Obama to give more power to the Federal Reserve

Commy

His pretext was -the institutions responsible for oversight don't have the power to prevent an economic disaster in the future, and "that's going to change". as if he is using the recession/depression to carry out his schemes in the same way bush used 9/11.

the article is http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/jun/16/plan-gives-fed-sweeping-power-over-companies/?feat=home_headlines.

g under p

That's just great that's one of the last agency to be given more power. They're a secret mafia syndicate that answers to no one and now they're to given more power. To this is not a wise move, it would be better to eliminate the SEC than to give the Fed Reserve more power.

Peace

VINNY GOOMBA

The biggest and most significant change that could ever be produced in Washington would be to cut off this cartel's access to the printing press.

If we want to talk about adding regulations to ensure that we don't experience another financial crisis of this magnitude, then it's the Federal Reserve itself that has to be put under strict regulations.

soulsinging

Commy wrote:

His pretext was -the institutions responsible for oversight don't have the power to prevent an economic disaster in the future, and "that's going to change". as if he is using the recession/depression to carry out his schemes in the same way bush used 9/11.

the article is http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/jun/16/plan-gives-fed-sweeping-power-over-companies/?feat=home_headlines.

He's also stripping it of its jurisdiction over a number of things in order to hand those powers over a CONSUMER protection agency. That sounds promising to me. Basically, he's dividing its power in half, but enhancing its ability to enforce power over those halves.

Commy

soulsinging wrote:

Commy wrote:

His pretext was -the institutions responsible for oversight don't have the power to prevent an economic disaster in the future, and "that's going to change". as if he is using the recession/depression to carry out his schemes in the same way bush used 9/11.

the article is http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/jun/16/plan-gives-fed-sweeping-power-over-companies/?feat=home_headlines.

He's also stripping it of its jurisdiction over a number of things in order to hand those powers over a CONSUMER protection agency. That sounds promising to me. Basically, he's dividing its power in half, but enhancing its ability to enforce power over those halves.

interesting. where are you getting all of this?

soulsinging

Commy wrote:

soulsinging wrote:

Commy wrote:

His pretext was -the institutions responsible for oversight don't have the power to prevent an economic disaster in the future, and "that's going to change". as if he is using the recession/depression to carry out his schemes in the same way bush used 9/11.

the article is http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/jun/16/plan-gives-fed-sweeping-power-over-companies/?feat=home_headlines.

He's also stripping it of its jurisdiction over a number of things in order to hand those powers over a CONSUMER protection agency. That sounds promising to me. Basically, he's dividing its power in half, but enhancing its ability to enforce power over those halves.

interesting. where are you getting all of this?

From the associated press:

"Geithner also noted that the plan would strip the Fed of its role in overseeing consumer protections in setting up an agency focused solely on the mission."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090618/ap_ ... l_overhaul

yahamita

Why can't the American people demand the Fed Reserve be audited?!?!?!

yoke

yahamita wrote:

Why can't the American people demand the Fed Reserve be audited?!?!?!

because most people don't pay attention to anything.. they have their heads in the sand.

yahamita

yoke wrote:

yahamita wrote:

Why can't the American people demand the Fed Reserve be audited?!?!?!

because most people don't pay attention to anything.. they have their heads in the sand.

It seems like such a tremendous task, where would one even start to raise hell to get some attention to where it needs to be, at the Reserve?

VINNY GOOMBA

yahamita wrote:

yoke wrote:

yahamita wrote:

Why can't the American people demand the Fed Reserve be audited?!?!?!

because most people don't pay attention to anything.. they have their heads in the sand.

It seems like such a tremendous task, where would one even start to raise hell to get some attention to where it needs to be, at the Reserve?

The effort is growing. It has all the votes it needs in the house. Time to focus on the Senate. Call and write your Senator and tell him or her to co-sponsor S604. There are only 2 co-sponsors on that bill so far, and we need over 50.

dustinpardue

yahamita wrote:

Why can't the American people demand the Fed Reserve be audited?!?!?!

Because the federal reserve pretty much bought the US government in the 1930's.

Pepe Silvia

soulsinging wrote:

From the associated press:

"Geithner also noted that the plan would strip the Fed of its role in overseeing consumer protections in setting up an agency focused solely on the mission."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090618/ap_ ... l_overhaul

from the next paragraph

However, it is likely that the Fed will mount a defense to keep its consumer oversight duties. Fed officials believe their oversight of mortgages, credit cards and other products fits well with their duties to regulate banks, and that they have the right mix of experts — economists and lawyers — already on hand to do the job.


guess we'll have to wait and see how the final draft looks

soulsinging

Black Hole Symphony wrote:

soulsinging wrote:

From the associated press:

"Geithner also noted that the plan would strip the Fed of its role in overseeing consumer protections in setting up an agency focused solely on the mission."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090618/ap_ ... l_overhaul

from the next paragraph

However, it is likely that the Fed will mount a defense to keep its consumer oversight duties. Fed officials believe their oversight of mortgages, credit cards and other products fits well with their duties to regulate banks, and that they have the right mix of experts — economists and lawyers — already on hand to do the job.

guess we'll have to wait and see how the final draft looks

To your last sentence... exactly. Thus why the subject of this thread is bullshit (though I shouldn't have expected anything else given the OP). It was selective reading to support and unfounded histrionic reaction. Obama's plan is not what the OP described it as. Could be this whole thing never passes and things stay as they are, could be the Fed will whine and complain, could be it'll end up far weaker than it once was. No way to know just yet, but to condemn Obama's plan without bothering to understand what he's actually proposing... well, that's just how Commy and his ilk operate I suppose.

Commy

soulsinging wrote:

Black Hole Symphony wrote:

soulsinging wrote:

From the associated press:

"Geithner also noted that the plan would strip the Fed of its role in overseeing consumer protections in setting up an agency focused solely on the mission."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090618/ap_ ... l_overhaul

from the next paragraph

However, it is likely that the Fed will mount a defense to keep its consumer oversight duties. Fed officials believe their oversight of mortgages, credit cards and other products fits well with their duties to regulate banks, and that they have the right mix of experts — economists and lawyers — already on hand to do the job.

guess we'll have to wait and see how the final draft looks

To your last sentence... exactly. Thus why the subject of this thread is bullshit (though I shouldn't have expected anything else given the OP). It was selective reading to support and unfounded histrionic reaction. Obama's plan is not what the OP described it as. Could be this whole thing never passes and things stay as they are, could be the Fed will whine and complain, could be it'll end up far weaker than it once was. No way to know just yet, but to condemn Obama's plan without bothering to understand what he's actually proposing... well, that's just how Commy and his ilk operate I suppose.

A well respected news group reported exactly what the title of the thread suggests. they say Obama is giving more power to the federal reserve, and he is, in a way. your ap link suggest he's also taking some away, which i wasn't aware of. but that was the point of the thread, to find out what's going on.

and its dangerous, putting a private institution in charge of oversight, over institutions that can have an impact on all of us. don't you realize how fucked up that is? a private institution, run like a fascist dictatorship, in charge of the entire economy. lets just hope they have our best interest in mind, which is all we can do. its a situation that deserves to be looked at carefully, forget who's right or wrong.;

VINNY GOOMBA

soulsinging wrote:

Black Hole Symphony wrote:

soulsinging wrote:

From the associated press:

"Geithner also noted that the plan would strip the Fed of its role in overseeing consumer protections in setting up an agency focused solely on the mission."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090618/ap_ ... l_overhaul

from the next paragraph

However, it is likely that the Fed will mount a defense to keep its consumer oversight duties. Fed officials believe their oversight of mortgages, credit cards and other products fits well with their duties to regulate banks, and that they have the right mix of experts — economists and lawyers — already on hand to do the job.

guess we'll have to wait and see how the final draft looks

To your last sentence... exactly. Thus why the subject of this thread is bullshit (though I shouldn't have expected anything else given the OP). It was selective reading to support and unfounded histrionic reaction. Obama's plan is not what the OP described it as. Could be this whole thing never passes and things stay as they are, could be the Fed will whine and complain, could be it'll end up far weaker than it once was. No way to know just yet, but to condemn Obama's plan without bothering to understand what he's actually proposing... well, that's just how Commy and his ilk operate I suppose.

The Fed has the power to legally counterfeit money, and does not legally have to produce any record of where it goes. Giving them more or less power, or as they like to call it "tools" sounds like smoke and mirrors to me. What more power could they be given aside from straight dictatorial control over businesses directly? Actually, they have quite a bit of that already-- didn't the Fed force Bank of America to buy Lehman Brothers? If anything, the majority of the population probably believes that giving the Fed more power is a good thing. It's a trick to get people's hopes up. It's not a dirty trick, it's just something that boosts confidence, "Ahhh, good! At least they're doing something about it!" The next guy asks, "Doing what?" "uhh, I don't know. Something. They got more tools now!" Yeah, whatever that means.

Isn't that what our whole economy is? Confidence? A house of cards? I'd probably not be in favor of an audit of the Fed or dramatically changing their role if I didn't think that we've inflated our last and biggest bubble-- the dollar itself. Else, as long as everyone is smiling, happy with all of their useless shit, and other countries still want to buy our bonds, this boom-bust process would probably last beyond my lifetime without it absolutely crushing me personally (although, that would be pretty selfish of me ). However, this process does destroy people's savings through inflation, and continually favors people and businesses making all of their investments based on credit rather than capital. It breeds poor decision making, and is always doomed to fail... And talk about "trickle down--" anyone who has ever hated this concept, typically liberals who hate on Regan (with some good reason), should understand that the Fed are the hugest pushers of "trickle down economics" ever. The money they inject into the economy is almost always given directly to the uber-rich through banks and corporations, to be spent before the effects of price inflation are realized. The first guy spending new money is really operating with the same money supply as he had before he received the money. Now after he spends it, the money supply increases, and through the laws of supply and demand, money becomes worth less now that there's more of it.

They (The Fed) are dangerously government, and dangerously not government at the same time. They also wield enough influence to try and manage something that is just simply unmanageable from the top-down, the economy. It's like if Baxter Stockman (from the Ninja Turtles) showed up tomorrow with a device to control the weather, would you want him to even try? (Actually, I think he did in season 1?) What if he wanted everyone to be happy? People love sunny days. Would he be a hero if he fixed it so we had 200 beautiful summer days in a row? Well, not if it caused a severe drought by the end, and killed off all of our crops, and livestock feeding off those crops, and left us all starving. This is what the Fed does with monetary policy. They have just enough power and influence to meddle in the behavior of the "force" that is the market. And in true chaos-theory fashion, there are unthinkable reprucussions when the bank flexes a little too much. I'm not saying these guys are necessarily a shadowy group of evil men, but even if they are sincerely acting in the best interests of this country, they can only try to tamper with something HUGE that is going to react in unpredictable ways to the tampering. On top of that, them and all of their friends and shareholders are always safeguarded (bailouts, and control of the 'printing press' with the only LEGAL tender usable in this country), while the rest of us, mostly our grandchildren get left footing the bill.

So more, power? Less power? So long as they have the power to meddle with the market, none of it really matters. The most disturbing part is, I don't know of a single person that can explain exactly how the Fed works, who its shareholders are, and how they are able to be checked by the people or a government by the people.

soulsinging

Commy wrote:

A well respected news group reported exactly what the title of the thread suggests. they say Obama is giving more power to the federal reserve, and he is, in a way. your ap link suggest he's also taking some away, which i wasn't aware of. but that was the point of the thread, to find out what's going on.

and its dangerous, putting a private institution in charge of oversight, over institutions that can have an impact on all of us. don't you realize how fucked up that is? a private institution, run like a fascist dictatorship, in charge of the entire economy. lets just hope they have our best interest in mind, which is all we can do. its a situation that deserves to be looked at carefully, forget who's right or wrong.;

Well then they fucked up.

And I am no defender of the Fed. It is a sketchy organization that I'd be happy to see opened to more scrutiny. I'm not trying to defend the Fed. I just think it's lame that the story leads with Obama giving the Fed more power when that's not exactly what he's doing. In fact, this is the first time I've heard of any president proposing to reduce its power in any way, shape, or form.

Pepe Silvia

soulsinging wrote:

Black Hole Symphony wrote:

soulsinging wrote:

From the associated press:

"Geithner also noted that the plan would strip the Fed of its role in overseeing consumer protections in setting up an agency focused solely on the mission."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090618/ap_ ... l_overhaul

from the next paragraph

However, it is likely that the Fed will mount a defense to keep its consumer oversight duties. Fed officials believe their oversight of mortgages, credit cards and other products fits well with their duties to regulate banks, and that they have the right mix of experts — economists and lawyers — already on hand to do the job.

guess we'll have to wait and see how the final draft looks

To your last sentence... exactly. Thus why the subject of this thread is bullshit (though I shouldn't have expected anything else given the OP). It was selective reading to support and unfounded histrionic reaction. Obama's plan is not what the OP described it as. Could be this whole thing never passes and things stay as they are, could be the Fed will whine and complain, could be it'll end up far weaker than it once was. No way to know just yet, but to condemn Obama's plan without bothering to understand what he's actually proposing... well, that's just how Commy and his ilk operate I suppose.

from the OP article:

The final plan due to be released on Wednesday



hopefully we'll find out today or tomorrow

Pepe Silvia

Commy wrote:

A well respected news group reported exactly what the title of the thread suggests.

i like your posts, Commy, but if you're referring to the Washington Times as a well respected news group I think you are a little mistaken. Unless it was sold recently that paper is owned by the Rev Sun Yun Moon or something who can be a bit whacko