Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: The Root of the Problem- The Federal Reserve.

Posted 8 years ago on Oct. 20, 2011, 2:52 a.m. EST by tunitcommander (12) from Cherry Hill, NJ
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

How many of you believe that the FEDERAL Reserve is run by the government? Well, it is not. The Federal Reserve is a PRIVATE central bank that prints money out of thin air and loans it to banks on WALL STREET or overseas. In a partial audit of the Federal Reserve, pushed for by Congressman Ron Paul, it was found that $2 TRILLION dollars had been sent overseas to bail out banks in Europe. Now you ask why prices have been going up for almost everything - gas, food, services, and especially gold. The answer is because your money is worth LESS because the Federal Reserve keeps printing it out of thin air. The more money they print, the less your individual dollars are worth. Money is not backed by gold as it used to be, it is backed by nothing. The US Dollar (USD) is the World Reserve Standard of Currency. Deals and purchases with almost all nations are made with the USD. There have been recent talks between nations of getting rid of the USD as the World Standard due to the Federal Reserve's endless printing of the money. If this happens, it will surely put the US into an even deeper hole that it will not be able to climb out of, a disaster. Did you know that the foreign wars cost roughly $30 Million dollars PER HOUR to fund? Where does this money come from? You guessed it, the Federal Reserve. Who funds and bails out the big banks on Wall Street? The Federal Reserve. Who buys and pays for almost every presidential candidate aside from a few (Ron Paul comes to mind)? The Federal Reserve. Ladies and gentlemen, I have now presented to you the root of the problem, and I would encourage you to recognize this problem at it's source, the Federal Reserve. With this corrupt PRIVATE central bank either eliminated or highly restricted, it will cause a domino effect that will be echoed in Wall Street, Washington, and worldwide!

151 Comments

151 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 5 points by les54tom (15) 8 years ago

Good thing that they are being audited. Also, the Fed, as it's often refered was set up by the US Congress. It's operation is loosely governed by the Senate. There is even a committee dedicated to it. The value of the dollar is not based on thin air and is subject to fluctuations based on economic trends - has been for some time. The Federal Reserve Banks (and there are several) are quasi-private entities, similar to the US Post Office, but they, of course handle a different type of paper. The US Congress can also change it's operating protocols, but hasn't done so for quite some time. That is hasn't doesn't imply a complete abcense of control. In fact, the US Congress has the power to complete dissolve the Federal Reserve and has done in the distant past - not that it currently has any professed interest in doing so. It is not a completely seperate entity as some catastrophisers/doomsayers would insist. Whether anyone happens to disagree, doesn't change the fact of it's charter being established and subject to Congressional discretion. Look it up.

[-] 1 points by MonetizingDiscontent (1257) 8 years ago

It was only a partial audit. And what was discovered (The 16 Trillion sent overseas that was never disclosed to congress) warrants a FULL audit.

[-] 0 points by Levels (73) 8 years ago

You mean "they are not getting audited".

[-] 1 points by booshington (397) 8 years ago

They've already been audited.

[-] 1 points by MonetizingDiscontent (1257) 8 years ago

Yes but It was a partial audit only. They very smallest tip of the iceberg is all that was allowed any scrutiny at all. We need to have a FULL audit.

[-] 4 points by les54tom (15) 8 years ago

Without a doubt, the Fed does need to be reformed, but abolishing it completely will lead to anarchy. There are certain norms/constructs necessary for civilisation to operate. Money/credit and the management of it on a national if not global scale, are definitely a part of that. There's always the tendency to regress in times of stress,(even to go to extremes and completely abolish what was set up through time and practice for good reason, but to do so is a maladaptive response.

[-] 2 points by booshington (397) 8 years ago

Yeah everyone spouts off about ending the Fed but nobody can even touch on explaining how you make the currency of the largest economy in the world worthless, literally burn every US Dollar and wipe it from every bank, then replace it with some other currency while somehow avoiding a complete meltdown.

So to you END THE FED'ers, how do you accomplish swapping out the actual currency?

[-] 3 points by MonetizingDiscontent (1257) 8 years ago

Allow for Competition in legal currencies. Let the people decide what they want. If the people decide to get into a new form of money that is sound in policy, backed by something something real, they will vote by choosing that alternative.

Allow the people to opt out of the promissory-note (dollar) into something that is Not backed by anything but promises.

But you dont have to ban anything is my point. We would just allow for more free choice, an opt out, and an alternative that pegs a new currency to something that is real. Agriculture, Gold, A combination... People always choose the better product with the most value over time.

[-] 1 points by booshington (397) 8 years ago

At that point you undermine the dollar and it's value will suffer along with our economy, even further.

[-] 1 points by MonetizingDiscontent (1257) 8 years ago

Well what is the dollar really worth anymore?

Ironic "Scariest Chart Ever" Redux - America Will Surpass 100% Debt To GDP On Halloween

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/ironic-scariest-chart-ever-redux-america-will-surpass-100-debt-gdp-helloween

(ZeroHedge) ..."Yes, ladies and gentlemen: All Hallows E'en will be doubly scary this year: for the first time since World War II, US debt will officially surpass GDP on Halloween 2011."

[-] 1 points by mgiddin1 (1057) from Linthicum, MD 8 years ago

It's worth a lot more than it's going to be worth very, very soon. I hope you bought gold - it's going sky-high sooner or later.....

[-] 1 points by booshington (397) 8 years ago

It's worth about tree fiddy I'd say.

[-] 1 points by MonetizingDiscontent (1257) 8 years ago

lol

[-] 1 points by Socrates469bc (608) from New York, NY 8 years ago

Good RP supporters, please help the cause and donate: http://occupywallst.org/donate/

[-] 0 points by classicliberal (312) 8 years ago

Yes let's keep the Fed and the establishment. I don't like progress or freedom.

[-] 0 points by jeremiah (23) 8 years ago

Same way President Lincoln and Kennedy did during their presidency. The US started printing their own interest free money; $4.5 million and $4.3 trillion respectively. It hurt the FED so much that they were both assassinated moths later and all that money Kennedy had printed was recalled the very next day. The US prints their own money based on gold standard then kicks the FED straight out of the country to never return.

[-] 1 points by Republicae (81) 8 years ago

Basically that is what this government is doing now with the FED policy of Quantitative Easing, the FED is buying up U.S. Treasuries. Lincoln's Greenback system was designed to finance his illegal WARMACHINE, nothing more. It was an economic disaster causing massive debt accumulation, more than had ever been accumulated to that point by the Government and it also caused massive inflation, making the people suffer the consequences. Also, Lincoln was a major supporter of centralized banking, highly centralized government. In fact, we have Lincoln to thank for much of what we are now facing in this country.

[-] 1 points by jeremiah (23) 8 years ago

I understand, but I don't agree with that. What Lincoln did was illegal, I agree. He had a problem to face. The bank was going to charge him 36% interest and what he did he thought was the lesser evil of the two. He said that the country would never be able to repay the debt interest to the bank so he made a desperate choice to print his own. It won him the war, but cost more than he thought in inflation. I still believe he made a better choice. And he hated the idea of national banks controlling the nation.

[-] 1 points by booshington (397) 8 years ago

Also the greenbacks suffered some pretty serious inflation.

[-] 1 points by Republicae (81) 8 years ago

I’m not sure where you found that he opposed or hated the banks or bankers, when in fact he was a continual supporter of a centralized banking system, a combination of government and banking, similar to what we have now. In 1832, Lincoln gave the following speech: "My politics are short and sweet, like the old woman's dance. I am in favor of a national bank, I am in favor of the internal improvements system and a high protective tariff." He never changed his politics, but he worked for the next two decades making political and banking alliances that would prove to be advantageous to his political views and career.

He opposed Andrew Jackson’s push against the Bank of the United States and he continued to support the national banking system in Illinois even after the system was shown to be utterly corrupt. Lincoln had a very distinct political agenda, that agenda was, at first, found with the platform of the Whig Party, later in the Radical Republican Party and it depended upon a strong centralized banking system that could assist the creation of a highly centralized government, doing away with the Republic and replacing it with what we have now, a central government that assumes its power beyond the law.

The Greenback system implemented by Lincoln was, in fact, a boon for the bankers, they profited much more under Lincoln’s system than they would have if they had loaned the money to the government. In order to maintain the Greenback system, the Lincoln Administration made deals with the Bankers to sell them bonds at a certain percentage, to be repaid not in Greenbacks, but in gold. The issue of newly printed government bonds was in fact, very similar to what we now suffer under today, it was a system that provided interest payments to the buyer of those bonds. If you look at the amount of debt accumulated during the war years it was enormous, so much so that when a Congressional Committee investigated the way the debt accumulated, they came to the conclusion that it was caused, not by the war, but by the usage of the Greenback Fiat Monetary System. That system made bankers rich, in fact many of the bankers and financiers during that period later became the magnates of Wall Street, and many of them helped form the Federal Reserve Bank.

[-] 1 points by jeremiah (23) 8 years ago

I should have been more clear. I'm referring to the Rothschild Banking system he despised. Lincoln did support a central banking but not from an outsider. His famous quote, "The money power preys upon the nation in time of peace and conspires against it in times of adversity. It is more despotic than monarchy,..." I'm just saying his ideas for keeping them out of our country for the good of our country was the right thing to do. His actions would have made our country more powerful because of our debt-free economy and probably more corrupted as a result. I won't deny that. Not everyone is good or evil to the core. He had bad ideas and good ones. Wanting to keep the corrupt Rothschild institution out of our affairs was, in my opinion, a wise choice. His actions wouldn't have stopped corruption at all. Just kept the richest crooks out of it.

[-] 1 points by booshington (397) 8 years ago

So you're saying it's unhealthy to switch currencies.

[-] 1 points by jeremiah (23) 8 years ago

It was for those two, lol. They underestimated what the bankers were capable of and it cost them. But that's not what I'm saying. Money whether it be gold, paper or a chunk of wood has no value until we give it one. We could keep the same currency just not have someone else print it and sell it to us. If the US printed its own money it would be debt and interest-free, because it could be regulated. We can't regulate the FED so they control the flow and worth of OUR dollar. We can't get out of debt because we're borrowing money from the people who are creating the debt.

[-] 1 points by booshington (397) 8 years ago

We actually can regulate the Fed though. I don't know why so many people miss that.

One of the goals of Dodd-Frank (if people would quit messing with it and blocking it's implementation) is to strip some of the power from the Fed and place it under stricter regulations.

[-] 1 points by jeremiah (23) 8 years ago

Yes, CAN is the word. That's completely different from ARE. We can, but some reason with regulators coming out of our ears, it's still not getting done. We attempted an audit and only got a partial out of the deal. The rich got richer in the financial collapse and the poor and middle class lost nearly everything. That's not regulation. $16 trillion going out to keep the pockets bursting of the wealthy while mothers and fathers are lost their jobs and are driven to steal from businesses to keep their kids from starving or losing their homes. That's not regulation.

[-] 1 points by booshington (397) 8 years ago

K dude read the second sentence now.

[-] 1 points by jeremiah (23) 8 years ago

I know. I was semi-agreeing with you. Sorry if that came off as defensive.

[-] 1 points by Republicae (81) 8 years ago

There are two types of fiat monetary systems, one being the type you are recommending by having the government print up money without interest, that is a single-tier system and those systems are extremely unstable, usually ending in massive hyper-inflation, the other is a dual-tier system as we have today, it is still unstable, but inflation is restrained by the organization of debt into currency. Both are inherently dishonest in that they give the government the power to do whatever it wants to do and to wage war without any restraint. Both are debt based and not asset based. Whether the government prints paper money substitutes directly as you suggest or as it does not through the FED, the results are essentially the same. Both types are debt obligations, both are nothing more than I.O.U.s with a promise to pay, both are double liabilities with no asset value whatsoever. Both are not solutions to the current problems faced by this country.

Gold/Silver are double assets on both sides of the books, each are their own promise of payment, both are interest and debt-free units of exchange. Both require no government seal of approval to be recognized or accepted as money. Both retain confidence as a medium of exchange and as a store of value.

[-] 1 points by jeremiah (23) 8 years ago

So you're saying to use the Gold standard? That was my actual point. Sorry I didn't clarify that very well. I've been talking about the gold standard in many a forum over the last few days, my bad. So yes, I support that method. Thanks.

[-] 1 points by Republicae (81) 8 years ago

Actually Jeremiah...I am and have been devoted to the destruction of the FED for well over two decades.

Read my blog....http://1776solution.blogspot.com

[-] 1 points by jeremiah (23) 8 years ago

ok good to know. Thanks. :) Not a bad blog. Good read.

[-] 1 points by Chocolatechicken (14) from New York, NY 8 years ago

Double amen

[-] 0 points by marcxstar (167) from Los Angeles, CA 8 years ago

Amen.

[-] 1 points by mgiddin1 (1057) from Linthicum, MD 8 years ago

Anarchy? JFK did it by executive order, and it would have saved us a ton of money because we wouldn't be paying interest on Federal Reserve notes, which is a ponzi scheme.

http://www.rapidtrends.com/it-almost-became-money-united-states-notes-versus-federal-reserve-notes/

[-] 4 points by Mcc (542) 8 years ago

This is only partially true. The Federal Reserve is actually a coop with the Federal government. They don't act independently. They act in cooperation with the Federal government to print money as needed to cover economic growth. Its absolutely necessary to print money. Absolutely vital. Of course, there is corruption anytime big money is involved. But it's not just printed on a whim. Even with pure intentions and no corruption, it would still be necessary to increase the M1 money supply (cash) as needed to cover economic growth. More transactions require more cash. Some transactions are electronic but there is still a legitimate need to increase that supply of cash regardless of how much gold is piled up in Fort Knox.

Of course, there is corruption and the Feds did help bail out foreign banks. I don't recall the figure but it's not the underlying cause. Just another trick to make bankers, executives, politicians, their buddies, and the one percent club richer. Greed is always the underlying cause when it comes to government corruption.

The US dollar isn't going anywhere. No way.

[-] 0 points by Chocolatechicken (14) from New York, NY 8 years ago

Us dollars dead. Once the world removes it as the reserve currency, America will be bankrupt.

[-] 0 points by thoreau42 (595) 8 years ago

Contrary to popular miseducated belief, it is not "absolutely necessary" to print (more) money.

[-] 1 points by Mcc (542) 8 years ago

Then what happens when existing currency is concentrated among the rich?

[-] -1 points by thoreau42 (595) 8 years ago

Prices fall and the poor have more buying power.

[-] 1 points by Mcc (542) 8 years ago

No drop in demand?

[-] 1 points by thoreau42 (595) 8 years ago

In a healthy economy, supply and demand can go up and down, or do you always consume the same amount of goods and services, in an increasing amount, at all times?

[-] 2 points by Mcc (542) 8 years ago

If I'm broke you can bet your ass I 'll buy less.

[-] 1 points by thoreau42 (595) 8 years ago

So the more we artificially prop things up, the more they have to correct themselves at some point, unless we're going to bleed everyone dry to prop up an artificial economy. That doesn't make any sense.

[-] -1 points by GeorgeMichaelBluth (402) from Arlington, VA 8 years ago

Money printing is wrong and the dollar is almost dead.

[-] 1 points by booshington (397) 8 years ago

Citation needed.

[-] 1 points by GeorgeMichaelBluth (402) from Arlington, VA 8 years ago

Look around you, it's a dynamic citation.

[-] 1 points by booshington (397) 8 years ago

You really don't know what you're talking about do you?

[-] 1 points by GeorgeMichaelBluth (402) from Arlington, VA 8 years ago

yes. it means the proof youre looking for is not a wikipedia link, its all around you. Look at what 4 decades of money printing has done. Its put all the money in the hands of those with the money printing press, and made all the dollars held by everyone else, almost worthless. The dollar has lost 97% of its value since they started an organization to stabilize it.

[-] 1 points by booshington (397) 8 years ago

Seriously what the hell are you talking about.

97% of it's value is gone? hahah.

[-] 2 points by jeremiah (23) 8 years ago

It's actually 98%. What he's saying is based on the price of our dollar in 1913 before the FED took over. An ounce of gold (which is what our dollar was based on) was worth $20.64. That same ounce of gold is now worth $1,370 at a loss of 98.5% since the money has lost its gold standard and is produced in such large quantities.

[-] 1 points by booshington (397) 8 years ago

You know that when an economy grows it requires more currency right?

What was the average pay rate in 1913 anyways?

[-] 1 points by jeremiah (23) 8 years ago

They are not growing at the same rate. $15,000 avg annual compared to $45,000 avg annual income. That's only 3X in 98yrs, not a lot compared to inflation rates. Gold is worth that much because the dollar and world currencies' worth is so low, causing a very high demand of the product. And inflation is caused usually by an excess in printed money, or countries borrowing large amounts of money to cover ever-rising debts, or because industries' costs rise due to demand to ensure a steady profit. The consumer is the last on the list so they see the hike in prices well before their paychecks increase. That's the simple version anyway. Question booshington. What are you doing here? It seems to me, and many others, that you're supporting the bankers and the greedy. You have an objective here? Trying to demoralize some of these people? Are they threatening to you in any way? I support human and industrial growth, honesty, hard work, integrity, and freedom. What exactly do you support? You and Republicae seem to be working together in this; going against the grain if you will from the majority of the people in this forum. Tell me, what are you here to gain?

[-] 0 points by GeorgeMichaelBluth (402) from Arlington, VA 8 years ago

you doubt that?

[-] 1 points by jeremiah (23) 8 years ago

I understood, look above. :)

[-] 1 points by GeorgeMichaelBluth (402) from Arlington, VA 8 years ago

Good backup!

[-] 0 points by Scout (729) 8 years ago
[-] 1 points by reddy2 (256) 8 years ago

The private Federal Reserve is at the root of almost all the problems in the United States today.

[-] 1 points by suzencr (102) 8 years ago

You know what's funny? People are actually SCARED to do what really needs to be done to turn this thing around. They end up distracted by thousands of peripheral issues, when a clear, logical assessment of the situation shows the history, timeline, culprits, and simple first step that would reverse and solve the problem.

We have a federal government that has metastasized into a cancerous growth feeding off of itself, with programs and departments that further complicate and disrupt our lives. Hand in hand with greedy corporate mobsters and banksters, the federal government spends its way into oblivion through endless wars, and projects that focus only on profit, not the common good. At the top of this mess is the federal reserve bank, who ceaselessly prints phony fiat money backed by nothing, while bankers create insane derivative investments that pile debt upon debt upon debt, more than can ever be repaid. Wall Street is the gambling den where these guys place bets on who is going to end up with the hot potato. They manipulate the market so even if it crashes, they now ahead of time so they can short it. It's all a big game to them, they couldn't care less how the useless eaters are effected, they hope most of us die and go away, now that the've pretty much sucked up every real asset in existence.

If we take the Federal Reserve bank out of the equation, what happens? First, there's no funny money printing machine for the banks and corps to go to. Now, with a national bank under the U.S. Treasury, and hundreds of state banks, all the interest flows in to the Treasury and we are flush! No more middle man, get it?

It's so hard to get people to understand that they've been lied to, that what they taught in school is a lie. Most people STILL think the Federal reserve is a branch of gov't LOL! Just start reading and asking Q's and you will find out the truth. We do NOT need the Federal Reserve for a functional monetary system, in fact they have been instrumental in fueling every boom-bust cycle and every call to war, because it these activities have made the 1% as rich as they are and able to do what they continue to do. Now they do it in the open and think you can do nothing to stop them, they don't even hide it any more! So please, let's focus on getting this insanity stopped before it goes any further.

[-] 1 points by suzencr (102) 8 years ago

You got it my friend. If we were to focus on just this one issue, we could nip this insanity in the bud.

1 - Repeal the Federal Reserve Act of 1913 and return the printing of money to the U.S. Treasury - we need sound, commodity-based money, not usurious debt-based FRNs. The corporate banksters who now control money printing are rogue criminals and they created this economic depression to suck our wealth from us and it all started with the Federal Reserve Act.

2 - Create a firewall between government and corporations, no corporate personhood, no private funding of any governmental activity.

Just these two things would make a hell of a difference. All of our other problems stem from here, including the military-industrial complex and their corporate fat cats who just can't wait to test their new drones on civilians.

If you follow the money back to its source, you find the real trouble makers. End the Fed and put the corporate banksters in jail.

Here's some education on the subject:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G9IH-XKQpOI&feature=BFp&list=FLN7cf_w8wZbDe-9Q8BCrhuQ

[-] 1 points by LSN45 (535) 8 years ago

What we really need is real, loop-hole free CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFORM if we are to break the cycle of legalized bribery we have today. It needs to be THE main goal of these protests.

[-] 1 points by e307465 (147) 8 years ago

The sad part is that the audits have already established the Fed was making loans to foreign banks. Nothing came of it though. What's the point of audits if corrective action isn't taken? End the fed!

[-] 1 points by WeHaveDemands (186) 8 years ago

spread it... :)

[-] 1 points by number2 (914) 8 years ago

The problem is the Federal Reserve's cronies. Goldman, Citi, JP, Bof A and the prostitute politicians that they own.

[-] 1 points by FedWallFedWellFedUP (183) 8 years ago

Federal Reserve caused the GREAT DEPRESSION and this the GREAT RECESSION and DEPRESSION by increasing the interest rates at a time that served their greed and not in the best interest of the economy or the people.

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 8 years ago

the banks created money than loaned it to the people

the money disappeared and now the people cannot pay it back

[-] 1 points by AllUnited (7) 8 years ago

agree, the only federal thing is the name, they are private, no more federal than Fedex. We need money with no debt, bring the greenbacks back! We need money with no debt, this is the cause of all our problems

[-] 1 points by uslynx81 (203) 8 years ago

Right on point good post.

[-] 1 points by OpenTheory (19) 8 years ago

After reading through the comments it seems clear that we can't live with them and we can't live without them. I tend to disagree on the latter but I must admit I know nothing of the inner workings of the FED and can't understand the organizations relevancy. I would suggest though, that we collectively stop referring to this organization as the FED and perpetuating the myth that it's Federal. Instead, I would humbly suggest we start referring to it as the Central Bank.

I guess what I'm trying to say is; They came up with that name for a reason. Calling it what it really is will help us gain perspective on how we should deal with the problem.

I'm not smart enough to predict what would happen if we switched to another currency or if we abolished the Central Bank but I think a full audit would leave us with a better understanding of the problem. Let's take it one step at a time. Gather information, make it accessible, then figure out what to do about it once we have the facts.

[-] 1 points by OpenTheory (19) 8 years ago

It's really secrecy that's the problem, we should push for transparency.

[-] 1 points by PublicCurrency (1387) 8 years ago

All of our currency (units of exchange) are created as debt by privately owned banks.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ps2eLSDThc

End the Federal Reserve.

Over time, whoever controls the money system, controls the nation.

[-] 1 points by pissedoffconstructionworker (602) 8 years ago

Misleading OP.

The Fed is a quasi-governmental organization with a purposely ambiguous nature and charter.

I hate to be Johnny One Note, but the only way to fight the pervasive misinformation, propaganda and hype on this site is via dissemination of sound knowledge and information.

Pragmatic Capitalism, a well-known investor resource website, has the best on-line tutorial in the functioning of the money system. There's also a video version for video people.

http://pragcap.com/resources/understanding-modern-monetary-system

http://pragcap.com/resources/media-section

[-] 1 points by jimbabb (1) 8 years ago

The first needed reform would be to just let us opt-out of the depreciating dollar. Legalize private currencies by repealing legal tender laws.

BTW, the Federal Reserve is not exactly private. It was created by Congress at the request of the banking cartel and its board is appointed by the president. It does have private owners though so the Fed is more of a government/corporate hybrid (otherwise known as fascism).

[-] 1 points by lifesprizes (298) 8 years ago

The halting of printing money never collapsed any society into anarchy. It would be the lack of food and water or total destruction of the human spirit that would cause such events to unfold.

[-] 1 points by frosty72 (3) 8 years ago

american politics... how did the USD become the centre of the world? federal reserve caused a global recession because it had USD attached to it

[-] 1 points by PublicCurrency (1387) 8 years ago

A new audit of the Federal Reserve detailed widespread conflicts of interest involving directors of its regional banks.

“The most powerful entity in the United States is riddled with conflicts of interest,” Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) said after reviewing the Government Accountability Office report. The study required by a Sanders Amendment to last year’s Wall Street reform law examined Fed practices never before subjected to such independent, expert scrutiny.

The GAO detailed instance after instance of top executives of corporations and financial institutions using their influence as Federal Reserve directors to financially benefit their firms, and, in at least one instance, themselves. “Clearly it is unacceptable for so few people to wield so much unchecked power,” Sanders said. “Not only do they run the banks, they run the institutions that regulate the banks.”

Sanders said he will work with leading economists to develop legislation to restructure the Fed and bar the banking industry from picking Fed directors. “This is exactly the kind of outrageous behavior by the big banks and Wall Street that is infuriating so many Americans,” Sanders said.

The corporate affiliations of Fed directors from such banking and industry giants as General Electric, JP Morgan Chase, and Lehman Brothers pose “reputational risks” to the Federal Reserve System, the report said. Giving the banking industry the power to both elect and serve as Fed directors creates “an appearance of a conflict of interest,” the report added.

The 108-page report found that at least 18 specific current and former Fed board members were affiliated with banks and companies that received emergency loans from the Federal Reserve during the financial crisis.

[-] 1 points by henoktg (66) 8 years ago

Abolish the FED, the US gov / Treasury should print fixed interest free money. Wall street is just a casino. the casino owner is the FED .. END THE FED.

[-] 1 points by JamesS89118 (646) from Las Vegas, NV 8 years ago

Just for clarification, the FED can not be ended. It's chartered so we would cancel the charter (very possible) and give the FED to the Treasury Department and pray. There must be a FED like there must be banks. The question is of control and for whose benefit. The people need the control and the benefits. I'm with you a hundred percent, but I also have a little knowledge about this. (Luckily, a little knowledge can be a dangerous thing! lol) Peace

[-] 1 points by MonetizingDiscontent (1257) 8 years ago

An audit... a FULL audit mind you, is absolutely necessary. Congress didn't even know about the 16 Trillion sent overseas. It wasn't disclosed. What else is the federal reserve doing?

http://amerpundit.com/2011/07/22/audit-fed-lent-16-trillion-globally-in-three-years/

If 16 Trillion sent offshore was uncovered by a partial audit, I think a FULL audit is now warranted.

[-] 1 points by Steve15 (385) 8 years ago

A quick lesson in American history:

Rise of the financial empire: http://youtu.be/SwI5_HH9N7c

[-] 1 points by greenback (4) 8 years ago

Here is a documentary that the powers that be do not want you to see: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=swkq2E8mswI I do not think that switching to the gold standard is the best option for the 99%. Listen to what Bill Still has to say and spread the news. The American people need to educate themselves about the problem. The government and the mainstream media will not do that for us. Please watch the video. You do not have to agree with it but at least you will hear another opinion.

[-] 1 points by hedgie223344 (2) from New York, NY 8 years ago

Questioning the decision to send our sons, daughters, brothers, and sisters to fight half-way around the world with murky goals/mandate is a completely separate topic.

Looking at the war's expense as an additional bill for cash-strapped Americans doesn't make sense to me. Guns shoot bullets, not pennies. Planes drop bombs, not dollars. If anything, our wars are putting more Americans to work. Don't worry, I don't think this is the best way to put Americans to work or that more violence is the path to economic prosperity; I just think that the real problem with the economy is something else. Furthermore, I always thought that the unifying issue of "Occupy Wall St" was in the matter of private (rather than public) interests funding the economy. Haha, now I'm imagining a militant wing of Goldman Sachs. In any case, it's my understanding that most dollars spent by the government go into the hands of Americans. Then those Americans spend it on things in America.

The country's large banks didn't make a killing on the real estate bubble. Maybe some small mortgage brokers did, and to some extent people who bought and lived for several years in houses they could never have afforded reaped some of the surplus whilst living in luxury that they ultimately wouldn't pay for.

Large banks had nowhere to hide and were holding the hot potato when the music stopped. Or however that game works. I might be thinking of musical chairs, but that's not as good of an analogy.

[-] 1 points by guesswho (4) 8 years ago

I'll go you one better: the very system of getting money into the economy is designed to create debt no prosperity. The federal reserve gets money from the treasury, which it loans to banks and it expects the money back with interest. Banks in turn make loans to citizens. For a mortgage, for example, the points you pay go straight back to the federal reserve to pay them the interest they want. The problem is the treasury only produced the money for the principle; the system wants principle and interest back, but they only printed the bills for the principle! Bascially, they created a debt that cannot be paid unless someone else is made poorer--shiffting the debt! Welcome to the new indentured servitude.

[-] 1 points by TruePatriots (274) from San Diego, CA 8 years ago

"Now you ask why prices have been going up for almost everything - gas, food, services, and especially gold."

You lost all credibility right there. Gold went up in price not because of inflation but because uncertainty in the market place (greek debt, American economy).

[-] 1 points by sudoname (1001) from Berkeley, CA 8 years ago

Great post - the Fed is the Root of the Root of the problem!

The demands "Money out of politics" and "Reform the fed" are almost like chicken or the egg. We must do BOTH to make the change permanent.

[-] 1 points by jeremiah (23) 8 years ago

Like. Need a like button here. Well said.

[-] 1 points by sudoname (1001) from Berkeley, CA 8 years ago

Thank you

[-] 1 points by JamesS89118 (646) from Las Vegas, NV 8 years ago

it's that small little arrow, isn't it?

[-] 2 points by jeremiah (23) 8 years ago

haha good call. Thank-you.

[-] 1 points by enough (587) 8 years ago

Congress can debate in public for months about the content and extent of an economic stimulus package or some other piece of proposed legislation, whereas the Fed holds its privileged deliberations on monetary policy behind closed doors. The amount of taxpayer money involved in Fed decisions, however, is multiples of that discussed in the halls of congress. If this seems unbalanced, it’s because it is. What rabbit hole did the U.S. fall through to allow such a deviant situation to continue unabated? If the Fed holds interest rates low for a prolonged period of time and savers do not receive a reasonable return on their capital, is that not equivalent to a steep tax increase? If the Fed prints money and drives down the value of the dollar, is that not equivalent to a steep tax increase? Isn’t this a perversion of our founding principle of no taxation without representation? If the big banks are privy to Federal Reserve policies before they are publicly announced, are they not guilty of insider trading when they act to capitalize on the information?

[-] 1 points by rugids (11) 8 years ago

Not Two Is Peace

http://www.globalcooperationproject.org

Global Cooperative Forum Beyond Tribalism Based on Prior Unity of Humanity Not two Is Peace

[-] 1 points by sfsteve (151) 8 years ago

First, I want to make it clear. There is no way in hell I would vote for Ron Paul.

Regardless, the Federal Reserve Bank is a private corporation. It is the largest private corporation in the world. As such, it has a huge potential for corruption. The FED can cause inflation and deflation by issuing more or less money. With this power they can create bubbles and crashes. They also loan to private banks and through this ability can prop up certain industries at the expense of others. I am not saying they are doing any of this, they may be entirely on the level. But, the way the Federal Reserve Act was written, their operations are not subject to public review. This is not right and people should not allow it to continue. An alternative would be to have it be publicly owned and have its operations a matter of public record.

[-] 1 points by jeremiah (23) 8 years ago

Why make it public record when we should just abolish the whole damn thing and print our own interest and debt-free money. We don't need a bank to do that. We've done it before and can do it again. But a few presidents died for trying is the only problem.

[-] 1 points by sfsteve (151) 8 years ago

That is precisely what I mean. It the fed was public, then it would be the US government that prints the money at no interest and without the need to pay it back. A public fed could also serve as the bank for banks but oversight of its client banks would be public. As it is now, there is no way of knowing if the fed is indeed checking to make sure the "too big to fail" are not overly leveraged. I got news for you, they were overly leveraged, and that's why we're in this mess. Likely they still are.

[-] 1 points by jeremiah (23) 8 years ago

I get what you're saying, now. Thank-you. Good post.

[-] 1 points by JamesS89118 (646) from Las Vegas, NV 8 years ago

For the love of Higg's Boson, get an education. The Fed is needed to be the bank of banks. What's wrong is that the people do not have control of the Fed like North Dakota who has had very few problems these three years.

[-] 1 points by jeremiah (23) 8 years ago

I've had a full education thank-you. You're delusional. The FED is NOT needed. It's a private corporation making money off other people's misery. The gov't/ treasury, which can be regulated through the people, are the ones that should be doing what they've given the FED the power to do. Like North Dakota? What the hell are you talking about? Because they haven't been effected as badly as the rest of the country? You need to clarify. The people of North Dakota aren't regulating the FED in their state.

[-] 1 points by JamesS89118 (646) from Las Vegas, NV 8 years ago

Not full enough for this debate though. North Dakota is also the only state with a state owned bank (a FED). Please believe me when I type, that the FED by any other name is still a FED because a FED is needed. We both have now typed that the PEOPLE must own this ... wait for it ... FED! Peace

[-] 1 points by sfsteve (151) 8 years ago

From what I understand, the bank of North Dakota is just a public ran bank. It is much like any commercial bank but it is not for profit and its books are public record. They cannot create money like the FED, rather they can create fiat money they ultimately have to pay back to the FED with interest. The reason North Dakota was spared a lot of the pain of the economic collapse, was mainly because the bank of North Dakota did not engage in the reckless lending that all the commercial banks did. The cost of homes did not inflate at the same rate as the rest of the country. And after the collapse, they did not fall much either.

[-] 1 points by JamesS89118 (646) from Las Vegas, NV 8 years ago

For the most part I concur. Yet if our national FED were run 'By the people, for the people, and yada yada yada then the banks would not have us grabbing our ankles.

[-] 2 points by sfsteve (151) 8 years ago

So true.

[-] 1 points by jeremiah (23) 8 years ago

I don't agree but I'll accept that. I guess we shall see how it all turns out. Take care.

[-] 1 points by les54tom (15) 8 years ago

A vote for Ron Paul is a vote for anarchy.

[-] 1 points by thoreau42 (595) 8 years ago

A vote for consolidation of power is a vote for slavery.

[-] 1 points by LIVE4CHANGE (37) 8 years ago

i'm guessing someone watched zeitgeist recently... he he he. I completely agree with you and anyone who is reading this needs to watch the zeitgeist: the federal reserve and that will sum up everything you need to know. Even if its only 70% true, that is still more than enough! nice post!

[-] 0 points by JaneDough (3) from Toronto, ON 8 years ago

'The Money Masters: How International Bankers Gained Control Of America' http://video.google.nl/videoplay?docid=-515319560256183936

[-] 0 points by Gerald1755 (0) 8 years ago

I'm just curious what exactly do you expect to change. If you notice most of the media about the protest is not about the cause it is about the protest itself. I just don't see anything getting accomplished except some arrests.

[-] 1 points by JamesS89118 (646) from Las Vegas, NV 8 years ago

Stay tuned... :) Cheers

[-] 1 points by hedgie223344 (2) from New York, NY 8 years ago

how do you "like" a comment. you explained the entire issue in 3 sentences.

if your advanced degree in poetry was funded by borrowed money, i bet your current income is covering the loan payments. if not, maybe i should be inspired to join the protesters...

[-] 0 points by Lifesaver (9) 8 years ago

There is nothing "Federal" about Federal Reserve.

[-] 0 points by Socrates469bc (608) from New York, NY 8 years ago

Good RP supporters, please help the cause and donate:

http://occupywallst.org/donate/

[-] 0 points by Satyr000 (86) 8 years ago

The only reason I think we would ever need a Federal Reserve or any type of central bank is if we are part of a network of countries that share a currency. Like the Euro zone. Even then the role of the central bank would be to police countries. To insure there is no manipulation of the shared currency that will negatively effect on the entire zone. They would also have money on hand to help contain any type of damage done by one or more country with in the zone manipulating the shared currency. Also depending how much damage was done and other factors the central bank could also force a country that has manipulated the currency to come up with there own currency or revert back to the one they where using before so that they can be removed from the shared currency zone.

Of course removing them would be done on a time line. So that the central bank can place buffers between the country leaving the zone and the other countries within the zone. It would also allow the country to adapt a new currency or revert back to the one they where using before. Giving them the ability to clean up there act so they can rejoin the currency zone would be a good idea also. But, they would have to submit to stricter monitoring by the central bank and if they manipulate the shared currency again they would be ejected form the currency zone permanently. They would also have to have the role of a central Treasury form the start.

That is the only reason I see for having a central bank. Given the fact that we don't share a currency with any other country I don't see any reason to have a central bank. Right now all the Federal Reserve seems to be doing is playing the middle man when they are not needed.

[-] 0 points by RobRob (45) from Manhattan, NY 8 years ago

http://dailybail.com/home/holy-bailout-federal-reserve-now-backstopping-75-trillion-of.html

154 trillion is going to smart just a little when its rammed up the tax payer.

This is what they did in Ireland, turn privet debt into public debt and walk away with a bonus for doing so.

This has been posted on this site and the 154 trillion dollar elephant is not very important. Wonder why?

[-] 0 points by taysic (87) from Tiburon, CA 8 years ago

Yawn another Ron Paul post? You'd like us to all believe the Fed Reserve is at the source of all problems. I disagree - human character is at the source of our problems. Greed. There is no one institution that we can get rid of in order to heal this nation.

We need a systematic change and it needs to begin in our hearts -- a desire to share and care for our fellow citizens.

[-] 1 points by darrenlobo (204) 8 years ago

Wouldn't it be wiser to devise a system that works with people as they actually are rather than some nonexistent fantasy version? That's the beauty of the free market, people help others by helping themselves.

"What elevates man above all other animals is the cognition that peaceful cooperation under the principle of the division of labor is a better method to preserve life and to remove felt uneasiness than indulging in pitiless biological competition for a share in the scarce means of subsistence provided by nature. Guided by this insight, man alone among all living beings consciously aims at substituting social cooperation for what philosophers have called the state of nature or bellum omnium contra omnes or the law of the jungle." --Ludwig von Mises

[-] 1 points by jeremiah (23) 8 years ago

I agree with George. You can't change mankind. People are people and will be different for all eternity. You are right, though. Greed is the issue, yet the FED have total control of the world's "greed". They are the major contributor to the problem. They NEED to go.

[-] 0 points by GeorgeMichaelBluth (402) from Arlington, VA 8 years ago

Yawn another hippie post. You can't change human nature. Lose the institutions that exploit the weaknesses in human nature and forget the free love junk

[-] 0 points by owschico (295) 8 years ago

Exactly this operation is such a sham it wont address the real issue because hey have so many trolls and "organizers" working to make sure it is easy to co opt and steer for the good of the CORPORATISTS

[-] -1 points by sdcheung (76) 8 years ago

it's run by the Zionist Rothschilds and their Agents. Since 1913... our money is not our own.

[-] -1 points by Cancelcurrency (72) from Anchorage, AK 8 years ago

Occupy Capitol Hill and cancel all money. End of problems.

[-] -1 points by MarcTwane (76) 8 years ago

Agreed, the Federal Reserve is at the root of almost all the problems in the United States today.

[-] -1 points by LIVE4CHANGE (37) 8 years ago

the feds run the government which rule US. government is just put there to pretend like we make a difference.

VOTE FOR RON PAUL. He's trying to audit the feds.... change/peace.

[-] 1 points by JamesS89118 (646) from Las Vegas, NV 8 years ago

You have a great future ahead of you young man. Propaganda hasn't been this thick since the '30s. Try and get that student loan.

[-] -2 points by owschico (295) 8 years ago

End the Fed

[-] 1 points by jeremiah (23) 8 years ago

Well said friend!