We will find out soon. I’m betting this one will end up just like the bailouts, because you see the corporate media has been making a huge splash on this diversion.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Black-people-must-leave-NJ-apf-1749619349.html?x=0

Very sad circumstance, and it’s a shame that one would do such a thing against their fellow man.

However, what happens when you find that over a million dollars of stimulus money has been appropriated to districts that do not exist?  $1,257,183 dollars has been appropriated to four districts in Alabama that do not exist.

This list includes $1,257,183 given to the 8th, 9th, 12th, and 19th congressional districts of Alabama saving 52 jobs. Now how is this possible? Is this just another 1.25 million dollars that is going to end up in the abyss that is Montgomery Alabama?

To you, the reader, it may seem that 1.25 million dollars is not a lot. However, lets look at another state. Arizona apparently has an 86th congressional district that is receiving over 34 million dollars!

I am thankful that this administration has been transparent on this issue of where our money is going, but where is the outrage over the mismanagement of it? Why has the media kept quiet on this? Is it an error in the system or has this money just been handed off to someone? This leaves a lot of questions unanswered, and hopefully we will get the answers.

Whenever you open an account at a bank, you hold yourself at risk of losing your investment to a certain point. Such as not banking with an FDIC establishment and FDIC Bank Reserves are low and can not account for all money inside the bank’s accounts.

However, this issue I want to show you today is a controlled example on what happens to your money once it enters the banking establishment.

Lets say this is my bank, and I put $10,000 dollars into a savings account. The bank will use my money as collateral to created $100,000 of credit to loan out to other individuals. Now on this fictional money that has been created will draw interest from the debtor, I will normally receive between 1.5 – 2.0% interest on average while the bank keeps the rest. Now the Interest + Principle from ex.A is real money being given to the bank to pay off fictional money.

Ex.B : This section of the circle shows the federal reserve seeding money to the bank, for use in the Sub Prime mortgages. Ex.C shows that the Bank has now created 10 million USD out of 1 million USD, both of which are fictional. However, this fictional money is going toward the purchase of a REAL object, a house. Just like your original $10,000 in the center of the circle $90,000 USD is going toward the purchase of real objects, however using fictional money stored on a harddrive.

Ex.D is where the real problems began in this circle / bubble. Banks began creating bonds using the Sub prime mortgages as collateral, in which private companies would invest into for “wealth” management. This means investing private “real” currency is being invested into a real product which was bought with fictional money.

How, these sub-prime mortgages were preferably given to people whom the banks new would never be able to repay the debt of owning a home. Also, with an Adjustable Interest Rate the banks were able to inflate the interest that an individual pays on top of their principal balance. This produced a hardship on many of these individuals, as many were unable to repay nor refinance with a Fixed Interest Rate.

The real thing to question here is, What really caused this? My theory is that the federal reserve made a call for its money in an attempt to contract the currency market place, and this caused the AIR’s to explode.  In doing so, many people left their homes with none payment, and it leaves the banks with property that is now worth less than what it originally was when the initial loan was made. This is, in essence, your boom and bust cycle. The Federal Reserve is able to seed money into the marketplace, fictional money, which creates the appearance of a booming economy. In doing so, the federal reserve is creating inflation that is not seen until later.

When the federal reserve cuts off the money supplied to the banks, this is when things go awry. This is all but a small overview of how the federal reserve creates money through debt, and then inflation when they cut off the supply.

A lot of these banks were to caught up in the mess and were bailed out by the federal government, creating more debt, that we the people have to pay off. We just didn’t have a say in this, yet we’re stuck with the bill.

Now, building off of what the previous system was. If a bank over extended itself, the people would normally do a run on the bank. By withdrawing their cash, they have a say in the banking practices. However, during a panic, it is realized that there is not enough money accountable for every account, and that is why it is called a panic.

If the marketplace was filled with only real currency that was fully controlled by congress, this fractional reserve system of credit would not have taken off in the way that it has. However, in the climate of how our Congress works, a majority of our legislative servants are bought and paid for by the Banking Industry. Flawed by Design and this portion is hardly noticed by your everyday citizen.

http://mises.org/story/3687

I will never be equal Dr. Paul’s understanding this subject, even though I am a student of Austrian economics. I will just never match his understanding.

I need to get the book soon, possibly off Amazon.

Tomorrow I shall be back, on the subject of the actual currency and how it works in the marketplace.

I felt that is was necessary to include before I dive into the overview.  Dr. Ron Paul’s sentiments ring true here; inflation is a tax upon the people of which they will never see. That is, until they go to the grocery store and notice that milk is near $5 a gallon when it was normally $2.80.

However, in this clash between Dr. Paul and Bernanke it is known that they come from two different understandings of how economics work. For Dr. Paul it is the Austrian School and Bernanke it is the Keynesian School.
There are major differences between these two types of ecnomics, you could even go as far as to say that they are polar opposites. It is intriguing to me that Bernanke happens to say that he agrees with Dr. Paul on the facts that if the Federal Reserve pumps more money into the system that it will only devalue the dollar, causing inflation to rise.

However, Bernanke continues on toward the end of the clip saying that it is the Federal Reserve’s policy to control the amount of inflation.

Before I go off on how ridiculious his statement is, I will explain the different views between Keynesian and Austrian Economics.

Keynesian Economic view on Inflation increase in money supply has no relation to inflation, it is only the pressures of the economy expressing themselves in the marketplace.

Austrian Economic view on inflation is by definition always and everywhere simply an increase in the money supply, which in turn leads to a higher nominal price level for assets (such as housing) and other goods and services in demand, as the real value of each monetary unit is eroded, loses purchasing power and thus buys fewer goods and services.

This is  an interesting concept to me as for the Keynesian view, it is like they say that the real root of the problem is the market place and not the actions of those who control the money supply. For me, the money supply is what controls the marketplace. If you flood the market with money, the price of items will continually go up. That is how fiat currency works, with nothing to back or control it, inflation is used as a tax and will run rampant over time.

Lets go back to Bernanke’s comment on “controling inflation”.

Mr. Bernanke, Do you feel the Federal Reserve has done a good job at controling inflation? I do not think so. $1 USD today is equal to $0.047 from 1913. Is that a good control on the market place? With banks lending money, over extending themselves, and the federal reserve always ready to loan money to the government, it is no wonder the USD has been devaluated to this extent.

All I can say is think of it like this, when you work hard for you weekly paycheck and realise that you have to pay 25-50% more for your groceries, wouldn’t you get mad? It’s not the fault of the grocer but the fault of the private Federal Reserve banking System.

In reality, Jekyll Island was the all exclusive club for the wealthy. In which, peons such as you and I would never been able to visit during that time period. However, something sinister was bore from the island, and it’s wretched tentacles have to to disembark from this country.

A group of men gathered in Jekyll Island club house, with the goals intact. A way to institute a National Banking system that would only concentrate their own wealth over the long run. These men included Senator Aldrich, Abraham Andrew (Assistant Secretary of the Treasury), Frank Vanderlip (President of Citibank, Rockefeller Intrest), Henry Davidson (JP Morgan), Charles Norton (First National Bank of New York; later merged into Citibank), Benjamin Strong (head of JP Morgan’s Banker’s Trust Company; First Federal Reserve Chairman) and finally Paul Warburg.

Paul Warburg was possibly the most prominent of the men attending this meeting. He understoon how European banking systems worked and was able to show the logistics of this and come up with the plan of the Federal Reserve.

The people in this time period were against the money trust, similar to what we are against today; the banking industry and wallstreet. So had the people known that this secret cabal meeting was going own, and the Federal Reserve Act was to come out of it, it would’ve never passed in the way it did.

With the Money Trust writing and executing the act in secrecy, they were able to protect their interest and user in slavery via “inflation”.

Tomorrows Topic will be on inflation, what it is and how it affects you.

The Panic of 1907 was meticulously designed. Out of a failure to corner the market on the stocks of United Copper, the banks who funded this push and associate banks were subjected to a run on the banks.

Wikipedia states that “The panic may have deepened if not for the intervention of financier J. P. Morgan, who pledged large sums of his own money, and convinced other New York bankers to do the same, to shore up the banking system. At the time, the United States did not have a central bank to inject liquidity back into the market.”

In my own understanding, I read this quite differently, as J. P. Morgan had much to gain out of this ordeal.

Next Comes Jekyll Island

From today until September 30th, I am going to spend every day reporting my research on the Federal Reserve. In response to my disgust, I am going to fast to bring light on this important issue in our country. I  am putting my own body on the line as a response to what I feel is corrupt and needs to be abolished.

For today’s Lesson on the Federal Reserve, I want to set up a timeline of events prior to the Federal Reserve Act of 1913.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Bank_of_the_United_States :

In 1791, the original Bank of the United States, sometimes referred to as “The First Bank of the United States”, was proposed and brought into being under the support of the first Secretary of the Treasury Alexander Hamilton.

Along with establishing a mint and an excise tax, the purpose of Hamilton’s proposed bank was to:

* Establish financial order, clarity and precedence in and of the newly formed United States.
* Establish credit—both in country and overseas—for the new nation.
* To resolve the issue of the fiat currency, issued by the Continental Congress immediately prior to and during the United States Revolutionary War—the “Continental”.

A student of both the French finance minister Jacques Necker and his British counterpart Chancellor of the Exchequer Robert Walpole (in addition to his own extensive reading), Hamilton devised a bank for the whole of the country, not just for sections or states.

According to the plan put before the first session of the First Congress, Hamilton proposed establishing the initial funding for the Bank of the United States through the sale of $10 million in stock of which the United States government would purchase the first $2 million in shares. Hamilton, foreseeing the objection that this could not be done since the U.S. government didn’t have $2 million, proposed that the government make the stock purchase using money loaned to it by the Bank; the loan to be paid back in ten equal annual installments.

The remaining $8 million of stock would be available to the public, both in the United States and overseas. The chief requirement of these non-government purchases was that one-quarter of the purchase price had to be paid in gold or silver; the remaining balance could be paid in bonds, acceptable scrip, etc.

By continuously insisting on these conditions the Bank of the United States might technically possess $500,000 in “real” money that it could, and would, use as security to make loans up to its capitalized limit of $10 million.[2] However, unlike the Bank of England from where Hamilton drew much of his inspiration, the primary function of the Bank would be commercial and private interests. The business it would be involved in on behalf of the federal government—a depository for collected taxes, making short term loans to the government to cover real or potential temporary income gaps, serving as a holding site for both incoming and outgoing monies—was considered highly important but still secondary in nature.

There were other, nonnegotiable conditions for the establishment of the Bank of the United States. Among these were:

* That the Bank was to be a private company.
* That the Bank would have a twenty year charter running from 1791 to 1811, after which time it would be up to the Congress to renew or deny renewal of the bank and its charter; however, during that time no other federal bank would be authorized; states, for their part, would be free to charter however many intrastate banks they wished.
* That the Bank, to avoid any appearance of impropriety, would:

1. be forbidden to buy government bonds.
2. have a mandatory rotation of directors.
3. neither issue notes nor incur debts beyond its actual capitalization.

* That foreigners, whether overseas or residing in the United States, would be allowed to be Bank of the United States stockholders, but would not be allowed to vote.
* That the Secretary of the Treasury would be free to remove government deposits, inspect the books, and require statements regarding the banks condition as frequently as once a week.[3]

To ensure smooth compliance to both the current and future demands of its governmental accounts, the Bank required a source of additional funding, “for interest payments on the assumed state debts would begin to fall due at the end of 1791…those payments would require $788,333 annually, and… an additional $38,291 was needed to cover deficiencies in the funds that had been appropriated for existing commitments.”[4]

To achieve this, Hamilton repeated a suggestion he had made nearly a year before—increase the duty on imported spirits, plus raise the excise tax on domestically distilled whiskey and other liquors. This was the origin of the Whiskey Rebellion.

In 1811, Congress voted down rechartering the First Bank of the United States. If you read this article as carefully as I did, you will have noticed that the First Bank of the US was allowed to have foreign shareholders, who after the end of 1811 would no longer make money off of their investment. After the First Bank was closed down it became common knowledge that many of the investors were British and Dutch. This is interesting because of the War of 1812.

In response to the War of 1812, The Second Bank of the United States was set up in 1816. Major reasons for it’s formation was heavy inflation due to financing military operations from the war. Given a 20 year charter the Bank would be up for rechartering in 1836. Andrew Jackson, ran on a platform of ending the Second Bank, because when a private corporation has its hands involved with monetary policy, it will cause corruption.

In 1832, Andrew Jackson removed all money from the Second Bank of the US. In 1836 he vetoed the charter and by 1841 the Bank was defunct.

Now, there is a lot of similarities between these banks.

• They are both Privately owned.
• Both have allowed shareholders who are not American.
• They Both have FULL control over the monetary system.
• They Both will loan money to the US Government in return receiving interest on the debt.

A trip through history will show the evolution of how the Federal Reserve came about. The Federal Reserve Act of 1913, did not include a charter like it’s previous incarnations. This was a safety net so they could not be stopped. They are still privately owned, have control over the monetary system and loan money to the government at interest, which is considered our National Debt, though through the Black Books, the National Debt should be around an estimated 30 trillion USD.

Tomorrow will be a new day.

This is some of my own raw footage from last night when Bachus was doing a meet and greet. The gentleman in front of me did an exceptional job on asking about how 550 billion USD disappear in 2 hours. This shows how clueless Spencer Bachus is, and he’s the RANKING Minority member on the House Financial Services Committee.

At about 2:14 you’ll see my jab about ENDING The Federal Reserve, and getting brushed off when I stated we need to remove the fiat currency and get out of our markets. His only reply was that he was the one that got Ron Paul on a Subcommittee and that they don’t have the votes. You’d think that some of these people who cosponsored the Audit the Fed bill would at least doing something.

Spencer Bachus held a town hall meeting in Birmingham, Alabama last night. I decided to attend and make my voice heard on who he really is.

Spencer Bachus has been in congress for well over 15 years now. Only recently has his true colors creped into the light.

On October 3, 2008 Congressman Spencer Bachus voted for the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008, which is bill that created TARP. We all know this as to being a corporate welfare project for the banks who gave out loans to people who couldn’t afford them in the first place, many under the discretion of Congress.

What you may not know is that from 2007 to 2008, Spencer Bachus received over $232,000 from the banking industry, $136,000 of it from their PACs alone.

http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/summary.php?cycle=2008&type=I&cid=N00008091&newMem=N

Now, who do you believe Congressman Bachus is willing stand up and fight for? The banking industry has stuffed his pockets full of money and he returns the favor. Of course in the end we are the ones who will end up with the bill.

We need more people in Congress who are willing to stand up and realize that it is time to break the shackles of the Federal Reserve. They are the ones who are causing these economic meltdowns by continually expanding and contracting the market place. In turn it causes massive inflation, and that is the tax that most Americans never see.

The real problem is this, government involvement lead to what we have now. Insurance companies and hospitals that charge outrageous sums of money for care. For the government to do this is demeaning to he common American. Then to turn around and say that reforming the health care industry is the only way to fix our economy is out right blasphemous. To “reform” a health care system that is already broken by government involvement, to say at the least. isn’t going to fix the wheel.

How about this for an idea. Get rid of all insurance companies, and allow the citizens local banks to offer a tax-free Health Savings Account. Allow the citizens and healthcare providers to find common ground and work a deal toward paying for the healthcare expense. Adding Socialism and Government Involvement between a citizen and doctor is not going to help the citizen get the care that he and his family needs.

This current administration seems to be wanting bring in corporate fascism to this country, and is doing a good job at it. Shame that they would never let someone like me in that conference room. I would most certainly ask some real questions about the economy. Like the connections between Bailout money and the group of people who chose Timothy Geithner to head up the NY Federal Reserve. Just read this slate article.