… … we apparently have a very different view on what the FED is.
The nature of the Fed has been discussed before. I really don’t want to go into it again. Perhaps someone else will respond. Otherwise, try search.
My advice is this: if anyone tells you that the Fed is private, ignore everything they ever say to you on banking, economics and the Fed.
I was asking people for reasons why they think I guess wrong.
Guess wrong as opposed to what? Guess right? There’s no guessing right. If you’re guessing, you’re wrong.
Guess wrong as opposed to what? Guess right? There’s no guessing right. If you’re guessing, you’re wrong.
That seems like the perfect outlook on life to kill all innovation, change and progress.
The nature of the Fed has been discussed before. I really don’t want to go into it again. Perhaps someone else will respond. Otherwise, try search.
My advice is this: if anyone tells you that the Fed is private, ignore everything they ever say to you on banking, economics and the Fed.
That’s too bad. This is what the Dutch page of Wikipedia says about the FED (translated). I hope someone on this forum is willing to make corrections, because if nobody does, I’ll continue to believe that it’s all true:
The Federal Reserve System or the Federal Reserve (also known informally as The Fed) is the private, central bank of the United States of America, similar to the European Central Bank in Frankfurt. The Bank is governed by a Board which is appointed by the President. Although the Federal Reserve name suggests otherwise, the bank is not owned by the state: the shares are required by all participating banks (“members”). All banks with a federal banking license should be member / shareholder, banks with a license from a state may choose to do so if they meet certain conditions. The Bank is principally engaged in monetary policy. In addition, the bank is monitoring domestic payments. The current Fed Chairman is Ben Bernanke. He was appointed by President George W. Bush. His predecessor was Alan Greenspan.
Although I’m Dutch, I prefer discussing US economics, because the Dutch are too boring (Our central bank is simply owned by the government, so we don’t have interesting books like this (most helpful customer review: “It should be remembered that the Fed is a privately owned bank!!”))
That seems like the perfect outlook on life to kill all innovation, change and progress.
Is that what you think innovation is? Guessing?
That’s too bad.
I tried searching for old threads, but could not find on – though I’m pretty sure it exists. Anyhow, my answer is really in my post above. A gangster can make people pay him protection money and call it “shares in Mafia Inc.”. The real question is about control. The Fed is a good example of fascist system, because it retains some nominal private features, but is fully controlled by the government. When it comes to control, day-to-day bureaucratic membership and power over others – the real distinguishing features – the Fed is indistinguishable from a government regulatory agency.
That Wiki article was probably written by some Libertarian fruitcake. (Don’t get me started on Ron Paul!)
Is that what you think innovation is? Guessing?
The Wright brothers guessed that making a flying machine (airplane) was possible. They had absolutely no way to know for sure, so yes, I think guessing and then checking is an essential part of innovation… my name is solution checker for a reason, I came here to have my solution checked to see what arguments in favor or against it would come up. It seems what you have been trying to say is: “It’s too complex to predict the consequences, and often government involvement has a lot of unwanted side effects, so there’s no use in having this discussion.” So your message is clear enough. I welcome you to re-enter the discussion with arguments regarding the economic subjects sNerd and I are discussing, because I’m not here to discuss the meaning of the word ‘guessing’.
When it comes to control, day-to-day bureaucratic membership and power over others – the real distinguishing features – the Fed is indistinguishable from a government regulatory agency.
Hi sNerd, I remain curious about your sources. I’ve named the Supreme Court, Wikipedia and congressman Ron Paul to back up my idea that the FED is essentially a privately owned institution, together with the argument that a government cannot be in debt of itself. Yet you keep your opinion that it’s not private, and even if it were, it wouldn’t matter because still it would be the government calling the shots. Moreover, you say on a bureaucratic level it is indistinguishable for other government regulatory agencies. However, the FED themselve point out some clear differences on their website:
“It is considered an independent central bank because its monetary policy decisions do not have to be approved by the President or anyone else in the executive or legislative branches of government, it does not receive funding appropriated by the Congress, and the terms of the members of the Board of Governors span multiple presidential and congressional terms.”
I would also welcome other readers to state their opinion on whether or not they think the FED should be considered a federal or a private institution. The answer ‘It’s part federal and part private’ might be true, but it’s not helpful without specifying what part is what. Thanks!
Hi sNerd, I remain curious about your sources.
This is not a question of sources. This is an issue of defining what exactly you mean by a “private organization”. I gave all my reasons above.
BTW *you* pointed to a Fed page, so I looked at it and this is what is said:
The Federal Reserve System fulfills its public mission as an independent entity within government. It is not “owned” by anyone and is not a private, profit-making institution.
As the nation’s central bank, the Federal Reserve derives its authority from the Congress of the United States. It is considered an independent central bank because its monetary policy decisions do not have to be approved by the President or anyone else in the executive or legislative branches of government, it does not receive funding appropriated by the 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 the Congress, which often reviews the Federal Reserve’s activities and can alter its responsibilities by statute. Therefore, the Federal Reserve can be more accurately described as “independent within the government” rather than “independent of government.”
The 12 regional Federal Reserve Banks, which were established by the Congress as the operating arms of the nation’s central banking system, are organized similarly to 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.
Are you presenting the above as proof that the Fed is private?
Are you presenting the above as proof that the Fed is private?
No, I’m presenting the above as proof that it is distinct from other government regulatory agencies. Like I said, the FED themselves prefer to be very vague about their ownership. By the way, I just came across a partly similar discussion here.
No, I’m presenting the above as proof that it is distinct from other government regulatory agencies. Like I said, the FED themselves prefer to be very vague about their ownership. By the way, I just came across a partly similar discussion here.
I decided to create a fresh topic.
I doubt I have any more to add, but since this question comes up from time to time, and since idiots like Ron Paul make this popular, I figure it deserves a topic of its own.
The Wright brothers guessed that making a flying machine (airplane) was possible.
No, they didn’t.
They had absolutely no way to know for sure,
Yes, they did.
The Wright Brothers were successful in building a flying machine (as others failed around them) precisely because they didn’t guess. They instead studied the laws of physics, actual flight (of birds) and past human successes (with gliding).
Humans have been guessing how to fly long before the early 20th century. The reason why they never succeeded (and could never have succeeded) was because guessing does not and cannot work to engineer a solution to a complex problem like human flight. What is required is knowledge of the driving principles behind the problem.
I’m not here to discuss the meaning of the word ‘guessing’
There’s no disagreement on the meaning of the word. The disagreement is on whether it’s a useful method for solving problems.
Realizing that it isn’t begins some time in elementary school, when kids are presented with their first math problems. That is where teachers have a responsibility to eliminate guessing from every student’s repertoire of methods to solve those problems (by creating problems that can’t be guessed, or, if that’s impossible, by never accepting a guess as the answer - not even when it’s the right answer).
Has no teacher ever told you to stop guessing in class? If they didn’t, then that’s on them. It really is a shame that there’s a learning institution out there that equates creativity with guessing.