There is nothing Federal about the deceptively named US 'Federal Reserve' (MUST SEE)

[rollingrock]

Run time: 07:37 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dpHp_deaBs8   Posted on YouTube: July 25, 2007 By YouTube Member: Views on YouTube: 0   Posted on DU: March 12, 2009 By DU Member: rollingrock Views on DU: 2279

 
Conspiracy theory or conspiracy fact?

The US Federal Reserve, the central bank of the United States, is a private corporation owned by shareholders, according to the Federal Reserve's own website. Who are the major shareholders of the Federal Reserve? Answer: the nations largest private banks are the major shareholders of the US Federal Reserve.
----------------------------------------


“The refusal of King George to allow the colonies to operate an honest money system, which freed the ordinary man from clutches of the money manipulators was probably the prime cause of the revolution”
-Benjamin Franklin

“I believe that banking institution are more dangerous than standing armies… If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of currency… the banks and corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the people of their property until their children wake up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered”
-Thomas Jefferson (1743-1826)

“If you want to remain slaves of the bankers and pay for the costs of your own slavery, let them continue to create money and control the nation’s credit”
-Sir Josiah Stamp (1880-1941)


So what is a central bank?

A central bank is an institution that produces the currency of an entire nation. Based on historical precedent, two specific powers are inherent in central banking practice: the control of interest rates and the control of the money supply, or inflation. The central bank does not simply supply a government's economy with money, it loans it to them at interest. Then through the use of increasing and decreasing of supply of money the central bank regulates the value of the currency being issued. It is critical to understand that the entire structure of this system can only produce one thing in the long run: DEBT. Or rather, debt enslavement


It's important to clearly understand, the Federal Reserve is a private corporation. It is about as "federal" as Federal Express. It makes its own policies and is under virtually no regulation by the US Government. It is a private bank that loans all the currency at interest to the Government, completely consistent with the fraudulent central banking model that the country sought to escape from when it declared independence in the American revolutionary war. Now, going back to 1913 the Federal Reserve Act was not the only unconstitutional bill pushed through Congress. They also pushed the Federal Income Tax. It's worthwhile to point out that the American public's ignorance towards the Federal Income Tax is a testament to how dumbed down and oblivious the American population really is...
----------------------


“Our great industrial nation is controlled by its system of credit. Our system of credit is privately concentrated. The growth of the nation, therefore, and all our activities are in the hands of a few men.. who necessarily, by very reason of their own limitations, chill and check and destroy genuine economic freedom.”

“We have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled and dominated governments in the civilized world –no government by free opinion, no longer a government by conviction and the vote of the majority, but a government by the opinion and the duress of small groups of dominant men.”
-Woodrow Wilson


“A world banking system was being set up here… a superstate controlled by international bankers.. acting together to enslave the world for their own pleasure. The FED has usurped the government.”
-Congressman Louis McFadden

“Under the Federal Reserve Act, panics are scientifically created. The present panic is the first scientifically created one, worked out as we figure a mathematical equation.”
–Charles Lindbergh

“It was a carefully contrived occurrence, international bankers sought to bring about a condition of despair, so that they might emerge the rulers of us all.”
-Louis McFadden

“Give me control of a nation’s money supply, and I care not who makes its laws”
-Mayer Amschel Rothschild, Founder of Rothschild Banking Dynasty


Parts 2-5: www.youtube.com/watch?v=CoHyjZvxGkU&feature=channel

[midnight]

1. Isn't this revealing!

[L. Coyote]

34. Who owns the Federal Reserve?

Who owns the Federal Reserve?
http://www.federalreserve.gov/generalinfo/faq/faqfrs.htm

The Federal Reserve System is not "owned" by anyone and is not a private, profit-making institution. Instead, it is an independent entity within the government, having both public purposes and private aspects.

As the nation's central bank, the Federal Reserve derives its authority from the U.S. Congress. It is considered an independent central bank because its decisions do not have to be ratified by the President or anyone else in the executive or legislative branch of government, it does not receive funding appropriated by Congress, and the terms of the members of the Board of Governors span multiple presidential and congressional terms. However, the Federal Reserve is subject to oversight by Congress, which periodically reviews its activities and can alter its responsibilities by statute. Also, the Federal Reserve must work within the framework of the overall objectives of economic and financial policy established by the government. Therefore, the Federal Reserve can be more accurately described as "independent within the government."

The twelve regional Federal Reserve Banks, which were established by Congress as the operating arms of the nation's central banking system, are organized much like private corporations--possibly leading to some confusion about "ownership." For example, the Reserve Banks issue shares of stock to member banks. However, owning Reserve Bank stock is quite different from owning stock in a private company. The Reserve Banks are not operated for profit, and ownership of a certain amount of stock is, by law, a condition of membership in the System. The stock may not be sold, traded, or pledged as security for a loan; dividends are, by law, 6 percent per year.

.................

[FLAprogressive]

2. time for reform

[zipplewrath]

3. Not exactly as it is presented

"The twelve regional Federal Reserve Banks, which were established by Congress as the operating arms of the nation's central banking system, are organized much like private corporations--possibly leading to some confusion about "ownership." For example, the Reserve Banks issue shares of stock to member banks. However, owning Reserve Bank stock is quite different from owning stock in a private company. The Reserve Banks are not operated for profit, and ownership of a certain amount of stock is, by law, a condition of membership in the System. The stock may not be sold, traded, or pledged as security for a loan; dividends are, by law, 6 percent per year."

[libodem]

4. excellent review

we need this economic lesson review, to remember, why, our forefathers, were so leary of Banks



BECAUSE THEY ARE FUCKERS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[RoyGBiv]

5. I'm so sick of this thing ...

I suppose I should accept as inevitable that crackpots like this will have the limelight given the current state of affairs in the world.

[rollingrock]

6. Is that you, Barbara?

"Why should we hear about body bags and deaths," Barbara Bush said on ABC's "Good Morning America" on March 18, 2003. "Oh, I mean, it's not relevant. So why should I waste my beautiful mind on something like that?"

[RoyGBiv]

7. Cute ...

You really want to sit here and trade random quotes with me?

[Pharaoh]

8. Good food for thought........n/t

Yeah, the money system is a huge pyramid scheme. Just a few on top end up with all the money.

But we let them get away with it because most of us are watching football or whatever.

I hope we can end the system of interest.

[unblock]

9. so much idiocy and disinformation about the fed. it IS federal. it is NOT private.

and it sure as shit is not a jewish conspiracy, as a review of many youtube videos might lead one to believe.

http://www.federalreserve.gov/generalinfo/faq/faqfrs.htm

[rollingrock]

10. According to your link, the Federal reserve is both public and PRIVATE

From www.federalreserve.gov/generalinfo/faq/faqfrs.htm:

-----------------------------------------
"The Federal Reserve System is not "owned" by anyone and is not a private, profit-making institution. Instead, it is an independent entity within the government, having both public purposes and private aspects."
-----------------------------------------


This statement contradicts itself. Something that is private, by definition, is owned by someone or someones.




-----------------------------------------
The twelve regional Federal Reserve Banks, which were established by Congress as the operating arms of the nation's central banking system, are organized much like private corporations--possibly leading to some confusion about "ownership." For example, the Reserve Banks issue shares of stock to member banks. For example, the Reserve Banks issue shares of stock to member banks. However, owning Reserve Bank stock is quite different from owning stock in a private company. The Reserve Banks are not operated for profit, and ownership of a certain amount of stock is, by law, a condition of membership in the System. The stock may not be sold, traded, or pledged as security for a loan; dividends are, by law, 6 percent per year."
-----------------------------------------



Another contradictory statement. The Federal Reserve issues shares of stock issues to its members, which means it is a corporation. The members are the private banks who as members are issued shares and receive dividends (a form of profit) from the Federal Reserve. In practice, there is no meaningful difference between owning stock in the Federal Reserve and owning stock in a private company (other than semantics).

[unblock]

11. the "stock" in the fed bears little resemblance to stock ownership in private corporations

the ownership structure of the fed is unique and governed by the statutes that created it and are not the same as typical common stock. one major restriction is that you can't sell shares in the fed. it's your membership in the club, and it's non-transferable. now that's a very odd type of "ownership" if you can't sell your stake even for a penny.

i think a lot of the confusion stems from the fact that congress chose to use terminology that has other meanings, such as stock and corporations and so on, when the rules are very different when it comes to the fed. you have to break away from the terminology and look to the actual meaning to see that this is NOT a typical private corporation ownership structure.


nevermind that congress could, in theory, alter or abolish it in an afternoon if it were so inclined....

[rollingrock]

12. It is a corporation

The Federal Reserve issues shares of stock to its private member banks.
By definition, the shareholders are the owners of the corporation.

Hence, the Federal Reserve is a corporation owned by its shareholders, the private banks. That cannot be disputed. It's right there on their website, as clear as day. It is federal in name only.

[unblock]

14. yes, it's a corporation because that's the word the used.

and it does look like a corporation in some way. but it's unlike any other corporation in several respects. perhaps if they had labelled it a shmorporation you'd have a better handle on it.




The Federal Reserve System is not "owned" by anyone and is not a private, profit-making institution. Instead, it is an independent entity within the government, having both public purposes and private aspects.

As the nation's central bank, the Federal Reserve derives its authority from the U.S. Congress. It is considered an independent central bank because its decisions do not have to be ratified by the President or anyone else in the executive or legislative branch of government, it does not receive funding appropriated by Congress, and the terms of the members of the Board of Governors span multiple presidential and congressional terms. However, the Federal Reserve is subject to oversight by Congress, which periodically reviews its activities and can alter its responsibilities by statute. Also, the Federal Reserve must work within the framework of the overall objectives of economic and financial policy established by the government. Therefore, the Federal Reserve can be more accurately described as "independent within the government."

The twelve regional Federal Reserve Banks, which were established by Congress as the operating arms of the nation's central banking system, are organized much like private corporations--possibly leading to some confusion about "ownership." For example, the Reserve Banks issue shares of stock to member banks. However, owning Reserve Bank stock is quite different from owning stock in a private company. The Reserve Banks are not operated for profit, and ownership of a certain amount of stock is, by law, a condition of membership in the System. The stock may not be sold, traded, or pledged as security for a loan; dividends are, by law, 6 percent per year.

[rollingrock]

16. The Federal Reserve lends money to the federal government

at interest. Why does it do that? Who pays that interest? The taxpayers do.

Interest = profit. Dividends = another form of profit.

Or do you believe that the Federal Reserve, a corporation that is in fact owned by private banking interests, loans money to the government out of the goodness of its heart?

Is there a legitimate reason why the federal government can't print its own money, interest-free? Why do the taxpayers have to be beholden to private banks?

[unblock]

17. in fact the government does exactly this.

the bureau of engraving and printing prints up dollars and delivers them to the federal reserve banks, which use those dollars to, among other things, buy up treasury securities or foreign exchange securities, thereby introducing more money into the economy.

net-net, the fed earns more money than it needs from these holdings and forwards what would otherwise be "profit" back to the treasury.


the dividend to member banks is more like a subsidy for the banking industry, though it was in exchange for their initial contributions to the creation of the fed. at worst, it is no more nefarious that a subsidy for the aggriculture industry or any other industry. the government is not "beholden" to these entities in any meaningful way.

[rollingrock]

20. Really? Is that so?

then why does all our paper money have 'Federal Reserve Note' stamped on it, which tells you where it came from?

[unblock]

22. i don't know whether to laugh or cry.

you really think the bureau of engraving and printing can't put "federal reserve note" on the money it prints?

http://www.bep.treas.gov/section.cfm/2

Welcome to the Bureau of Engraving and Printing’s (BEP) website. We are the largest producer of security documents in the United States. The BEP prints billions of Federal Reserve Notes for delivery to the Federal Reserve System each year (the BEP does not produce coins – all coinage is minted by the United States Mint). These notes are produced at our facilities in Washington, DC, and Fort Worth, Texas. In addition to U.S. currency, the BEP produces several other security documents such as portions of U.S. passports, materials for Homeland Security, military identification cards, and Immigration and Naturalization Certificates.

[rollingrock]

23. The BEP does not have the power to set monetary policy

the Federal Reserve does.

The BEP is nothing more than a service provider that does the actual printing of official documents, not unlike how Kinko's provides document copying and printing services for various private companies for example. To suggest that the BEP has anything to do with setting the nation's monetary policy, well that's just plain laughable.

[RoyGBiv]

27. Do you know why?

Why does the Federal Reserve have the authority to set monetary policy?

[rollingrock]

38. Why do the private banks own the Federal Reserve?

you tell me.

[RoyGBiv]

40. They don't ...

Next question.

[rollingrock]

42. Yes, they do

"For example, the Reserve Banks issue shares of stock to member banks. "

www.federalreserve.gov/generalinfo/faq/faqfrs.htm




The last time I checked, the owners of a corporation are its shareholders.

[RoyGBiv]

43. This has been explained ...

You're ignoring the answer because you don't like the answer since it disagrees with your preconceived notions.

[rollingrock]

44. A corporation is not owned by its shareholders?

whatever you say, boss.

[RoyGBiv]

45. This has been explained ...

You're ignoring the answer because you don't like the answer since it disagrees with your preconceived notions.

[unblock]

30. i never suggested the bep had anything to do with monetary policy

correct, they just print up the dollars and hand them over to the federal reserve banks. one part of the federal government providing a simply service for another part of the federal government. the fed then decides what to do with the money.

[RoyGBiv]

13. It's hopeless ...

I'm sure you've had this battle before as well, given your insight.

I've gone to the extent of taking out all the fancy quotes flashed on the screen that supposedly mean something and have placed them into context and, in some cases, corrected them or pointed out how there is *no source* for the supposed quote other than additional conspiracy theories which themselves cite nothing but yet another previous conspiracy.

If one points out how wrong most of this is, that person is labeled by the film's devotees as "a part of the problem" or even a part of the conspiracy itself.

People who critiqued the Protocols of the Elders of Zion (which, if anyone really took the time to deconstruct this down to its essentials would come across as strikingly familiar) had the same problem, only worse. A few million of them were killed.

I applaud your effort nonetheless and wanted to say so.

[unblock]

15. it's amazing how some myths persist. like how income taxes are supposedly unconstitutional

even if someone were to have a theoretical, intellectual point about some technicality about the way the amendment enabling the income tax had been passed improperly, it matters not one bit because in practice, the supreme court would NEVER recognize that mistake, if only because it would probably then require the government to refund every bit of income tax they ever collected, and there ain't no way THAT's happening.

yet the lure of a justification for not paying taxes is so strong that some people will believe any debunked piece of crap going back to 1913.

[wildbilln864]

18. k&r! nt

[camera obscura]

19. Many of those quotes are incorrect. Here are the actual quotes:

"Banking was conceived in iniquity and was born in sin. The Bankers own the Earth. Take it away from them, but leave them the power to create deposits, and with the flick of the pen they will create enough deposits to buy it back again. However, take it away from them, and all the great fortunes like mine will disappear, and they ought to disappear, for this would be a happier and better world to live in. But if you wish to remain the slaves of Bankers and pay the cost of your own slavery, let them continue to create deposits."

-Sir Josiah Stamp

-- he was talking about banking in general, not centralized banking.



"A great industrial nation is controlled by its system of credit. Our system of credit is privately concentrated. The growth of the nation, therefore, and all our activities are in the hands of a few men who, even if their action be honest and intended for the public interest, are necessarily concentrated upon the great undertakings in which their own money is involved and who necessarily, by very reason of their own limitations, chill and check and destroy genuine economic freedom."

AND

""We have restricted credit, we have restricted opportunity, we have controlled development, and we have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled and dominated, governments in the civilized world--no longer a government by free opinion, no longer a government by conviction and the vote of the majority, but a government by the opinion and the duress of small groups of dominant men."

- Woodrow Wilson

-- Both of these quotes are from 1912, a year before the Federal Reserve Act was passed.


There is no evidence that Charles Lindbergh said the quote attributed to him, although he was against the FRA.


Louis McFadden was an anti-Semitic congressman who believed Jews controlled the economy and who supported Hitler's attempt to rid his country of Jewish influence.


Mayer Amschel Rothschild died a whole century before the Fed was created.

SOURCE: http://www.conspiracyscience.com/articles/zeitgeist/part-three/

[RoyGBiv]

21. Louis McFadden ...

Just adding that the inclusion of this asshat should send up warning bells for anyone paying attention.

The people who put this little gem together grabbed comments attributed to anyone, including some that were entirely fabricated decades ago, if that comment could be twisted in any way to make a point. Aside from being a rather elementary logical fallacy, the tactic shows the sloppiness of research and, most importantly, a willingness to hold up the supposed words of individuals who agreed fully with the underlying message of the video, not because that message is correct, but because it was a weapon of hatred against race and/or ethnicity.

One might also look into McFadden's actual career along with the reasons the Fed was brought into being in the first place. Guess what McFadden was. A banker. (As an aside, there's a character in a recent Pratchett book that at least seems loosely based on him, only far more comical.)

Give me enough time, and I'll find quotes from anyone anywhere at any point in history that support any point I want to make. Without context and actual evidence, that means squat. I could find a quote from Robert E. Lee's own "papers" that shows he wanted to abolish slavery, and if I relied only on the book called his "papers" without actually looking at the letter that the complier selectively edited, I'd never know that immediately after writing the thing that could lead to this conclusion, he inquires about the most trustworthy slave merchant in the area and asks about cost. His duties had become so burdensome for him, he "reluctantly" was going to have to acquire a slave.

I'd even bet a round of drinks for the Lounge that I could find something from Alexander Hamilton that indicates he opposed banks, assuming I get to strip all context and add (or not if I don't feel like it and can hide it well enough) ellipses anywhere I want.

[rollingrock]

24. I don't know what this has to do with being a Jew

Most Jews are ordinary people who have nothing to do with the banking industry. There is nothing anti-semetic in this video. McFadden's anti-semetism is a separate issue, and one that I fiercely disagree with.

Just because most if not all of our founding father owned slaves, including Thomas Jefferson, doesn't mean that we can't agree with them on other important issues. Otherwise, let's just trash the entire US Constitution altogether because the people who authored it were a bunch of slave-owners.

[camera obscura]

25. But his opinions on the banking system were based on his hatred of Jews.

I have no desire to got through the whole video and pick out the incorrect or misleading parts, there are other websites that have done that. I just wanted to do a heads up about the quotes for anyone who comes across this post and thinks it's reliable.

[rollingrock]

28. It's a quote from one man, out of dozens presented in the video

I only thought his particular quote was significant coming from a Depression-era Congressman, which is why I included them. I knew nothing else about McFadden before watching this video. Many credible people can agree that the Federal Reserve is a bad idea, without agreeing with Congressman McFadden that the Federal Reserve is some kind of Jewish conspiracy, when in fact the founders of the Federal Reserve were all white Protestant and Anglo-Saxon males, not Jews. So to blame the existence of it on the Jews would be sheer lunacy, would it not? That some might try to focus on one or two quotes from one individual mention in the video in an attempt to discredit everything else said in the video shows, well that's nit-picking and just a cheap shot IMO.

The Israeli government was in favor of the US invasion of Iraq of 2002. It doesn't make one anti-semetic to disagree with them, does it? Otherwise, 90% of the posters on DU could be labeled anti-semetic, would they not? It's just as ridiculous.

[RoyGBiv]

31. Pot, meet Kettle ...

That some might try to focus on one or two quotes from one individual mention in the video in an attempt to discredit everything else said in the video shows, well that's nit-picking and just a cheap shot IMO.

You are here accusing critics of selectively choosing that which to critique and of taking words out of context.

What you are failing to understand is that this is precisely what the editor of this video does.

It's not "one or two" quotes. It's damn near all of them. McFadden is merely an example, although a rather egregious and telling one considering that the video's producer is in some sense parroting what McFadden was saying. That's the part that is simple stunning to me. It's the same argument, modified with some elements from history since McFadden's day. The argument wasn't wrong because it was directed at Jews or Bolsheviks. It was wrong because it lacked a factual basis. It's wrong from the same reason now.

The quotes themselves are almost all either fabrications, misquotes, or comments taken out of context to the extent that, in some cases, the the writer/speaker had the opposite intent of what was suggested by the editor of the video. Further, the quotes themselves might not mean as much had the producer not placed them at the center of the rhetoric, but he does. He uses the quotes to make the point, then tries to fill that in with half-fluff, pseudo-intellectual historical analysis. It fails on every level except as propaganda.

There are, now, several academically sourced sites all over the Internet that deal with this thing. So, it comes to that. A link to one of them was provided. If you need more, just ask, or you could try a peer reviewed book that deals with the history of the Federal Reserve. As mentioned previously, starting with the 1907 Panic would be a good place.

:bluebox: Bruner, Robert F. and Sean Carr. _The Panic of 1907: Lessons Learned from the Market's Perfect Storm_

:redbox: Caporale, Tony and Barbara McKiernan. "Interest Rate Uncertainty and the Founding of the Federal Reserve," The Journal of Economic History, Vol. 58, No. 4 (Dec., 1998), pp. 1110-1117.

:redbox: Moen, Jon R. and Ellis W. Tallman. "Clearinghouse Membership and Deposit Contraction during the Panic of 1907," The Journal of Economic History, Vol. 60, No. 1 (Mar., 2000), pp. 145-163.

[rollingrock]

35. You keep telling yourself that, Barbara

whatever it takes to preserve your beautiful mind.

[RoyGBiv]

36. You too, Lyndon ...

Tell everyone at the LaRouche clan hello for me.

And I'll note well that you have no response other than childish name-calling. Kudos.

[rollingrock]

39. And you have no response

except to call everyone who dares to disagree with you an anti-semite.

talk abut childish name-calling.

[RoyGBiv]

41. Liar

I've called no one except McFadden an anti-Semite.

If you think otherwise, I question your reading comprehension skills.

Actually, I assume you haven't really read my posts, and if you have, I assume you don't understand what I'm saying because you don't want to. It interferes with your preconceived notions.

This is why I offered you citation to a book and two scholarly articles. I could dig up more, if you're interested.

If you'll read them.

[RoyGBiv]

26. I understand that you don't know ...

That much is clear. McFadden concocted his entire complaint based on his paranoid fantasy that what he called "European banking interests" were trying to take over the United States. That, if you don't realize it, is a dog whistle for "Jews." He came up with this idea at the same time the Protocols of the Elders of Zion was making the rounds in Europe and being associated with the Bolsheviks, i.e. one of the original "Red Scares."

And *this* guy and his argument is one the person who produced this video wants to hold up as supportive of his, what I'll kindly call, theory. And people accept that uncritically because they'll listen to anyone who says something that justifies their own preconceived notions.

Of course the entire argument isn't based directly on McFadden. I very much doubt the producer had the first clue who McFadden was or what he believed, and it is likely he simply got the quote out of a book of quotations and found he liked it for the point he was trying to make. He also doesn't realize that his notions originated with McFadden and people like him. This is a mark of shoddy research and should call into question everything the individual says, at the very least moving a person who hears this recycled message to, ya know, look it up.

The point is that the "argument" in this video is the same "argument" that was used against Jews at one point. It's the same argument used against the Bolsheviks. It's the same argument the bankers whose shady dealings that mirror with frightening detail much of what has taken place in the last 20-30 years used against the Fed originally. This whole movie -- all three parts -- is, at best, intellectually dishonest and rife with error in both fact and interpretation of fact.

But I understand that you don't know that because you clearly haven't researched a single claim this guy makes. Just ignore the whole McFadden business and go to the quote from Wilson. As noted above, Wilson said that before a Federal Reserve even existed. In the broadest sense, Wilson was commenting on the lingering fallout of the 1907 Panic and the out-of-proportion influence individuals had in manipulating markets. If you really want to understand the Fed and why it is there, read up on the 1907 Panic. And, read something other than the Wiki article. If your interest in this issue is as intense as one could infer by your defense of this video, you owe it to yourself to gain some detailed awareness of all its aspects, not just those telescoped elements some conspiracy theorist wants you to understand according to his skewed sense of perception.

I am just so sick of this cut-and-paste approach to tackling highly complex issues that is passed off as inquisitive study because it has good production values and speaks to a certain set of prejudices and/or ideology. But then we're back to Jews again and one of the mechanisms by which they were demonized in the 19th and 20th centuries: an uncritical acceptance of propaganda that had little to no basis in fact yet spoke to and heightened people's hatreds.

[Why Syzygy]

29. Really appreciate that source link!

:thumbsup: Thanks.

[specialed]

32. Woodrow Wilson should be dug up and hung.....

And every SOB who voted for the 1913 FRB act.

[RoyGBiv]

37. Yeah, that makes sense ...

Dig up and hang the people who were trying to reform and regulate the banking industry. Certainly. Yes. Absolutely. Brilliant idea.

While we're at it, let's dig up and hang Lincoln for signing the first of the banking acts that helped lead to the reserve, and then let's dig up and hang FDR for taking us off the gold standard.

Clearly the Lyndon LaRouche fan club's website is having server problems.

[PDJane]

33. Canada's fed is a national institution.

Different system, and it is responsible for the monetary policy. It has been a public institution since 1938, and is the equivalent of the US federal reserve. It sets monetary policy and regulates the banking industry with parliament and the minister of finance.

That may be one of the reasons that the banks in Canada are still well-regulated and are doing quite well, thank you, even in this particular crisis.

The US federal reserve is supposed to fulfil the same purpose; however, the manner of its ownership and the input of various outside entities mean that it is not as single-minded in the pursuit of good fiscal policies and sound banking practices as it needs to be.