This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
100-Year Flashback - Even The Father Of The Fed 'Feared' Fiat Money
Paul Warburg - the oft-cited 'father of the Federal Reserve' - pushes back on those who see him as favoring the issue of 'fiat money'... No one, he writes, "has given more time and energy to "the fight for sound money," adding a warning that "all direct connection between the government and the banking business is undesirable." We suspect Warburg would be turning in his grave at the oligarchy he unleashed...
h/t @RudyHavenstein
»
- 14058 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
We will continue paying for our lunches and cocktails in "fiat", while you will pay in hard assets.
power once created is always corrupted and always grows. that is its nature. Jefferson knew this and warned us about it
I guess Warburg was a fool.
Saturday will be another 100 year anniversary. On 28 June 1914, Austrian Archduke Franz Ferdinand visited the Bosnian capital, Sarajevo. He was assassinated by Gavrilo Princip, which was the catalyst for WWI.
100 years of people ranting that the collapse of the Federal Reserve is coming soon.
Just like the Rapture.
Harold Camping was as good as any economist.
What bullshit.
Warburg was a direct secret participant at Jekyll Island where the Fed was designed at the Rockefeller's Indian Mound cottage and where exlusive control of 'elastic money' was deigned to be given to the Fed and its shareholder banks.
Of course Warburg gave much thought to sound money as he was trying to crleverly outflank it without US citizens understanding until it was too late.
Fiat, MIC, bankers, oligopolists and oligarchs all colluding with a government repressive of the people it "represents" gung-ho raping and pillaging foreign countries in the name of freedom and democracy.
Insanity by any other term.
Yes, not only was Harold Camping more right than economists, his prophecies are plain right.
Look about you.
The very fabric of global society has been torn asunder.
Evil incarnate, abounds.
What could go wrong?
Other than denial?
PS Methinks that referenced Warburg is one and same family of investment and merchant bankers, via City of London, BTW
Much calculus was applied by Warburg and the other participants to confuse US citizens as to what the Fed actually was - a central bank issuing first "flexible" currency then fiat currency after the gold default occurred.
Control of money should be in the hands of no one - least governments or bankers.
Let the markets rule.
The markets choose gold and silver.
IMO, the entire issue Warburg was raising is merely the distinction between government issued notes vs. notes issued by a private central bank that are guaranteed by a government as "legal tender" as well as being redeemable for specie.
Remember, there used to be a distinction between the two back then. The very distinction that led to the phrase "Ain't worth a greenback."
To me this fits in perfectly with the idea of banksters wanting government "out of their business" as the entire premise behind "The Aldrich Plan" was to gain a choke-hold over government via a monopoly on finance.
As soon as you start talking 'elastic' money redeemable for gold but created at will you have fraud.
The money is only redeemable until citizens catch on that there isn't enough gold to back the money and start pulling out their gold.
You are then guaranteed default on the gold redeemability promise as occurred in 1933 when gold ownership was made illegal by FDR.
It was all a giant fraud using deception and the boiling frog gradualism approach.
The massive bubble of the 20s was blown the people fleeced and then they were denied the protection of gold.
His name says what he was all about. He and his family and relatives and buddies in the Rothschild clan. WAR and BURG, burg is a small city. SO this mofo was all about creating wars in cities around the world, financed by paper crap he printed ad nauseum while he indebted countries for the toilet paper he made on the printing presses he controlled. Later after they were war ravaged and indebted he bought their hard assets and natural resources for pennies on the dollar.
That POS should rot in hell and so should the rest of his banking kin.
The banksters are selling their original scam again, the fractional reserve gold currency which collapsed many times before and was the reason why the Fed was created. So here we go again... 50 years of gold, 50 years of fiat, and then repeat. People never learn or read the Constitution.
“The Congress shall have Power ... To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin” for the benefit of the people instead of the banksters.
Correct!
"...regulate the Value thereof..." means to hold to a constant value. They've done a great job on this- what one could purchase in 1913 for 3 cents now takes 100 cents (a dollar)!
BTW, what is the legal definition of a "dollar" or a Federal Reserve Note"? I can't find either in the US Code?
A Dollar is defined in the coinage act of 1792:
http://www.constitution.org/uslaw/coinage1792.txt
"three hundred and seventy-one grains and four sixteenth parts of a grain of pure, or four hundred and sixteen grains of standard silver"
They learned their 'calculus' through all the previous attempts at a Central Bank in the US, and their Central Banks overseas. They never stop learning how to fool the ignorant.
You got a problem with privatized banking, and other privatization efforts? Or are you one of those socialists who want the State to take over the measure of money again?
Have we met? You seem very familiar.
It's the privatization/merging of banking and law enforcement that some people have a problem with.
Most of us here do. Everything would be fine if law enforcement worked, and the law applied equally to everybody. But since it doesn't, we are all doomed to watch this ugliness unfold in living color.
Yes, I have a problem with non-constitutional "fractional reserve banking" where paper fiat money is issued as debt. And no, I don't want government to "issue" money. Congress and the Treasury Dept. would be far worse in their treatment of fiat money.
What I want is for the Treasury to "mint" their money out of gold and silver as per the constitution.
If our money was sound and fractional reserve banking was outlawed like it should be then I would have no problem with private bankers risking their own gold and silver for their business ventures.
The Treasury Department does mint money from silver and gold. Lots of people here at ZH have lost plenty of money buying and holding such an "investment."
If gold and silver were money then you losing yours is your fault alone, and that is sort of the point.
Yes. No. Its not an either-or issue.
It's not bullshit, it just isn't consistent with the Cliff's Notes oversimplification of events.
Bullshit is looking for answers from the Creature of Jekyl Island while ignoring the THOUSANDS of pages of groundwork for the Federal Reserve Act laid by the National Monetary Commission, and the subsequent EVOLUTION of beast after Dr. Frankenstein unleashed it.
The FED didn't get to where it is today in 1913 or even within the lifetime of ANY its architects.
The FED didn't get into the gov bond business until WWI, after the turn of the decade they finally killed the sub-treasuries, then there was the McFadden Act, the death of real bills came a decade later, meanwhile FDR had taken the bank's gold (in exchange for MOAR paper), ... and finally the foundation of the occult temple was completed by Kissinger, Connally and Schultz over a period of about 5 years during Tricky Dick's reign.
I would guess that this is the "pamphlet" referred to, so it's a matter of public record, along with the copious NMC publications.
https://archive.org/details/discountsystemin00warb
Edit: Warburg Cliff's Noted himself for sheeple consumption (the more things change...)
https://archive.org/details/jstor-1171781
The Money Masters
"We suspect Warburg would be turning in his grave at the oligarchy he unleashed..."
I dunno. I would guess the unleashed oligarchy would give him a massive hard on.
<< Archduke FF assassinated caused WW1
<< Berlin-Baghdad Railway caused WW1
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baghdad_Railway
The first British Troops deployed overseas at the beginning of WWI went where?
A) Belgium
B) France
C) Iraq
D) None of the above
Give yourself a hand if you answered 'C' - it was all about oil then (with navies converting from coal to oil) and it's STILL all about oil.
Why would anyone believe anything a Warburg had to say? They were no fools, they knew the value of propaganda.
I'd bet a Maple Leaf this letter was written for publication. Anything remotely accurate is under triple lock-and-key.
Oh, by the way, if you live in the US Southeast, you should probably move to South America right now. The WIPP nuclear waste storage facility in Carlsbad, New Mexico apparently was never sealed after plutonium waste drums blew up in February, and the radiologic contamination is just getting worse:
'Radiation spikes at WIPP nuclear facility — Hits highest levels since initial hours of radioactive release in February — Document link removed from official website — Gov’t analyzing samples for “potential impact on human health”'http://enenews.com/large-spike-radiation-levels-wipp-nuclear-facility-hi...
This is probably the worst nuclear accident in US history, considering the amount of plutonium involved, and apparently nothing has been done to mitigate the expulsion of plutonium into the wind, which takes it across the Southeast. The numbers are just getting worse.
Good luck to you and your children. Clearly, no one in DC gives a shit.
Dude, radiation that capitalism produces is good for what ails you. Consider Hormesis.
Hormesis is a biological phenomenon whereby a beneficial effect (improved health, stress tolerance, growth or longevity) results from exposure to low doses of an agent that is otherwise toxic or lethal when given at higher doses.
Count your blessings that hormesis is too cheap to meter.
This message was brought to you by the Anne Coulter School of Medical Sophistry.
PS... I agree that handi wipes will make kids sick because they don't get their hands dirty and in fact were healthier sucking on dirty pennies found alongside the roadways
http://gettingstronger.org/hormesis/
Todd Becker is a freelance blogger based in the San Francisco Bay Area, where he lives with his wife and two children. He has degrees in Chemical Engineering and Philosophy from Stanford University and Brown University. Todd currently works as a staff scientist for a biotechnology company in Palo Alto, where he leads project teams and holds more than 20 patents.
Hormesis isn't working for all the employees that are dying at Hanford, not to mention all the children being born without brains:
'8 times more babies than usual born without brain near U.S. nuclear site; Much higher rate than anywhere else in country'http://enenews.com/tv-8-times-more-babies-than-usual-born-without-brain-...
It's not working for all the sailors on board the USS Reagan after Fukushima blew. It didn't work for all the people that died of radiation poisoning after Chernobyl blew.
Didn't work for these kids (lots of photos):
http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=radiation+babies&qs=n&form=QBIR&pq=r...
Do you read at all?
Let's see...
If all the fiat in the world were highly radioactive then that should kill all the germs and would be OK to suck on ...
Just thinkin' of the childern.
I actually thought he was being sarcastic. Silly me.
And if I had mentioned Montgomery Burns, would you have been more certain?
"A lifetime of working with nuclear power has left me with a healthy green glow." ~Mr. Burns
Oh sure, boys got their fingers cut off in those Dark Satanic Mills.
Yet, a proper capitalist knows the proper history of industrialization. It has made things better for us. Rand, Rothbard, and Hahek have all written on this.
Do you read at all? You're merely spouting a traditional socialist/liberal view industrial development.
"The traditional view of modern economic growth as a phenomenon in which humanity was burned and warped in an industrial cauldron is every bit as resilient as it is inaccurate."
The Myths of Capitalism's History
mises.org/daily/3455/The-Myths-of-Capitalisms-History
I like the new look and face Million Dollar Bonus.
I agree.
The omnidirectional anger and lack of any real position adds that certain something.
MDB makes me smile. This guy is just an angry liberal with a highly developed talent for sophistry and misquoting.
Actually Becker works for DuPont:
http://www.linkedin.com/pub/todd-becker/3/94/579
For the record, it is nothing to brag about. Let's just say that I can give an extremely informed opinion on that.
Why would anyone believe anything a Warburg had to say? They were no fools, they knew the value of propaganda.
Yeah, not sure why ZH is not be able to see that...
It grows until it self destructs or is destroyed by opposition, directly or through subterfuge. In either case the entire oligarchy/tribe is always completely annihilated, by their competition or uprising, which is why we keep making the same mistakes.
On the bright side, their seed all die. Every fucking one of them. Always.
Bradley Manning will get justice.
it looks from this letter like 'we' have been cretins for a long time; first warburg for writing this sort of thing, and the 'rest of us' for 'going along with it'. 'sound money' ... chortle guffaw
Gold is bad. Don't Own Gold..
Funny guy.
100 years ago 28 juin 1914 attentat de sarajevo. Archiduc death and begin World War 1
Somewhat OT:
Has anyone else read that story about Dick Cheney 'predicting' another 'terror attack' soon?
DC has canceled all vacation for the entire police force and completely rewriting the work schedules (against union wishes, so it's a big deal):
http://www.myfoxdc.com/story/25886187/all-hands-on-deck-program-to-begin...
What do they know that we don't? Or are they running a drill with crisis actors?
Well, the Ukraine is still merely smoldering, Syria didn't provide enough of a reason for all out intervention and ISIS running rampant in Iraq is getting only 'advisors' in response.
Anyone else thinking TPTB have been trying REALLY REALLY REALLY hard for WWIII - without result...... seems like it's time for an ArchDuke to die if that's what's needed 'cause if things go on much longer as is they may very well hit the fan VERY CLEARLY for all to see - and we can't have that, so WAR is necessary, the historically proven 'distraction' used when no other alternatives are left.
Yes, I think you're right:
"Law Enforcement Firm: Nobody Will Complain About Militarized Police When ISIS Attacks Company suggests outrage over toddler critically injured by police flashbang grenade will subside when terror group "comes a calling""http://www.infowars.com/law-enforcement-firm-nobody-will-complain-about-...
Just in: Pablo Escobar warns against dope
For your consideration.... a recent review on Amazon that uses the changes in the toilet paper industry as fodder to explain the risk of fiat money to the masses...
PROLOGUE
In the hilarious comedy `Coming to America', Eddie Murphy played Prince Hakeem, a rich, pampered heir to throne of the make believe nation of Zamunda. The movie opens with Eddie in the bathroom just as his official b*** wiper is about to perform his assigned duty. Uh... rather let's say assigned `task'.
PREFACE
For the non-royalty of the world, this is a job we normally take on ourselves. We consumers go to the store, we put a package of tissue in the basket, and so on... we install a roll in the dispenser, and at key moments we `consume' it. Simple, right? Well then I have a question. Why are there literally thousands of Amazon reviews on the subject of toilet paper? Wait. Lets' just stop right there. I can't bring myself to use that phrase over and over in this review. And quite honestly, the terms `bathroom tissue', or just `tissue', seem a bit cowardly. So how about `TP'? Can we agree on that? And while on the subject, I most definitely can't bring myself to say the `a' word, the `b' word, the `h' word, the `r' word, nor the other `b' word. Therefore may I suggest the code words `asphalt', `bummer', `heineken', rumples, and `buttonhole' instead? That's just a special code between us.
Before continuing may I mention the alternate titles that were considered for this review: 1) Only in America, 2) Another Landmark in the Demise of Civilization, 3) Zen and the Art of Tissue Selection, 4) Please Don't Squeeze the Truth.
INTRODUCTION
So back to the question; why do people write TP reviews? I only came to Amazon looking for TP because I wasn't able to get to the store, and supplies were dwindling. Low and behold I was able to get a 48 pack of AngelSoft delivered to my door for a tad less than a brick & motor Walmart! Amazing. And way low and behold, it appears that people have a LOT of opinions about their TP. Amazon is dripping with TP reviews. Huh? I had to find out what the furor was all about because frankly, reviewing TP struck me as a bit silly. Now I'm not so sure.
LAUGHT IT UP
First, anytime you need a good laugh, just peruse the TP reviews for nearly any brand. The subject matter inherently opens the gates to humor. For example, there is a high rated review for AngelSoft that opens like this:
Title: Step your Poop Game UP
"Hey, yo... When I was in my early 20s, a girlfriend broke up with me because I was using the single-ply variety of toilet paper in a cost-saving measure. Living in New York City is very expensive. I learned an important lesson, you gotta step up your poop game. Take that S--- seriously. Pun intended." (review continues ...)
Well, my first thought about this review was; "I wonder what his excuse was when the next girlfriend broke up with him?". My second thought however was that the camel back-breaking straw that killed my first marriage was an argument over which direction to install the roll on the dispenser. I [rightly] felt that the tissue should dispense from the top of the roll... my wife [wrongly] felt you should be able to feed it from below. Understand? So that was that, and regardless of *your* opinion on this matter I am not in a position to criticize Mr. "Hey Yo".
I might add that Hey Yo also reviewed Reese's Peanut butter cups. Huh again. Why bother? That's even more pointless than reviewing TP because all human beings innately know that Reese's Peanut Butter cups are some of the best candy bars on the planet. If Yo was going to review a candy bar I would have expected it to have been a Baby Ruth (you'll only get that joke if you've seen the movie `Caddy Shack').
Here's another priceless review:
"TP is mostly for girls but a girl is just happy as long as their is Toilet Paper on the roll. So review is based on keeping a girl happy not us guys, as we just use the shower to save paper ;-)"
I'm gonna pass on that one without comment. I must admit thought that when a woman enters a male domicile TP usage roughly triples. What are you girls doing with that stuff? Oh... oh... ok. Never mind.
ARE PEOPLE TOO PARTICULAR OR IS THE TP INDUSTRY JUST A SIGN OF THE TIMES?
But once you stop laughing at the reviews you notice that there IS a point to them. A point that is in fact a fractal reflecting both the state of consumerism as well as a sign of corporate greed (or so it first appears). In short, many Americans are unhappy with their TP!! And they blame the corporations making the TP. Let's look at a review or two to illustrate the issue:
"So, I have been on a new TP brand mission lately. We used Angel Soft for YEARS, and the quality just started to vary SO MUCH, I got aggravated. I purchased this one AFTER trying Quilted Northern's "Plush & Strong" which was just strange. It was REALLY thick and had lots of "fiber powder". I'm not sure you will understand my term for it, but we did not like it. I came back and ordered this one. The "powder" issue is gone, but once again, the quality of each roll varies SO MUCH. I seriously wonder if these companies even have a QC dept? Why is it so hard to make your product all the same, all the time? UGH! I notice that the TP varies by the size pkg you buy too. For instance, if you buy a 4-roll pack versus a 24-roll package. The quality is just different. I don't get it..."
Such reviews are prolific, regardless of brand. The nearly universal claim is that TP is just not what it used to be. At best, the quality is uneven. At worst, well.... I can tell you privately that some consumers even go so far as to claim their TP is harming their buttonholes. Oh my.
Here's another example. Startlingly, this depressing review is in regards to the mother of all TP brands; Charmin (remember that commercial with the anal grocery clerk Mr. "Please don't squeeze the Charmin" Whipple?). We have to bring this review to light however, as the woman who posted it has irrefutable proof that there is funny business going on in the TP industry.
Title: from +5 to -5 stars if it were possible
"We have been using Charmin Ultra Soft for 10+ years. We even put up with their narrower, shorter rolls, and their repackaging to hide the cost increases, but now their alleged two-ply is as thin as a normal one ply and it's super linty and irritating. I can document the changes listed above because we have 2 older packs of "emergency" Charmin Ultra Soft that we brought in from the garage and we compared them to the ones we recently bought. The old packs had 12 rolls, the new packs had 9 rolls. The sizes and thicknesses were completely different. The newer edition is a totally cheap imitation of the original Charmin and it's now also irritating as well. In fact, it's so irritating that we can never buy it again. The Costco TP wasn't as fancy, but at least it has never caused any pain and irritation to anyone in our house."
Is nothing sacred anymore? This review had comments posted, and here is a comment that REALLY stands out.
"We're sorry to see that you're so upset by the new Charmin after 10+ years of loyalty. We cannot thank you enough for being such a loyal customer for more than a decade and we do hope you'll give the new Charmin a try. We'd like to discuss this further with you, so please make sure to give our team a call at 1-800-777-1410 9AM-6PM Mon-Fri. Thank you for reaching out!"
Guess who posted that comment? The Charmin people! The name on the comment reads: "Amelia (Comm Mgr. Charmin)". I was forced to reply to Amelia with the following comment:
--------------------------
"Although a helpful post rating of 0 out of 5 pretty much tells the story, I, who am not the reviewer, feel obligated to respond when company shills try to spin an honest review. First, note that Amelia from Charmin works out of a department called; "Comm". Comm, as in 'Communications', as in 'Customer Communications', as in the 'Public Relations department'. As in, it's my job to troll Amazon for negative Charmin reviews and try to put a positive spin on them. That's Amelia's job folks.
Note how patronizing and unconstructive Amelia is...
Amelia: 'We're sorry to see that you're so upset'
This is usually code for "you get upset easily". (note to Amelia: if you don't want to insult people you use a word like "disappointed" instead).
Amelia: 'We cannot thank you enough for being such a loyal customer'
That's right, you are unable to show appreciation to a long term customer by continuing to supply them with the same product they fell in love with a decade ago.
Amelia: 'we do hope you'll give the new Charmin a try'
Hello? Did you read the review Amelia? The reviewer DID try the latest Charmin. She reported that it sucks. You forgot to edit the boilerplate text you pasted into your comment.
Oh, and here's the one that really gets me...
Amelia: 'Thank you for reaching out!'
A) She wasn't exactly 'reaching out', was she? Certainly not to Charmin. Liar liar, pants on fire.
B) "Reaching out" is such an annoying, overused, disingenuous term that as of today I'm going to start slapping people when they use it. If someone uses it on the phone I'm going to put the handset right down where the Charmin normally goes and cut one.
So, reviewer, did you ever give "the team" a call? Bless you for your review. +1
(note: the reviewer replied that she did not bother calling the team)"
--------------------------
Now seriously, what is the problem here? We consumers are no longer free to saunter down the paper products isle of our local retailer, eyeball the TP section (which in the super-stores now runs for approx. 2 miles), snatch a package of TP, and continue on. Nooooooo ... the purchase of TP is now a REALLY BIG DEAL that requires gathering statistical information, creating a decision tree, and performing complex calculations in order to derive the correct brand/model to purchase for your family. (btw - some of these TP formulas have been adopted on Wall Street to calculate derivative return ratios).
Think I'm joking? Here's a partial list of the criteria that now distinguishes one TP brand/model from another:
# of rolls in package, # of plys, roll size, sheet size, single or double roll, overall square footage, diameter of cardboard tube, tightness of tissue wrapped on roll, softness level, eco-friendly packaging, septic safe, scented vs unscented, virgin vs recycled paper, frustration-free packaging, where purchased, date of purchase, does it shred or leave "dingles" behind, odor (separate attribute from Scented vs unscented), and pattern (some people don't like hearts and flowers embossed on the sheets).
Who is to blame for this madness? I used to think the cereal aisle was bad, but this TP cavalcade of horrors is a quantum leap beyond picking out your morning grain. How did it come to this?
Well it's the [mostly American] consumer, right? We are spoiled, correct? TP on a roll wasn't even invented until 1920. Before that people used largish tissue `squares'. The further back you go in history .... well, let's not even go there.
So we are just a bunch of winey, complacent, spoiled .... let's think of a good derogatory term .... hmm... `consumers'. Yeah that's it. We consumers have it all, and we're still not happy. Right?
No. Wait a minute. It's not the consumer! After all we all have a right to properly wipe our Heinekens do we not? And with something other than corn cobs (oh, we weren't going to go there). Anyway, clearly it's the TP makers who are the culprit here. They are trying to shrink the size of our TP, hoping we won't see it. They are using low-grade pulp, thinking we won't feel it. They give us double rolls one the one hand and then shrink them back to the size of a single roll with the other hand. They try to distract us with embossed floral patterns (which adds bulk but not paper). And .... they even imagine that we won't notice the little shreds and dingles on our asphalts.
It's pure corporate greed folks!
OK. Wait a minute. Wait a minute. Calm down. To be fair, and we are certainly interested in being fair here, the greedy corporations probably have some kind of lame excuse for their behavior. So let's hear it.... Well... costs are up! Pulp, processing plants, labor, insurance, embossing machines... all cost more than they used to. What's more, you `consumers' don't want to pay any more. You buy on price. Charmin has to compete with Scott, who has to compete with AngelSoft, and we ALL have to compete with Kirkland! If one of us raises our price on TP and the others don't follow, we are shortly out-of-business. And guess what... if we all got together and agreed to raise prices at the same time you would accuse us of everything from collusion to anti-trust behavior.
[At this point in the review I thought it might be worthwhile to lookup the historical price of TP. Results were spotty (although I did find a 1960 grocery store flyer showing 1,000 sheet rolls of Scott tissue going for 33¢ a roll). But there is good historical data on the postage stamp. And if you think about it the two products are more similar than they first appear. They are both paper products, and a lot of energy and water goes into the production of paper. Both products also have transportation costs. The big difference between TP and postage stamps (other than the obvious), is that there is only one place to buy stamps! For the purposes of mailing a physical letter, the post office doesn't really have any competition. The post office therefore has more freedom to reflect the true cost of the stamp in the price. In 1950 a stamp costs 3¢. By 1968 a stamp had doubled in price to 6¢. By 1975 it had doubled again to 13¢. And by 1988 the price had again doubled to 25¢. Getting the idea? TP makers don't have that kind of latitude because their competitors would have them for lunch.]
------------------------
Wow. The above information sure kicks the legs out of the two best candidates we had to pin this mess on. People have a right to wipe their rumples in comfort and corporations have a right to make a profit (it does pay employee salaries after all).
I know who we can blame. Inflation. That insidious robber of wealth, that creeping crud that dilutes our purchasing power, that once great tool that was at first used, then mis-used, then ab-used. Do we all know what inflation is? Are we all on the same page with regards to where inflation comes from? Would a quick primer help?
1) Inflation is the simplest thing in the world to understand. Inflation is the diluting of the currency. It's printing more money than the economy is geared for. Any time you dilute something; like watering down say, liquor, or gasoline (lower octane number), it becomes weaker. It loses its power. The same is true of currency. If you print money faster than the economy is growing its supply of goods and services you are diluting the currency. Economists call it `monetary inflation'. Inflate the money supply too much then you get more and more people with money in their hands trying to buy the same amount of goods. When that happens prices tend to go up. That's called `price inflation'. Monetary inflation often (but not always) leads to price inflation. Simple supply and demand. Every consumer innately understands supply and demand.
2) Historically, all currencies that have come, end up going. They have all died out at some point (not too many Roman Denarius in circulation, eh?). New forms of currency replace old forms of currency. The life of a currency can be extended however. If a [paper] currency is tied to a commodity on a fixed basis (like 1 quatloo = 1 bushel of corn) it is difficult to dilute. Quatloos can't be printed without more corn being planted. Historically, the commodity most often used to back a currency though is gold or silver. Corn gets consumed, so gold, which is rare, rarely consumed, recognizable, divisible, hard to counterfeit, and is really cool and shiny, just works out better.
3) US dollars used to be backed by gold. The currency therefore was quite stable. A citizen (the old name for consumers) could walk into a bank and exchange a $20 bill for a $20 gold coin. But to stimulate the economy after the Great Depression, President Roosevelt made it illegal for citizens to own gold. Thus they could no longer exchange their promissory notes (currency) for actual gold. And thus, the government was able to start tinkering with the money supply. And that is when price inflation took off in this country (at least for this current inflation cycle. I'm simplifying).
4) Although it was illegal for citizens to own gold, foreign countries maintained the right to redeem US currency for gold, at a fixed price of $35 oz. This helped keep the international monetary system stable. The US dollar was `as good as gold'. But in the 1960s the US began to seriously inflate the money supply. In particular, the money supply was inflated under President Johnson, with his `guns & butter' policy; a plan to both pay for the Vietnam war, while maintaining a high standard of living for US consumers. As a result, prices started to rise. But as everything started to cost more gold was still pegged at $35 oz. Since gold was actually worth more than $35 in the free market, countries like France started redeeming dollars for gold. Yes, those dirty, selfish Frenchies had the gall (or De Gaulle) to recognize that gold had become worth more than the US currency it was supposedly to be pegged to. How dare the French try and hedge against rising prices around the world. We should have switched from french-fries to freedom-fries back then! Anyway, to solve the problem of foreigners draining America's gold stash President Nixon (are you starting to see a pattern here?) put the kybosh on gold sales. Dollars were no no longer redeemable in gold by ANYONE.
5) With the dollar now unfettered from the nuisance of being backed by a commodity, the US government (primarily through the Federal Reserve) was free to expand the money supply as it saw fit. This in-turn triggered the inflationary years of the 1970s that those who were there still remember. The problem of course continues today, and the result is both rising prices as well as lowered quantity and quality of goods (4-packs of high fructose corn syrup Coke instead of 6-packs of sugar based Coke, etc.)
So... it's the government's fault that TP ain't what it used to be!? Yes. No. You see, it can be argued that the government was told it could get away with inflating the currency. Uh huh. Guess where that idea came from? An economist. If you don't know anything about economists all you need to know is one thing; economists are wrong as often about the economy as a broken watch is about the time of day. Obviously that is an opinion, and I should therefore add a disclaimer that I myself am not an economist (but I did stay at a Holiday Inn last night).
The economist in question is one John Maynard Keynes. Keynes came forth during the Great Depression of the 1930s with a philosophy that boiled down to: We need to spend our way out of the depression. And if we don't have the money, spend it anyway. In fact, Keynes argued that not only is deficit spending tolerable, it's helpful. In other words, Keynes believed in monetary inflation. And indeed, monetary policy has been influenced by this man throughout the 20th and now into the 21st century.
So if you want someone to blame for the condition of your TP, blame Keynes.
Now in all seriousness the mess we are in can't be blamed on one single person. And the blame game is pretty much pointless really. But there *are* lessons to be learned here, and in wrapping up this review I would like to mention two of them please.
Lesson #1
Keynes's theory of economics was not uncontested. There was another major economic theory being put forth at the same time Keynes was promoting government intervention to get past the depression. An Austrian economics professor named Freidrich Hayek espoused the opposite of what Keynes was pushing. He basically claimed that government intervention would backfire and that the economy should be left to heal on its own.
Wow. Can you see why Keynes won? Mind that I'm not asking who was right or wrong in their economic theory. We are not qualified to judge, no matter how many Holiday Inns we stay at. Rather, just imagine a time in this country when people were hungry and out of work. And imagine the government saying it wasn't going to lift a finger to help. Oh, did you think I was talking about the 1930s? No, I meant 2008. Just kidding, but do you see the point? Even if Hayek was/is right, it was/is politically unfeasible to employ his "do no harm" approach. People won't stand for the government doing nothing (even if nothing is better than something) any more than they will tolerate TP that leaves dingles.
Lesson #2
The TP dilemma, with all the shenanigans about shrinking the rolls, degrading the quality, and such as and so forth, is actually a touch point for the less obvious ramifications of monetary inflation. It's not just about rising prices. And it's not just about smaller quantities. Inflation has been described as a force that leads to moral decay. It changes people's behavior. It forces us to cheat. In our little TP example we see that raising prices is not enough, nor is shrinking roll size. Companies get creative... they reduce quality, they emboss their sheets to fluff them up, they employ deceptive advertising, they hire professional liars like Amelia to make us believe that yes, although the rolls are smaller the quality is still the same, in spite of direct evidence to the contrary (bless you Amelia, you're just trying to pay your bills).
The moral problem of inflation goes FAR beyond that however. It effects literally everything. No time here for piles of examples so let's just cut to the end game. In the end, inflation kills the underlining currency. We've seen hyperinflation kill currencies in Germany, Zimbabwe, Argentina, and in at least two dozen other countries over the past century. Those following the financial news may be aware that there is a worldwide movement taking place right now to drop the US dollar in world trade. Country after country is making trade agreements specifically designed to bypass the dollar and trade either in direct commodity exchange or in the country's native currency. The only thing that has allowed Keynesian economics to survive in America as long as it has is that the US dollar is used throughout the world as the currency of choice. But in eroding the value of the dollar we have eroded the world's confidence in the dollar. With a currency not backed by a commodity such as gold, CONFIDENCE is the only thing propping it up. If confidence evaporates we may well see prices go to levels that will make all previous inflation since the depression pale in comparison.
Yes, I'm saying that if unchecked spending is not curtailed we can expect dollar bills soon be cheaper than sheets of TP when it comes time to do our "duty".
-----
PS - If you've ever camped in a National Forest campground and experienced the TP in those restrooms, everything that hits your bummer from then feels like silk. Problems are relative. Enjoy the good life while it's here.
Dude, that is was long post. You don't expect us to read all of that on a Friday afternoon, do ya?
No, I guess not. And I wouldn't try to convince you otherwise. I know what comes after "Say what again"...
Boy, that was a lot of shit about a lot of shit. Good shit, though. Really good shit.
OK, fucking awesome shit! Well, maybe not that much . . .
If it was that gooda shit would you summarize it for us, please?
It's nothing you don't understand very well already Mr. knukles. Same goes to the others. Sorry for the length. You might pass it to a relative (with a lot of time on their hands) who doesn't get why inflation is a not so good a thing, and how it all may end soon. ;>
Pakled....I have to agree with you. LOL !!! I thought I was just being crazy....(well, crazier than normal)... and paranoid.....(well....nowadays, can't be too much of that).
Now my complaining ass is validated. After reading this I asked my wife if she noticed anything....."different".... with the Charmin. She said...."Yeah...you know I noticed something. I had to look to see if I had bought the wrong version of Charmin."
Thank you Federal Reserve.....now go straight to Hell.
Jeez.....we're just Venezuela.....in Sloooooooooow.....motion.
Do you want the short shit or the medium shit, cuz you clearly don't like the long shit.
Let me know, cuz I'm huffin' and puffin' ready to spill my shit.
(Only for you, knuck)
TLDR:
The price of shitty TP is to high and leaves dinglebarries; because people would rather hear a lie about price then be honest about money.
Toilet paper is a luxury that the middle-class will soon be unable to afford.
Tip: just keep the nails on the left hand neatly trimmed and an ample supply of soap and water handy. (For hemorroid sufferers, your anus will thank you.)
Methinks the individuals who review TP on Amazon have way too much time on their hands. Either that or they are in denial about making the tough choices. However, it is a good example of the effects of 'hidden inflation'.
Actually, the job of imperial ass wiper has historically been a coveted one, since it is the only post that affords the opportunity to speak to the imperial ass in private.
You have to wonder if Charles Ponzi-(March 3, 1882 – January 18, 1949) and Paul M. Warburg (August 10, 1868 – January 24, 1932) ever had the pleasure of meeting each other?
Paul M. Warburg - Biography of a person who figures prominently in the Federal Reserve’s history
The Federal Reserve History Gateway provides historical materials that illustrate how the Fed has changed over its first 100 years
Look who has my icon
Past events
http://www.acidpulse.us/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=12166&sid=129f0164da12a2e36f...
Backup
http://cryptome.org/
How the Fuck can Washington DC have any crime? Let's go through their restrictions
- Registration cert for ammo (up to 2012 one could only purchase ammo for the firearm they have registered)
- Expended casings are considered "ammo" according to DC laws
- No concealed carry
- No open carry
- All firearms registered with the Met DC Police
- NCIC, back ground check, photo and finger prints
- Must declare the physical location of firearm
- Firearm registration occurs every 3 years
According to Hitlary the cunt and Pelosi the hag, once we enact these restrictions, all gun violence will cease to exist and we can all live in harmony singing kumbya. You mean to tell me these two used up whores were wrong?!
Warburg and Allan G and Ben B, they're all cut from the same cloth. With such people always watch what they do and pay no heed to what they say.
Regardless of what you name it the "Federal Reserve Nightmare" or the "Yellen conundrum", the box Ben Bernanke made when he painted both himself and the Federal Reserve in a corner remains. Bernanke has by passing the chairmanship to Yellen escaped from the QE trap but left the rest of us fully in its grasp.
With a policy of loose and cheap money and an inflation target of just 2% the Federal Reserve continues to please those gambling that not fighting the Fed guarantees profits. As many Americans are forced to pay higher food, gasoline, and health insurance premiums, I wish someone would let the Fed know we are already there. Any thought that inflation is not higher has come from the false illusion brought from lower payments on things like auto loans and mortgages, this is a one off and will not continue. More on this subject in the article below.
http://brucewilds.blogspot.com/2014/06/exit-strategy-from-qe-remains-elu...
VIDEO : Austrian Economics versus Mainstream Economics : Mark Thornton : http://goo.gl/EVx8sM
http://www.fas.harvard.edu/~histecon/crisis-next/1907/docs/Chen-Warburg_...
...
Banking Reform in a Hostile Climate:
Paul M. Warburg and the National Citizens’ League
Lucy D. Chen
.."....
.
III. Paul M. Warburg and the Establishment of the National Citizens’ League
Warburg strongly believed that the weakness of the country’s system lay in the
decentralization of bank resources and the lack of a sense of responsibility that banks had for
each other in times of emergency (as in 1907). Accordingly, Warburg became one of the
country’s biggest champions for the Aldrich plan, which aimed to centralize reserves in a
National Reserve Association and to divide the country into fifteen different banking regions. In
a letter written in 1910, Chairman of the Merchants’ Association of New York Irving T. Bush
suggested,
“With such an institution in existence as the United Reserve Bank [Warburg]
proposes, a currency famine and money panic would become impossible, the
monetary reserve would be efficiently utilized, the National Treasury relieved of
all responsibility for the money market and international exchanges and
movements of gold easily regulated with immense benefit to all producers,
distributors and consumers alike, in every station of life.”27
Despite the apparent benefits—at least to the banking class—of having a central bank, the
pragmatic Warburg was also conscious of the political realities of the time. He recognized early
on that widespread antipathy towards Wall Street at the time meant that the Aldrich bill, with its
Jekyll Island origins and its close ties to banking, would be summarily defeated without making
some concessions and without a national educational campaign. As a result, Warburg set about
gathering mass support for banking reform. In 1911, Warburg proposed the formation of a
Business Men’s Monetary Reform League with the object of “carry[ing] on an active campaign
of education and propaganda for monetary reform, on the principles, without endorsing every
detail of a reserve association with branches in the business centers of the country as outlined in
Senator Aldrich’s plan.”28 Warburg recognized the campaign’s fundamental need to represent
national interests—at least in the eyes of the public—and his subsequent actions in forming and
promoting this organization can be seen as determined attempts to alter the public’s perception
towards Wall Street. In a letter to James B. Forgan, Esq., of First National Bank dated February
13, 1908, Warburg wrote, “It is unfortunate that the general attitude of the country towards New
York and Wall Street is such that any measure proposed from here would be doomed from the
start. For this reason it looks to me as if the situation would have to come from the West.”29
Indeed, the first set of the officers of the League was entirely made up of Chicago
businessmen and politicians, led by President John V. Farwell and Chairman of the Executive
Committee J. Laurence Laughlin.30 As a matter of fact, the League’s original “Constitution and
By-Laws” stipulated that the eighteen members of the Executive Committee must be residents of
or do business in Cook, County, Illinois.31 With respect to its management and organization, the
League committed itself to creating a distinct separation between its leadership and the
immorality associated with Wall Street. On April 19, 1911, Warburg received a personal letter
from A. Piatt Andrew, a member of the Jekyll Island party and then-Assistant Secretary to the
Treasury, who, suggested that Warburg hire a man by the name of Thornton Cooke as the
League’s secretary. In addition to being a Harvard graduate trained in the methods of theoretical
banking, Cooke was seen as a worthy candidate for the position because of his Kansas roots.
Andrew wrote, “[Cooke] is thoroughly qualified I should say to fill the place, and being a native
of the Middle West would be a particularly appropriate person…He could doubtless help in
organizing the League, and in propagating an interest in his region.”32 Furthermore, the League
sought to represent itself as promoting the interests of the ordinary American businessman and
citizen in the media. In a statement made to the New York Times in July of 1911, Laughlin said,
“The National Citizens’ League is not an organization of bankers. On the contrary, it is an
organization of the general business and commercial public. It represents the borrowers rather
than the lenders of the country. It represents those who have realized the stress and banking
constriction during the panic of 1907.”33 The overrepresentation of Midwesterners in the
national organization of the League combined with the group’s repeated declarations that it stood
for business and commercial interests reflected a strong belief that banking reform needed to
originate from—or at least, appear to—interests separate from those of Wall Street.
For this reason, Warburg—and the bankers associated with the construction of the
Aldrich plan—could not be openly affiliated with the League. Despite this obstacle, however,
Wall Street managed to stay actively involved in banking reform and the promotion of the
Aldrich bill. As Warburg noted, “Among the most liberal contributors [to the League] were the
banks.”34 Furthermore, Warburg’s personal correspondences indicate that he, in particular, was
heavily involved in shaping the general trajectory of the League as well as the selection of its
visible leadership well beyond its initial organization. In a letter dated June 15, 1911, Warburg
wrote to Senator Aldrich that despite his difficulties in trying to find the time to organize local
committees of the League in New York, Philadelphia, and Boston, he “hope[d] to make some
headway anyhow.”35 In another letter to Aldrich dated December 7, 1911, Warburg spoke
specifically of his concern regarding the leadership of the New Jersey branch of the League, as
he wrote,
“I am informed to-day that Governor Murphy is again wavering to accept the
Chairmanship of the Jersey League. Our people are very much disturbed about
this, since they say they need his support, and even if he would serve only in a
nominal way, leaving others to do the actual work, they say they cannot afford to
lose the use of his name.”36
These private statements of Warburg indicate that he was heavily engaged in the League’s
administration and operation even though his name was not formally associated with the
organization’s public campaign. Warburg’s deliberate steps to select “proper” leadership for the
organization and to separate himself from the image of the National Citizens’ League for the
promotion of Sound Banking Reform appear have been necessitated by the hostile attitudes
many Americans had towards Wall Street bankers at the time. But even though the League was,
in the mind of the media and the public, “not an organization of bankers,” Warburg’s personal
correspondences demonstrate that bankers were certainly involved in running the activities of the
League.
IV. The Issue of Reserve Centralization ...." l.c.
“With such an institution in existence as the United Reserve Bank [Warburg]
proposes, a currency famine and money panic would become impossible, the
monetary reserve would be efficiently utilized, the National Treasury relieved of
all responsibility for the money market and international exchanges and
movements of gold easily regulated with immense benefit to all producers,
distributors and consumers alike, in every station of life.”
This is a classic example of the road to Hell being paved with good intentions.
Here were private citizens running private companies wanting to privatize the Nation's finances because they were sick of the way government was handling the nation's finances....(in their ""humble" opionion of course).
But what these greedy fucktards didn't care about was the Constitution. It was supposed to be Congress's (the voice and will of the People)n job to handle the nation's finances including minting coin and setting the value of. And of course all backed by gold and silver.
America became a Fascist State in 1913 with the enaction of the Federal Income Tax (IRS) and the Federal Reserve. R.I.P
I can not argue with that statement.
Direct election of senators was set in 1913. The oft overlooked final piece of their plan.
Paul Warburg, one of the most disgusting, sick, vile human beings in modern history lying about 'sound money'?
Gross.
Actually, I would have phrased the statement a little differently.
"Any connection between an independent and uncontrollable central banking authority and government is a disaster for the government and the people of that country"
The central banking authority does not care who makes the laws as long as the central bank is able to purchase the laws they want and hold the country hostage to its money creation power.
Ideally there should be no central bank, but instead many independent banks who, through the free market, compete for customers for their currency. The government's role is only to ensure that there is free and lawful competition. A banking monopoly ensures the death of freedom and fairness.
Sometimes the old guys who have seen it all have the most perspective. What I like about numbers is that when they are not jockeyed, jerked around, and falsified they tend to tell the truth. Looking down the road the numbers do not work.
Allen H Meltzer is viewed by many economist as America’s foremost expert in monetary policy, Meltzer is the author of the three-volume “A History of the Federal Reserve.” For over 25 years he was the chair of the Shadow Open Market Committee, a group that meets regularly to discuss the policy of the Federal Reserve. “We’re in the biggest mess we’ve been in since the 1930s,” he recently stated. “We’ve never had a more problematic future.” More on his thoughts in the article below.
http://brucewilds.blogspot.com/2013/07/it-will-all-end-badly.html
“We’ve never had a more problematic future.”
Well, that's enough for me, Allen.
http://www.fas.harvard.edu/~histecon/crisis-next/1907/docs/Chen-Warburg_...
Banking Reform in a Hostile Climate:
Paul M. Warburg and the National Citizens’ League
Lucy D. Chen
IV. The Issue of Reserve Centralization
.
The League emphasized its Midwestern origins and separation from Wall Street in order
to appeal to and reach out to the average American citizen who held bankers responsible for the
panic of 1907 and who did not necessarily understand the intricacies of banking reform.
Consequently, the publicity campaign of the League may be understood as an outcome of the
criticisms launched at Wall Street following the events of 1907. In order to connect with and
mobilize these voters so that banking reform could be instituted, the League initiated a massive
movement in 1912 with a blitz of addresses and pamphlets written in non-technical jargon. The
organization depended on this constituency to then go forth and spread the League’s message to
other citizens. The League hoped that in due time, there would be a large enough population to
champion their beliefs—and those of the League—to their representatives. In a statement
directed to the members of the National Citizens’ League, General Secretary A. D. Welton wrote,
.
“By joining the League, you proved your interest in the cause of banking reform.
Every member of the League should prove again that interest by doing active
missionary work. It is necessary to spread the gospel of a sound, panic-proof
banking system…One way is for League members to write direct to their
Representatives and Senators, urging action and giving the reasons for it. Another
way is to urge your interested friends to do the same.”
.
And to this constituency, the League emphasized, above all other principles, its commitment
against a completely centralized banking system. In a pamphlet entitled, “Origins of the
League,” it was written, “Co-operation, not dominant centralization, of all banks by an evolution
out of our clearing-house experience.” In various brochures addressed to audiences as diverse
as small business owners and Southern cotton planters, the League continuously discussed the
benefits American citizens would derive from a banking system that facilitated coordination
among a system of regional banks free from the influence of Wall Street.
While this position appears to directly oppose Warburg’s previous statement that nothing
short of a modern central bank would be able to solve potential currency crises, the League
simply desired to highlight very prominently those aspects of its banking reform platform that it
felt would appeal to its target audience. The League still ultimately aspired to a plan that would
centralize bank reserves, but this design was embedded within a larger discussion of a system of
banks cooperating under a National Reserve Association. As Laughlin wrote in a pamphlet
entitled, “Banking Reform and the National Reserve Association, “A Central Bank in the United
States is undesirable and unsuited to our conditions. What we need is not centralization but
cooperation, entered into by all of our independent banks, both national and state. For this
reason, we must favor the National Reserve Association as opposed to a Central Bank.”39
Laughlin argued that the currency shortage of 1907 occurred when each individual bank only
looked after its own interests and what the country needed was union in the face of potential
panics. In order to avert future such liquidity crises, the scheme proposed by the League would
divide the country into fifteen self-governing districts with local reserves that would federate
themselves to form a National Reserve Association. The design stipulated that each of the
districts would elect one director to the board of the National Reserve Association and also that
one-third of that board would come from industries unrelated to banking. Finally, the plan also
included a suggestion to create a central reserve association with an initial capital of about
$300,000,000 to be obtained from the government. Under such an arrangement, Laughlin wrote,
.
“No centralized power could dominate an organism whose life is drawn from functions local to
each community. The individual bank is put into helpful relations with its nearest neighbors, and
not under the control of a dominating Central Bank.”
.
Although these statements made by the
League in their public pamphlets appeared to disagree with the earlier words of its creators in
favor of centralization, the League was merely specifying in its publications that a central bank
in the European sense—one that lacked the local associations proposed by the League—would
be regarded with great distrust. In general, the League sought to highlight for the American
public those aspects of the Aldrich bill that de-emphasized Wall Street control over the financial
system and curbed the power of the central institution.
The call for instituting a system of cooperating regional banks was a theme that continued
throughout the subsequent pamphlets distributed by the National Citizens’ League. But, it is
interesting to note that the League also tailored its message about banking reform to different
audiences by exploring the differing points of emphasis in the pamphlets it distributed that
targeted certain groups. The following discussion of the two differing appeals made by the
League—one to the small business owners and the other to Southern merchants—regarding the
creation of a National Reserve Association helps to elucidate the League’s answers to the
public’s two primary concerns regarding reserve centralization: Wall Street control and the
efficiency of the financial system.
In an address to small businessmen about the National Reserve Association that was later
published in a pamphlet, Farwell was particularly critical of New York bankers, as he said,
.
“If any one had tried to construct a banking system which he wished to have controlled by, and
centered in, Wall Street, he could not possibly have accomplished his object better than by
formulating our present plan of doing business.”
.
Farwell also introduced his discussion of the
function of a National Reserve Association by saying that the new plan was formulated “in order
to deliver ourselves from this ‘sword of Damocles’ and get the whole system as far away from
Wall Street as possible.” The use of such disparaging language towards New York and the
amount of time Farwell spent in his speech on discussing the role of Wall Street in the 1907
panic indicates that he likely appealed to his audience’s dislike of bankers to turn them towards
the National Reserve Association plan, which he presented as the best alternative. To these
businessmen, Farwell also emphasized the fact that the National Reserve Association was not, in
fact, to be a central bank held in the hands of Wall Street. Rather, it would be a “cooperatively
owned machine for rendering liquid the good current commercial paper of all banks and, also,
through mobilization of the reserves, a steadfast bulwark against any possibility of lack of
confidence in the system.” Thus, Farwell, in discussing the aims of the League to these small
business owners, sought to portray the National Reserve Association as an entity separated from
Wall Street.
Perhaps an even clearer example of the lengths the League went to in tailoring its
argument to appeal to different audiences is in the writing in a pamphlet entitled, “A National
Reserve Association and the Movement of Cotton in the South.” In the piece, Laughlin
described the import of coffee and bananas and the export of cotton through Southern ports and
how these processes would be made smoother with a National Reserve Association. The
principal argument being made to Southern merchants was that of efficiency. Because these
merchants dealt with various bills of exchange (including foreign bills) and required a greater
amount of currency during the crop-moving period, it was extremely unwieldy to have to rely on
New York banks to discount the bills and ship currency to the South. Laughlin maintained,
“Such a cooperative agency as a National Reserve Association…is, by its very nature and
operation, adapted to meet the peculiar difficulties which confront the South during the
movement of the cotton crop.” The presence of Southern branches of the National Reserve
Association would allow the South to be relatively freer from New York influence. Laughlin wrote,
.
“By such a cooperative association the South would be enabled to coin its own cotton into
notes through its own local associations; and there would be no reason for the expensive
shipment of cash to and from New York. Moreover, by making the south dependent on only
itself, it would be free from its present dependence on New York.”
.
The case Laughlin made to
the Southern merchants on the benefits of having a National Reserve Association emphasizes
that the proposed scheme would make the economy run more smoothly, addressing the common
fear that the institution of a central bank would only benefit the banking class.
Taking the League’s appeal to small business owners and Southern merchants together
illuminates the manner in which the League dealt with the country’s two main concerns with
regard to banking reform. First, the issue of Wall Street dominance was addressed by
emphasizing the marked separation between the interests of the League and those of New York
and with repeated declarations that the proposed system would free the financial system from the
influence of banks. Second, the League appealed to the fear of another credit crisis similar to the
Panic of 1907 and addressed the public need for currency, particularly in times of stress on the
banking system, by arguing that the proposed system would be much more efficient.
....
As a whole, the main issue at stake was that of reserve centralization. The League downplayed the
notions that the National Reserve Association would function as a single, all-powerful, central
institution and instead stressed the aspects of the plan that called for coordination, rather than
centralization, among a system of local associations.
Perhaps as a result of this large-scale publicity and educational campaign, the press was
remarkably favorable towards the Aldrich plan and the aims of the National Citizens’ League.
An editorial published in The New York Times on October 21, 1911, discussing a minor change
in the composition of the executive committee of the proposed National Reserve Association
began with the line, “The amendments to the tentative plan proposed by Senator Aldrich for the
adoption of the Monetary Commission indicate a praiseworthy stubbornness to principle and an
equally praiseworthy open mindedness in detail.” The editorial then later affirmed statements
made by Laughlin and Farwell in the Citizens’ League pamphlets, as it read, “It is clear at once
that New York cannot secure representation in proportion to its predominance in the banking
world.”
.
Such a statement indicates that the movement was successful in establishing itself as
independent of Wall Street influence and that the proposed Aldrich plan had the best interests of
the public at heart. The editorial finished by stating, “The proposal now enters upon its critical
stage. It meets the demand for details when it was becoming insistent…Let those who are
criticizing for the sake of criticism ponder the risk they run in weakening the only plan which has
received and deserved praise.”48 Such praise in the popular media was also engineered, in part
by the League. From July 1911 until January 1912, numerous speeches and the letters of leaders
of various branches of the League that emphasized the fact that the Aldrich plan would benefit
all Americans and that it would greatly weaken Wall Street’s hold on the financial system were
published in the Times.
.
Although the League sought to allay the public’s fears that proposed banking reform
measures inherently called for greater centralization of reserves and power on Wall Street by
underscoring the League’s preference for a federation of local banking associations under a
National Reserve Association, a letter from Warburg to Laughlin dated April 22, 1912, indicates
that an independent central reserve was still very much a concern and priority for Warburg.
Despite the League’s numerous assertions that the National Reserve Association would be free
from the influence of Wall Street and that it would be impossible for any one interest to
dominate the organization, it is clear that even after the defeat of the Aldrich Bill, Warburg still
felt that centralization of reserves was necessary in the country’s banking reforms. Moreover,
Warburg felt that it was necessary for men with experience in finance to be involved in the
operations of the proposed institution. In response to a plan that would lessen the amount of
reserves to be held at the central reserve institution, Warburg wrote,
.
“I am worried about [Willis’] articles in the Journal of Commerce. He writes against centralization of reserves, and I believe he has the Fowler idea in mind of federating 7% and leaving the balance alone.”
Warburg further stated,
“I am writing thus fully about Fowler, because I feel the necessity of killing the
prestige which he might possibly enjoy with the committee, which might
otherwise be too willing to listen to his plan of scattered reserves and scattered
note issue. Fowler has never been a banker, and never been successful, and I am
astounded by his courage to advocate a new and untried scheme approved by no
practical banker, against a plan which has been carefully developed on the well
established European principles by the combined banking and business-brains of
the country.”
.
Warburg’s strong criticism here of a competing plan that sought to further decentralize reserves
in the country may shine a light on his real feelings towards reserve centralization.
.
His statement
reflects a distinct fear of decentralized reserves and note issue, indicating that the National
Citizens’ League’s repeated statements that the National Reserve Association was essentially
decentralized system of federated local associations were likely just statements meant to rouse
public support for the Aldrich bill. Furthermore, Warburg’s harsh criticism that the opposing
plan did not originate from the mind of a banker is yet another sign of his actual feelings towards
a plan free from the ideas of bankers.
The arguments raised by the pamphlets of the National Citizens’ League combined, the
organization’s favorable press coverage regarding its willingness to take public criticism, and
ultimately the statements made by Warburg in a private letter to Laughlin all suggest that the
League may not have represented the plan for a National Reserve Association completely
faithfully to the public with its repeated emphasis on the decentralized nature of the proposed
system. Under the direction and leadership of Warburg, the League placed tremendous
importance on its Midwestern origins and frequently denounced Wall Street in its pamphlets in
order to sever ties with the banking class. But it appears from Warburg’s own writings from that
time that these aspects of the League were publically highlighted while others, in particular the
identities of the organization’s actual leadership and its commitment to having a centralized reserve system, were obscured for the sake of drawing public support to the cause of banking
reform. This is not to say that the League was purposefully dishonest in concealing these aspects
of its organization to the American public. Rather the country’s financial elite, led by Warburg,
was cognizant of the difficult political realities of the time and was forced to garner the public
support needed to pass the banking reform bill it felt the country needed.
V. Conclusion
In ...... ....." l.c.
etc ...
comment: the details and backroom mechanisms of fascism were worked
out way before the term was "coined", that is "banking" is a duplicitous
and fascistic creation/operation, the centralization and canonization of which is manifest evil in our time; no?
blindman, if you are going to copy and paste like that, you should take the time to correct the formatting, by systematically deleting all the line breaks present in the original, which, when copied and pasted, make the final result extremely difficult to read. (I only mention that because you seem to do it much of the time in your posts.)
you don't have to be such a prick about it.
one of the things about me you must negotiate
is my laziness; not to mention I don't get
paid to make information comfortable or entertaining.
take it or leave it, regardless, it remains what it is;
the bankers con precedes eddy bernays, el duce and
the Bolsheviks and survives.
.
http://sgtreport.com/2014/06/must-share-neo-nazis-who-brought-us-911-are...
The FED was just a bunch of hedge funds that were loseing money on there investments so they got the peoples government to guarantee and make good on there private losses. Hence the right to Issue a private currency to a public government.
BULLSHIT! THAT'S ALL THIS IS, IS BULLSHIT. TYLER ACTUALLY PRINTED THIS SHIT, EH? WTF, OVER.
The development of organized crime may be analogous to the development of science. That reminds me of a couple quotes attributed to Issac Newton about:
Standing on the shoulders of giants.
&, Finding pebbles on the sea shore.
http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Isaac_Newton
http://todayinsci.com/N/Newton_Isaac/NewtonIsaac-PlayingOnTheSeashore.htm
The actual history of science is full of astonishing twists of fate, as discussed in entertaining documentaries like James Burke's "Connections" series.
I think it was significant that DEBT ENGINES and STEAM ENGINES were both developed at about the same time, and both were understood through the biggest bullies' bullshit dominating the philosophy of politics, as well as science, which problematic occurrences have continued through to the present time, with globalized electronic frauds, backed by the threat of the force of atomic bombs.
However, the deeper problems are that the development of economics was more like the development of militarism, than like any other science. Militarism was the oldest and best developed social science, whose success was based on deceits. Economics was a more recent social science whose success was based on frauds. That gives rise to interesting, thoroughly entangled, paradoxes in human history! One may well recall here the point made by Mark Twain: the best liars believe their own lies.
Warburg was instrumental in a great revolution in the American political economy, which was achieved by stealth and deception. A few intellectuals were aware of what was happening, but mostly that profound change just surreptitiously slipped through.
http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Revolution
"... as often happens in the history of intellectual revolutions, the achievement of revolutionary goals destroyed the revolutionary ideology that gave them birth ..."
The Federal Reserve Board was the single most significant achievement of the methods of organized crime being able to take control over the government of the USA. Since the USA dominated the world after World War Two, and the American Dollar became the global reserve currency, so far, there have been no greater political paradoxes!
so far, there have been no greater political paradoxes!
Paradox? What's the paradox?
All I can see is a huge long-running lie that very few understand.
"Nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public."
But this is not the first time that an entire country is infected with a massive group psychosis. But that's what we have here and it's been going one since 1914.
H.E. Barnes (1889-1968) did a very good job explaining why this is so as one of the Columbia school of New History, basically combining 1) historical revisionism; and 2) making sociology a truly all-encompassing multidisciplinary discipline making use of anthropology, geography, evolutionary biology, history, psychology, ethics, economics, polititical science, etc. etc.
I'll bet that I'm the only one here who has read his books! Too bad for you, because there is no living historian or social scientist brave enough to publish truth about our current times.
The article above mentions history and social theory but it's written in ignorance of Barnes, who explained everything that puzzles the author ... and pretty much everyone else here.
Start with Barnes' posthmous Cato Paper 12 and the 1970s reprints you can buy unused for cheap from a place in Brooklyn: History and Social Intelligence, The New History and the Social Studies, and his 2-volume World Politics in Modern Civilization.
Everyone in academia who talked about 9/11 being a hoax has been fired, regardless of tenure. And some of them are lucky to be alive because many have been killed.
Thanks for pointing out Barnes.
You are right that I have never read any of his material.
The essential PARADOX is that governments are the biggest form of organized crime, controlled by the best organized gangs of criminals. The Federal Reserve Board of the USA is its national Fraud King.
The paradoxical problem is the language that we use is the biggest bullies' bullshit, which makes discussing the paradoxical ways that the best organized criminals dominated the political processes, in order to get their lies legalized, and those frauds enforced by legalized violence, almost impossible to significantly engage within the public space, which is almost totally dominated by the bullies' bullshit world view.
Although there is a globalized system, with the Bank of International Settlements being the King of Kings of Fraud, the American Federal Reserve Board is still the single greatest King of Fraud. The "paradox" is the problem that there is no widely accepted and understood language to use to label and talk about the social situations that exist after the best organized gangs of criminals are able to capture control over the government.
A better scientific understanding of human society begins with the recognition that all human realities are always organized lies, operating robberies. Governments were made by the history of war. The War Kings were based on them surviving as the biggest forms of organized crime, because warfare was organized crime on a larger scale.
The War Kings segued into the Fraud Kings, because they were able to apply the methods of organized crime to capture control over the political processes. At the present time, almost all American politicians are the banksters' puppets, whose job is to perform for the masses of muppets, that have been brainwashed to believe in bullshit by their schools and mass media.
The controlled opposition has also had control over it mostly captured. Thus, their "solutions" are still based on false fundamental dichotomies, and the related impossible ideals, which therefore recommend that everyone should be better sheeple. However, the FACTS are that the world operates according to the principles and methods of organized crime, which problem PARADOXICALLY includes that most people thing the "solutions" are to somehow stop that from happening, despite that being NOT possible.
Since the biggest bullies' bullshit so totally dominates our society, we suffer under the paradoxes that the best organized criminals control the governments, which problem has almost no generally understood language to label and discuss that problem. That makes facing those facts, and attempting to develop better dynamic equilibria between the different systems of organized lies operating robberies, almost impossible.
The established systems lie about what they are really doing. Their controlled opposition lie about what the "solutions" could be. Therefore, around and around we go, while the government automatically becomes worse and worse systems of legalized lies, backed by legalized violence, in which the Federal Reserve Board is still the single most important example of that process, inside what is still the single most important country.
THUS, THE PARADOX IS THAT THE FEDERAL RESERVE BOARD IS THE TRIUMPH OF ORGANIZED CRIME, WHICH HAS BECOME THE GOVERNMENT, WHERE THERE IS NO GENERALLY UNDERSTOOD LANGUAGE TO LABEL AND DISCUSS THAT PROBLEM ANY BETTER.
The paradoxical ways that the government IS organized crime continue to be triumphant run away systems, because not only are the established systems based on that foundation, but also, the controlled opposition groups continue to promote "solutions" which are the bullshit that that should not be the case, when it necessarily must be the case that there are combined murder/money systems, in which the death controls back up the debt controls.
The paradoxical language comes from the profoundly unscientific view that merely because governments legalize enforced frauds, that those stop being frauds, and more deeply, the biggest bullies' language, which is shared by the controlled opposition groups, continues to agree that there are some "magical" ways whereby human realities should stop being based on the principles and methods of organized crime. Instead, "magical" words are used to transform robberies into "rights" and "freedoms," without paying attention to the paradoxes of enforcement, when nobody guards the guardians, and therefore, the biggest form of organized crime is government, which gets controlled by the best organized gangs of criminals.
Inside of that paradoxical situation, the Zombie Sheeple are exhorted by the Black Sheeple that the "solutions" are for everyone to become better Sheeple, while the actual situation is runaway systems of enforced frauds, getting worse, which are destroying the ability of a democratic republic to operate through the rule of law, because too many "citizens" have become incompetent political idiots, that believed too much, for too long, in the biggest bullies' bullshit social stories. (That kind of controlled opposition can be clearly seen to also run rampant in those who publish on the Zero Hedge Web site, as well as almost everyone else, where it is usually even worse!)
Better dynamic equilibria between the different systems of organized lies, operating robberies, are theoretically possible. However, impossible ideals about that actually make the opposite happen in the real world. Therefore, the paradoxes that governments are the biggest forms of organized crime, controlled by the best organized gangs of criminals, keep on getting worse, faster, because their controlled opposition continues to promote the same language as was developed by the biggest bullies. Hence, we are living in runaway globalized systems of enforced frauds, where the basic social facts are either denied, or asserted to be solvable with "magical" words, such as expressed through impossible ideals, that constantly drive the vicious spirals of actually making the opposite happen in the real world.
"all direct connection between the government and the banking business is undesirable."
Gimme break.
Big Business is Government, and Government is Big Business.
And there's nothing anyone can do about it either.
"There's nothing anyone can do about it" as long as the opposition continues to be controlled.
The primary way that the opposition is controlled is that they use the same language of false fundamental dichotomies and related impossible ideals, as were originally developed by the biggest bullies, as currently manifested in Big Government and Big Business.
To change that would require that enough people understand the social situation more scientifically, using unitary mechanisms, rather than false fundamental dichotomies. However, the worst practical problems are that the opposition ends up being controlled in every possible way. The mainstream morons, and reactionary revolutionaries, or the Black Sheeple, advocating that the solutions are that everyone should be better Sheeple, are the primary reasons why "there's nothing anyone can do about it."
The biggest systems of organized lies operating robberies HAVE become a blended ouroboros of incorporated robberies. However, EVERYONE lives the same way, and there can be no better resolutions of that situation other than better dynamic equilibria. Those who advocate "solutions" that depend on stopping human realities from being organized lies operating robberies are the controlled opposition, that make those systems get worse, rather than better. Those ways that the opposition groups are controlled are the worst reasons WHY "there's nothing anyone can do about it."
The elections end up being puppet shows between different groups of controlled opposition. Unless enough people can stop thinking in the same ways that the biggest bullies want them to think, and therefore, supporting different varieties of controlled opposition, then the overall political situation will continue to be such that "there's nothing anyone can do about it."
Every fiat currency has failed eventually.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bex2fVIiiN4