payments on loans to the FED, or ND. So look at that claim a little deeper. The treasury purchases FRN's with interest bearing I.O.U.'s - sorta like paying a surcharge for the usage of FRN's.
I think you are a little lost on the actual function of this bank here.
cilcannonvryce 3 months ago
@cilcannonvryce See the Fed's balance sheet prepared by accountants Deloitte. Fed net income is $81b for 2010: $26b is interest on "treasury securities" (i.e. from Treasury) and $44b from Govt. sponsored enterprises (GSEs). The Fed paid $1.5 billion of income to member banks and $79b+ to the US Treasury (Treasury is the real "owner"). Even if Treasury subsidised the GSEs by $443b, it breaks even.
macroman52 3 months ago
@macroman52 All this proves in the end is the (settlement) of $79b in FRN's for $443b in GSE's. This exchange is most likely military or housing via Fannie or Freddie. I don't even need to look. If it was done electronically, I could find it other ways and prove my point. Like the BIS for one. A settlement - you need to look up the definition, does not make the Treasury the owner. The Fed admits the 'member banks' are the stockholders...and the treasury never made and offering.
cilcannonvryce 3 months ago
@cilcannonvryce Thanks for the discussion, but if you don't even need to look at figures and facts I suggest we have nothing much to talk about. The fact remains that the FED pays most of its profits to the Treasury and a tiny part of its profits to the banks that were required to put up the capital to establish the Fed. In that functional sense the owner/contoller is the US government, not the nominal owners, the member banks.
macroman52 3 months ago
@macroman52 - post a link to the facts and figures - I will look at them. What I was saying is that I don't need to look at them to understand the math of what you are putting up there. They aren't paying profit to the Treasury. That is the wrong way to look at it. Its improper context. The Fed Prints the FRN - FRN's have no value to the FED. So is the FED give $79b in FRN's to the Treasury - its that, giving. In this case, they got $443b in bonds.
cilcannonvryce 3 months ago
@cilcannonvryce See federalreserve dot gov, + links to financial statements. There were misprints in my previous posts. Round numbers for 2010: Fed holds $1000b Treasury securities +$1000b mortgage backed securities (MBS). FED income is interest paid to it: $26b from Treasury+$44b from MBS+$3b others = $83b total income. Its expenses were $3b, leaving $80b net income. The $80b was distributed: $1b to member banks, $79b to the US treasury.
macroman52 3 months ago
@macroman52 - I called the Treasury today. I asked a representative if the Treasury owns the Federal Reserve. They said no. The Treasury cannot own anything...it is simple part of the federal govt is what they told me. They have to power to commission an agency or dept. with certain authorities, such as the IRS. See civil no. 93-405-e-EJL |United States' Answer and Claim #4. I was referred directly to this by the treasury themselves. Interesting aye. Quite spreading disinformation.
cilcannonvryce 3 months ago
Also - as I established earlier - the exchange of $79b in FRN's for $443b in bonds does not equate to the Treasury owning the Federal Reserve. As the you well know - this is done everyday - the exchange of bonds and FRN's between these two entities...Treasury owns nothing except the notes, bonds and securities they print. That is right from the Treasury themselves. See this also.
treasury(.)gov/about/organizational-structure/bureaus/Pages/default(.)aspx
cilcannonvryce 3 months ago
@cilcannonvryce We need to clear up this supposed $443b in bonds. The Fed in 2010, did not give the Treasury $79b in exchange for bonds. Minor point: the Fed buys treasury bonds from the PUBLIC, not directly from the treasury The Fed owns $1000b of Treasury bonds and Treasury paid the Fed $26b as interest on these bonds. The Fed paid $79b in PROFITS to its master the US government (to Treasury) and got nothing in return. Another minor point, most transfers are electronic not via FRNs.
macroman52 3 months ago
@macroman52 Your theory is nice. But is not holding water. I talked to another rep at the Treasury today. This time - higher level. This transaction you are talking about, I will be coming back to you with great detail about from the Treasury itself. Here is what I understand to be accurate from my years in the profession: Electronic, or physical: transfer from the FED is just that, a transfer and they are allocated on their book-keeping as FRN's. The Treasury and The Fed agree.....
cilcannonvryce 3 months ago
with me. I have called both of them now and verified this. They are quite easy to talk to, and get information from if you know who to ask for, and what to ask about. Anyways. The Fed does not take a single order on monetary policy from the Federal Govt. unless a law is passed by congress and signed by the President. Also - you had it wrong in the beginning...so I will correct you.
cilcannonvryce 3 months ago
A selection of candidates for Chair of the Fed Board is presented to the President of the U.S. The president makes a decision on who he will nominate for Chair. He nominates one, CONGRESS CONFIRMS, not approves...and with this consensus - there is a new Chair of the Federal Reserve Board of Governors. But don't go making more out of it than there really is. Look a little more closely.
cilcannonvryce 3 months ago
@cilcannonvryce Control is the issue: Government chooses to allow the FED to conduct independent monetary policy. The government could change that tomorrow. The government could chage the Fed's goal from stable prices and full employment to either one of these alone or anything else. I am interested in what your firend at the FED says about the line in the auditor's report 2010 : "Payments to Treasury as interest on FRNs $79b". Could the FED independently choose NOT to make that payment?
macroman52 3 months ago
@macroman52 For the first time, you and I agree. Control is the issue. The power of ISSUANCE is what is being debated here. And congress should be allocating this power do a government agency that they oversee, and that congress is responsible for controlling the quantity of the money supply with. That simple. With the Fed, this can't be done. And the believe of stable prices?? Sure, why doesn't the fed use Core CPI and Food, and gas. What a joke.
cilcannonvryce 3 months ago
"Payments to Treasury as interest on FRNs $79b"
I have no friends at the FED. I called the Treasury. You are the one here trying to defend the FED, lets keep that straight. I denounce them fully. And congress, and the Treasury for allowing this manipulation of our money supply.
Can they choose not to make this payment. Call the FED and ask them yourself. See what kind of answer you get.
cilcannonvryce 3 months ago
@cilcannonvryce I agree the legal owners are natioan-wide banks. However, these banks were: required to provide the capital for a bank they do not contol, requried to deposit capital with the Fed and get virtually no return on it. If ownership means control, then the member banks have a nominal ownership only. Congress controls the Fed, congress makes the Fed pay its profits to the treasury. Congress appoints the Chair. Congress has amended the Federal reserve Act about 100 times.
macroman52 3 months ago
@cilcannonvryce Treasury does indeed pay interest on the national debt (treasury securities). It just so happens that the Fed at the moment owns $1trillion worth of those securities, and the interest paid on those securities forms part of the Fed's profit. Most of the Fed's profit goes back to the Treasury - you can check the Fed auditor's reports if you want. Of course most of the national debt is not owed to the Fed, and you can worry about that part of the debt as much as you like.
macroman52 3 months ago
You all have to understand that it's not our government that's completely to blame, it's the FED and major corporations running our government that keep making these horrible choices. And the power of money has a much bigger impact on our leaders than morality. The president (in general, not Obama or Bush or any in particular) is just a tool, a pawn for them to use and control. They're just greedy enough to be influenced so easily. WE NEED TO TAKE THE FED DOWN or we will all go as the Dodo bird.
jerm22278 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@jerm22278 Real footage of real banks causing real problems.
Watch “How To Rob A Bank” at UmotionS.com
See Trailer at my channel
DedmanUmotionS 3 months ago
America can lead in the world not through the barrel of a gun but through its people standing by their great leaders of conscience!
nubarilight 3 months ago
People have to pray for this guy. He can free America from the "secret" menace; May God protect him!
nubarilight 3 months ago
This guy is consistent! He sounds the same then and now. I can trust him! He'd be good for america and good for the rest of the world. A world statesman!
nubarilight 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Estimated fortune of the Rothschilds family who control Wall Street and The Fed through relations and puppets and who control the economy of the world:
$1.9 trillion US (@ 4%)
$7.8 trillion US (@ 5%)
$31.5 trillion US (@ 6%)
$125,189.1 trillion US (@ 7%)
$491,409.0 trillion US (@ 8%)
americaisbacktrump 3 months ago
• It is not enough to say "Vote Ron Paul"
If you do not SWITCH PARTIES in time, 12 weeks in advance OF THE PRIMARIES IN MOST STATES (starting Late January 2012) your vote does not count! If you are not REGISTERED REPUBLICAN you can not vote Ron Paul in the PRIMARY If Ron Paul does not win the PRIMARY, he has no chance to win the election. Be the "Trojan Horse" be the "mole", infiltrate the system. FIND OUT when your state has its primaries.
Copy and paste this everywhere.
waypasthadenough 3 months ago
Shit makes me so fucking angry how brainwashed America is AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH...ok, now I feel better.
kardis6 3 months ago 12
@kardis6 Don't lie, you feel no better than you did. It's a war, between the people, and the global banks. The US has been fighting it sense 1776, and at this point they are winning. Too many people are involved in Football, or aother sports to really look at what the Fed is doing. It's doing a great job of fucking the poor and middle class, but they also get payments through the fed, that prints the Social Security checks, it's a no win situation.
asleeperj 3 months ago
@kardis6
But not only US...
neoplastik 2 months ago
May God Almighty have mercy on America! He is the ONLY ONE WHO CAN truly save the nation! May He allow the next president to be the real instrument of true change..which includes the eradication of the Federal Reserve System!!!
GreatKM 3 months ago
@GreatKM
God can only save those who have repented of their evils and who ask to be saved. God cannot save America because America has rejected God. It's unfortunate, but true. It's up to individual people now to see to it that this train is stopped before it goes over the cliff.....
DivinityBleu 3 months ago
The only man can save us RON PAUL , the rest are poppets and they will destroy our country and grate nation . The only one can help us is us , lets put our hands together and save our grate nation & country , lets help the man can lead us to grateness and set us free , lets put our hope on him no others will do . Please vote for RON PAUL . God bless you and bless America Country of freedom & hopes .
ThePeace3777 4 months ago 19
Na Peter sch if for president Ron Paul for Vice pres
superhawkn 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
It's not enough to say "Vote Ron Paul"
PEOPLE NEED TO SWITCH PARTIES 12 WEEKS IN ADVANCE OF THE PRIMARIES IN MOST STATES.
IF YOU DO NOT SWITCH IN TIME YOU CANNOT VOTE IN PRIMARY.
IF YOU ARE NOT REGISTERED REPUBLICAN YOU CANNOT VOTE IN PRIMARY.
IF RON PAUL DOES NOT WIN PRIMARY, NO GENERAL ELECTION ! REGISTER AS A REPUBLICAN. FIND OUT WHEN YOUR STATE HAS PRIMARIES. FIND OUT WHERE AND VOTE VOTE VOTE ! PLEASE !
WE NEED EVERY LAST VOTE ! Copy and paste this everywhere
elmerthugg 4 months ago
Please register as a Republican so that you can vote for Ron Paul in 2012. If you are a Democrat, you are needed, because right now, thanks to them fooling you with Obama, you are probably one of the silenced anti-war spokespeople. You are needed. Stand up for honesty not bipartisanship.
NZDuriahheap 4 months ago
Exactly! Congress is TOOL ! The money Masters dont even tell them what there doing with money. Democratic elected Govt? They cant even audit the mint. The Federal Govt dosnt control its own money.Explains why Obama takes his ques from Goldman anf Sacks who are part onwers of the Federal Reserve. 9/11 why its covered up? If you can cover up the fact of operation of iluminate Dollar, you can cover up anything including JFK assisination order 11110
GalaticSpaceHero 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Register in your state as Republican so you can vote Ron Paul in 2012
Ninety9Soulz 4 months ago
Wake up America ! Yesterday the major Zionist organizations told us whom we may or may not criticize in Middle East, today they tell us whom we may criticize in the United States, tomorrow they will tell us to bend our heads and submit to their lies and deceptions in order to engage in new wars of conquest at the service of morally repugnant colonial regime. Where is our liberty? when we criticize Zionists, were labeled as "anti-semite", I called that bullshit. Wake up America, stop zionists.
southernman1905 4 months ago
Dr. Ron Paul is the answer four our country. Our country's policies are hijacked by zionist in Washington. We need to get rid of those warmonger zionists and israeli firster. Did you know Fed Reserve is NOT part of government? who are these people? Answer is wealth zionist, they pray on innocent average people tax and money.
southernman1905 4 months ago
@southernman1905 FOUR our country? Please don't vote...
lasoogneypubes 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
It's not enough to say "Vote Ron Paul"
PEOPLE NEED TO SWITCH PARTIES 12 WEEKS IN ADVANCE OF THE PRIMARIES IN MOST STATES.
IF YOU DO NOT SWITCH IN TIME YOU CANNOT VOTE IN PRIMARY.
IF YOU ARE NOT REGISTERED REPUBLICAN YOU CANNOT VOTE IN PRIMARY.
IF RON PAUL DOES NOT WIN PRIMARY, NO GENERAL ELECTION! REGISTER AS A REPUBLICAN. FIND OUT WHEN YOUR STATE HAS PRIMARIES. FIND OUT WHERE AND VOTE VOTE VOTE! PLEASE!
WE NEED EVERY LAST VOTE! Copy and paste this everywhere.
2eelShmeal 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Subscribe to me and i will Subscribe to you and will fight censorship . DR Ron Paul 2012
Allseeingeye2013 4 months ago
Uncle99B is a classic communist dupe, brainwashed by the so called Democrats who are also communist dupes.
They won't believe the truth even if St Barry told them.
Dragdamar 4 months ago
gotta love his consistency
wthf5 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
ron paul 2012
55539brian 5 months ago
CHIKEN LITTLE WAS SET UP BY THE FEDS if u don agree jst look at the facts THE FACTS PEOPLE
SpicedHammers 6 months ago
@SpicedHammers Well then how about pointing us in the direction of "the facts". Because quite frankly, I'm not going to take the word of SpicedHammers on youtube at face value.
jboyko3 5 months ago 2
@jboyko3 THE FACS!!!
SpicedHammers 5 months ago
@SpicedHammers Oh, those "facs". How stupid of me. It all seems so clear now... Thanks for showing me the way SpicedHammers on youtube. : /
jboyko3 5 months ago 2
@jboyko3 IS tru in glad th faccs have won u overr
SpicedHammers 5 months ago
@SpicedHammers Oh yeah. Your "faccs" have won me over alright. They've won me over to the fact that random, anonymous people in a public forum who say "look up the facts" without actually presenting a resource in which to start looking for so-called "faccs", are either children who are up way past their bedtime, or illiterate escapees from a state hospital who gained access to a computer terminal. Either way, enjoy you're green jello, or let it remind you of that failed shock treatment therapy.
jboyko3 5 months ago
@jboyko3 did you not understand that I was kidding? I claimed that a fictional character in children's literature was set up by the federal government
SpicedHammers 5 months ago
@jboyko3 further more, I am not anonymous
SpicedHammers 5 months ago
Ron Paul NWO Pimp
This traitor has been in the Republican Party for 33 years
and claims to be a Libretarian
Ron wants to end health care and social security
DeadJesus100 6 months ago
@DeadJesus100 Health care and S.S. will end themselves.
TheDetoX 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The FED actually owe the taxpayers money. Why? The constitution states only Congress can coin money. Yet that privilege has been passed onto the FED which is not part of our government. The FED is a private institution. So why is the FED allowed to coin money out of thin air and then charge an interest on that debt to the taxpayers. SHOULDN'T WE BE CHARGING THE "FED" a FEE JUST TO HAVE THAT PRIVILEGE TO COIN MONEY?
MrSeriouslynot 6 months ago
The private banks of the Fed are as follows :
1. Rothschild Banks of London and Berlin
2. Lazard Brothers Bank of Paris
3. Israel Moses Sieff Banks of Italy
4. Warburg Bank of Hamburg, Germany and Amsterdam
5. Kuhn Loeb Bank of New York
6. Lehman Brothers Bank of New York. Not!
7. Goldman Sachs Bank of New York
8. Chase Manhattan Bank of New York ( Rockefellers)
Nautilus1972 6 months ago
all u people who say tht ron paul is the only hope for america. THINK AGAIN!!! the only hope for america is YOU!!!! WE MUST RISE UP AND OVER THROW OUR GOVERNMENT!!!!! WE MUST SHOW THT WE WILL NOT BE SLAVES TO THEM!!!! DOWN WITH FASCISM!!! AND DOWN WITH THE NWO!!!! WE MUST START A REVOLUTION AND REVOLT!!!! WAKE UP AMERICA!!!
AcaRJacKeR 6 months ago 39
@AcaRJacKeR you are absolutely right..and a revolution will take place, but by then it may be too late.
Uprising771 6 months ago
@AcaRJacKeR WE MUST YOUTUBE OUR WAY TO FREEDOM!! WE MUST TYPE IN ALL CAPS TO SHOW THAT WE MEAN BUSINESS!! EXCLAMATION POINTS WILL FREE YOU FROM YOUR SHACKLES!!!
rigatony019 6 months ago
@AcaRJacKeR You are about a century too late with that. People are asleep deeply and they aren't going to wake up.
SoftwareTheft 5 months ago
@SoftwareTheft
Everybody wakes up in a FEMA camp. But then its already to late.
People will also wake up seeing a honest politician get shot after watching the simpsons on tv for 40years.
So hell will break lose, anyway you slice it.
InODependanceSyndrom 5 months ago
@InODependanceSyndrom I agree, if the shit does hit the fan, people will just get rolled by the juggernaut. However, I don't agree with the alarmist mentality you find so much here on YouTube. I think there's a slow bleed going on, much like the parable about the frog in the pot of water, slowly being turned up to boil. Before he notices he's dinner, it's far too late.
SoftwareTheft 5 months ago
@AcaRJacKeR you sound like you want something other than free markets and individual liberty. we dont need to overthrow anything, we simple need to follow the perfectly logical and coherent rules in the constitution that we started ignoring a century ago. if we followed the rules our founders set up, we'd be fine. the constitution is not a living breathing document, it's the best document the world has ever produced regarding what a government should do. it doesn't need to be adapted, FOLLOW IT!
Welsh77 5 months ago
@Welsh77 ok let me say this yes i was over reacting. i guess i was just super mad because this was the first day i realized tht our gov lies to us about EVERYTHING. but yes i would most deffinately like to follow the constitution but the problem is that how do we get our gov. to follow it? because obviously they dont.
AcaRJacKeR 5 months ago
@AcaRJacKeR you explain to liberals that social security, medicare, medicaid, obamacare, and any other entitlements are unconstitutional and massive ponzy schemes that steal from people. you also don't elect people like obama who claim they want to spread wealth around. try to convey these ideas to as many people as possible, it's all you can do.
Welsh77 5 months ago
@Welsh77 Soc Sec is a ponzi scheme? How many ponzi schemes do you know have paid out every obligation for over 75 years?
Uncle99B 5 months ago
@Uncle99B lol bernie madoff's scam paid out every obligation for 30 years, social security is just a much bigger scheme and has the resources to last longer. it's a pyramid scheme, saying it's worked so far ignores the inevitability of the system collapsing and people losing their investments.
Welsh77 5 months ago
@Welsh77 You have no idea how Soc Sec works, do you?
Uncle99B 5 months ago
@Uncle99B yes, actually i do. it's just like a pyramid scheme, generating income from new investors instead of legitimate enterprises. trusting the government with our retirement money has led to them wasting hundreds of billions of SS surpluses. i also don't think the government should have the ability to take a % of your income and force you to contribute to your retirement, then decide at what age you can get the money back, how often you'll withdraw it, and how big the checks will be.
Welsh77 4 months ago
@Welsh77 . As I suspected and said. You don't even have the most basic understanding. You speak in right wing talking points
Uncle99B 4 months ago
@Uncle99B no, i think you lack a basic understanding, that's how the system works. when it collapses you won't be praising it anymore. everything i've said is simply true, it's not on the right or the left. government has the ability to forcefully run part of my retirement and i'd like to do it myself. i want the money i put into SS back so i can invest it how i choose, not in treasury bonds. the only reason the govt can't do that is because they have to sustain the pyramid scheme that SS is.
Welsh77 4 months ago
@Welsh77. "collapses, forcefully, pyramid scheme". You write like a frightened child. You haven't the first idea of how a Defined Benefit Pension Plan works.
Uncle99B 4 months ago
@Uncle99B yes i do, and social security is not a defined benefit pension plan, it's a defined contribution plan. people are required to give a defined contribution, 6.92%, but what they get out depends on calculations done by the government is by no means "defined". it changes on a year to year basis. stop acting so educated you have no idea what the hell you're talking about. government is forcefully running part of my retirement, you just refuse to acknowledge how outrageous that is.
Welsh77 4 months ago
@Welsh77. You confirm your ignorance. Social Security is precisely a defined benefit Plan. The benefit one receives from the plan is exactly defined by the rules of Social Security. With some COLA adjustments. Hell, there are Soc Sec bft calculators all over the web
Why is it that those who know the least about topics feel they know the most and name call those who actually do know something about the topic? It's a right wing thing, I guess.
Uncle99B 4 months ago
@Uncle99B i sent you a message explaining pretty deeply why the middle class is not shrinking, why everyone is much richer than 30 years ago, and why stating that the top 1% take a higher proportion of the total income than 30 years ago really has nothing to do with the size or growth of the middle class. when you track the same real people over time, the people who are poor at the beginning see much higher rises in their income than those who are rich. push your agenda tho, keep ignoring it.
Welsh77 4 months ago
@Uncle99B you clearly know nothing about the current state of our country or our progress, because you insist the poor today are worse off than the poor 30 years ago. based on that, i really shouldn't give any merit to what you have to say about anything, including social security. social security has a defined contribution aspect to it: the government defines how much you contribute. it's common sense. it's more of a defined contribution plan than a defined benefit plan.
Welsh77 4 months ago
@Welsh77 . You have more than adequately displayed your absolute ignorance of Social Security as well as the fate of the poor and the middle class over the past 30 years.
Uncle99B 4 months ago
@Uncle99B sure i have, but you haven't offered any evidence to back up your claims. show me ONE study by a legitimate source that shows the poor have lower real incomes than 20 or 30 years ago. show me ONE study that says social security isn't going collapse within 30 years at this rate. or you can just go on spouting your crap. anyone can say things without any evidence. i gave you studies from the treasury, which the CBO concurs with, in my message, showing mobility and real income increases.
Welsh77 4 months ago
@Welsh77 . "i (sic) gave you studies from the treasury, ....". What's scary is that you think you actually did. Do me a favor and re-read all you comments.
Uncle99B 4 months ago
@Uncle99B let's see a study showing declining real incomes for the poor and middle class, im still waiting for one.
Welsh77 4 months ago
@Welsh77 Free Markets and Individual Liberty should not be discussed in the same sentence. They are not the same thing. That statement supports to fullish idea of corporations are people. Free Market is just a fancy word they labeled it but they do the complete opposite. How is free market richer get rich richer and poor get poorer? The middle class gets wiped out in the process. This is some loop hole to support greed! Bible money is the root of all evil. That is the doc we should follow!
newjeruselem 5 months ago
@newjeruselem if you think the poor are poorer than they were 30 years ago, you're simply wrong. your argument is based on claims that are not true. the poor are much, much richer than they were 30 years ago. the gap has increased, but when you consider the fact that most of the people in the bottom 20% 30 years ago are no longer in the bottom 20%, that claim falls apart. everyone is better off than 20 years ago, look at the things poor households own now that they didn't then. ex: cell phones
Welsh77 5 months ago
@Welsh77 Nope. The poor are substantially worse off then they were 30 years ago. Less access to education, fewer and lower paying jobs, less help from government, lower income (inflation adjusted), lower net worth (actually higher net debt). This is a fact clearly supported by all measures and not ipen to debate
Uncle99B 5 months ago
@Uncle99B lol poor worse off? haha that's funny. ask some poor people what the 70s were like. you'll notice they didn't have cable tv, color television, washing machines, dryers, microwaves, most didn't own their property while now 45% do. 25% of the people the government considers poor had cell phones. sounds like they're a lot poorer...
Welsh77 5 months ago
@Welsh77 . I base my opinions on the facts. Which I have already listed.
Uncle99B 4 months ago
@Uncle99B please show me the statistics that indicate that real median incomes for poor households have declined over the last 30 years. that's simply not true.
Welsh77 4 months ago
@Uncle99B also, why do you think defined benefit pension plans are nonexistent in the private sector nowadays, and waning out of the public sector? they aren't run properly and they cause companies to go bankrupt. the government is no exception, keep guaranteeing people money and you're going to have problems. with that said, social security looks more like a defined contribution plan every day, as peoples checks are "adjusted" to fit the economy. there have been lots of SS cuts
Welsh77 4 months ago
@Welsh77. They are less frequent (hardly non-existent) in the private sector today, as are post retirement health care plans -- well, except for executives -- as part of the erosion of the middle class that has taken place over the past 30 years. This is all part of the massive transfer of wealth from the poor and middle class to the super rich that has occurred over that time period.
Uncle99B 4 months ago
@Welsh77
That's a very wrong to look at things. A lot of those things were expensive back then because they were new and could not be brought to market cheaply but now thanks to tech and other things they can be now.. But the real thing you have to look at is the purchasing power of the dollar overall and the overall situation. We have less quality jobs, more on welfare/food stamps. The standard of living is down.. People have NO SAVINGS.
xMaXiMuSx 4 months ago
@xMaXiMuSx i agree on the savings, but saying that we should cut out technology and attribute our gains to it and assume it would have happened anyway is foolish. i have the correct way of viewing things, and although the dollar has been devalued, real incomes are higher. it's simply true that someone in the 10th percentile has a much higher real income, and therefore purchasing power, than someone in the 10th percentile in 1970. factor in mobility, and the gains are much larger.
Welsh77 4 months ago
@Welsh77
We agree to disagree..
xMaXiMuSx 4 months ago
@xMaXiMuSx i guess i can agree to disagree on some of the things, but not on the incomes issue. real incomes are higher, i will send you the data. more people are on food stamps because they know they can get them, our 35 million people the govt consider poor buy televisions with their income, and cable to go with it, and then apply for foodstamps because they know they can get them. the actual number of people who can't afford food is extremely low.
Welsh77 4 months ago
@Welsh77
well everyone has cell phones, cable, TV.. Thankfully there is a still free market in those, that's why they are cheap and getting cheaper... If had free market in education,health care, automobile we would have a higher standard of living and of course we need a sound monetary system along with that..
xMaXiMuSx 4 months ago
@xMaXiMuSx purchasing power of the dollar is NOT the same thing as purchasing power for individuals. individuals real incomes are higher, they can buy more goods and services now than they could back in the 70s. the dollar is weaker, in regards to international trade. those aren't the same, and you need to distinguish between them. you can't just ignore technology and say "that would have happened anyway" - living standards are up, purchasing power for individual households is up. for everyone
Welsh77 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@xMaXiMuSx purchasing power of the dollar is NOT the same thing as purchasing power for individuals. individuals real incomes are higher, they can buy more goods and services now than they could back in the 70s. the dollar is weaker, in regards to international trade. those aren't the same, and you need to distinguish between them. you can't just ignore technology and say "that would have happened anyway" - living standards are up, purchasing power for individual households is up. for everyone
Welsh77 4 months ago