National Debt reaches $14.3 Trillion!! Financial Terror

[Guest LAW]

"What we do know for sure is that in the next decade the upward pressure on federal spending is going to be very, very large," says Ms. Rivlin, who also worked as President Clinton's budget director and is now at the Brookings Institution. "It's not so much the aging of the population as the fact that spending on medical care has been rising faster than GDP."

 

In March 2006, the total U.S. government debt is approximately $8.3 trillion ($8,283,025,171, 750 or in scientific notation $8.3×1012). Debt held by the public: $4,809,044,449,061.17 and Intragovernmental holdings is $3,461,844,667,128.51. The deficit on trade in goods and services widened $33 billion in real terms, subtracting 1.2 percentage points from real GDP growth.

 

What is the Debt Held by the Public?

 

Debt Held by the Public -- Is all Federal debt held by individuals, corporations, state or local governments, foreign governments, and other entities outside of the United States Government less Federal Financing Bank securities. Types of securities held by the public include, but are not limited to, Treasury Bills, Notes, Bonds, TIPS, United States Savings Bonds, and State and Local Government Series.

 

What are Intragovernmental Holdings?

 

Intragovernmental Holdings -- Government Account Series securities held by Government trust funds, revolving funds, and special funds; and Federal Financing Bank securities. A small amount of marketable securities are held by government accounts.

 

Once again the federal government has reached its "debt ceiling," and once again Congress is poised to authorize an increase in government borrowing. The result is that National Debt interest payment is now the third largest item in the federal budget. Soon our government will reach the point where it can no longer keep up with its monthly bills to foreign creditors.

 

"Running a deficit" is sometimes proposed as a short term economic stimulus (Democrats tend to mean an increase in spending, Republicans tend to mean a decrease in tax rates, the Bush Administration achieved both); but the after-effects can be a long term drag, either in the form of an eventual tax increase or higher interest rates to cover the increase in government debt.

 

Debt destroys U.S. sovereignty, because the American economy now depends on the actions of foreign governments. While we brag about our role as world superpower in international affairs, we are in truth the world's greatest debtor. Like all debtors, we are not truly free. China and other foreign government creditors could in essence wage economic war against us simply by dumping their huge holdings of U.S. dollars, driving the value of those dollars sharply downward and severely damaging our economy. Desmond Lachman, an economist at the American Enterprise Institute, states that foreign central banks "Now have considerable ability to disrupt U.S. financial markets by simply deciding to refrain from buying further U.S. government paper." Former Treasury secretary Lawrence Summers warns about "A kind of global balance of financial terror," noting our dependency on "the discretionary acts of what are inevitably political entities in other countries."

 

If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their money, first by inflation and then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them, will deprive the people of their property until their children will wake up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered. - Thomas Jefferson

 

Ultimately, debt is slavery. Every dollar the federal government borrows makes us less secure as a nation, by making America beholden to interests outside our borders. So when you hear a politician saying America will do "whatever it takes" to fight terrorism or rebuild Iraq or end poverty or provide health care for all, what they really mean is they are willing to sink America even deeper into debt. We're told that foreign wars and expanded entitlements will somehow make America more secure, but insolvency is hardly the foundation for security. Only when we stop trying to remake the world in our image, and reject the entitlement state at home, will we begin to create a more secure America that is not a financial slave to foreign creditors.

 

Is it possible to repay the debt by simply printing more money?

 

While common knowledge says just printing more money is destructive to an economy, and results in inflation, there is no historical evidence that this occurs. The truth is that the wealthy few make money off our deficit. Did you know that the Federal Reserve is a private a organization of private and international banks that does not answer to the United States government. Plus there are no precious metal reserves that back the money they issue. Even a casual look at the Fed's history leads one to wonder how an institution that profits mightily from their own policies has maintained control over the money of the wealthiest nation on Earth. For those who have made a serious inquiry into the Federal Reserve, they have found it is shadowed in deceptive origins and fraudulent policies.

 

The FED began with approximately 300 people or banks that became owners (stockholders purchasing stock at $100 per share - the stock is not publicly traded) in the Federal Reserve Banking System. They make up an international banking cartel of wealth beyond comparison. The FED banking system collects billions of dollars in interest annually and distributes the profits to its shareholders. The Congress illegally gave the FED the right to print money (through the Treasury) at no interest to the FED. The FED creates money from nothing, and loans it back to us through banks, and charges interest on our currency. The FED also buys Government debt with money printed on a printing press and charges U.S. taxpayers interest. Many Congressmen and Presidents say this is fraud.

 

Who actually owns the Federal Reserve Central Banks?

 

ABN AMRO Bank, N.V., New York Branch

BNP Paribas Securities Corp.

Banc of America Securities LLC

Barclays Capital Inc.

Bear, Stearns & Co., Inc.

CIBC World Markets Corp.

Citigroup Global Markets Inc.

Countrywide Securities Corporation

Credit Suisse Securities (USA) LLC

Daiwa Securities America Inc.

Deutsche Bank Securities Inc.

Dresdner Kleinwort Wasserstein Securities LLC.

Goldman, Sachs & Co.

Greenwich Capital Markets, Inc.

HSBC Securities (USA) Inc.

J. P. Morgan Securities Inc.

Lehman Brothers Inc.

Merrill Lynch Government Securities Inc.

Mizuho Securities USA Inc.

Morgan Stanley & Co. Incorporated

Nomura Securities International, Inc.

UBS Securities LLC

 

How did it happen? After previous attempts to push the Federal Reserve Act through Congress, a group of bankers funded and staffed Woodrow Wilson's campaign for President. He had committed to sign this act. In 1913, a Senator, Nelson Aldrich, maternal grandfather to the Rockefellers, pushed the Federal Reserve Act through Congress just before Christmas when much of Congress was on vacation When elected, Wilson passed the FED. Later, Wilson remorsefully replied (referring to the FED), "I have unwittingly ruined my country"

 

I am not stating that I know the answers to a huge problem, but I do know that the Fed members love our Dollar.

 

http://www.cbo.gov/

http://www.federalre...gov/general.htm

http://www.fms.treas...etin/index.html

http://www.newyorkfe...rs_listing.html

[Guest NY Times : Carl Hulse]

Just hours after opening a new line of credit through an increase in the federal debt limit, the Senate splurged on a bevy of popular programs before approving a spending plan that was as much a political document as an economic one, its fine print geared to the coming elections. Lawmakers, analysts and others said the Senate's reluctance to clamp down on spending was a natural result of an approach that fails to recognize a sharply changed reality. In some respects, the administration and Congress act as if the surplus that greeted President Bush when he checked into the White House is still in the bank, rather than recognizing that whatever windfall was available then was eaten up and more by tax cuts.

 

The reality is that the cuts, plus two wars, new domestic security needs, natural disasters and a big expansion of Medicare have left the government's account badly overdrawn with no prospect of getting it back in balance anytime soon. The criticisms set out by many Democrats — that no real progress can be made in setting the nation's finances right until Congress proves willing to revisit the tax cuts and that the nation is failing to invest sufficiently in addressing its economic and social ills — do not receive much of a hearing in a Washington where Republicans are in charge....

 

"I think the critical flaw is the failure to adjust fiscal policy in the face of new circumstances," said Robert L. Bixby, executive director of the Concord Coalition, a bipartisan group that advocates reducing the deficit through spending cuts and tax increases. Mr. Bixby and others say the Republican-controlled Congress and the Bush administration have shown a near total disregard for fiscal discipline, running up new debt. "The problem we have had on the budget all along is a lack of adult supervision on the part of the White House," said Bruce Bartlett, an economist and author of a new book critical of Mr. Bush's economic record. "You can't blame members of Congress for looking out for their parochial interests. It is the president's responsibility to look out for the national interest."

 

With the president's influence on Capitol Hill slipping along with his poll numbers, it is unclear how much authority Mr. Bush could exert over lawmakers regardless. Senate Republicans showed no hesitation about bursting through the spending ceiling he set, adding more than $16 billion after eliminating some of his cuts....Almost lost in all the budget and spending activity was that House and Senate negotiators continue to try to hammer out an agreement for new tax cuts that could cost an additional $70 billion over five years.

 

Read More Here

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/18/politics/18budget.html

[Guest Fact Checker]

In the 2007 State of the Union Address President Bush called for fiscal restraint and claimed credit for cutting the federal deficit in half:

 

What we need is to impose spending discipline in Washington, D.C. We set a goal of cutting the deficit in half by 2009, and met that goal three years ahead of schedule.

 

Actually, Bush inherited a budget with a comfortable surplus, and then ran up enormous deficits that continue to the present. Under Bush, the national debt (debt held by the public) has increased by more than $1.5 trillion. The annual deficits peaked at $413 billion in fiscal year 2004, and has declined since then. But in fiscal year 2006 (which ended last Oct. 31) the deficit was still $248 billion. The latest estimates from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office project a further reduction in the current fiscal year, to $172 billion. That would indeed be less than half the worst of Bush's deficits, but it would be only two years prior to fiscal 2009, not three.

 

As for spending restraint, Bush has shown little if any to date. He allowed spending to soar 42 per cent during his presidency, and didn't veto a single spending bill. (His only veto was of a bill to loosen restrictions on federally funded stem-cell research.) He did sign massive tax cuts, and revenues increased only 21 per cent during the same period.

[Guest Mr. Kotter]

The federal budget deficit was about $107 billion in the first quarter of fiscal year 2008, CBO estimates—about $27 billion more than in the same period last year. Outlays have risen by 9 percent compared with their level in the first three months of 2007, whereas revenues have grown by about 6 percent.

 

Our country has been in a sorry state for the past seven years. With its currency sinking like a pebble in a pond, its manufacturing sector disappearing like a snowball on a summer pavement, its political system disintegrating, and an endless, pointless, self-declared global war on an ill-defined terrorism, the worse might yet be off in the near future. Only its unparalleled capacity for self-deception allows the US media to continue to parrot the incredible official declarations that things are going well at home and abroad.

 

Let's Get serious about lowering the corporate tax rate. Countries around the world are doing it. (Tax Foundation backgrounder.) Major U.S. trading partners, including Germany, France and Spain all recently have cut theirs and the United States is on its way to having the highest corporate tax rate in the OECD. If you want to grow business in the United States -- and attract new investment -- cutting the corporate rate is a great start.

[Luke_Wilbur]

As of 01/31/2008 Total Public Debt Outstanding 9,238,008,288,942.11

 

http://www.treasurydirect.gov/NP/BPDLogin?application=np

 

Monthly Interest on the Public Debt $106,138,177,851.45

 

Congressional Budget Office estimates that if today’s laws and policies did not change, federal spending would total $2.9 trillion in 2008 and revenues would total $2.7 trillion, resulting in a budget deficit of $219 billion. That deficit could increase significantly if legislation is enacted to provide economic stimulus—as is currently under consideration. Furthermore, additional funding that is likely to be needed to finance military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan could add $30 billion to outlays this year.

 

http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/89xx/doc8933/01...Testimony.shtml

[Guest Congressman Ron Paul]

Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke testifies twice every year before the congressional Financial Services committee, and I look forward to these opportunities to raise questions about monetary policy. I believe monetary policy is critically important yet overlooked in Washington. Money is the lifeblood of any economy, and control over a nation's currency means control over its economic well being. Fed bankers quite literally determine the value of our money, by controlling the supply of dollars and establishing interest rates. Their actions can make you richer or poorer overnight, in terms of the value of your savings and the buying power of your paycheck. So I urge all Americans to educate themselves about monetary policy, and better understand how a small group of unelected individuals at the Federal Reserve and Treasury department wield tremendous power over our lives.

 

The following are some excerpted comments from my opening remarks at the hearing with Mr. Bernanke:

 

Transparency in monetary policy is a goal we should all support. I've often wondered why Congress so willingly has given up its prerogative over monetary policy. Astonishingly, Congress in essence has ceded total control over the value of our money to a secretive central bank.

 

Congress, although not by law, essentially has given up all its oversight responsibility over the Federal Reserve. There are no true audits, and Congress knows nothing of the conversations, plans, and actions taken in concert with other central banks. We get less and less information regarding the money supply each year, especially now that M3 is no longer reported.

 

The role the Fed plays in the President's secretive Working Group on Financial Markets goes unnoticed by members of Congress. The Federal Reserve shows no willingness to inform Congress voluntarily about how often the Working Group meets, what actions it takes that affect the financial markets, or why it takes those actions.

 

But these actions, directed by the Federal Reserve, alter the purchasing power of our money. And that purchasing power is always reduced. The dollar today is worth only four cents compared to the dollar in 1913, when the Federal Reserve started. This has profound consequences for our economy and our political stability. All paper currencies are vulnerable to collapse, and history is replete with examples of great suffering caused by such collapses, especially to a nation's poor and middle class. This leads to political turmoil.

 

Government officials consistently claim that inflation is in check at barely 2%, but middle class Americans know that their purchasing power--especially when it comes to housing, energy, medical care, and school tuition-- is shrinking much faster than 2% each year.

 

We look at GDP numbers to reassure ourselves that all is well, yet a growing number of Americans still do not enjoy the higher standard of living that monetary inflation brings to the privileged few. Those few have access to the newly created money first, before its value is diluted.

 

For example: Before the breakdown of the Bretton Woods system, CEO income was about 30 times the average worker's pay. Today, it's closer to 500 times. It's hard to explain this simply by market forces and increases in productivity. One Wall Street firm last year gave out bonuses totaling $16.5 billion. There's little evidence that this represents free market capitalism.

 

In 2006 dollars, the minimum wage was $9.50 before the 1971 breakdown of Bretton Woods. Today that dollar is worth $5.15. Congress congratulates itself for raising the minimum wage by mandate, but in reality it has lowered the minimum wage by allowing the Fed to devalue the dollar. We must consider how the growing inequalities created by our monetary system will lead to social discord.

 

How can a policy of steadily debasing our currency be defended morally, knowing what harm it causes to those who still believe in saving money and assuming responsibility for themselves in their retirement years? Is it any wonder we are a nation of debtors rather than savers?

 

We need more transparency in how the Federal Reserve carries out monetary policy, and we need it soon.

[Guest Jim]

Without much dispute, the US Economy has relied too heavily upon its service sector, but also upon its financial sector to generate bubble after bubble on phony illicit wealth. The economic and banking leaders then engaged in systematic propaganda and false inculcation to deceive the public into accepting the doomed philosophy.

[Guest John Shadegg]

While the short-term ramifications of Washington’s corruption and fiscal promiscuity are disturbing, the long-term consequences for our children and grandchildren should give every American cause for serious concern. Because Congress chooses to spend far more than is collected in current taxes, the government must borrow money to fund our largess.

 

And borrow we have, to the point where our current national debt is a whopping $9.2 trillion dollars — or more accurately $9,193,315,468, 899.43 as of December 21, 2007. That translates to $30,323.94 of debt for every man, woman, and child in America.

 

Who, exactly, is lending us all this money? Well, Japan has lent us $586 billion. We owe Communist China $400 billion. Our “friends” in Saudi Arabia and other oil producing nations have lent us $123 billion. And here is the really bad news: they expect us to pay them back — with interest. In fact, we paid $430 billion in interest on our debt last year alone.

 

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MjgyZ...TcwYTNjN2YzZDc=

[Guest Gal Luft]

It would be a gross injustice to blame the Chinese, from whom we borrow one billion dollars per day or the oil countries, from whom we buy oil for another billion, for our plight. After all, Americans are known for their exuberant spending, gas guzzling and low saving rates. With net foreign debt in access of $3 trillion and with annual current account deficit of $600-$700 billion a year the U.S is the world’s

largest debtor nation.

[Guest Tom Edwards]

The federal government disbursed $2.45 trillion in domestic spending in 2006, according to two reports published by the U.S. Census Bureau. That represented an 7.5 percent increase in federal spending over 2005.

 

The first of the new reports, Consolidated Federal Funds Report: 2006, provides a broad overview of how and where the federal government allocates funds. Statistics are provided for each federal department and agency, and presented by state, county and subcounty area.

http://www.census.gov/prod/2008pubs/cffr-06.pdf

 

The second report, Federal Aid to States for Fiscal Year 2006, contains data on federal grants to state and local governments.

http://www.census.gov/prod/2008pubs/fas-06.pdf

 

Defense spending totaled $400 billion in 2006. This amount includes procurement contracts, payroll, military pensions and grants. Department of Homeland Security spending totaled $57 billion.

 

Per capita spending among states was highest for Louisiana ($16,263). Mississippi was second ($14,516), followed by Alaska ($13,805). The states that received the lowest per capita distribution of federal funds were Nevada ($5,852), Utah ($6,162) and Minnesota ($6,175).

 

California received 10.3 percent of the total distribution of federal expenditures while Texas received 6.8 percent, followed by New York at 6.2 percent.

 

Nearly half of all domestic government spending (excluding interest on the federal debt) went to Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, which accounted for $1.16 trillion. The one-year increase in spending for these three programs was approximately $170 for every person living in the United States.

 

The government spent $739 billion on retirement and disability. Of that amount, 80 percent, or $594 billion, went to Social Security. Social Security was comprised of retirement insurance payments ($350 billion), survivors insurance ($107 billion), disability insurance ($99 billion) and supplemental security income payments ($38 billion).

 

The remaining federal dollars spent on retirement and disability went to civilian government workers’ retirements ($59 billion), military retirements ($36 billion) and veterans’ benefits ($34 billion).

 

California received the largest share of civilian federal government employee retirement and disability dollars ($5 billion), followed by Virginia ($4 billion). Florida received the most in military retirements ($3.7 billion), while Texas received the largest share of veterans’ benefits ($3.1 billion).

 

Other highlights:

 

* The federal government spent $569 billion on direct payments other than retirement and disability, which included hospital insurance ($188 billion), supplemental medical insurance ($161 billion), earned income tax credits ($38 billion), food stamps ($30 billion), unemployment compensation ($28 billion), agricultural assistance ($28 billion), federal employment health and life programs ($21 billion) and housing assistance ($9 billion).

 

* Procurement contracts for the federal government totaled $409 billion in 2006 with most going to the Defense Department ($266 billion). The Army received the largest share ($83 billion), followed by the Navy ($73 billion), the Air Force ($60 billion) and other defense ($50 billion).

 

* Among the $143 billion procured by nondefense agencies, the Department of Energy had the largest amount ($22 billion), followed by the Department of Veterans Affairs ($16 billion), Postal Service ($15 billion), Homeland Security ($15 billion), General Services Administration ($12 billion) and National Aeronautics and Space Administration ($11 billion).

 

* In addition to procurement funding, the federal government issued grants totaling $494 billion. Of these, Health and Human Services accounted for $283 billion, followed by Transportation ($58 billion), Education ($38 billion), Housing and Urban Development ($37 billion), and Agriculture ($26 billion).

 

Federal government direct expenditures for retirement and disability, direct payments, grants and procurement are provided for each state and county area.

 

Population figures used to calculate per capita for the 50 states, the District of Columbia and all counties come from the 2006 population estimates and can be found at http://www.census.gov/popest/counties/CO-EST2006-01.html.

The data in these reports are not subject to sampling variability but are subject to nonsampling errors, which include errors of response and processing.

[Guest Stewart A. Alexander]

Recently, the U.S. economy has become the number one concern with a majority of Americans; and as President Bush attempts to hold together the U.S. economy during his final six months in office, it is likely it will become the responsibility of the next president to offer a national plan that will move the nation forward and to restore the confidence of the American people.

 

Today, working people are concerned with a broad range of issues that are presently threatening their financial well-being; those issues include job security, smaller paychecks, affordable housing, soaring gasoline and food prices, health care cost, the value of the U.S. dollar, inflation and the expanding U.S. recession.

 

Most working families are earning less than what they earned when President Bush became president in 2000; and with all the promises that were made by the Democrats in the House and Senate in 2006, conditions have gone from bad to worse for working people over the past 18 months. The price of gasoline has increased by more than $2.00 per gallon and the Democrats have chosen to invest in war while millions of Americans are finding it difficult to keep up with the rising cost of food.

 

The campaign rhetoric of Obama and McCain is failing to connect with a majority of working people; both candidates represent political parties that have failed to ease the massive loss of jobs nationwide. Recent employment data indicates that more than 320,000 jobs have been lost in the past six months and more than 79,000 for the months of May and June of this year.

 

Both McCain and Obama are promising to invest in clean and energy efficient technologies to create jobs and to revamp foreign policies to protect U.S. jobs; however, both candidates represent political parties that are whole selling jobs to foreign markets and have only invested in new technologies that are in the interest of special interest groups and technologies that are military related.

 

Both McCain and Obama have failed to offer any viable plans for the battered U.S. economy. Obama recently proposed his own version of a national stimulus package that would amount to another $50 billion. The $168 billion stimulus package that was presented by the Bush administration has failed to stimulate the sagging U.S. economy; and it is likely Obama’s stimulus proposal would only create an additional tax burden on working people and add to the national debt.

 

Obama is also calling for government subsidies for health care, college and for those retired; however, his plan would require him to tax the nation’s top earners and the special interest groups that have helped his campaign the most.

 

With less than four months before the 2008 Election, both McCain and Obama have failed to offer an economic road map that will alter the course of the U.S. economy; a course that has many signs indicating more trouble ahead.

 

Stewart Alexander says, “The U.S. economy needs a fundamental transformation, focusing on production for need not profit;” as stated in the National Platform of Socialist Party USA. Alexander says the campaign of his U.S. Presidential running mate, Brian Moore, is not about reforming the process, “our campaign is about changing the process.”

 

Unlike McCain and Obama, Presidential Candidate Brian Moore is demanding the immediate withdrawal of the United States from the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and the Central America Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA), and Moore opposes the creation of a widened Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA).

 

As the presidential nominee for Socialist Party USA and a presidential candidate seeking the nomination of the Peace and Freedom Party, Brian Moore supports the platforms of both the socialist parties. Both socialist parties are calling for worker and community ownership and control of corporations within the framework of a decentralized and democratically determined economic plan. To the contrary, Obama and McCain support an economy that is based upon corporate profits, dominated by the capitalist ruling class and a few massive corporations.

 

Brian Moore is also calling for a minimum wage of $15 per hour, indexed to the cost of living. The presidential candidate has also presented a plan that will provide full employment and he supports the provisions of a livable guaranteed annual income.

 

Moore and Alexander believes it is possible to provide health care for all; Alexander says all financial and insurance institutions must be socially owned and operated by a democratically-controlled national banking authority, which should include credit unions, mutual insurance cooperatives, and cooperative state banks.

 

Alexander says the makeover that is needed for the U.S. economy will be much broader than the New Deal that was introduced during the Roosevelt administration; the New Deal helped to pull the nation out of the Great Depression. Socialists believe only a global transformation from capitalism to democratic socialism will provide the conditions for international peace, justice, and economic cooperation based on the large-scale transfer of resources and technology from the developed to the developing countries.

 

Two things are for certain, there is no easy fix for the ailing U.S. economy, and Barack Obama and John McCain are not prepared to make the necessary changes that will protect the interests of working people. Comparing the economic plans of the two candidates, it does not matter whether McCain or Obama is elected in the 2008 Election; the economic programs that have been outlined by both candidates will only produce minor differences to the present Bush White House.

[Guest Bobby_*]

Congress has raised the debt ceiling some 48 times over the past 68 years, and they will continue to do so until the voters demand that it stops.

[Guest TheOffice]

The real truth is our intelligence-military-fiscal complex is raping the treasury and our political system is not strong enough to stop them.

[Guest Doug Page]

AN ILLUSTRATION OF THE WAY THE PRIVATE BANKING SYSTEM MAKES HUGE PROFITS OUT OF THIN AIR

 

Let’s use $10,000 as an example to understand the process.

 

The Federal Reserve Bank buys $10,000 of US debts called Treasury Bills from the US. Where does the Fed get the money? The Fed creates it out of thin air. This is the first bit of magic. This is authorized by the Federal Reserve Act of 1913, and is a questionable delegation by Congress of its own power to “coin money and regulate the value thereof. It is the ultimate in privatization. It is an authorization for the Fed and the banks to counterfeit actual hard money. Other federal laws make this counterfeit money legal tender for the payment of all debts and taxes.

 

The Fed then loans this $10,000 to a bank and requires the bank to pay the current federal funds rate as interest. This $10,000 becomes a “liability” of the bank, but the bank immediately loans this money to a borrower, but in double entry bookkeeping, this $10,000 loan becomes an “asset” of the bank from which the bank can make further loans. Here is where the second bit of magic occurs called “fractional reserve banking.” The reserve is not gold or any other hard asset. The “reserve” is debt.

 

The bank is permitted by the Fed to loan 90% (or more) of that $10,000 loan to make a second loan of $9,000 which also becomes an “asset” of the bank from which the bank can make a third loan of 90% or $8100 and continuing to a maximum of 10 times the first $10,000 or $100,000.

 

The bank “earns” interest on this magic $100,000 created out of thin air which is the source of the bank’s immense Ponzi-like profit. A bank can earn more profit by borrowing more from the Fed and loaning it. This explains why the banks are so eager to give us credit cards.

 

By federal law, this money created out of thin air is “legal tender” and must be accepted in the payment of debts and taxes. The backup security is not gold, but “the full faith and credit” of the United States.

[Guest FYI]

Our national is debt is 11 trillion.

[Guest LPAC]

In uttering his lame excuses for looting the treasury to fatten the swindlers, this current President has left us with the fact, that the only way the U.S. could survive, even almost two years later than July 25, 2007, is by reversing the intrinsically fraudulent "bail out" of Wall Street and London, to put the system into bankruptcy-reorganization, as I specified this then. In a choice between serving the swindlers and the people of the United States, President Obama has chosen the side of the swindlers who contributed so much to buy themselves his presently less than worthless Presidency.

 

The only hope for his Presidency, now, is that he must betray the swindlers who bought him his election; he must do this in order to serve the citizens of the U.S.A., people whose trust in him he has presently betrayed, and to whom he owes the burden of his declared oath of office.

[Guest K. Campbell]

The Economy Is So Bad...

 

* CEO's are now playing miniature golf.

* Jewish women are marrying for love.

* Even people who have nothing to do with the Obama administration

aren't paying their taxes.

* Hotwheels and Matchbox stocks are trading higher than GM.

* Obama met with "small" businesses to discuss the Stimulus

Package: GE, Pfizer and Citigroup.

* McDonalds is selling the 1/4 ouncer .

* Parents in Beverly Hills fired their nannies and learned their

children's names.

* A truckload of Americans got caught sneaking into Mexico .

* The most highly-paid job is now jury duty.

* People in Africa are donating money to Americans.

* Motel Six won't leave the light on.

* The Mafia is laying off judges.

 

 

And finally...

 

Congress says they are looking into this Bernard Madoff scandal.

Hey, neat...the guy who made $50 billion disappear is being investigated by the people who made $750 billion disappear.

[Guest Dwight_*]

The current IRS structure was created at the same time the Fed Reserve was created (1913 time frame) and this was no accident. The design was for us taxpayers to start paying National Debt interest payments into the bankers pockets that they engineered.

[Guest York]

Over the last six months the national debt skyrocketed by nearly $3 trillion. According to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, our national debt will more than double by 2019. Americans will have to pay for this stratospheric spending spree first by begging foreign nations to buy our bonds, and later through higher taxes and inflation.

 

Grassroots anger at the inability of Washington to live within a budget has been building for some time, and began to boil over in late 2007 as the Bush Administration and Treasury Secretary Paulson abandoned their claimed free market principles to bail out auto makers and Wall Street banks through TARP.

 

When newly-elected President Obama and his allies in Congress passed the $780 billion debt stimulus plan in February 2009, activists took to the streets.

 

On tax day, the tea party movement began in earnest. Until now the movement has remained at the local levels. No longer will that be the case. The movement is coming to Washington on September 12, 2009, for a march and rally at the U.S. Capitol.

 

From autos to banking, the government is crowding out the private sector of our economy. Where Bush bailed out the private sector, Obama is making hostile government takeovers. Ignoring our multi-trillion dollar deficit, Washington is considering a massive new energy tax and a takeover of health care.

 

On Saturday, September 12th, FreedomWorks will be joined by over ten thousand liberty-loving activists to take a stand against politicians who are bankrupting our future. National co-sponsors include Tea Party Patriots, ResistNet, National Taxpayers Union, Americans For Tax Reform, Young Americans for Liberty, Ayn Rand Center, Campaign for Liberty, Free Republic, Young America’s Foundation, Smart Girl Politics, and The Club for Growth.

 

The event will kick-off on September 10th and 11th with various events throughout Washington, including grassroots leadership training and Capitol Hill visits. The three-day event culminates on September 12th as taxpayers march on the Capitol building.

 

For more information, including media inquiries, registration, contacting event coordinators, and the schedule of events, please visit our event website at

 

http://www.912dc.org.

[JT Allen]

AN ILLUSTRATION OF THE WAY THE PRIVATE BANKING SYSTEM MAKES HUGE PROFITS OUT OF THIN AIR

 

Let’s use $10,000 as an example to understand the process.

 

The Federal Reserve Bank buys $10,000 of US debts called Treasury Bills from the US. Where does the Fed get the money? The Fed creates it out of thin air. This is the first bit of magic. This is authorized by the Federal Reserve Act of 1913, and is a questionable delegation by Congress of its own power to “coin money and regulate the value thereof. It is the ultimate in privatization. It is an authorization for the Fed and the banks to counterfeit actual hard money. Other federal laws make this counterfeit money legal tender for the payment of all debts and taxes.

 

The Fed then loans this $10,000 to a bank and requires the bank to pay the current federal funds rate as interest. This $10,000 becomes a “liability” of the bank, but the bank immediately loans this money to a borrower, but in double entry bookkeeping, this $10,000 loan becomes an “asset” of the bank from which the bank can make further loans. Here is where the second bit of magic occurs called “fractional reserve banking.” The reserve is not gold or any other hard asset. The “reserve” is debt.

 

The bank is permitted by the Fed to loan 90% (or more) of that $10,000 loan to make a second loan of $9,000 which also becomes an “asset” of the bank from which the bank can make a third loan of 90% or $8100 and continuing to a maximum of 10 times the first $10,000 or $100,000.

 

The bank “earns” interest on this magic $100,000 created out of thin air which is the source of the bank’s immense Ponzi-like profit. A bank can earn more profit by borrowing more from the Fed and loaning it. This explains why the banks are so eager to give us credit cards.

 

By federal law, this money created out of thin air is “legal tender” and must be accepted in the payment of debts and taxes. The backup security is not gold, but “the full faith and credit” of the United States.

 

That is HUGELY fascinating to me. How is this legal? What a friggin' scam! Right now I have to let it sink in as I cannot wrap my mind around this post ...

[Guest Enron Ex]

The more bonds lose ground, the more investors are likely to wonder whether the Federal Reserve will increase its current $300 billion program of buying Treasurys, which it launched in March to keep credit conditions loose throughout the recession-bound economy.

[Guest Richard in NY]

On Tuesday, Treasury suffered its worst five-year auction in history. Yet that news barely made a headline. The Treasury’s five-year auction yield was 2.69% with 21.15% allotted at the high and bid to cover was 1.92 to 1. The average of the past ten auctions has been 2.20%. Indirect, central bank participation was 35.7% versus an average of 36.8%. Overall that was weak demand. Do not forget the Treasury has to raise $2 trillion by 9/30/09. In addition, the $2 trillion or so of "government" issuance over the past year is greater than the $1.4 trillion peak total mortgage credit growth during 2005 and 2006.

 

Today’s credit crisis finance bubble will make the residential and commercial bubble look like a joke. Multiply by 5 or 10. Who knows where this can end up? Despite record debt issuance, the market will lend the Treasury three-month money at about 11 basis points (bps), or 0.11%. Two-year borrowings come at cost of about 100 bps. The price of Treasury notes and bonds inflates in spite of enormous deficits as far as the eye can see.

 

Instead of a movement toward constructing a more stable global credit system and backdrop, policymakers have instead jumped farther into the uncharted waters of unconstrained credit expansion.

[Guest Capitol Hill]

The economy could spiral into hyperinflation not seen since the early 1980s if the Federal Reserve does not tighten its monetary policy soon, Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) warned Tuesday.

 

Grassley, speaking about the renomination of Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke to a second term as head of the Fed, asserted that Bernanke's ability to hold down inflation would be the metric by which the Fed's success would be measured.

 

 

"We won't know for a year if he's done a good job so far, because he shoveled money out of an airplane to save banks and the financial system," Grassley said in a conference call with Iowa reporters. "But shoveling money out of an airplane to solve problems can be inflationary — in this case, hyperinflationary — if he doesn't start mopping up some of the money that's out there."

 

Grassley, the ranking member of the Senate Finance Committee, said that inflation as a result from government spending on bailouts could result in inflation rivaling rates in 1980, when it hit a peak of 13.5 percent.

 

"The Fed has the ability to put money out, it's got the ability to take money back in, and if they don't do that, we will have hyperinflation worse than we had in 1980 and '81," Grassley said. "And I hope he demonstrates that ability."

 

Grassley argued that while it would be a year until lawmakers will know whether Bernanke has been successful at bringing inflation under control, it would probably be best to keep the chairman on board for a second term as head of the Federal Reserve.

 

 

"I would suggest that right now, when everybody's nervous about the economy, that you don't change horses in the middle of the stream, and consequently, it would probably be detrimental to not have him reappointed,"

[Guest Human]

To give you folks how much money is a Billion Dollars?

If you were to count up to a BILLION DOLLARS, it would take you from birth till the person dies plus ten years afterwards to count to a Billion.

 

That’s just 1 Billion, now imagine 10 Billion? 100 Billion? 500 Billion? 1 Trillion?

Now Imagine the interest on the national debt? 1.4 trillion And counting, and that's with out Nationalized health care. Add 2 trillion more at least.

 

 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The economy could spiral into hyperinflation not seen since the early 1980s if the Federal Reserve does not tighten its monetary policy soon, Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) warned Tuesday.

 

Grassley, speaking about the renomination of Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke to a second term as head of the Fed, asserted that Bernanke's ability to hold down inflation would be the metric by which the Fed's success would be measured.

 

 

 

 

Grassley, the ranking member of the Senate Finance Committee, said that inflation as a result from government spending on bailouts could result in inflation rivaling rates in 1980, when it hit a peak of 13.5 percent.

 

 

 

Grassley argued that while it would be a year until lawmakers will know whether Bernanke has been successful at bringing inflation under control, it would probably be best to keep the chairman on board for a second term as head of the Federal Reserve.

[Guest Cyberian]

The largest currency reserve managers, namely China and Russia want a new alternative global reserve currency, including expanded SDR to incorporate the yuan and ruble.