This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.

Guest Post: Are The 12 Regional Banks Of The Fed Private Entities?

Tyler Durden's picture


Submitted by Lars Schall or,

Related to a book that I’m writing in German, I was asking myself whether the 12 regional Federal Reserve banks are privately owned.

The US Supreme Court, I found out, said this on January 3, 1928 in the case “United States Shipping Board Emergency Fleet Corporation v. Western Union Telegraph Co.“:

Instrumentalities like the national banks or the federal reserve banks, in which there are private interests, are not departments of the government. They are private corporations in which the government has an interest. Compare Bank of the United States v. Planters’ Bank, 9 Wheat. 904, 907, 6 L. Ed. 244.

See here for yourself.

Connected to the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) case “Bloomberg LP v. Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, 08-CV-9595, U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York (Manhattan)“, Bloomberg reported in May 2009:

The New York Fed is one of 12 regional Federal Reserve banks and the one charged with monitoring capital markets. It is also managing $1.7 trillion of emergency lending programs. While the Fed’s Washington-based Board of Governors is a federal agency subject to the Freedom of Information Act and other government rules, the New York Fed and other regional banks maintain they are separate institutions, owned by their member banks, and not subject to federal restrictions.

See here for yourself.

In connection to the same FOIA case, Yvonne Mizusawa, Senior Council of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, stated on January 11, 2010 that the regional banks of the Federal Reserve System are indeed “private banks“.

See here for yourself.

Moreover, I’ve asked today Nomi Prins, the author of the book “All the Presidents’ Bankers“, the following:

Do you think it is right to say that the Federal Reserve System includes private member banks, which receive a 6% dividend for their shares from the profits that the regional fed banks are making on their market operations?

Nomi Prins responded:

As I understand Section 7 of the Federal Reserve Act, that is the case. Stockholders, or member banks, of the Federal Reserve System are entitled to receive a 6% per annum dividend on their paid-in capital stock, and any surplus fund can be used to pay dividends in the event that any year’s current earnings of the Federal Reserve System are insufficient to cover funds for that year.

See the early 1922 letter from its General Counsel, here:

The material portions of Section 7 of the Federal Reserve Act read as follows:


“After all necessary expenses of a Federal reserve bank have been paid or provided for, the stockholders shall be entitled to receive an annual dividend of six per centum on the paid-in capital stock, which dividend shall be cumulative. After the aforesaid dividend claims have been fully met, the net earnings shall be paid to the United States as a franchise tax except that the whole of such net earnings, including those for the year ending December thirty-first, nineteen hundred and eighteen, shall be paid into a surplus fund until it shall amount to one hundred per centum or the subscribed capital stock of such bank, and that thereafter ten per centum of such net earnings shall be paid into the surplus.


“…Should a Federal reserve bank be dissolved or go into liquidation, any surplus remaining, after the payment of all debts, dividend requirements as hereinbefore provided, as the par value of the stock, shall be paid to and become the property of the United States and shall be similarly applied.”

See here.

As additional information on the dividends, the law requires dividends are paid to reserve member banks, before the Fed transfers any excess earnings to the Treasury Dept. as interest on Federal Reserve notes, (see p 398 of the Fed’s 2013 annual report)…It should be noted that the amounts aren’t huge, for 2013, annual dividends were $1.65 billion.

See here.

Update – July 10, 2014:

On the same day, I wrote this e-mail to some people at the press office of the New York Fed:

Dear Ladies and Gentlemen,
I am a financial journalist from Germany. Related to this article, I would like to know whether the NY Fed pays local property tax, and if it doesn’t, on what ground does it claim exemption?

Moreover, may I ask you whether the NY Fed sees itself as a private entity as suggested in its response to the FOIA case “Bloomberg LP v. Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, 08-CV-9595, U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York (Manhattan)“? You find the quote to which I’m referring in the article above.

Furthermore, how does the NY Fed respond to the statement by Yvonne Mizusawa, Senior Council of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, that the regional banks of the Federal Reserve System are “private banks“? See also in the article above, please.

Thank you very much for your attention!

Kind regards,
Lars Schall.

That e-mail was inspired by an idea that it might be worthwhile to check whether the regional Fed banks pay local property tax. After all, that was how Wright Patman established that the Board of Governors, in Washington, is a public entity. But I believe the same logic would apply to the regional banks.

I’ve arranged a PDF copy of a certain passage in William Greider’s book “Secrets of the Temple,” so that you can read for yourself that strange story about Wright Patman and the Fed’s headquarter building in Washington DC – see here. According to Patman, “constitutionally, the Federal Reserve is a pretty queer duck.”

Furthermore, I wrote yesterday an e-mail to US economist L. Randall Wray. In the book that I’ve mentioned, I quote Prof. Wray from an essay about the so called “independence” of the Federal Reserve, and specifically one sentence in the sense of this article:

“The Glass-Owen bill split the difference, with private ownership and a decentralized system, but with the Treasury Secretary and the Comptroller of the Currency sitting on the Board.”

With regards to this sentence, I’ve asked him: Where does the “private ownership” come from?

Prof. Wray replied by stating that I was “barking up the wrong tree” and pointing to a paper he co-authored. He added: “The Fed is a creature of congress. The ownership by member banks amts to getting a 6% return and some delegated fairly insignificant duties, which can be changed at any time by congress. The shares cannot be sold.”

Chris Powell, the press secretary of the Gold Anti-Trust Action Committee (GATA) in the US wrote me:

While the share structure of the Federal Reserve System is peculiar, this issue has always seemed to me to be of no point. The system was created by federal law and is a creature of government. OF COURSE the system, like the rest of government, contrives reasons not to be accountable to the public, and OF COURSE the system, like all other government agencies, is captured by the private interests it is supposed to regulate, and OF COURSE as a result it tends not to serve the public interest. But it remains a creature of government and the public, through its elected representatives, could take control of it any time the public could mobilize itself to do so.


“If the Federal Reserve Board was not a government agency, GATA could not have sued it under the Freedom of Information Act and won a federal court order for disclosure against it (and a court award for legal costs) a few years ago. And didn’t Bloomberg win its similar case against the New York Fed for the QE records?”

I’ve told Powell about the court ruling from March 19, 2010 by the United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit – see here. It said:

“As the records of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York had not been searched, we need not decide here whether what may be found must be produced.”

Chris Powell replied: “Thanks for the resolution of the Bloomberg case. I think that settles the issue. The FOI Act applies only to government agencies.”

“All in all, nothing to see here, I guess…”, I thought.

I also saw then two more significant statements:

1) The Board and the Clearing House appeal only on the ground that a proper interpretation of FOIA Exemption 4 covers the requested material. No contest is made as to Exemption 5, or as to the scope of the Board’s (disputed) obligation to conduct a search of records at the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. Any argument that the Board had as to Exemption 5, or either side had as to the scope of the ordered search at the Federal Reserve Bank of New York is therefore deemed waived. Norton v. Sam’s Club, 145 F.3d 114, 117 (2d Cir.1998). Whether certain records of the twelve Federal Reserve Banks are records of the Board is an issue that is decided in an opinion-filed simultaneously with this opinion-in the appeal (heard in tandem with this appeal) from the Southern District’s decision in Fox News Network, LLC v. Board of Governors of the Fed. Reserve Sys., 639 F.Supp.2d 384 (S.D.N.Y.2009). See Fox News Network, LLC v. Bd. of Governors of the Fed. Reserve Sys, —F.3d —-, 2010 WL 986665 (2d Cir.2010).


2) The requests sought (in relevant part) detail about loans that the twelve Federal Reserve Banks made to private banks in April and May 2008 at the Discount Window and pursuant to ad hoc emergency lending programs (described in the margin )… The Board denied these requests (in relevant part) in December 2008. The Board conceded possession of records showing the loan information Bloomberg sought, with the exception of the collateral; collateral information is held by the lending Federal Reserve Banks. But the Board advised that the responsive information in its possession—contained in “Remaining Term Reports”–was exempt from disclosure under FOIA Exemptions 4 and 5. The Board did not search the lending records of the twelve Federal Reserve Banks, explaining that a request to the Board does not constitute a request for information held by those institutions.

Chris Powell then replied: “Yes. They can claim that the law exempts certain records from disclosure but they can’t claim that they are not a government agency or that they are not covered by the law.”

I asked Powell in a provocative manner: “Why not file a FOIA request re the NY Fed and the German gold? Perhaps, one could solve two issues at once…”

Powell: “That WOULD be an interesting one. One must remember that while GATA won its case against the Fed in a technical sense, the court still ruled that the Fed could keep all of its gold records except one. Among the records the Fed was allowed to keep secret were records of gold swaps with foreign banks.”

I asked: “Have you specifically asked for something re the NY Fed?”

“Yes”, he wrote back. “A few months ago I asked the New York Fed whether, as its former vice president said in a speech, the bank provided gold accounts to banks. Couldn’t get the publicist to answer and so wrote to Dudley, the NYFed president. Couldn’t get an answer there either and so wrote to my congressman and senators to ask them to bludgeon an answer out of the NYFed.

“Maybe a month after that I got a letter from an underling to Dudley contradicting the speech of the former NYFed vice president. See the middle of the speech here. And then this.”

If the NY Fed responds to my questions, I will let you know, although I wouldn’t expect anything; they’re not very good at answering my questions – as you can see for yourself here, for instance.

I will also let you know whether Yvonne Mizusawa, the Senior Council of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, has anything to add to her remarks that were brought forward in the Second Circuit Court of Appeals related to the FOIA cases “Fox News Network LLC v. Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System” and “Bloomberg LP v. Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System”. Today I sent a press inquiry to Michelle A. Smith, press secretary of the Washington-based Board of Governors, in order to ask her to forward it to Ms. Mizusawa, whom I made familiar with my e-mail to the NY Fed – and then added the following:

May I ask you on the record:

Why are the regional banks of the Federal Reserve System “private banks“?

How do they differ from other private banks?

Thank you for your attention!

Kind regards,
Lars Schall.

To be continued, I guess…

Update – July 11, 2014:

Thank You For Filling Out This Form

Shown below is your submission to on Friday, July 11, 2014 at 11:09:48

This form resides at

NAME: Lars Schall
YOUR POSITION: Financial Journalist
QUESTION: Press Inquiry Dear Ladies and Gentlemen, I haven’t been able to contact directly your press office. Related to a current research of mine, I would like to know whether the NY Fed pays local property tax, and if it doesn’t, on what ground does it claim exemption? Is this public information? Kind regards, Lars Schall.

What you’ve just read is an inquiry that I sent today to the tax department of the City of New York, after I had tried for 45 minutes to get in touch with its press office via phone.

I think, a Title Insurance Company could tell you the answer within 5 minutes. But, you would have to hire them and pay about $500 for the search. All they would need is the street address of the building.

In addition, pull this up, and then go to page 25, #12: Federal Reserve Bank of New York / 33 Liberty Street / Block 35 / Lot 1.

This is a register of all public buildings in NYC – hospitals; jails; fire halls; schools; etc. Public Buildings are exempt from real estate taxes. See here. All exemptions are listed there. Check out the specific exemption for: Federal property (see United States, property owned by). Other exemptions may apply. You would have to ask someone to research the building – the value (assessment) for real estate tax purposes is a matter of public record. If there is an exemption, the particular exemption will be stated on the “card” for that particular property: 33 Liberty Street / Block 35 / Lot 1.

The foregoing does not answer my questions, but provides a good guess that: This property is exempt from real estate taxes because it is classified as “Federal property”.

After he saw my inquiry re the NYC Department of Finance, Chris Powell wrote me:

“I’m sure that the New York Fed pays no local property taxes. But to resolve the issue of the government nature of the Fed and the regional Federal Reserve banks, it is necessary only to look at a dollar bill.


“On the front the bill says ’Federal Reserve Note’ on the top and then, just underneath, ’The United States of America.’ It is signed by the treasurer of the United States and the secretary of the treasury, both U.S. government officials. It carries the seal of a regional Federal Reserve bank; all the regional banks issue such notes. And it says: ’This note is legal tender for all debts, public and private.’ That is, the law — made by the government — is what gives value to Federal Reserve notes.


“On the back the bill carries the Great Seal of the United States.


“If the Fed and its regional banks were not government agencies, the dollar bill would look very different.”

And yet, we still have Yvonne Mizusawa saying officially on behalf of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System: The regional banks of the Fed are not agencies, they are private banks.

I haven’t made this up.

After I had not seen any response from Ms. Smith coming my way with regards to my inquiry, I looked for Ms. Mizusawa’s e-mail address at the Fed – and I was successful. Therefore, I have been able to write her directly:

Dear Ms. Mizusawa,

my name is Lars Schall. I’ve tried yesterday to get in touch with you via Michelle A. Smith, press secretary of the Board of Governors of the FRS. I copy my inquiry below.

I hope this e-mail address that I just found in the web works.

I would appreciate a response from you very much!

Kind regards,

Lars Schall.

Then followed a copy of my original inquiry that I sent to Ms. Smith.

To be continued, I guess…


(1) “Federal Reserve Bank Governance and Independence during Financial Crisis”, published at Levy Economics Institute of Bard College, April 2014, here. You may also want to read an interview that I did with Randall Wray in the past: “Truths and Myths of the Federal Reserve”, published on May 6, 2010 here.

(2) The court ruling can be found here. “The Federal Reserve System–the central bank of the United States–is composed of twelve regional Federal Reserve Banks and the defendant-appellee Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (“Board”) in Washington, D.C. The Board is a federal agency that (among other things) supervises the operations of the twelve Federal Reserve Banks. (…) As the district court concluded, not all lending records of the twelve Federal Reserve Banks necessarily become records of the Board. However, Board regulations provide that some records at the Federal Reserve Banks– those kept at the Federal Reserve Banks under certain conditions for “administrative reasons”–are records of the Board; these must be searched. We remand to the district court to order further searches and to determine if the fruits of those searches must be disclosed. The district court did not reach the question of whether the Board misconstrued the scope of the Fox News FOIA requests (the district court having ruled these documents would be [**6] exempt from disclosure in any instance); we remand for further consideration of that question as well.”


- advertisements -

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Sat, 07/12/2014 - 20:07 | 4951086 Jumbotron
Jumbotron's picture

The 12 headed Hydra

Sat, 07/12/2014 - 20:08 | 4951092 Jumbotron
Jumbotron's picture

The matter of if the Federal Reserve is private or public is moot.  It is both.  It is Fascist.  It's a Goverment/Private Partnership.  Fascism pure and simple. 

Sat, 07/12/2014 - 20:10 | 4951096 nmewn
nmewn's picture

Pure & simple.

Sat, 07/12/2014 - 20:18 | 4951123 Pladizow
Pladizow's picture

Yes we're a private institution and no we don't pay property taxes. What are you going to do about it - we run this bitch!

Sat, 07/12/2014 - 20:30 | 4951151 Boris Alatovkrap
Boris Alatovkrap's picture

Serve the squid!

Sat, 07/12/2014 - 20:55 | 4951204 813kml
813kml's picture

Now you've got me jonesing for some calamari.

Sat, 07/12/2014 - 21:50 | 4951331 nidaar
nidaar's picture

FED is Schrodinger's cat; it's both alive and dead. The collapse (of the wave function) will occur when the box is opened, hence it gets audited. When everyone sees that all the gold is gone...

Sun, 07/13/2014 - 03:58 | 4951745 daemon
daemon's picture

" FED is Schrodinger's cat "

Yes, definitely a good way to express the "status" of this "entity".

I would personally describe it as  : " the banksters' trojan horse in the republic " , to make it clear that it's a criminal being. 

Sun, 07/13/2014 - 04:09 | 4951751 chumbawamba
chumbawamba's picture

Interesting.  So the most elucidating fact to come out of this for me is that the Board of Governors of the FRB is a government agency but the regional Federal Reserve Banks are private.  That's pretty clear enough.

Understanding the structure is crucial if you're going to attack it (Sun Tzu 101: know your enemy).

Good stuff, Lars.


Sun, 07/13/2014 - 16:36 | 4953215 Unknown User
Unknown User's picture

The Fed is a private central bank that uses a powerless Board of Governors to pretend that it’s a quasi-government agency.  The Board is a seven member panel appointed by the President and approved by the Senate. It determines the interest rate, known as the discount rate, for loans to commercial banks and thrifts, and selects the required reserve ratio which determines how much of customer deposits a bank must keep on hand. The Board is a front that has no power. The actual banking operations of the Fed, including the 12 regional banks, are in private hands.  Considering that the US government issues only 5% of all money in circulation and that the banks often collect as much money in interest as they lend, shows the magnitude of the problem with a private fractional reserve monetary system.

Wed, 08/06/2014 - 05:57 | 5053001 AE911Truth
AE911Truth's picture

As with any private corporation, the board (of directors) is obligated to serve the interests of the share holder owners, who, in this case, are the private federal reserve banks.

The TBTF banks like JPM, BOA, City, etc. own (share in) the Regional Fed banks. So, the FRB ultimately serves these owners.

This is why these banks can instruct the Fed to loan them billions of FRNs short term at 0.5% interest which they use to buy UST long term obligations which earn 3.5%, so they profit 3.0% (the difference) on what they borrow. Who pays the interest on the long term USG obligations? You do with your Taxes to the IRS.

If you are not totally pissed off and ready to jail all of these criminals, then you are not paying attention.

Sun, 07/13/2014 - 05:27 | 4951785 bullchit
bullchit's picture

Wave functions don't collapse, they develop. The gold is a minor actor in this play.

Think 10's of $Trillion's......of your money.



Sat, 07/12/2014 - 21:01 | 4951223 NihilistZero
NihilistZero's picture

Ozymandias had to create the squid.  Bringing about the NWO is the only way to save humanity.  The Comedian was right...

Mon, 07/14/2014 - 09:32 | 4955124 Me.Grimlock
Me.Grimlock's picture

+1000 for the reference.

Sun, 07/13/2014 - 03:01 | 4951721 Occident Mortal
Occident Mortal's picture

The Swiss Central Bank is a private corporation and even has it's own stock ticker.

As you can see the Swiss National Bank (which is Switzerlands Central Bank) also has a dividend determined by law, which like the Fed is fixed at 6%.

For just 1,089CHF anyone can say they own a central bank.

Sun, 07/13/2014 - 10:28 | 4952083 Buckaroo Banzai
Buckaroo Banzai's picture

Technically then, if Swiss Central Bank shares are traded on public markets, it is a publicly-owned corporation-- not private.

Shares of the Federal Reserve banks are not traded on public markets, which makes them private corporations.

Sun, 07/13/2014 - 06:51 | 4951825 OldTrooper
OldTrooper's picture

A quick online search at reveals that the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas pays property taxes -  $1,694,388.70 is the current levy - on the property located at 2200 N PEARL ST.

I didn't check the other Fed locations.  Other tax jurisdictions may not have such easy to navigate online portals.  However, it appears at first glance that the Fed is not exempt from local property taxes.  Go find a lawyer to tell you if this means anything or not.  I'm just an old title guy that knows how to look for this kind of info.

Sun, 07/13/2014 - 08:13 | 4951874 overmedicatedun...
overmedicatedundersexed's picture

when sociopaths run a system - does it matter how it is structured? when congress exempts itself from laws written for the common folk, does it matter?, Our most likely next president has said:

"At this point what difference does it make!" quite right you are there reptile hag crone that sums it all up in 8 words.

Sun, 07/13/2014 - 09:29 | 4951955 OldTrooper
OldTrooper's picture

Well, knowing the facts may help someone strengthen their arguments.  It distresses me when a friend or ally makes an ass of themselves by failing to verify a 'fact'.  So, that is why I provide the results of my research.  Does it matter?  It doesn't particularly matter or change anything for me to know that the Fed branches print off a few million each year to 'pay' their property taxes.  But it does matter to me when an otherwise good argument, made by a decent normal person, is ruined by including an easily refutable untruth.

Sun, 07/13/2014 - 09:57 | 4952015 Jumbie
Jumbie's picture

New York Fed pays property tax

Go to:

33  Liberty St Manhatten



Total New Charges Due by July 01, 2008 $1,319,187.54 Total Amount Due by July 01, 2008 $1,319,187.54 Amount Not Due but That You Can Choose to Pay Early $1,319,187.54 Savings if You Choose to Pay Early $-39,575.63 Total Amount You May Pay by July 01, 2008 $2,598,799.45
Sun, 07/13/2014 - 10:27 | 4952084 studfinder
studfinder's picture

Google led me to this:


"(c) Exemption From Taxation. Federal reserve banks, including the capital stock and surplus therein, and the income derived therefrom shall be exempt from Federal, State, and local taxation, except taxes upon real estate."

Sat, 07/12/2014 - 20:23 | 4951139 Greenskeeper_Carl
Greenskeeper_Carl's picture

and bullshit. listen to krugman defend the fed, and talk about how people who complain about ZIRP and QE are the very rich who are complaining they arent making money. I read this becuase i saw a link to it, and the outright lieing and bullshit in this article is almost beyond belief. He actually claims that the '.01%' ARE THE LOSERS OF FED POLICY. \

end the fed....

Sat, 07/12/2014 - 21:17 | 4951269 Squid-puppets a...
Squid-puppets a-go-go's picture

man its unbeleivable the extent to which these assholes will say absolutely anything - any patently false absurdity - and have no impact on their credibility within the power structure

thats when you know the republic is buried 6 feet under, never to return this side of violent bloody revolution

Sat, 07/12/2014 - 21:37 | 4951305 Greenskeeper_Carl
Greenskeeper_Carl's picture


hopefully not. gary north makes a very compelling case for a slow but steady de-centralization. any transition will go through a painful period, but this guy has been pressing this possibiliy pretty hard for a while now. he makes a very good case. i hope he is right.

Sun, 07/13/2014 - 10:50 | 4952149 Buckaroo Banzai
Buckaroo Banzai's picture

That is a compelling case, thanks for the link. It also explains why the Obama administration seems so eager to foment revolution-- it's because that's exactly what they want.

Sun, 07/13/2014 - 11:27 | 4952246 Greenskeeper_Carl
Greenskeeper_Carl's picture

thats why Im fearful of those calling for a revolution. The most likely outcome of that is a bloody, violent period, lots of dead people, many of whom will be innocents(like the 1 million or so iraqis we call 'collateral damage') who were just caught in a crossfire, or just plain unlucky. A revolution, especially at the hands of the 50 million strong FSA, would merely put more power in the hands of the govt. kind of like what Cloward-Piven tries to bring about. What scares me the most is that from the point of a tyrannical govt, an economic calamity would give them the excuse they need to really drop the hammer on the populace. There are over 50 million people who get food stamps, most of whom couldn't care less about the fed, warfare, NSA spying, the constitution, etc, and only care about that card getting filled with someone elses money each month. They will be demanding the govt tax even more, confiscate savings, etc. Just like with Occupy wall street and all those people, basically demanding MORE govt. Thats what a revolution in this country would look like. There are way more of them then there are of us.

Sun, 07/13/2014 - 10:53 | 4952155 gcjohns1971
gcjohns1971's picture

Hope not,

Violent revolutions are dominated by the few directing the fighting, and to whom directly goes all the power.

That those few be proof against Acton's Axiom, or concerned with the public welfare in the first place, is as rare as an honest politician.

Sat, 07/12/2014 - 22:21 | 4951390 dumby
dumby's picture

I agree with Jumbotron: the question of the Fed being public or private is a false dichotomy.

But the same can be said of the 'government' in most of its functions: military, regulatory, judicial - these all serve private interests, in a "heads we win, tails you lose" fashion whereby all the risks are assumed by the 'public' - i.e. citizen / serfs.

Fascism is the best word for both the US Fed and the US government, and most, if not all governments in the world, I suspect.

Sun, 07/13/2014 - 04:15 | 4951755 chumbawamba
chumbawamba's picture

Not really.  That's like swinging at it wildly with a stick and yelling "HAH!! HAH!!" trying to scare it, because in fact you're the one whose scared and you have no fucking idea how to attack this behemoth.

Understanding how the Fed actually is structured is not that difficult.  You can research old case law as Lars did, and also check the Federal banking code and the Congressional record for how the Fed was formed.  It's all there, it's just a lot of tedium one must endure to go through it all.

I am Chumbawamba.

Sun, 07/13/2014 - 11:24 | 4952234 Jumbotron
Jumbotron's picture

You're full of shit Chumbles.  The behemoth of National / Central Banks has been known and studied for for over 300 years....

And for America we've know about them for over 200 years....

Modeled on the Bank of England,[6] this privately held, but publicly funded institution would also serve to process revenue fees and perform fiscal duties for the federal government.[5][7] Secretary Hamilton regarded the bank as indispensable to producing a stable and flexible financial system.[6][8]

And here is the list of the longest running banks in the world going  back to the year 1407.


I'm sick of your shit Chumbles.  You get on this site and you talk up what needs to be done, what others should be doing.  Fuck you.  You and I are not in the club.  We never will be and we will never win.  The Elites own this world....they always have and they always will.

You say that all we need is to know better the structures of this and the machinations of that.  We need Ron Paul.  Someone needs to kick out all the JOOS. 

Fuck you.  You sit in your mother's basement snarking away on ZeroHedge and probably other sites as well.  I don't see you picking up the gun.  I don't see you burning down the Fed.  If you are's obviously a wasted vote.

All you can say is "I am Chumbawamba"  Who the fuck cares ?  Not the Elites.  Not the Powers That Be.  Not the Bankers.  Not the N.S.A......although they appreciate the good laugh everytime your name "Chumbawamba" shows up in their database. need to grow the fuck up.  There is nothing you or I or anyone can do to stop any of this.  Mankind from the day they came out of the caves has wanted to control this world and the universe.  They have ALWAYS wanted to be God.  Money printing and the transfer of said money is P O W E R.  It is the power of God.  It creates something from nothing.  And everyone's life from the lowliest to the highest is controlled by it.

And you think....that if one of us.....some fucking unknown as of right now hero amongst us knew just a LITTLE bit more about how the Fed works or the machinations of the Elite, he....she.....or we could bring it all down.  Even if we did....this cancer is so prevalent that it would kill the world entire and drive us all back to subsistence farming.  I'm down with that.  But not the billions who still want to live in the MATRIX even though they know that the steak they are eating is fake and a holographic construct.

Fuck you and fuck hope.

Sun, 07/13/2014 - 14:01 | 4952806 chumbawamba
chumbawamba's picture

You sad nigger.

While you sit there and lament the hopelessness of the situation, there are thousands of brawlers out there who are putting the pieces of the puzzle together and they aren't doing any of their research on Wiki-fucking-pedia.

I like how you think I'm going to give up because some douchefag on Zero Hedge told me the situation is hopeless.  While you're toiling away at your 40 hour week, I'm busy bringing the California Superior Court to its knees.  I don't have time to wallow in self-loathing and ineffectiveness, I got shit to do.

You are a sad and silly clown man.  Take your circus sideshow somewhere else where maybe it has an audience.  This isn't Fag Club.

I am Chumbawamba.

Sun, 07/13/2014 - 15:33 | 4953073 Jumbotron
Jumbotron's picture

Then man up ball licker.

I want to see your sorry ass with a bullet in your head in front of the Fed or your bombed out carcass in Gaza defending the poor pitiful "Palestinians".

All you can do is bitch on ZeroHedge and probably other sites where you go by a different name.  That's OK.  We all need a place to vent.  Like sitting at the local bar getting juiced and bitching to some poor schmuck next to you that has no where to go and no one to talk to either. silly, deluded, probably drug addled useless piece of effluent down a sewage pipe to hell.  You're bringing the California Superior Court to its knees.  Ok big man.......tell us all the court case.  Let us search the public records.  Let us determine whether or not you are single handely bringing down the California Superior Court.

Fuck you.  You ....ain't....doing....shit.....but boasting like a pissy little cunt who got owned by the system and is kicking up dust and screaming about how you ain't're still fighting.

You ain't Chumbawamba.  You're nothing but a piece of shit.  You always have been since the day you squirted from your mother's womb.  You were given a name by someone else.  And the system gave you a number.  You go to work for the man.  And if you don't you are still taxed by the system......followed by the systems....tracked by the system.......allowed to live by the system. get freed from the Feds....then you're owned by the Corporations.  You get freed from the're owned by the Feds.   You get freed by both of're owned by a local or state Elite.  If you are free from all're owned by the strong man.

And if you reach ALL those's only because you became one of them.  That's the only choice you have. 

But're Chumbawamba.....whatever the fuck that means.  Which in this precisely zero.

But please......ignore me.  Like you've got shit to do.   I agree.  You ain't got nothing......but shit to do.


Sun, 07/13/2014 - 10:57 | 4952171 Buckaroo Banzai
Buckaroo Banzai's picture

I've said this before in this forum, but it bears repeating: it is not fascism we are facing, but communism. Fascism is the league of corporate SHAREHOLDERS and government; communism is the league of corporate EXECUTIVES and government.

The obvious reason why the Federal Reserve is composed of private corporations under allegedly public oversight is to obfuscate their operations to the greatest degree possible. You can't argue with the results. We can't even agree as to what they ARE, much less what, exactly, they are doing.

Sun, 07/13/2014 - 11:34 | 4952250 Jumbotron
Jumbotron's picture


WE ARE ALL shareholders.  We pay our taxes to the Federal Government who appoints the head of the Private Federal Reserve who then prints the MONEY that funds the PUBLICALLY held banks that then fund the PUBLICALLY held companies that give you a PAYCHECK which is then taxed by the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT.

We ALL own shares in every bank and every publically held company and the Federal Government simply through our labor which is funded by a Private Federal Reserve Bank and taxed back to the Federal Government.  It doesn't matter if we WANT to own shares.....we simply do.

I'll only agree with you if you meet me halfway by stating that perhaps our Government is Communism but operates with Fascist tendencies and principles.

In the doesn't much matter what techniques the Elites use or the makeup of the chains they wrap us in.  It's still Feudalism.  It's still the Plantation.  They're just smart enough now to the MATRIX....that we need to THINK we have a bit of freedom......that there is still room for HOPE. 

There is no Freedom.....there is NO hope.

Sun, 07/13/2014 - 14:22 | 4952843 chumbawamba
chumbawamba's picture

There intelligence in that pile of wet noodle of yours.

What pair of sad wretches raised you into the humongous pile of worthless shit you are today?  I'd really like to meet them so I can berate them proper in front of you.

You might want to check Title 12 United States Code section 411 for your remedy.  Taxes are voluntary.  You incur the excise when you use Federal Reserve Notes.  However, FRN are dual use instruments, both FRN and US Notes, the latter of which is lawful money.  Lawful money is not and cannot be taxed by the IRS, because they only concern themselves with the private bankster credit that the Fed issues

I endorse any check I cash with "REDEEMED IN LAWFUL MONEY PER 12 USC 411".  I have not filed taxes since 2008 and haven't paid since 2006.  Why?  Because I'm not a taxpayer and I didn't incur a liability.  In 2006 and 2007 I thought I did, and filed, but I learned in 2008 it was a mistake.  I may eventually elect to go back and demand the return of every payment beyond the 40 quarters I was required to pay into the Social Security system to earn retirement benefits, which I probably will never use anyway, even if I wanted to, since the IRS, the Fed and all that "money" I paid will be gone by the time my balls are hanging twice as far between my legs as they are now.

Go find a rock to hide under, you fucking abject coward.

I am Chumbawamba.

Sun, 07/13/2014 - 15:46 | 4953100 Jumbotron
Jumbotron's picture

You're the fucking coward.  It takes courage to see the world as it truly is and still not put a bullet in your brain.

The only way you don't is you make up little fantasies in your head about obtaining freedom.  Whatever the fuck that means.  That's the way and most of you on ZeroHedge cope.  That and probably a big, fat doobie from time to time.

I don't need to hide under a rock.  There is no truth to be found under the rock.  Neither is there any found in your pathetic, feeble, drug fueled fantasies about bringing the system down.

HOOOO BOY !   You're really sticking it to the Feds with your little "lawful" money scheme.  Yeah boy.....the Foundations of the Fascist System is QUAKING in its boots over your little scheme.  You're a fucking Matlock for sure baby boy.

Now....what about local and state regulations.  There's WAY more to "freedom" than Fed taxes. 

Dude.....I can't tell you HOW many of my friends and assciates have fallen for that whole "Fed taxes are voluntary" bullshit.  Some got away with it for some time too.  Good luck buddy.  But if fucking the Feds out of a few dollars is your idea of Freedom.....then you need to lay off the dope....even if its legal in your state.

Sun, 07/13/2014 - 18:29 | 4953516 sleigher
sleigher's picture

I was going to ask about 12 USC and US Notes as lawful money.  I understand you must say that the money is redeemed per 12 USC 411, but I have not able to figure out what to do if your company requires direct deposit.  There is no way that I can see to redeem that way with DD.  

Sun, 07/13/2014 - 20:44 | 4953915 Jumbotron
Jumbotron's picture

Don't even begin to try it.  Chumbo is lying.  He isn't doing shit.  He's not fucking the Man over.

If he's probably an under the table neighborhood grass mowing outfit he's running.


I am fucking Chumbawamba......that is to say.....surround by retards.  And the BIGGEST one of all is Chumbawamba

Mon, 07/14/2014 - 01:34 | 4954612 gafgroocK
gafgroocK's picture



Thanks Jumbo, I felt much better after you wrote that Post, as I was thinking exactly what you wrote about him and his 'clever' moniker post endings...what a dickhead he is!


"I am Chumbafucka, I am Perfect, I must STERILIZE myself......STERILIZE......STERILIZE"

Mon, 07/14/2014 - 07:56 | 4954818 dumby
dumby's picture

Buckaroo Banzai,

If I were speaking to someone, such as a good friend, who reads the New Republic and The Spectator, I would probably, dishonestly, agree with you and label fascism as "communism" - for the sake of building bridges with well-intentioned, potential allies.

However, I treasure language, where it can be defined, with some strong references, in current usage and history.

I think "National Socialism" is a useful equivalent for "fascism", as it clearly identifies fascism as a collectivist - or, as you might say, "communist" ideology.

See Jonah Goldberg's "Liberal Fascism" as for a reference on this point of view.

However, I think I disagree with Goldberg: though fascism claims collectivist intent, this is simply a smokescreen to mollify the masses, while some 0.01 percent reap the lion's share of rewards, from all "public" projects.

"Communism", as defined by Karl Marx, was a utopian society, which would result AFTER the "withering away of the state". This definition seems equivalent to anarchy, which results from a period of brainwashing, aka "Dictatorship of the Proletariat", after which all individualistic impulses have been eliminated [usually by the practice of geonicide, though Marx didn't write much about such little details as the "Great Leap Forward" or the "Cultural Revolution"].

The world has, so-far, never experienced any such thing as "communism", though many have abused the term, still we have the Communist Manifesto to inform us on proper usage, rather than rely on avowed "anti-communists" to define the term.

Some words burn bridges, some build them.

"Communism" and "Capitalism" mostly burn bridges. "Fascism" seems to build them.

I almost never use the word "capitalism" since it is misunderstood so much, and was never used by Adam Smith, but mostly used, in a derogatory fashion, by its chief detractor, Karl Marx.

Sat, 07/12/2014 - 23:53 | 4951547 Kirk2NCC1701
Kirk2NCC1701's picture

It's both public and private, and the circumstances dictate what it is at any given time?

Reminds me of the wave-particle duality of light. Interesting.

Sat, 07/12/2014 - 20:13 | 4951105 Bro of the Sorr...
Bro of the Sorrowful Figure's picture

nuke all the heads

Sat, 07/12/2014 - 21:42 | 4951313 Escapedgoat
Escapedgoat's picture

You mean 12 Tribes, right??

But the problem here is the THIRTEENTH TRIBE.


Sun, 07/13/2014 - 09:03 | 4951934 junction
junction's picture

A trip down the rabbit hole with no end in sight.

Sat, 07/12/2014 - 20:07 | 4951090 Duffy Duck
Duffy Duck's picture


try an foia request.

Sat, 07/12/2014 - 20:21 | 4951136 Da Yooper
Da Yooper's picture

Try doing it in yiddish & you will probably get a reply

Sat, 07/12/2014 - 20:09 | 4951093 nmewn
nmewn's picture

Of course they dodge serf taxation, they're creatures of Congress! ;-)

Sat, 07/12/2014 - 20:12 | 4951100 A Lunatic
A Lunatic's picture

Even God endorses the use of Federal reserve notes, or so I read.........



Sat, 07/12/2014 - 20:59 | 4951214 813kml
813kml's picture

I could see the Fed explaining away their vig as God's endorsement fee that they are collecting on his behalf.

Sat, 07/12/2014 - 20:12 | 4951102 Jendrzejczyk
Jendrzejczyk's picture

What's 6% of 1.7 trillion per year add up to? The answer is: Enough to buy a government.

Sat, 07/12/2014 - 20:15 | 4951109 pachanguero
pachanguero's picture

Criminals everyone of them.  

but "what difference does it make now"  We have to do something about the "children" coming here.

Sat, 07/12/2014 - 20:18 | 4951118 A Lunatic
A Lunatic's picture

If you think about it there isn't really a problem under the sun that can't be at least partially resolved through the judicious use of the common guillotine........

Sat, 07/12/2014 - 20:43 | 4951182 Winston Churchill
Winston Churchill's picture

Talking of them.

What do you suppose was in Mosul university's biology lab, if they had 88 lbs of

LE uranium in the physics one.

And if you wanted to vector that across the USA if you were ISIS.

Pneumonic plague outbreak in Colorado reported today.Victim supposedly caught it from his dog.

Blacks Vetinary begs to differ on canine plague's existence.

Ellis Island was a disease quarrantine station ,as its primary purpose,first.


Sat, 07/12/2014 - 20:17 | 4951117 Bro of the Sorr...
Bro of the Sorrowful Figure's picture

can someone please tell me why adblock is no longer blocking the ads? been away a couple weeks and obviously missed something.

Sat, 07/12/2014 - 20:51 | 4951197 kraschenbern
kraschenbern's picture

click on the ad blocker icon and reconfigure.

Sat, 07/12/2014 - 20:20 | 4951129 Miffed Microbio...
Miffed Microbiologist's picture

The worst thing about these criminals is they can admit this with a smile on their faces.


Sat, 07/12/2014 - 20:49 | 4951194 813kml
813kml's picture

The next US fiat currency should be printed with brown ink to properly indicate its intrinsic value.

Sat, 07/12/2014 - 20:55 | 4951205 Winston Churchill
Winston Churchill's picture

Scheiss dollar.

Sat, 07/12/2014 - 21:16 | 4951267 813kml
813kml's picture

Jim Willie has been prophetic about many things.

Sat, 07/12/2014 - 23:37 | 4951519 putaipan
putaipan's picture

but nice to see lars sited around here.

Sat, 07/12/2014 - 20:21 | 4951133 Reaper
Reaper's picture

The bank is private when a government fiat says it's private. It's public when a government fiat says it's public. Consistency is the weakness of a lessor mind.

Sat, 07/12/2014 - 20:25 | 4951148 Seasmoke
Seasmoke's picture

Sounds just like Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. When are the people going to wake up. You are at WAR !!!! (And you are losing badly)

Sat, 07/12/2014 - 20:46 | 4951189 Mempo of Twilight
Mempo of Twilight's picture

If I steal 5% of your wealth each year then I am a theft, but if the government does that it is doing its job. 

There is a reason why the government is always interested in education.

Sat, 07/12/2014 - 20:33 | 4951157 Duffy Duck
Duffy Duck's picture

'ownership' exists in different forms.  So far as I can tell, the FRS is federal when it benefits them [property taxes, immunity] and private when it benefits them [profits, secrecy].

It certainly isn't purely private, but We The People have no kind of equity interest in it, or in it ability to print money.

What matters is the issuing power aspect.  The issuing power is absolutely, positively in the FRS' hands, and it most assuredly has on its "private" hat in the exercise of that power.  It can print trillions, give it to foreign banks or individuals, and resist inquiry by Congress absent, perhaps, a full audit - which it may be able to resist anyway on the basis of being private.

Amending [or better, sure, revoking] the Federal Reserve Act is the only thing for it.  There is no reason for the 6% - tens of billions, ot be siphoned off the top, and for that matter, there is no reason to have the large banks acting as middlemen taking a cut when the government sells bonds to get FRNs. 

All in all, and if nothing else, it is a fantastic giveway to privately owned banks paid back in blood sweat and tears by US taxpayers who could sorely use that money for healthcare, education, and rent.


The fact "progressive" economists defend, however tacitly, this absurd system means that they are either fundamentally ignorant of it, or they labor under the misconception that this skim is the price of independence.

That we can not find out who truly owns the power to print the public currency is fucking absurd.

Sat, 07/12/2014 - 22:56 | 4951458 Lanka
Lanka's picture

JFK attempted to curtail the Fed monopoly on fiat.

Sat, 07/12/2014 - 20:43 | 4951178 honestann
honestann's picture

You think your questions are a mess?

Try to get an answer to this simple question:

The "dollar bill" is called a "federal reserve note".  A "note" is a debt.

Answer the following question for any specific one dollar bill...

#1:  Who owes the debt.

#2:  Who do they owe the debt to.

#3:  Exactly what does the debtor owe?

Good luck getting answers to those questions.

The emperors new notes.

Sat, 07/12/2014 - 21:03 | 4951229 GreaterFool1965
GreaterFool1965's picture

#1 - the government of the U.S.A.

#2 - the holder of the note

#3 - another dollar bill with a different serial #


Brialliant!  A ponzi scheme where the 'new' money can be printed into deposits by the private regional fed banks and given to their 'shareholders' the banks!  Those banks can then charge anyone who wants to borrow the just printed out of thin air money a rate of interest.  Great work if you can get it!

Sun, 07/13/2014 - 02:19 | 4951372 honestann
honestann's picture

So where & why does the federal reserve come in?  Why is it called a federal reserve note?  Someobdy should ask Yellen these questions.

Sun, 07/13/2014 - 11:08 | 4952196 Buckaroo Banzai
Buckaroo Banzai's picture

The answer you will get is this: " in order to isolate the currency emitting and regulation function from the vagaries of the political process, those responsibilities were delegated to a quasi-independent system of regional banks."

To paraphrase Woody Allen, it is a creature with the body of a crab and the head of a Certified Public Accountant.

Mon, 07/14/2014 - 17:19 | 4956952 honestann
honestann's picture

I didn't say the following (but should have).

What I want is two answers.

#1:  What the predators-that-be claim.

#2:  What is the official legal fact (if one exists).

People are inventing all sorts of strange theories, and that's fine.  But that's not what I'm interested in.  I want a specific answer from the federal reserve or US treasury.  Not necessarily an answer to me personally, but a document somewhere (on the federal reserve website for instance) that states what THEY claim.

Once we have their SPECIFIC claims, we can move forward.

But without a specific answer... ANYTHING GOES.

Which is, indeed, what the predators-that-be want.

Sun, 07/13/2014 - 15:08 | 4953018 withglee
withglee's picture

The Federal Reserve is the score keeper. He keeps track of trader's promises which he has certified, such certificates then circulating as items of simple barter we call money. He monitors for delivery on the trader's promises by collecting the certificates as agreed and extinguishing them. He monitors for defaults and collects a like amount of interest assuring zero inflation of the media of exchange in the marketplace.

We need a different score keeper. The one we have is cheating ... by design.

Sat, 07/12/2014 - 22:16 | 4951379 old naughty
old naughty's picture

Great answers, GF.

Sun, 07/13/2014 - 00:18 | 4951578's picture

As the holder of the note I believe you are an unsecured creditor:

Definition of 'Unsecured Creditor'

An individual or institution that lends money without obtaining specified assets as collateral. This poses a higher risk to the creditor because it will have nothing to fall back on should the borrower default on the loan. A debenture holder is an unsecured creditor. 
Sun, 07/13/2014 - 02:24 | 4951692 honestann
honestann's picture

But federal reserve notes are definitely not money.

If the holder is creditor, who is the debtor?

Sun, 07/13/2014 - 11:12 | 4952205 Buckaroo Banzai
Buckaroo Banzai's picture

Absent gold, the note is backed by the taxing authority of the Federal Government. That means the debtor is the taxpayer.

This is why the reach of the IRS extends across the globe.

Sun, 07/13/2014 - 15:04 | 4953003 withglee
withglee's picture

Nonsense. The marketplace as a whole is the creditor. The debtor is obligated to return the money. If he doesn't, it must be returned through interest collections of amount equaling the default. That guarantees the marketplace zero inflation of the media of exchange ... all the time ... everywhere.

Sun, 07/13/2014 - 15:01 | 4952984 withglee
withglee's picture

You think your questions are a mess?

Try to get an answer to this simple question:

The "dollar bill" is called a "federal reserve note".  A "note" is a debt.

Answer the following question for any specific one dollar bill...

#1:  Who owes the debt.

The trader who created it by making a trading promise that spanned time and space.

#2:  Who do they owe the debt to.

The marketplace in which the debt is now circulating as money and being freely exchanged as an item of barter because it doesn't lose its value over time and space. When the trader creating the debt delivers on his trading promise he returns the money he created and it is extinguished. For example: You buy a house for $100,000 with a promise to pay back in 100 monthly payments of $1,000. You have created $100,000 worth of certificates which you give to the seller. The seller then does what he wants with those certificates (that money) using them in simple direct barter transactions. You, the buyer, then do similar trading  and each month you acquire through simple barter (usually working for an employer who pays you in money) $1,000 worth of certificates. You return them and they are extinguished. You do this 100 months and you have completed your trading promise. None of the money you created then circulates in the marketplace. It has all been recovered and extinguished.

#3:  Exactly what does the debtor owe?

The debtor (the trader who created the money by making a trading promise to deliver that spanned time and space) owes the marketplace the return and extinguishing of the money he created for his trade. His trading promise is defined by amount and repayment schedule. If he fails to deliver as agreed and return the money, the money he has left in circulation (which is now diluting other trading promises) is recovered through interest collections exactly equal to the default. This interest is borne by other traders in his class of irresponsible traders. The more irresponsible the trader (i.e. higher propensity to default), the higher interest he pays.

Good luck getting answers to those questions.

Guess you're in luck. Any more questions?

The emperors new notes.

Has nothing to do with the emperor. It has to do with traders and the marketplace in which they efficiently trade. Just remember: "money is a promise to complete a trade". Federal Reserve Notes are our (badly mismanaged) medium of exchange making trades over time and space possible. The emperor (our governments) are just traders like you and I ... except they default "all" the time. They call it rolling over their debt. But that's failure to deliver as promised ... it is default.


Mon, 07/14/2014 - 03:39 | 4954682 honestann
honestann's picture

ignore... ZH malfunction

Mon, 07/14/2014 - 03:42 | 4954683 honestann
honestann's picture

Yes, you gave answers, but the answers are definitely WRONG, at least in part.  Just for starters, look at your answer to #2.

No way can some vague non-existent like "the marketplace" be either a debtor or debtee.  That's just bogus floating abstraction crazy spin talk.  But that kind of nonsense works on most people, because their brains are programmed by decades of exposure to nonsense to accept complete nonsense as answers.

Jedi Mind Tricks, Sith Mind Tricks, predator-that-be mind tricks, and your attempts at mind tricks don't work on me.

The fact is... if anyone asked these questions of Janet Yellen, she would refuse to answer.

Money is NOT a promise! That's a completely insane claim.

Mon, 07/14/2014 - 12:44 | 4954888 withglee
withglee's picture

Yes, you gave answers, but the answers are definitely WRONG, at least in part.  Just for starters, look at your answer to #2.

No way can some vague non-existent like "the marketplace" be either a debtor or debtee.  That's just bogus floating abstraction crazy spin talk.  But that kind of nonsense works on most people, because their brains are programmed by decades of exposure to nonsense to accept complete nonsense as answers.

Ever hear of a mutual insurance company? That's one way we see the concept being used over many many decades. So now you must drop your "no way" superlative and deal with the issues little girl.

Jedi Mind Tricks, Sith Mind Tricks, predator-that-be mind tricks, and your attempts at mind tricks don't work on me.

It does take a modicum of intelligence. But you appear to have at least enough of that to grasp these simple concepts.

The fact is... if anyone asked these questions of Janet Yellen, she would refuse to answer.

So what? Do you have any respect for Yellen and how she might respond to anything?

Money is NOT a promise! That's a completely insane claim.

Money is "obviously" a promise and I have repeatedly demonstrated why. Examine trade: 1) Negotiation; 2) Promise to deliver; 3) Delivery. In simple barter, 2 and 3 happen simultaneously on the spot. In such instances, money (certified trading promises) exchange as items of simple barter. Why? Because they don't lose their value over time and space (unless mismanaged as with the Fed ... yielding a 4% annual leak in value), and because they are universally accepted (with the illusion they're backed by the full faith and credit of the government ... which is laughable as they are the worst deadbeat traders ... but that is the illusion and you will buy it many times in your trading today ... in spite of your denial).

Now, how did this money get created? Simple. A trader made a trading promise and got it certified. An easy example to see and understand is someone getting a mortgage to buy a house. This allows them to enter into a trade over time and space (i.e. 3 happens sometime later, at a different place, and after many intermediate trades). The money is created at closing and circulates in the marketplace until the promise is delivered on (or default is mediated by like interest collections)

If you say this is not money then you must be prepared for at least 2 challenges yourself: (1) what part of this obvious description of the creation of money can you refute and how? And (2), give me your definition of money and be prepared to defend it.

Money is simply a necessary efficiency brought to simple barter.

Don't run away little girl. Answer this reply ... I answered yours. And please, try to grow up and save the slurs for the sophomores.

Todd Marshall
Plantersville, TX

Mon, 07/14/2014 - 17:04 | 4956872 honestann
honestann's picture

I PROVED you were wrong about money previously.  All you do when people PROVE you wrong is ignore it and assert your stupid nonsense endlessly like a parrot.  Which is what you are intellectually... a parrot.

#1:  Negotiation is negotiation.

#2:  Agreement is agreement.

#3:  A promise is a promise.

#4:  Goods are goods.

#5:  Money is gold.

#6:  A transaction is the EXCHANGE of goods for goods.

A transaction can be an exchange of any goods for any goods.

A transaction can be an exchange of any goods for gold (another good, but a special case).

The first transaction does not involve "money" (gold).

The second transaction does involve "money" (gold).


Everything IS WHAT IT IS.

You promote these convoluted insane wacko ideas that some dimwit (probably the federal reserve or their apologists) concocted to confuse everyone.

But the REALITY is simple.  Just read the above... step by step.

A is A.  Each thing or each process IS WHAT IT IS.

Your nonsense is pure nonsense.

Mon, 07/14/2014 - 21:26 | 4957625 withglee
withglee's picture

I PROVED you were wrong about money previously.  All you do when people PROVE you wrong is ignore it and assert your stupid nonsense endlessly like a parrot.  Which is what you are intellectually... a parrot.

I feel terrible. How did I miss your proof? Please provide me a link and I will study it thoroughly. But really little girl, your slurs are truly anoying and accomplish nothing.

#1:  Negotiation is negotiation.

Agreed. First step in any trade.

#2:  Agreement is agreement.

Agreed. It is the essence of what is step 2 ... promise to deliver. Negotiation doesn't necessarily lead to agreement and more often than not, agreement is attained without negotiation (i.e. the negotiation is implicit ... potato chips cost $3.00) , but that isn't at issue here.

#3:  A promise is a promise.

Agreed. But when it is what is being traded, it is different than other types of promises ... someone promising something and getting nothing in return ... no trade there.

#4:  Goods are goods.

Agreed. And services are services. So what? Goods are just one possible object of trade ... not even the most common. The most common is services. The employee providing services to the employer.

#5:  Money is gold.

If that is the case, I submit you have "never" entered into a trade involving money. I know I haven't. I've bought gold but I didn't give gold for it ... I gave FRNs. And the gold I got I can't buy potato chips with. All this time I thought I was buying potato chips with money ... and so has everyone else I've ever known. And the FRN and the Euro and the Franc and the Mark ... none are money and never have been? They're clearly not gold. So, since I am talking about the most common of objects of trade ... and it's not gold, so it's not money, then what is it? And if money is gold, is the reverse true? Is gold money? How about the gold on the contacts within this computer? Is that money?

#6:  A transaction is the EXCHANGE of goods for goods.

So when I buy a house and seller gets FRNs from me, which I get from a mortgage company in exchange for my promise to return them in 100 equal monthly payments ...  that's not a transaction? I would submit a trade of goods for goods almost never takes place. I can't remember when I made such a trade. Please describe to me the last such trade you made.

A transaction can be an exchange of any goods for any goods.

Right. But give me an example of such a transaction that you recently made. Tell me what percent of all your transactions can be considered goods for goods transactions ... like corn for a pig.

A transaction can be an exchange of any goods for gold (another good, but a special case).

And what makes that case special?

The first transaction does not involve "money" (gold).

Have we switched contexts? What is the "first" transaction?

The second transaction does involve "money" (gold).

What is the second transaction? Is there a third. I'm sorry, I have lost the context of your last two statements.


I know. But then that depends on what "this" is now doesn't it?

Everything IS WHAT IT IS.

Not exactly. Some things are what they stand for ... not what they are. The FRN I buy potato chips with does not stand for paper. But it is paper. A $10 FRN and a $100 FRN have essentially the same amount of ink and paper and other stuff ... but one stands for 10 times as much as the other.

You promote these convoluted insane wacko ideas that some dimwit (probably the federal reserve or their apologists) concocted to confuse everyone.

Your slurs are starting to get annoying. Grow up.

But the REALITY is simple.  Just read the above... step by step.

I read thoroughly and annotated. Now don't you dodge. What of those step by steps have I misunderstood that is the essence of our disagreement here? I'm particularly interested in your giving me the instances I ask for. From what you write, I don't think I have ever entered into a transaction that involved money. And all this time I thought the vast majority of my transactions involved money. If they didn't involve money (gold), what did they involve?

A is A.  Each thing or each process IS WHAT IT IS.

Then perhaps you can explain to me how today I exchanged (A), a five dollar FRN ... a piece of paper with printing that's hard to counterfeit (i.e. hard to pass a copy off as same), for (B), a bag of pretzels and a Dr. Pepper (one a reformulation of wheat and the other a reformulation of water and sugar). B may be B in this instance, but A is a piece of paper, and in this transaction it clearly stood for something else. And in the next transaction involving it, it will stand for something else again. I could not  have substituted a page out of a three ring notebook and made the same trade, yet both the FRN and the notebook page are paper aren't they.

Your nonsense is pure nonsense.

That being the case, your reply is anxiously awaited.  But don't cop out. If it's nonsense you can't just dispel it. You need to illustrate what about it is nonsensical. I've dissected what I write thoroughly. It all makes perfect sense in it's smallest component and as a whole. If it doesn't, show where it doesn't ... don't just declare it doesn't.


R? So you're not really honestann?

Todd Marshall
Plantersville, TX

Tue, 07/15/2014 - 00:09 | 4958028 honestann
honestann's picture

Well, FRN are fraud.  Exactly what kind of fraud they are is not clear.  And in fact, it may not be possible to figure out the exact nature of the fraud completely.

Yes, I have traded gold (and silver) for goods many times.  I have also traded goods for gold (and silver) many times.  Yes, I realize that is not very common any more, but back in the 1920s it was extremely common, since your coins WERE gold and silver.

A deal on a house is a very involved process.  It is NOT even "one transaction".  Due to various laws (and perhaps prudency), there are many elements and many processes involved in that process.

The fact is, whenever a mortgage is involved and whenever any FRNs are involved, the actually correct term for the interaction is FRAUD.  It is not possible (at least for me) to completely untangle the whole mess.

However, if the federal reserve and the US treasury would answer all my questions that started this tread, I could at least make a serious theoretical attempt to characterize what was happening.  But they won't, and so I can't.

However, I can say this.  Fiat anything is not real.  It is fake, fraud, fiction, fantasy.  That's the essense of what fiat means.  One problem is, every interaction that involves fiat currency is fundamentally and unavoidably fraudulant.  No transaction with FRN (or the computer bit equivalent) is honest or ethical.  Since fiat is nothing, all so-called "transactions" involving that fiat are not transactions.  Only one side received anything real, and THAT is FRAUD.

However, the law (and the police-state thugs who enforce said fictional law) require people to accept transactions in these non-existent fiat nothingnesses called FRNs.  So people do.  And because humans are able to accept and habituate the most monumentally insane notions and actions, and make them "second nature", almost all so-called transactions today are fraudulant, bogus, and not actually transactions at all (since one side gave nothing real to the other in exchange for something of value).

So no, I can't untangle the exact nature of this scam, because the predators-that-be refuse to even answer those most basic possible questions about their FRNs.  But I do know what they're not, which I just outlined.


Look, it is impossible to untangle your confusion, because you refuse to observe even the most simple facts when put in front of you.  Let me give you an example with #1 above, where you CLAIM to agree, but in fact you do not.

You claim to agree that "negotiation is negotiation".  But then immediately you contradict yourself.  You claim negotiation is part of trade.  NO.  NO.  NO.

This CANNOT be true.  Let me show you why... very simply.  You can negotiate, and then NOT agree to terms and NOT trade.

Which means... again...

#1:  negotiation is negotiation (not trade).

#2:  agreement is agreement (not trade).

and so forth.

And think about it.  Please SLOW DOWN and think about this.  Don't just rush on by and fail to notice what I'm pointing at (whether you agree or not).  Negotiation is INDEPENDENT of agreement.  Negotiation is INDEPENDENT of trade.  Agreement is INDEPENDENT of trade.

How can I know this?

Simple!  We can negotiate and never agree.  We can agree but never trade or transact.

Which means... these are SEPARATE actions.  And as a result, a sane consciousness recognizes this by NOT trying to make them mish-mashed together like you are trying to do.


But we can be even more thorough... so let's go there.

You can walk into a store, see a product with a price tag, NOT perform any negotiation at all, just set down the specified price on the counter and walk out with your goods.

AGAIN we see... trade and transaction without any negotiation.  We might be able to agree there was a tacit, implicit "agreement" in this process, but even that is stretching the term "agreement".  What actually happened is... you just TRADED.

Because negotiation is not ANY part of most trades and transactions, it is completely WRONG to claim that negotiation is part of trade or transaction.  I've just demonstrated this two separate ways, from two separate perspectives.

And in #2 above you talk about "promise to deliver".  In the example I just gave, THERE ARE NO PROMISES.  You picked up the candy bar, set a coin on the table by the cashier, and walked out of the store.

I cannot perform psychological analysis on you here, so I cannot figure out why you are so anxious to pretend that simple concepts and simple actions do not exist.  THEY DO.  As I just demonstrated.  And they are extremely common, in fact dominant.  Vastly more trade and transaction occurs WITHOUT any negotiation happening before the trade or transaction than WITH a negotiation process.

And further, to create the kind of incredibly convoluted mis-mash combinations and permutations that you advocate is crazy!  You'd need to invent one concept to identify each of the following:

negotiation + agreement + trade
negotiation + agreement + half-a-trade + promise-to-deliver + delivery
no-negotiation + agreement + trade
no-negotiation + no-agreement + trade
no-negotiation + agreement + half-a-trade + promise-to-deliver + delivery

and... dozens if not hundreds of more perverted concepts.

Seriously, I haven't even scratched the surface above!  Add in loans and credit-cards, debit-cards, store-credit-cards, layaways, delayed-payment-plans... and the endless wealth of ways buyers and sellers jerk themselves and each other around to complicate simple transactions... and you have thousands or millions of combinations and permutations... each of which you'd have to invent a term and concept for.

If you want to do this... go right ahead.

HOWEVER... you are NOT allowed to steal our basic concepts and pretend they are one of the thousands of wacko Rupe-Goldberg convolutions that you want to create.


The fact is, you can't even create convoluted concepts that MEAN ANYTHING unless you HAVE simple concepts to combine in various ways to create them.  So your attempt to DESTROY all the simple concepts would necessarily leave you without the tools to create complex concepts.

If we allowed you to take our simple and fundamental concepts and remove them from existence by re-defining them as massively convoluted messes... we would have no tools to think about the simple, fundamental actions that we need to take.

We won't let you do that.

We need to remain sane and coherent to live successfully.

So no matter how hard you try to convince us to SCREW UP OUR BRAINS, we refuse.  And I explained why... because we need those simple, fundamental concepts in order to think clearly and act rationally.

And guess what?  Even us "simple-minded fools" who only have those simple and fundamental concepts can... achieve anything we want.  We can do the following in order:

#1: negotiate
#2: agree or not
#3: exchange goods or not
#4: borrow or not
#5: loan or not
#6: promise or not
#7: deliver later or carry away now

... and so forth.

We have NO PROBLEM operating in the real world with these simple and fundamental concepts.  Do you know what?  Because they are real actions.  We can decide to take or not take each action.  We are completely flexible.  We are not constrained to whatever combination, permutations and orders you decide are appropriate.  We will decide those things FOR OURSELVES.

What you are trying to do is decide them for us.  We refuse.  We will take action after action after action to move in the direction we wish, and attempt to achieve the results we desire.  Very simple.  No propaganda required.  No fiat, fake, fraud, fiction, fantasy concepts required... whether they come from you or Janet Yellen.


Yes, I rarely exchange corn for pigs.  But you see, now you have fallen right smack square onto the bullseye of the situation that justifies the concept MONEY.

As you imply, when you have corn, and you want pigs, you have a problem.  You will have one hell of a time finding someone who:

#1:  has pigs
#2:  wants corn
#3:  wants as much corn as one pig is worth

And so, you and everyone else who trades goods for goods will have a miserably inefficient life, trying to find people who have what you want, who want what you have, and can divide things up in ways that work for both people involved (in terms of quantities).

Which is where MONEY comes in.

What is the point of money?  The answer is:

#1:  the two-step process.
#2:  a real, physical, valuable good.
#3:  a conventional standard for pricing.

Let's look at these one by one.

What is the two-step process?  This simply means you make two trades instead of one.  For example, previously you were trying to trade corn for pigs.  That's a one-step process (trade corn for pig).  The alternative is the two-step process, which means: trade corn for gold coins, then trade gold coins for pig.  That's two steps.

On the surface, you might complain and say "two steps is twice as much work as one".  Well, in terms of counting you're correct.  But this will be explained by #3 above in a moment.

The second point is... MONEY is a real, physical good.  It is NOT a piece of paper.  It is NOT a receipt for something.  It is NOT a claim.  It is NOT a debt.  Only a real, physical good can be MONEY.  If you don't see why yet, keep reading.  But hint, hint, hint... when you trade real goods for other real goods of equivalent value --- the transaction is DONE, both sides are HAPPY and FINISHED, and NO PROMISES of future behavior or goods are involved.

The third point is... MONEY is a standard.  For practical purposes, money is a standard in the same way as 120VAC @ 60Hz is standard electricity in the USSA and 240VAC at 50Hz is standard electricity in most other locations.  Or a standard like driving on the left side of the road versus the right side of the road.

Which means, MONEY does not have to be gold.  It could be silver.  It could be platinum.  It could be fully charged 3.6 volt @ 1AH litium-ion batteries.  ALL that is required is... common convention.  In other words, a standard.

Why is this important?  Why is it important or convenient for only ONE real, physical good to be considered MONEY (as a matter of convention, not force or law) ???  Again, the answer is simple.

When "grams of gold" are MONEY, then everyone who produces ANY product whatsoever can simply decide on and set the price for his goods in terms of MONEY.  Or in other words, "how many grams of gold I charge for a dozen of my eggs".

Now, once everyone does this (as a matter of convention), everyone everywhere can figure out the exchange rate between ANY good and ANY other good... simply by dividing the price of the first good (in grams of gold) by the price of the second good (in grams of gold).  You now have the price of the first good in terms of the second good.  Bingo!  Presto!  Done!

And this very simple process works on ANY goods, and ANY NUMBER of goods.

That's all there is to MONEY.  Very simple indeed.  But take away ANY of those requirements and... what you are talking about is NOT MONEY.

If you try to substitute something that has no value to be money... well... NOBODY in their right mind will trade their valuable goods for something worthless.  You'd have to hold a gun to their head to make them trade something valuable for something worth NOTHING.  Which is PRECISELY what the federal government does when they force people to accept fiat, fake, fraud, fiction, fantasy, fractional-reserve debt-soiled toilet-paper for real, physical valuable goods (or services).  The ONLY reason sane people accept NOTHING for valuable goods is... the cops will cage or kill them if they refuse.

And, of course, if people didn't price their goods in terms of some standard good, then figuring out how much of your good to trade for other goods would be... an extremely difficult and imprecise endeavor.  So #3 is also crucial.  Whatever is the good that people price in... that is MONEY.

Just because predators and their paid thugs force humans to act stupid doesn't change anything.  If you hold a gun to most people's head, they will do almost anything they are commanded to.  And that's where we are today.  But don't let that fool you.  FRN are NOT money.  In fact, nobody knows exactly what they are, and probably they aren't even anything specific (which the banksters just love).

This explains why you can get pretzels for a worthless piece of paper (your $5 bill that you call a FRN).  Because if they owner of the store refuses, he is shut down, caged, or killed by the thugs who work for the predators-that-be.  But that doesn't make FRNs into money.  That makes FRNs into fiat, fake, fraud, fiction, fantasy nonsense.

Don't tell me to grow up.  I grew up, while you and almost everyone else remained blind, either by choice or by laziness or perhaps by honest inability to grasp reality (in a very few cases).  I have explained CLEARLY and FUNDAMENTALLY at every single step.  And every single time you just ignore what I say, and continue to repeat your completely WRONG and NONSENSICAL ideas.  I really did try to go slow, be very clear, step-by-step.  And I explained why... here in this message again for the nth time.

You can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink.
You can lead a mind to reality, but you can't make it think.

Which is a problem. 

Tue, 07/15/2014 - 15:26 | 4958483 withglee
withglee's picture

Ok. I have read your complete rant and it reveals you to be a very disturbed little girl. You are behaving like a caged animal.

Let's try this a little at a time:

You say:

Yes, I have traded gold (and silver) for goods many times.  I have also traded goods for gold (and silver) many times.  Yes, I realize that is not very common any more, but back in the 1920s it was extremely common, since your coins WERE gold and silver.

I asked for a specific instance. What good did you trade to get the gold? What good did you get for which you gave gold in return? And if you have done this many times ... give me your three most recent instances.

Try to contain yourself. If you won't answer my questions as enumerated, I will deliver them to you one at a time to try to keep you on point. The above question is very direct and objective. Try to answer it without a rant. 

Tue, 07/15/2014 - 21:07 | 4961183 honestann
honestann's picture

I did an experiment about 3 years ago before I left the evil empire for good.  I went around to stores and attempted to convince them to accept gold or silver for their products.  I tried to buy every product I could this way, just as an experiment, to see how few or many places and products I could convince to trade their products for gold and silver.

At first it was tough.  The first month of my experiment I was only able to trade gold or silver at a few places.  One of the first to agree was a Fry's Electronics store, where I traded 1oz gold and silver wafers (not coins, technically) for hard disk drives, wireless router and many other goods.  It was a long time ago now, so I forget exactly which other products I purchased.  But once the manager of the store agreed, everything I wanted to buy at that store was easy.  He trained two employees (casheirs) how to look up the value of the gold or silver bars on the APMEX website to compute the price of the items in grams or ounces of gold (generally ounces).

About 3 months later I finally convinced the manager at a Whole Foods store to accept my gold and silver wafers, and I purchased endless food, herb and vitamin items at their store in the months following.

I eventually found a Shell gas station to accept my gold and silver.

He called his friend, a manager at a Sam's Club, and convinced him to also accept my gold and silver.  In that specific case I had to shop when he was at the store and not trade directly with any of the cashiers.  How he managed these transactions behind the scenes, I don't know.  But I suspect he just charged the items on his personal account and pocketed the gold and silver wafers I gave him, since he did scan all items at a self-checkout (with cards in his wallet, not mine).

My landlord was one of the last holdouts.  Once I convinced him to accept gold, I was at the point where I could buy over 90% of everything with gold and silver.

Was this process a bit difficult and time consuming?  Yes.

Did this process restrict the number of places I could shop with gold and silver?  Yes.

But I had a rule too.  I never purchased anything that I didn't want to buy, or pay extra for anything.  To do so would spoil the experiment.

I don't know whether those include my very last 3 trades.  I stopped the experiment when I moved out of the evil empire.  But I don't know why you need to know the last 3 individual trades.  I simply don't recall.  But I gave you 3 specific places where I traded gold for dozens or hundreds of items each.

This was an experiment, after all, so I don't claim it proves much of anything beyond the fact that more and more people are coming to think of gold and silver as something worth trading for in recent years.

Those trades and transactions were FINISHED the moment I handed them the gold/silver, and they handed me the bag full of goods.  NO PROMISES.  NOTHING for either of us to do in the future.  NO risk of non-payment.  NO need for collection.  Those were trades that were complete, because they were trades of real, physical, valuable goods for other real, physical, valuable goods.


I should correct one thing I stated previously.  You could make a technical argument that "gold is not money" because of item #3 in my list.  No longer is it common for most people and stores to price their goods in grams of gold.  On that basis, you can at least argue that "gold is not currently treated as money".  That's on the edge of being a reasonable argument.  However, the fiat pieces of trash that people often call money definitely do not qualify as money, because they fail the most important requirement (they are not real, physical, valuable goods).  The fact that people and stores don't immediately know the "price" of their goods in terms of grams of gold is a result of the fraud and force applied by the predators-that-be and their armed thug agents to destroy real money.  But the effort to figure out the price in gold is minor, so at worst gold and silver are far closer to money than anything else.  Plus, every honest investigator understands perfectly well from thousands of years of history (plus careful personal observation and thought) why gold is the best material to be conventional money that humans have ever found.

Wed, 07/16/2014 - 08:56 | 4962187 withglee
withglee's picture

I value your replies. I will use them in my book. Can we take this offline? It's getting difficult to communicate in this medium and clearly, no one is watching.

Please message me at Todd at WithGLEE dot com and include WITHGLEE in the subject line. I look forward to hearing from you.


Todd Marshall
Plantersville, TX

Sat, 07/12/2014 - 20:57 | 4951210 New_Meat
New_Meat's picture

they b people, don't cha' know. - Ned

Sat, 07/12/2014 - 21:02 | 4951222 Notsobadwlad
Notsobadwlad's picture

It probably does not escape people that in order for the those behind the global central banks to create globalized central control then must first destroy and/or absorb the individual and regional central banks and local control.

The people will not understand and simply agree to giving up their nationality, free will and power. People must be tricked into giving it up. They must believe that the UN and the BIS (or whatever central controlling powers are presented) is needed to get something that they cannot otherwise get... be it peace, security, safety, prosperity ... whatever the intended pitch may be.

The US government (and all country governments) must become deplorable failures and the individual central banks must become failures ... in the eyes of the people. In this way a global master can, when appropriate present a preferred alternative.

Why bother with the people at all, if the power has so much power to corrupt and control? Because power without those to have power over is useless. And, to rule completely by force is difficult to maintain over the ling run.

Sat, 07/12/2014 - 21:03 | 4951230 Chuck Knoblauch
Chuck Knoblauch's picture

How many times do we have to shoot this dead horse?

The Federal Reserve is a CARTEL!

An association of manufacturers or suppliers with the purpose of maintaining prices at a high level and restricting competition.

Sat, 07/12/2014 - 21:57 | 4951339 honestann
honestann's picture

How many times do we have to shoot this dead horse?


Sun, 07/13/2014 - 00:01 | 4951561 Kirk2NCC1701
Kirk2NCC1701's picture

If the dead horse won't die, you need to shoot it in the head or decapitate it.
Then burn it.

Sat, 07/12/2014 - 23:44 | 4951247 Freewheelin Franklin
Freewheelin Franklin's picture

The Federal Reserve System does not need to be audited, it needs to be abolished...if they audited the Federal Reserve System, they will find out it is doing exactly what it is supposed to do. 


G Edward Griffin 





And even when it is doing things that it shouldn't be doing, no one gives a fuck.

Sat, 07/12/2014 - 21:31 | 4951294 earleflorida
earleflorida's picture

Great read, Thankyou

Sat, 07/12/2014 - 22:47 | 4951437 ekm1
ekm1's picture


Sun, 07/13/2014 - 04:21 | 4951757 debtor of last ...
debtor of last resort's picture

Welcome back.

Sat, 07/12/2014 - 23:53 | 4951550 Lanka
Lanka's picture

The Fed is in charge due to their ability of print infinite amounts of fiat to buy influence in and control of all levels of government and big business.  A popular uprising (ala the Storming of the Bastille in 1789 initiating the French Revolution and the elimination of 40,000 of the oligarthy and large landowners) is not possible as the PTB have their own heavily militarized DHS, Law Enforcement Agencies, mercenaries, etc. to prevent such actions.  Only the military would be able to make the DHS, etc. to stand down.  

Sun, 07/13/2014 - 01:11 | 4951637 SameAsItEverWas
SameAsItEverWas's picture

“Let me issue and control a Nation’s money and I care not who writes the laws.”

Mayer Amschel Rothschild (1744-1812)

Sun, 07/13/2014 - 01:13 | 4951640 Bunga Bunga
Bunga Bunga's picture

Partners in crime.

Sun, 07/13/2014 - 01:42 | 4951661 QQQBall
QQQBall's picture

You don't need a title search. Simply access the County Assessor and/or Tax Collector websites.

Sun, 07/13/2014 - 05:06 | 4951775 GreatUncle
GreatUncle's picture

Federal Reserve with Private Banks.

Lol the only 6% return now take all your worth and acheive 6% YOY not for just 1 YEAR FOR ALL ETERNITY WITHOUT FAIL. That's a nice little earner run that since 2018 ... and just keep reinvesting everything into the same system (note the government guarantee).

A Keynes levdel return and even then you would likely never truly achieve it with your worth being devalued through the artificially genenrated inflation is only 2%? WTF!!!!!

Can anyone else see what has been done here? Talk about a licence to print money for yourself YOY. AS a comaprison 1 dollar now at 2% as per Keynes the guideline and 6% the fed guarantee. Remember you might not be able to sell the shares but you can invest the value with shares in the safe as gaurantor can you not?  Know how to work out compound interest?

1 dollar at 2% YOY reinvesting, 7.24 dollars after 100 years ...

1 dollar at 6% YOY the same way a stonking value of 339.30 dollars...


That 339.30 dollars or equivalent value as it cannot be trade can it be taxed as a property tax and I got a fuzzy feeling that this would be TAX FREE although the value could be used to guarantee other trades.

Expect all central banks to operate this way.



Sun, 07/13/2014 - 07:45 | 4951854 no more banksters
no more banksters's picture

US debt held by the Federal Reserve at the end of 2013: A new record high!

Banksters “print” more money than ever!

Sun, 07/13/2014 - 08:21 | 4951883 WTFx10
WTFx10's picture

"The issue which has swept down the centuries and which will have to be fought sooner or later is the people versus the banks."
John Dalberg Lord Acton

A War we'd like to hear that's happening?

 The Swiss government has reported large multiple explosions at the BANK of International Settlements.We are getting reports most of the complex has been destroyed.Civilian deaths have been minimized since the attacking force has used a tactic borrowed from the IDF by sending a small missile into the buildings to warn the bank employees to flee!

 There are reports coming in that,the IMF headquarters and World Bank are also being attacked along with central banks tied to the BIS in multiple countries. We are getting reports that the host nations military's are attacking these institutions of crime. All of the buildings have massive destruction.The US Federal reserve systems banks are also coming under attack from the US Air Force!!

 We are now getting reports that Rothschild and Rockefeller controlled corporations and personal estates are being systematically destroyed. Reports are coming in that National armies are rising up against the gangstered money cartel.
    Are we witnessing the dawn of a truly new world order? Where national sovereignty is restored to the planets nations as the private banking cartel is destroyed and persecuted for the theft they have legalized?


Sun, 07/13/2014 - 08:52 | 4951913 deflator
deflator's picture

Follow Kabuki theatre seems more appropriate than, "follow the money".

Sun, 07/13/2014 - 09:58 | 4952017 Jumbie
Jumbie's picture

New York Fed pays property tax

Go to:

33  Liberty St Manhatten



Total New Charges Due by July 01, 2008 $1,319,187.54 Total Amount Due by July 01, 2008 $1,319,187.54 Amount Not Due but That You Can Choose to Pay Early $1,319,187.54 Savings if You Choose to Pay Early $-39,575.63 Total Amount You May Pay by July 01, 2008 $2,598,799.45
Sun, 07/13/2014 - 10:19 | 4952065 messystateofaffairs
messystateofaffairs's picture

What normal person has time to ingest deliberately obfuscated FED gobblygook. It's a ziojew crookshit organization that needs to be ended and it's fiat theif product that parades as money replaced with free market selected specie money. Knowing more than that is not necessary unless its personal knowledge of how to circumvent this con game in your own personal financial affairs until the sheeple hopefully wake up enough to fuck this thing out of existence.

Sun, 07/13/2014 - 10:26 | 4952081 joethegorilla
joethegorilla's picture

O hell yea. Keep this up ZH.

Sun, 07/13/2014 - 12:08 | 4952396 Pumpkin
Pumpkin's picture

The fed is a private corporation in which the government has interests.  The FOIA is a farce.  It is a statutory method and is usable by any entity, such as a corporation.  The federal government employees and officers are servants of the people.  They are employed by the people and owe the people a fiduciary duty.  That duty includes the duty of disclosure, and therefore for the people, no FOIA is needed.  Now since the government has interest in the fed, the people also have an interest in the fed.  The feds officers owe a fiduciary duty to all those who hold interest, including the people.  FOAI is a statutory fiat for the duty of disclosure.  Don't use it if you are one of the people.

Mon, 07/14/2014 - 03:28 | 4954678 dvfco
dvfco's picture

As per the suggestion to search Block 35, Lot 1 - Here is the tenant list I received by using proprietary software to which I subscribe.  Notice, it runs from A-U - AIG to Goldman to the US Defense Dept., etc.

However, curiously, they list the property as 77-93 Front Street. a/k/a 28-36 Peck Slip a/k/a 46-48 South Street a/k/a 1 Financial Square.  

Maybe they've got their underground tunneling systems confused.  But, I'm sure you could call any of the businesses shown below and they'd fill you in on the details...

Meanwhile, the last transfer of the building appears to be:  $751,000,000 on 8/29/07 - between Old Slip Properties and Fsqr L P.


AIG Global Real Estate   Business (646) 857-2300 2012 Add to Address Book B New York Mellon Group   Business (212) 825-0860 2014 Add to Address Book Brownstone Agency Inc 8 Business (212) 962-5620 1998 Add to Address Book C O Frank Crystal & Co Inc 17 Business (212) 344-2444 2012 Add to Address Book Cb Richard Ellis 3 Business (212) 797-9840 2009 Add to Address Book Chartis Aerospace   Business (212) 785-1352 2012 Add to Address Book Chartis Healthcare   Business (212) 797-3750 2012 Add to Address Book Chase Bank   Business (212) 747-9248 2013 Add to Address Book City Access   Business (631) 858-1280 2009 Add to Address Book Clintton Group Inc   Business (212) 825-0096 2013 Add to Address Book Cls Bank Intl 21 Business (212) 943-0003 2013 Add to Address Book Crystal & Co Inc 17 Business (212) 344-2444 2012 Add to Address Book Daiwa Asset Management   Business (212) 612-6250 2007 Add to Address Book Daiwa Capital Markets Amer Inc   Business (212) 612-7000 1965 Add to Address Book Daiwa Capitol Mark   Business (212) 612-6700 2007 Add to Address Book Daiwa Finance Corp   Business (212) 612-7000 2012 Add to Address Book Daiwa Institute Research Ltd   Business (212) 612-6100 2007 Add to Address Book Daiwa Securities Trust Co 32 Business (212) 509-8622 2009 Add to Address Book Ferry News Stand   Business (212) 785-8381 2011 Add to Address Book Focal Communications   Business (212) 785-2411 2006 Add to Address Book Forex Capital Markets LLC   Business (212) 480-3626 2013 Add to Address Book Four Ex Capital Market   Business (212) 897-7660 2013 Add to Address Book Frank Crystal & Co Of NY Inc 17 Business (631) 287-4200 2009 Add to Address Book Goldman Sachs Asset Management   Business (212) 357-0726 2012 Add to Address Book Hip 7 Business (212) 806-4000 2008 Add to Address Book Hip 7 Business (212) 514-6253 2011 Add to Address Book Hip Data Ctr   Business (212) 510-3000 2011 Add to Address Book Hudson River Trading 30 Business (212) 293-1444 2009 Add to Address Book Hudson River Trading LLC 30 Business (212) 293-1444 2014 Add to Address Book Jager Smith Pc   Business (212) 683-3520 2011 Add to Address Book Mercury Technology   Business (212) 483-0300 2013 Add to Address Book Millennium Group Of Delaware   Business (212) 937-6067 2005 Add to Address Book Murphy & Jordan Inc   Business (212) 962-5620 1992 Add to Address Book Nine Alpha Capital 403 Business (646) 205-6200 2013 Add to Address Book Pbm LLC   Business (212) 425-0393 2013 Add to Address Book Provident Group   Business (212) 742-1877 2005 Add to Address Book Questrion Research Corp 34 Business (212) 558-1055 2013 Add to Address Book Santos Shop   Business (212) 477-4210 2013 Add to Address Book Swett & Crawford 5 Business (212) 871-0739 2012 Add to Address Book Swett & Crawford Group Inc 5 Business (212) 791-9745 1990 Add to Address Book Tfs Energy Futures LLC 34 Business (212) 943-6916 2010 Add to Address Book Tfs-Icap LLC 34 Business (212) 943-6916 2014 Add to Address Book Us Defense Dept   Business (646) 428-3900 2009 Add to Address Book

I guess it's a little interesting.


By the way  -annual taxes on the property are $8.6m, but maybe they don't pay dime as they are a tenant and it is not included in their lease?  C'mon - do you really think there is truly a way of getting to the bottom of this without an overthrow of the government - and private government - controlling our monetary system? 

The difference is, today, they'd just have to hit the delete button on their computers rather than burn the rioutous crowd climbed the stairwells.  

It might get 9-11'd if anyone got too curious.

Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!