Money, Banking and the Federal Reserve

Thomas Jefferson and Andrew Jackson understood "The Monster". But to most Americans today, Federal Reserve is just a name on the dollar bill. They have no idea of what the central bank does to the economy, or to their own economic lives; of how and why it was founded and operates; or of the sound money and banking that could end the statism, inflation, and business cycles that the Fed generates.

Dedicated to Murray N. Rothbard, steeped in American history and Austrian economics, and featuring Ron Paul, Joseph Salerno, Hans Hoppe, and Lew Rockwell, this extraordinary new film is the clearest, most compelling explanation ever offered of the Fed, and why curbing it must be our first priority.

Alan Greenspan is not, we're told, happy about this 42-minute blockbuster. Watch it, and you'll understand why. This is economics and history as they are meant to be: fascinating, informative, and motivating. This movie could change America.

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• Mises
• Federal
• Reserve
• Greenspan
• Liberty
• fiat
• money
• freedom
• banking

[tjtomkins]

@TheBalancedAmerican

"As trade and commerce grew, the demand for money grew. Clay tablets, Tally sticks, paper notes, anything."

Yeah & that merely means that the purchasing-power of gold goes up & we don't have to "chop the coins", that's why silver was used as a secondary-currency as it's supply lies at 15-20 times that of gold. Not to mention, people don't need to carry coins everywhere, electronic transactions will still be available anyways

[tjtomkins]

@beats299

Gold-std that had been in place was a PHONY one as under it, govt could price-fix so govt & banks used to create more money (devalue, inflate & thereby steal people's purchasing-power).

It's important understand that under business-cycle deflation is preceded by inflationary boom which is caused by over-expansion of credit due to central-banking & fractional-reserve-banking so deflation is merely a "correction" to the earlier inflationary boom; that's where problem lies

[cbasallie]

@TheBalancedAmerican OK that analogy is lost on me. It's food for thought though...... I'll have to mull it over for a while.

[beats299]

we had to get off the gold standard during the depression to fight off deflation, which was destroying our economy. i think we're headed for the other extreme now

[edisonoside]

How can one live without anger trying to own your own is made illegal in this country..they tricked up a scheme to enslave.

[TheBalancedAmerican]

If the economy were a body, its bones would infrastructure, its muscles would be labor, its mind would be entrepreneurs, and its blood would be money. ;)

[TheBalancedAmerican]

@cbasallie Your tree produces fruit, Your neighbor produces Cows. You must now make an exchange. Money made the exchanges easier and more efficient. As trade and commerce grew, the demand for money grew. Clay tablets, Tally sticks, paper notes, anything.

This is not really questionable. The only reasonable defense of a finite money supply inside of a growing economy is a negative fractional inflation model. Chopping the coins into ever smaller pieces. I can respectfully disagree =)

[cbasallie]

@TheBalancedAmerican OK . But I'm stuck on having this analogy of the scales as measuring commodities in a barter type system. I don't think economic stability can be weighed and balanced by forced equity. Balance of that sort inhibits growth. For example, a seed put in the ground doesn't equal the tree it produces. A dollar should compare the value of a seed to a tree. One tree = 1,000 seeds = $10.00 . If now we grow 400 trees do we need more dollars in circulation? I don't think we do

[TheBalancedAmerican]

@cbasallie Hmmm...I like your example of the balance scale. But I see the two sides as production on the left side, and "means of exchange" on the right side. As the "weight" of output grows(expanding economy), balance(economic stability) is achieved by adding more money to the right-side of the scale. Of course, adding too much money also causes an imbalance ;)

I understand the attractions of a Gold Standard, but it seems inflexible. Of course, Keynesians are wrong also, imo =)

[cbasallie]

@TheBalancedAmerican OK how about this example of my POV. A scale is balancing two commodities . A third component is the weight in the middle of the scale. Money/Gold is that weight. How much growth does there have to be in the commodities we are measuring, before the scale needs a larger weight?

I'm of the opinion that there is enough gold to suffice as a standard/measurement ... for the commodities which we are currently trading.

Can you see where I'm coming from?