Global Vision Forum

Full Version: The London Connection:Secrets of the Federal Reserve
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
SECRETS OF THE FEDERAL RESERVE

Download in ZIP File
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/Doc/RESERVE.zip
Download Word Document
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/Doc/RESERVE.doc

G. Edward Griffin

The Creature from Jekyll Island: A Lecture on the Federal Reserve
"G. Edward Griffin exposes the most blatant scam of all history. It’s all here: the cause of wars, boom-bust cycles, inflation, depression, prosperity. It's just exactly what every American needs to know about the power of the central bank."
Running time: 1:29:28.3 / File Size: 10.6 MB  


Eustace Mullins on the Pastor Pete Peterson radio program
http://www.apfn.net/audio/Eustace_Mullins.rm

Wake Up America - The Federal Reserve System
#1 http://www.apfn.net/audio/L003I060312114...rve1.MP3  (5.16MB) 22Min 33 Sec
#2 http://www.apfn.net/audio/L004I060312121...rve2.MP3  (5.97MB) 26Min 6 Sec
04/25/06 Audio: Ron Paul re: Money
http://www.apfn.net/pogo/M001I0604251938...5-06.MP3  (7.75MB)



THE LONDON CONNECTION

By

Eustace Mullins
Dedicated to two of the finest scholars of the twentieth century

GEORGE STIMPSON and EZRA POUND

Who generously gave of their vast knowledge to a young writer to guide him in a field which he could not have managed alone.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I wish to thank my former fellow members of the staff of the Library of Congress whose very kind assistance, cooperation and suggestions made the early versions of this book possible. I also wish to thank the staffs of the Newberry Library, Chicago, the New York City Public Library, the Alderman Library of the University of Virginia, and the McCormick Library of Washington and Lee University, Lexington, Virginia, for their invaluable assistance in the completion of thirty years of further research for this definitive work on the Federal Reserve System.

About the Author

Eustace Mullins is a veteran of the United States Air Force, with thirty-eight months of active service during World War II. A native Virginian, he was educated at Washington and Lee University, New York University, Ohio University, the University of North Dakota, the Escuelas des Bellas Artes, San Miguel de Allende, Mexico, and the Institute of Contemporary Arts, Washington, D.C.

The original book, published under the title Mullins On The Federal Reserve, was commissioned by the poet Ezra Pound in 1948. Ezra Pound was a political prisoner for thirteen and a half years at St. Elizabeth’s Hospital, Washington, D.C. (a Federal institution for the insane). His release was accomplished largely through the efforts of Mr. Mullins.

The research at the Library of Congress was directed and reviewed daily by George Stimpson, founder of the National Press Club in Washington, whom The New York Times on September 28, 1952 called, "A highly regarded reference source in the capitol. Government officials, Congressmen, and reporters went to him for information on any subject."

Published in 1952 by Kasper and Horton, New York, the original book was the first nationally-circulated revelation of the secret meetings of the international bankers at Jekyll Island, Georgia, 1907-1910, at which place the draft of the Federal Reserve Act of 1913 was written.

During the intervening years, the author continued to gather new and more startling information about the backgrounds of the people who direct the Federal Reserve policies. New information gathered over the years from hundreds of newspapers, periodicals, and books give corroborating insight into the connections of the international banking houses.*

While researching this material, Eustace Mullins was on the staff of the Library of Congress. Mullins later was a consultant on highway finance for the American Petroleum Institute, consultant on hotel development for Institutions Magazine, and editorial director for the Chicago Motor Club’s four publications.

* The London Acceptance Council is limited to seventeen international banking houses authorized by the Bank of England to handle foreign exchange.

ABOUT THE COVER

The cover reproduces the outline of the eagle from the red shield, the coat of arms of the city of Frankfurt, Germany, adapted by Mayer Amschel Bauer (1744-1812) who changed his name from Bauer to Rothschild ("Red Shield"). Rothschild added five golden arrows held in the eagle’s talons, signifying his five sons who operated the five banking houses of the international House of Rothschild: Frankfurt, London, Paris, Vienna, and Naples.

Table of Contents

Chapter One Jekyll Island 1

Chapter Two The Aldrich Plan 10

Chapter Three The Federal Reserve Act 16

Chapter Four The Federal Advisory Council 40

Chapter Five The House of Rothschild 47

Chapter Six The London Connection 63

Chapter Seven The Hitler Connection 69

Chapter Eight World War One 82

Chapter Nine The Agricultural Depression 114

Chapter Ten The Money Creators 119

Chapter Eleven Lord Montagu Norman 131

Chapter Twelve The Great Depression 143

Chapter Thirteen The 1930's 151

Chapter Fourteen Congressional Expose 171

Addendum 179

Appendix I 181

Biographies 186

Bibliography 193

Index 197

@The above facsimile is reproduced from page 60 of

"HISTORICAL BEGINNINGS . . . . THE FEDERAL RESERVE",

published by the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston in its seventh printing, 1982.

Foreword

In 1949, while I was visiting Ezra Pound who was a political prisoner at St. Elizabeth’s Hospital, Washington, D.C. (a Federal institution for the insane), Dr. Pound asked me if I had ever heard of the Federal Reserve System. I replied that I had not, as of the age of 25. He then showed me a ten dollar bill marked "Federal Reserve Note" and asked me if I would do some research at the Library of Congress on the Federal Reserve System which had issued this bill. Pound was unable to go to the Library himself, as he was being held without trial as a political prisoner by the United States government. After he was denied broadcasting time in the U.S., Dr. Pound broadcast from Italy in an effort to persuade people of the United States not to enter World War II. Franklin D. Roosevelt had personally ordered Pound’s indictment, spurred by the demands of his three personal assistants, Harry Dexter White, Lauchlin Currie, and Alger Hiss, all of whom were subsequently identified as being connected with Communist espionage.

I had no interest in money or banking as a subject, because I was working on a novel. Pound offered to supplement my income by ten dollars a week for a few weeks. My initial research revealed evidence of an international banking group which had secretly planned the writing of the Federal Reserve Act and Congress’ enactment of the plan into law. These findings confirmed what Pound had long suspected. He said, "You must work on it as a detective story." I was fortunate in having my research at the Library of Congress directed by a prominent scholar, George Stimpson, founder of the National Press Club, who was described by The New York Times of September 28, 1952: "Beloved by Washington newspapermen as ‘our walking Library of Congress’, Mr. Stimpson was a highly regarded reference source in the Capitol. Government officials, Congressmen and reporters went to him for information on any subject."

I did research four hours each day at the Library of Congress, and went to St. Elizabeth’s Hospital in the afternoon. Pound and I went over the previous day’s notes. I then had dinner with George Stimpson at Scholl’s Cafeteria while he went over my material, and I then went back to my room to type up the corrected notes. Both Stimpson and Pound made many suggestions in guiding me in a field in which I had no previous experience. When Pound’s resources ran low, I applied to the Guggenheim Foundation, Huntington Hartford Foundation, and other foundations to complete my research on the Federal Reserve. Even though my foundation applications were sponsored by the three leading poets of America, Ezra Pound, E.E. Cummings, and Elizabeth Bishop, all of the foundations refused to sponsor this research. I then wrote up my findings to date, and in 1950 began efforts to market this manuscript in New York. Eighteen publishers turned it down without comment, but the nineteenth, Devin Garrity, president of Devin Adair Publishing Company, gave me some friendly advice in his office. "I like your book, but we can’t print it," he told me. "Neither can anybody else in New York. Why don’t you bring in a prospectus for your novel, and I think we can give you an advance. You may as well forget about getting the Federal Reserve book published. I doubt if it could ever be printed."

This was devastating news, coming after two years of intensive work. I reported back to Pound, and we tried to find a publisher in other parts of the country. After two years of fruitless submissions, the book was published in a small edition in 1952 by two of Pound’s disciples, John Kasper and David Horton, using their private funds, under the title Mullins on the Federal Reserve. In 1954, a second edition, with unauthorized alterations, was published in New Jersey, as The Federal Reserve Conspiracy. In 1955, Guido Roeder brought out a German edition in Oberammergau, Germany. The book was seized and the entire edition of 10,000 copies burned by government agents led by Dr. Otto John.

The burning of the book was upheld April 21, 1961 by judge Israel Katz of the Bavarian Supreme Court. The U.S. Government refused to intervene, because U.S. High Commissioner to Germany, James B. Conant (president of Harvard University 1933 to 1953), had approved the initial book burning order. This is the only book which has been burned in Germany since World War II. In 1968 a pirated edition of this book appeared in California. Both the FBI and the U.S. Postal inspectors refused to act, despite numerous complaints from me during the next decade. In 1980 a new German edition appeared. Because the U.S. Government apparently no longer dictated the internal affairs of Germany, the identical book which had been burned in 1955 now circulates in Germany without interference.

I had collaborated on several books with Mr. H.L. Hunt and he suggested that I should continue my long-delayed research on the Federal Reserve and bring out a more definitive version of this book. I had just signed a contract to write the authorized biography of Ezra Pound, and the Federal Reserve book had to be postponed. Mr. Hunt passed away before I could get back to my research, and once again I faced the problem of financing research for the book.

My original book had traced and named the shadowy figures in the United States who planned the Federal Reserve Act. I now discovered that the men whom I exposed in 1952 as the shadowy figures behind the operation of the Federal Reserve System were themselves shadows, the American fronts for the unknown figures who became known as the "London Connection." I found that notwithstanding our successes in the Wars of Independence of 1812 against England, we remained an economic and financial colony of Great Britain. For the first time, we located the original stockholders of the Federal Reserve Banks and traced their parent companies to the London Connection.

This research is substantiated by citations and documentation from hundreds of newspapers, periodicals and books and charts showing blood, marriage, and business relationships. More than a thousand issues of The New York Times on microfilm have been checked not only for original information, but verification of statements from other sources.

It is a truism of the writing profession that a writer has only one book within him. This seems applicable in my case, because I am now in the fifth decade of continuous writing on a single subject, the inside story of the Federal Reserve System. This book was from its inception commissioned and guided by Ezra Pound. Four of his protégés have previously been awarded the Nobel Prize for Literature, William Butler Yeats for his later poetry, James Joyce for "Ulysses", Ernest Hemingway for "The Sun Also Rises", and T.S. Elliot for "The Waste Land". Pound played a major role in the inspiration and in the editing of these works--which leads us to believe that this present work, also inspired by Pound, represents an ongoing literary tradition.

Although this book in its inception was expected to be a tortuous work on economic and monetary techniques, it soon developed into a story of such universal and dramatic appeal that from the outset, Ezra Pound urged me to write it as a detective story, a genre which was invented by my fellow Virginian, Edgar Allan Poe. I believe that the continuous circulation of this book during the past forty years has not only exonerated Ezra Pound for his much condemned political and monetary statements, but also that it has been, and will continue to be, the ultimate weapon against the powerful conspirators who compelled him to serve thirteen and a half years without trial, as a political prisoner held in an insane asylum a la KGB. His earliest vindication came when the government agents who represented the conspirators refused to allow him to testify in his own defense; the second vindication came in 1958 when these same agents dropped all charges against him, and he walked out of St. Elizabeth’s Hospital, a free man once more. His third and final vindication is this work, which documents every aspect of his exposure of the ruthless international financiers to whom Ezra Pound became but one more victim, doomed to serve years as the Man in the Iron Mask, because he had dared to alert his fellow-Americans to their furtive acts of treason against all people of the United States.

In my lectures throughout this nation, and in my appearances on many radio and television programs, I have sounded the toxin that the Federal Reserve System is not Federal; it has no reserves; and it is not a system at all, but rather, a criminal syndicate. From November, 1910, when the conspirators met on Jekyll Island, Georgia, to the present time, the machinations of the Federal Reserve bankers have been shrouded in secrecy. Today, that secrecy has cost the American people a three trillion dollar debt, with annual interest payments to these bankers amounting to some three hundred billion dollars per year, sums which stagger the imagination, and which in themselves are ultimately unpayable. Officials of the Federal Reserve System routinely issue remonstrances to the public, much as the Hindu fakir pipes an insistent tune to the dazed cobra which sways its head before him, not to resolve the situation, but to prevent it from striking him. Such was the soothing letter written by Donald J. Winn, Assistant to the Board of Governors in response to an inquiry by a Congressman, the Honorable Norman D. Shumway, on March 10, 1983. Mr. Winn states that "The Federal Reserve System was established by an act of Congress in 1913 and is not a ‘private corporation’." On the next page, Mr. Winn continues, "The stock of the Federal Reserve Banks is held entirely by commercial banks that are members of the Federal Reserve System." He offers no explanation as to why the government has never owned a single share of stock in any Federal Reserve Bank, or why the Federal Reserve System is not a "private corporation" when all of its stock is owned by "private corporations".

American history in the twentieth century has recorded the amazing achievements of the Federal Reserve bankers. First, the outbreak of World War I, which was made possible by the funds available from the new central bank of the United States. Second, the Agricultural Depression of 1920. Third, the Black Friday Crash on Wall Street of October, 1929 and the ensuing Great Depression. Fourth, World War II. Fifth, the conversion of the assets of the United States and its citizens from real property to paper assets from 1945 to the present, transforming a victorious America and foremost world power in 1945 to the world’s largest debtor nation in 1990. Today, this nation lies in economic ruins, devastated and destitute, in much the same dire straits in which Germany and Japan found themselves in 1945. Will Americans act to rebuild our nation, as Germany and Japan have done when they faced the identical conditions which we now face--or will we continue to be enslaved by the Babylonian debt money system which was set up by the Federal Reserve Act in 1913 to complete our total destruction? This is the only question which we have to answer, and we do not have much time left to answer it.

Because of the depth and the importance of the information which I had developed at the Library of Congress under the tutelage of Ezra Pound, this work became the happy hunting ground for many other would-be historians, who were unable to research this material for themselves. Over the past four decades, I have become accustomed to seeing this material appear in many other books, invariably attributed to other writers, with my name never mentioned. To add insult to injury, not only my material, but even my title has been appropriated, in a massive, if obtuse, work called "Secrets of the Temple--the Federal Reserve". This heavily advertised book received reviews ranging from incredulous to hilarious. Forbes Magazine advised its readers to read their review and save their money, pointing out that "a reader will discover no secrets" and that "This is one of those books whose fanfares far exceed their merit." This was not accidental, as this overblown whitewash of the Federal Reserve bankers was published by the most famous nonbook publisher in the world.

After my initial shock at discovering that the most influential literary personality of the twentieth century, Ezra Pound, was imprisoned in "the Hellhole" in Washington, I immediately wrote for assistance to a Wall Street financier at whose estate I had frequently been a guest. I reminded him that as a patron of the arts, he could not afford to allow Pound to remain in such inhuman captivity. His reply shocked me even more. He wrote back that "your friend can well stay where he is." It was some years before I was able to understand that, for this investment banker and his colleagues, Ezra Pound would always be "the enemy".

EustaceMullins

Jackson Hole, Wyoming

1991



Introduction



Here are the simple facts of the great betrayal. Wilson and House knew that they were doing something momentous. One cannot fathom men’s motives and this pair probably believed in what they were up to. What they did not believe in was representative government. They believed in government by an uncontrolled oligarchy whose acts would only become apparent after an interval so long that the electorate would be forever incapable of doing anything efficient to remedy depredations.

EZRA POUND

(St. Elizabeth’s Hospital,

Washington, D.C. 1950)



(AUTHOR’S NOTE: Dr. Pound wrote this introduction for the earliest version of this book, published by Kasper and Horton, New York, 1952. Because he was being held as a political prisoner without trial by the Federal Government, he could not afford to allow his name to appear on the book because of additional reprisals against him. Neither could he allow the book to be dedicated to him, although he had commissioned its writing. The author is gratified to be able to remedy these necessary omissions, thirty-three years after the events.)

JEFFERSON’S OPINION ON THE

CONSTITUTIONALITY OF THE BANK

February 15, 1791

(The Writings of Thomas Jefferson, ed. by H. E. Bergh, Vol. III, p. 145 ff.)

The bill for establishing a national bank, in 1791, undertakes, among other things,--

1. To form the subscribers into a corporation.

2. To enable them, in their corporate capacities, to receive grants of lands; and, so far, is against the laws of mortmain.

3. To make alien subscribers capable of holding lands; and so far is against the laws of alienage.

4. To transmit these lands, on the death of a proprietor, to a certain line of successors; and so far, changes the course of descents.

5. To put the lands out of the reach of forfeiture, or escheat; and so far, is against the laws of forfeiture and escheat.

6. To transmit personal chattels to successors, in a certain line; and so far, is against the laws of distribution.

7. To give them the sole and exclusive right of banking, under the national authority; and, so far, is against the laws of monopoly.

8. To communicate to them a power to make laws, paramount to the laws of the states; for so they must be construed, to protect the institution from the control of the state legislatures; and so probably they will be construed.

I consider the foundation of the Constitution as laid on this ground--that all powers not delegated to the United States, by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states, or to the people (12th amend.). To take a single step beyond the boundaries thus specially drawn around the powers of Congress, is to take possession of a boundless field of power, no longer susceptible of any definition.

The incorporation of a bank, and the powers assumed by this bill, have not, in my opinion, been delegated to the United States by the Constitution.

CHAPTER ONE

Jekyll Island

"The matter of a uniform discount rate was discussed and settled at Jekyll Island."--Paul M. Warburg1

On the night of November 22, 1910, a group of newspaper reporters stood disconsolately in the railway station at Hoboken, New Jersey. They had just watched a delegation of the nation’s leading financiers leave the station on a secret mission. It would be years before they discovered what that mission was, and even then they would not understand that the history of the United States underwent a drastic change after that night in Hoboken.

The delegation had left in a sealed railway car, with blinds drawn, for an undisclosed destination. They were led by Senator Nelson Aldrich, head of the National Monetary Commission. President Theodore Roosevelt had signed into law the bill creating the National Monetary Commission in 1908, after the tragic Panic of 1907 had resulted in a public outcry that the nation’s monetary system be stabilized. Aldrich had led the members of the Commission on a two-year tour of Europe, spending some three hundred thousand dollars of public money. He had not yet made a report on the results of this trip, nor had he offered any plan for banking reform.

Accompanying Senator Aldrich at the Hoboken station were his private secretary, Shelton; A. Piatt Andrew, Assistant Secretary of the Treasury, and Special Assistant of the National Monetary Commission; Frank Vanderlip, president of the National City Bank of New York, Henry P. Davison, senior partner of J.P. Morgan Company, and generally regarded as Morgan’s personal emissary; and Charles D. Norton, president of the Morgan-dominated First National Bank of New York. Joining the group just before the train left the station were Benjamin Strong, also known as a lieutenant of J.P. Morgan; and Paul Warburg, a recent immigrant from Germany who had joined the banking house of Kuhn, Loeb

__________________________

1 Prof. Nathaniel Wright Stephenson, Paul Warburg’s Memorandum, Nelson Aldrich A Leader in American Politics, Scribners, N.Y. 1930

1



and Company, New York as a partner earning five hundred thousand dollars a year.

Six years later, a financial writer named Bertie Charles Forbes (who later founded the Forbes Magazine; the present editor, Malcom Forbes, is his son), wrote:

"Picture a party of the nation’s greatest bankers stealing out of New York on a private railroad car under cover of darkness, stealthily hieing hundred of miles South, embarking on a mysterious

launch, sneaking onto an island deserted by all but a few servants, living there a full week under such rigid secrecy that the names of not one of them was once mentioned lest the servants learn the identity and disclose to the world this strangest, most secret expedition in the history of American finance. I am not romancing; I am giving to the world, for the first time, the real story of how the famous Aldrich currency report, the foundation of our new currency system, was written . . . . The utmost secrecy was enjoined upon all. The public must not glean a hint of what was to be done. Senator Aldrich notified each one to go quietly into a private car of which the railroad had received orders to draw up on an unfrequented platform. Off the party set. New York’s ubiquitous reporters had been foiled . . . Nelson (Aldrich) had confided to Henry, Frank,

Paul and Piatt that he was to keep them locked up at Jekyll Island, out of the rest of the world, until they had evolved and compiled a scientific currency system for the United States, the real birth of the present Federal Reserve System, the plan done on Jekyll Island in the conference with Paul, Frank and Henry . . . . Warburg is the link that binds the Aldrich system and the present system together. He more than any one man has made the system possible as a working reality."2

The official biography of Senator Nelson Aldrich states:

"In the autumn of 1910, six men went out to shoot ducks, Aldrich, his secretary Shelton, Andrews, Davison, Vanderlip and Warburg. Reporters were waiting at the Brunswick (Georgia) station. Mr. Davison went out and talked to them. The reporters dispersed and the secret of the strange journey was not divulged. Mr. Aldrich asked him how he had managed it and he did not volunteer the information."3

Davison had an excellent reputation as the person who could conciliate warring factions, a role he had performed for J.P. Morgan during the settling of the Money Panic of 1907. Another Morgan partner, T.W. Lamont, says:



"Henry P. Davison served as arbitrator of the Jekyll Island expedition."4

__________________________

2 "CURRENT OPINION", December, 1916, p. 382.

3 Nathaniel Wright Stephenson, Nelson W. Aldrich, A Leader in American Politics, Scribners, N.Y. 1930, Chap. XXIV "Jekyll Island"

4 T.W. Lamont, Henry P. Davison, Harper, 1933

2

From these references, it is possible to piece together the story. Aldrich’s private car, which had left Hoboken station with its shades drawn, had taken the financiers to Jekyll Island, Georgia. Some years earlier, a very exclusive group of millionaires, led by J.P. Morgan, had purchased the island as a winter retreat. They called themselves the Jekyll Island Hunt Club, and, at first, the island was used only for hunting expeditions, until the millionaires realized that its pleasant climate offered a warm retreat from the rigors of winters in New York, and began to build splendid mansions, which they called "cottages", for their families’ winter vacations. The club building itself, being quite isolated, was sometimes in demand for stag parties and other pursuits unrelated to hunting. On such occasions, the club members who were not invited to these specific outings were asked not to appear there for a certain number of days. Before Nelson Aldrich’s party had left New York, the club’s members had been notified that the club would be occupied for the next two weeks.

The Jekyll Island Club was chosen as the place to draft the plan for control of the money and credit of the people of the United States, not only because of its isolation, but also because it was the private preserve of the people who were drafting the plan. The New York Times later noted, on May 3, 1931, in commenting on the death of George F. Baker, one of J.P. Morgan’s closest associates, that "Jekyll Island Club has lost one of its most distinguished members. One-sixth of the total wealth of the world was represented by the members of the Jekyll Island Club." Membership was by inheritance only.

The Aldrich group had no interest in hunting. Jekyll Island was chosen for the site of the preparation of the central bank because it offered complete privacy, and because there was not a journalist within fifty miles. Such was the need for secrecy that the members of the party agreed, before arriving at Jekyll Island, that no last names would be used at any time during their two week stay. The group later referred to themselves as the First Name Club, as the last names of Warburg, Strong, Vanderlip and the others were prohibited during their stay. The customary attendants had been given two week vacations from the club, and new servants brought in from the mainland for this occasion who did not know the names of any of those present. Even if they had been interrogated after the Aldrich party went back to New York, they could not have given the names. This arrangement proved to be so satisfactory that the members, limited to those who had actually been present at Jekyll Island, later had a number of informal get-togethers in New York.

Why all this secrecy? Why this thousand mile trip in a closed railway car to a remote hunting club? Ostensibly, it was to carry out a program of public service, to prepare banking reform which would be a boon to the people of the United States, which had been ordered by the National

3

Monetary Commission. The participants were no strangers to public benefactions. Usually, their names were inscribed on brass plaques, or on the exteriors of buildings which they had donated. This was not the procedure which they followed at Jekyll Island. No brass plaque was ever erected to mark the selfless actions of those who met at their private hunt club in 1910 to improve the lot of every citizen of the United States.

In fact, no benefaction took place at Jekyll Island. The Aldrich group journeyed there in private to write the banking and currency legislation which the National Monetary Commission had been ordered to prepare in public. At stake was the future control of the money and credit of the United States. If any genuine monetary reform had been prepared and presented to Congress, it would have ended the power of the elitist one world money creators. Jekyll Island ensured that a central bank would be established in the United States which would give these bankers everything they had always wanted.

As the most technically proficient of those present, Paul Warburg was charged with doing most of the drafting of the plan. His work would then be discussed and gone over by the rest of the group. Senator Nelson Aldrich was there to see that the completed plan would come out in a form which he could get passed by Congress, and the other bankers were there to include whatever details would be needed to be certain that they got everything they wanted, in a finished draft composed during a onetime stay. After they returned to New York, there could be no second get together to rework their plan. They could not hope to obtain such secrecy for their work on a second journey.

The Jekyll Island group remained at the club for nine days, working furiously to complete their task. Despite the common interests of those present, the work did not proceed without friction. Senator Aldrich, always a domineering person, considered himself the chosen leader of the group, and could not help ordering everyone else about. Aldrich also felt somewhat out of place as the only member who was not a professional banker. He had had substantial banking interests throughout his career, but only as a person who profited from his ownership of bank stock. He knew little about the technical aspects of financial operations. His opposite number, Paul Warburg, believed that every question raised by the group demanded, not merely an answer, but a lecture. He rarely lost an opportunity to give the members a long discourse designed to impress them with the extent of his knowledge of banking. This was resented by the others, and often drew barbed remarks from Aldrich. The natural diplomacy of Henry P. Davison proved to be the catalyst which kept them at their work. Warburg’s thick alien accent grated on them, and constantly reminded them that they had to accept his presence if a central bank plan was to be devised which would guarantee them their future pro-

4

fits. Warburg made little effort to smooth over their prejudices, and contested them on every possible occasion on technical banking questions, which he considered his private preserve.

"In all conspiracies there must be great secrecy."5

The "monetary reform" plan prepared at Jekyll Island was to be presented to Congress as the completed work of the National Monetary Commission. It was imperative that the real authors of the bill remain hidden. So great was popular resentment against bankers since the Panic of 1907 that no Congressman would dare to vote for a bill bearing the Wall Street taint, no matter who had contributed to his campaign expenses. The Jekyll Island plan was a central bank plan, and in this country there was a long tradition of struggle against inflicting a central bank on the American people. It had begun with Thomas Jefferson’s fight against Alexander Hamilton’s scheme for the First Bank of the United States, backed by James Rothschild. It had continued with President Andrew Jackson’s successful war against Alexander Hamilton’s scheme for the Second Bank of the United States, in which Nicholas Biddle was acting as the agent for James Rothschild of Paris. The result of that struggle was the creation of the Independent Sub-Treasury System, which supposedly had served to keep the funds of the United States out of the hands of the financiers. A study of the panics of 1873, 1893, and 1907 indicates that these panics were the result of the international bankers’ operations in London. The public was demanding in 1908 that Congress enact legislation to prevent the recurrence of artificially induced money panics. Such monetary reform now seemed inevitable. It was to head off and control such reform that the National Monetary Commission had been set up with Nelson Aldrich at its head, since he was majority leader of the Senate.

The main problem, as Paul Warburg informed his colleagues, was to avoid the name "Central Bank". For that reason, he had decided upon the designation of "Federal Reserve System". This would deceive the people into thinking it was not a central bank. However, the Jekyll Island plan would be a central bank plan, fulfilling the main functions of a central bank; it would be owned by private individuals who would profit from ownership of shares. As a bank of issue, it would control the nation’s money and credit.

In the chapter on Jekyll Island in his biography of Aldrich, Stephenson writes of the conference:

"How was the Reserve Bank to be controlled? It must be controlled by Congress. The government

was to be represented in the board of directors, it was to have full knowledge of all the Bank’s,

affairs, but a majority

__________________________

5 Clarendon, Hist. Reb. 1647

5

of the directors were to be chosen, directly or indirectly, by the banks of the association."6

Thus the proposed Federal Reserve Bank was to be "controlled by Congress" and answerable to the government, but the majority of the directors were to be chosen, "directly or indirectly" by the banks of the association. In the final refinement of Warburg’s plan, the Federal Reserve Board of Governors would be appointed by the President of the United States, but the real work of the Board would be controlled by a Federal Advisory Council, meeting with the Governors. The Council would be chosen by the directors of the twelve Federal Reserve Banks, and would remain unknown to the public.

The next consideration was to conceal the fact that the proposed "Federal Reserve System" would be dominated by the masters of the New York money market. The Congressmen from the South and the West could not survive if they voted for a Wall Street plan. Farmers and small businessmen in those areas had suffered most from the money panics. There had been great popular resentment against the Eastern bankers, which during the nineteenth century became a political movement known as "populism". The private papers of Nicholas Biddle, not released until more than a century after his death, show that quite early on the Eastern bankers were fully aware of the widespread public opposition to them.

Paul Warburg advanced at Jekyll Island the primary deception which would prevent the citizens from recognizing that his plan set up a central bank. This was the regional reserve system. He proposed a system of four (later twelve) branch reserve banks located in different sections of the country. Few people outside the banking world would realize that the existing concentration of the nation’s money and credit structure in New York made the proposal of a regional reserve system a delusion.

Another proposal advanced by Paul Warburg at Jekyll Island was the manner of selection of administrators for the proposed regional reserve system. Senator Nelson Aldrich had insisted that the officials should be appointive, not elected, and that Congress should have no role in their selection. His Capitol Hill experience had taught him that congressional opinion would often be inimical to the Wall Street interests, as Congressmen from the West and South might wish to demonstrate to their constituents that they were protecting them against the Eastern bankers.

Warburg responded that the administrators of the proposed central banks should be subject to executive approval by the President. This patent removal of the system from Congressional control meant that the

__________________________

6 Nathaniel Wright Stephenson, Nelson W. Aldrich, A Leader in American Politics, Scribners, N.Y. 1930, Chap. XXIV "Jekyll Island" p. 379

6

Federal Reserve proposal was unconstitutional from its inception, because the Federal Reserve System was to be a bank of issue. Article 1, Sec. 8, Par. 5 of the Constitution expressly charges Congress with "the power to coin money and regulate the value thereof.". Warburg’s plan would deprive Congress of its sovereignty, and the systems of checks and balances of power set up by Thomas Jefferson in the Constitution would now be destroyed. Administrators of the proposed system would control the nation’s money and credit, and would themselves be approved by the executive department of the government. The judicial department (the Supreme Court, etc.) was already virtually controlled by the executive department through presidential appointment to the bench.

Paul Warburg later wrote a massive exposition of his plan, The Federal Reserve System, Its Origin and Growth7 of some 1750 pages, but the name "Jekyll Island" appears nowhere in this text. He does state (Vol. 1, p. 58):

"But then the conference closed, after a week of earnest deliberation, the rough draft of what later became the Aldrich Bill had been agreed upon, and a plan had been outlined which provided for a ‘National Reserve Association,’ meaning a central reserve organization with an elastic note issue based on gold and commercial paper."

On page 60, Warburg writes, "The results of the conference were entirely confidential. Even the fact there had been a meeting was not permitted to become public." He adds in a footnote, "Though eighteen [sic] years have since gone by, I do not feel free to give a description of this most interesting conference concerning which Senator Aldrich pledged all participants to secrecy."

B.C. Forbes’ revelation8 of the secret expedition to Jekyll Island, had had surprisingly little impact. It did not appear in print until two years after the Federal Reserve Act had been passed by Congress, hence it was never read during the period when it could have had an effect, that

__________________________

7 Paul Warburg, The Federal Reserve System, Its Origin and Growth, Volume I, p. 58, Macmillan, New York, 1930

8 CURRENT OPINION, December, 1916, p. 382

7

is, during the Congressional debate on the bill. Forbes’ story was also dismissed, by those "in the know," as preposterous, and a mere invention. Stephenson mentions this on page 484 of his book about Aldrich.9

"This curious episode of Jekyll Island has been generally regarded as a myth. B.C. Forbes got

some information from one of the reporters. It told in vague outline the Jekyll Island story, but

made no impression and was generally regarded as a mere yarn."

The coverup of the Jekyll Island conference proceeded along two lines, both of which were successful. The first, as Stephenson mentions, was to dismiss the entire story as a romantic concoction which never actually took place. Although there were brief references to Jekyll Island in later books concerning the Federal Reserve System, these also attracted little public attention. As we have noted, Warburg’s massive and supposedly definite work on the Federal Reserve System does not mention Jekyll Island at all, although he does admit that a conference took place. In none of his voluminous speeches or writings do the words "Jekyll Island" appear, with a single notable exception. He agreed to Professor Stephenson’s request that he prepare a brief statement for the Aldrich biography. This appears on page 485 as part of "The Warburg Memorandum". In this excerpt, Warburg writes, "The matter of a uniform discount rate was discussed and settled at Jekyll Island."

Another member of the "First Name Club" was less reticent. Frank Vanderlip later published a few brief references to the conference. In the Saturday Evening Post, February 9, 1935, p. 25, Vanderlip wrote:

"Despite my views about the value to society of greater publicity for the affairs of corporations, there was an occasion near the close of 1910, when I was as secretive, indeed, as furtive, as any conspirator. . . . Since it would have been fatal to Senator Aldrich’s plan to have it known that he was calling on anybody from Wall Street to help him in preparing his bill, precautions were taken that would have delighted the heart of James Stillman (a colorful and secretive banker who was President of the National City Bank during the Spanish-American War, and who was thought to have been involved in getting us into that war) . . . I do not feel it is any exaggeration to speak of our secret expedition to Jekyll Island as the occasion of the actual conception of what eventually became the Federal Reserve System."

In a Travel feature in The Washington Post, March 27, 1983, "Follow The Rich to Jekyll Island", Roy Hoopes writes:



"In 1910, when Aldrich and four financial experts wanted a place to meet in secret to reform the country’s banking system, they faked a hunting trip to Jekyll and for 10 days holed up in the Clubhouse, where they made plans for what eventually would become the Federal Reserve Bank."

__________________________

9 Nathaniel Wright Stephenson, Nelson W. Aldrich, A Leader in American Politics, Scribners, N.Y. 1930, Chap. XXIV "Jekyll Island" p. 379

8

Vanderlip later wrote in his autobiography, From Farmboy to Financier:10

"Our secret expedition to Jekyll Island was the occasion of the actual conception of what eventually became the Federal Reserve System. The essential points of the Aldrich Plan were all contained in the Federal Reserve Act as it was passed."

Professor E.R.A. Seligman, a member of the international banking family of J. & W. Seligman, and head of the Department of Economics at Columbia University, wrote in an essay published by the Academy of Political Science, Proceedings, v. 4, No. 4, p. 387-90:

"It is known to a very few how great is the indebtedness of the United States to Mr. Warburg. For it may be said without fear of contradiction that in its fundamental features the Federal Reserve Act is the work of Mr. Warburg more than any other man in the country. The existence of a Federal Reserve Board creates, in everything but in name, a real central bank. In the two fundamentals of command of reserves and of a discount policy, the Federal Reserve Act has

frankly accepted the principle of the Aldrich Bill, and these principles, as has been stated, were the creation of Mr. Warburg and Mr. Warburg alone. It must not be forgotten that Mr. Warburg had a practical object in view. In formulating his plans and in advancing in them slightly varying suggestions from time to time, it was incumbent on him to remember that the education of the

country must be gradual and that a large part of the task was to break down prejudices and remove suspicion. His plans therefore contained all sorts of elaborate suggestions designed to guard the public against fancied dangers and to persuade the country that the general scheme was at all practicable. It was the hope of Mr. Warburg that with the lapse of time it might be possible to eliminate from the law a few clauses which were inserted largely at his suggestion for educational purposes."

Now that the public debt of the United States has passed a trillion dollars, we may indeed admit "how great is the indebtedness of the United States to Mr. Warburg." At the time he wrote the Federal Reserve Act, the public debt was almost nonexistent.

Professor Seligman points out Warburg’s remarkable prescience that the real task of the members of the Jekyll Island conference was to prepare a banking plan which would gradually "educate the country" and "break down prejudices and remove suspicion". The campaign to enact the plan into law succeeded in doing just that.

__________________________

10 Frank Vanderlip, From Farmboy to Financier

9

CHAPTER TWO

The Aldrich Plan



Nelson Aldrich

"Finance and the tariff are reserved by Nelson Aldrich as falling within his sole purview and jurisdiction. Mr. Aldrich is endeavoring to devise, through the National Monetary Commission, a banking and currency law. A great many hundred thousand persons are firmly of the opinion that Mr. Aldrich sums up in his personality the greatest and most sinister menace to the popular welfare of the United States. Ernest Newman recently said, ‘What the South visits on the Negro in a political way, Aldrich would mete out to the mudsills of the North, if he could devise a safe and practical way to accomplish it.’"--Harper’s Weekly, May 7, 1910."

The participants in the Jekyll Island conference returned to New York to direct a nationwide propaganda campaign in favor of the "Aldrich Plan". Three of the leading universities, Princeton, Harvard, and the University of Chicago, were used as the rallying points for this propaganda, and national banks had to contribute to a fund of five million dollars to persuade the American public that this central bank plan should be enacted into law by Congress.

Woodrow Wilson, governor of New Jersey and former president of Princeton University, was enlisted as a spokesman for the Aldrich Plan. During the Panic of 1907, Wilson had declared, "All this trouble could be averted if we appointed a committee of six or seven public-spirited men like J.P. Morgan to handle the affairs of our country."

In his biography of Nelson Aldrich in 1930, Stephenson says:

"A pamphlet was issued January 16, 1911, ‘Suggested Plan for Monetary Legislation’, by Hon. Nelson Aldrich, based on Jekyll Island conclusions." Stephenson says on page 388, "An organization for financial progress has been formed. Mr. Warburg introduced a resolution authorizing the establishment of the Citizens’ League, later the National Citizens League . . . Professor Laughlin of the University of Chicago was given charge of the League’s propaganda."11

It is notable that Stephenson characterizes the work of the National Citizens League as "propaganda", in line with Seligman’s exposition of

__________________________

11 Nathaniel Wright Stephenson, Nelson W. Aldrich, A Leader in American Politics, Scribners, N.Y. 1930

10

Warburg’s work as "the education of the country" and "to break down prejudices".

Much of the five million dollars of the bankers slush fund was spent under the auspices of the National Citizens’ League, which was made up of college professors. The two most tireless propagandists for the Aldrich Plan were Professor O.M. Sprague of Harvard, and J. Laurence Laughlin of the University of Chicago.

Congressman Charles A. Lindbergh, Sr., notes:

"J. Laurence Laughlin, Chairman of the Executive Committee of the National Citizens’ League since its organization, has returned to his position as professor of political economics in the University of Chicago. In June, 1911, Professor Laughlin was given a year’s leave from the university, that he might give all of his time to the campaign of education undertaken by the League . . . He has worked indefatigably, and it is largely due to his efforts and his persistence that the campaign enters the final stage with flattering prospects of a successful outcome . . . The reader knows that the University of Chicago is an institution endowed by John D. Rockefeller, with nearly fifty million dollars."12

In his biography of Nelson Aldrich, Stephenson reveals that the Citizens’ League was also a Jekyll Island product. In chapter 24 we find that: The Aldrich Plan was represented to Congress as the result of three years of work, study and travel by members of the National Monetary Commission, with expenditures of more than three hundred thousand dollars.*

Testifying before the Committee on Rules, December 15, 1911, after the Aldrich plan had been introduced in Congress, Congressman Lindbergh stated,

"Our financial system is a false one and a huge burden on the people . . . I have alleged that there is a Money Trust. The Aldrich plan is a scheme plainly in the interest of the Trust . . . Why does the Money Trust press so hard for the Aldrich Plan now, before the people know what the money trust has been doing?"

Lindbergh continued his speech,

"The Aldrich Plan is the Wall Street Plan. It is a broad challenge to the Government by the champion of the Money Trust. It means another panic, if necessary, to intimidate the people. Aldrich, paid by the Government to represent the people, proposes a plan for the trusts instead. It was by a very clever move that the National Monetary Commission was created. In 1907 nature responded most beautifully and gave this country the most bountiful crop it had ever had. Other industries were busy too, and from a natural standpoint all the conditions were right for a most

__________________________

12 Charles A. Lindbergh, Sr., Banking, Currency and the Money Trust, 1913, p. 131

* In 1911, the Aldrich Plan became part of the official platform of the Republican Party.

11

prosperous year. Instead, a panic entailed enormous losses upon us. Wall Street knew the American people were demanding a remedy against the recurrence of such a ridiculously unnatural condition. Most Senators and Representatives fell into the Wall Street trap and passed the Aldrich Vreeland Emergency Currency Bill. But the real purpose was to get a monetary commission which would frame a proposition for amendments to our currency and banking laws which would suit the Money Trust. The interests are now busy everywhere educating the people in favor of the Aldrich Plan. It is reported that a large sum of money has been raised for this purpose. Wall Street speculation brought on the Panic of 1907. The depositors’ funds were loaned to gamblers and anybody the Money Trust wanted to favour. Then when the depositors wanted their money, the banks did not have it. That made the panic."

Edward Vreeland, co-author of the bill, wrote in the August 25, 1910 Independent (which was owned by Aldrich), "Under the proposed monetary plan of Senator Aldrich, monopolies will disappear, because they will not be able to make more than four percent interest and monopolies cannot continue at such a low rate. Also, this will mark the disappearance of the Government from the banking business."

Vreeland’s fantastic claims were typical of the propaganda flood unleashed to pass the Aldrich Plan. Monopolies would disappear, the Government would disappear from the banking business. Pie in the sky.

Nation Magazine, January 19, 1911, noted, "The name of Central Bank is carefully avoided, but the ‘Federal Reserve Association’, the name given to the proposed central organization, is endowed with the usual powers and responsibilities of a European Central Bank."

After the National Monetary Commission had returned from Europe, it held no official meetings for nearly two years. No records or minutes were ever presented showing who had authored the Aldrich Plan. Since they held no official meetings, the members of the commission could hardly claim the Plan as their own. The sole tangible result of the Commission’s three hundred thousand dollar expenditure was a library of thirty massive volumes on European banking. Typical of these works is a thousand page history of the Reichsbank, the central bank which controlled money and credit in Germany, and whose principal stockholders, were the Rothschilds and Paul Warburg’s family banking house of M.M. Warburg Company. The Commission’s records show that it never functioned as a deliberative body. Indeed, its only "meeting" was the secret conference held at Jekyll Island, and this conference is not mentioned in any publication of the Commission. Senator Cummins passed a resolution in Congress ordering the Commission to report on January 8, 1912, and show some constructive results of its three years’ work. In the face of this challenge, the National Monetary Commission ceased to exist.

12

With their five million dollars as a war chest, the Aldrich Plan propagandists waged a no-holds barred war against their opposition. Andrew Frame testified before the House Banking and Currency Committee of the American Bankers Association. He represented a group of Western bankers who opposed the Aldrich Plan:

CHAIRMAN CARTER GLASS: "Why didn’t the Western bankers make themselves heard when the American Bankers Association gave its unqualified and, we are assured, unanimous approval of the scheme proposed by the National Monetary Commission?"

ANDREW FRAME: "I’m glad you called my attention to that. When that monetary bill was given to the country, it was but a few days previous to the meeting of the American Bankers Association in New Orleans in 1911. There was not one banker in a hundred who had read that bill. We had twelve addresses in favor of it. General Hamby of Austin, Texas, wrote a letter to President Watts asking for a hearing against the bill. He did not get a very courteous answer. I refused to vote on it, and a great many other bankers did likewise."

MR. BULKLEY: "Do you mean that no member of the Association could be heard in opposition to the bill?"

ANDREW FRAME: "They throttled all argument."

MR. KINDRED: "But the report was given out that it was practically unanimous."

ANDREW FRAME: "The bill had already been prepared by Senator Aldrich and presented to the executive council of the American Bankers Association in May, 1911. As a member of that council, I received a copy the day before they acted upon it. When the bill came in at New Orleans, the bankers of the United States had not read it."

MR. KINDRED: "Did the presiding officer simply rule out those who wanted to discuss it negatively?"

ANDREW FRAME: "They would not allow anyone on the program who was not in favor of the bill."

CHAIRMAN GLASS: "What significance has the fact that at the next annual meeting of the American Bankers Association held at Detroit in 1912, the Association did not reiterate its endorsement of the plan of the National Monetary Commission, known as the Aldrich scheme?"

ANDREW FRAME: "It did not reiterate the endorsement for the simple fact that the backers of the Aldrich Plan knew that the Association would not endorse it. We were ready for them, but they did not bring it up."

13

Andrew Frame exposed the collusion which in 1911 procured an endorsement of the Aldrich Plan from the American Bankers Association but which in 1912 did not even dare to repeat its endorsement, for fear of an honest and open discussion of the merits of the plan.

Chairman Glass then called as witness one of the ten most powerful bankers in the United States, George Blumenthal, partner of the international banking house of Lazard Freres and brother-in-law of Eugene Meyer, Jr. Carter Glass effusively welcomed Blumenthal, stating that "Senator O’Gorman of New York was kind enough to suggest your name to us." A year later, O’Gorman prevented a Senate Committee from asking his master, Paul Warburg, any embarrassing questions before approving his nomination as the first Governor of the Federal Reserve Board.

George Blumenthal stated, "Since 1893 my firm of Lazard Freres has been foremost in importations and exportations of gold and has thereby come into contact with everybody who had anything to do with it."

Congressman Taylor asked, "Have you a statement there as to the part you have had in the importation of gold into the United States?" Taylor asked this because the Panic of 1893 is known to economists as a classic example of a money panic caused by gold movements.

"No," replied George Blumenthal, "I have nothing at all on that, because it is not bearing on the question."

A banker from Philadelphia, Leslie Shaw, dissented with other witnesses at these hearings, criticizing the much vaunted "decentralization" of the System. He said, "Under the Aldrich Plan the bankers are to have local associations and district associations, and when you have a local organization, the centered control is assured. Suppose we have a local association in Indianapolis; can you not name the three men who will dominate that association? And then can you not name the one man everywhere else. When you have hooked the banks together, they can have the biggest influence of anything in this country, with the exception of the newspapers."

To promote the Democratic currency bill, Carter Glass made public the sorry record of the Republican efforts of Senator Aldrich’s National Monetary Commission. His House Report in 1913 said, "Senator MacVeagh fixes the cost of the National Monetary Commission to May 12, 1911 at $207,130. They have since spent another hundred thousand dollars of the taxpayer’s money. The work done at such cost cannot be ignored, but, having examined the extensive literature published by the Commission, the Banking and Currency Committee finds little that bears upon the present state of the credit market of the United States. We object to the Aldrich Bill on the following points:

14

Its entire lack of adequate government or public control of the banking mechanism it sets up.

Its tendency to throw voting control into the hands of the large banks of the system.

The extreme danger of inflation of currency inherent in the system.

The insincerity of the bond-funding plan provided for by the measure, there being a barefaced pretense that this system was to cost the government nothing.

The dangerous monopolistic aspects of the bill.

Our Committee at the outset of its work was met by a well-defined sentiment in favor of a central bank which was the manifest outgrowth of the work that had been done by the National Monetary Commission."

Glass’s denunciation of the Aldrich Bill as a central bank plan ignored the fact that his own Federal Reserve Act would fulfill all the functions of a central bank. Its stock would be owned by private stockholders who could use the credit of the Government for their own profit; it would have control of the nation’s money and credit resources; and it would be a bank of issue which would finance the government by "mobilizing" credit in time of war. In "The Rationale of Central Banking," Vera C. Smith (Committee for Monetary Research and Education, June, 1981) writes, "The primary definition of a central bank is a banking system in which a single bank has either a complete or residuary monopoly in the note issue. A central bank is not a natural product of banking development. It is imposed from outside or comes into being as the result of Government favors."

Thus a central bank attains its commanding position from its government granted monopoly of the note issue. This is the key to its power. Also, the act of establishing a central bank has a direct inflationary impact because of the fractional reserve system, which allows the creation of book-entry loans and thereby, money, a number of times the actual "money" which the bank has in its deposits or reserves.

The Aldrich Plan never came to a vote in Congress, because the Republicans lost control of the House in 1910, and subsequently lost the Senate and the Presidency in 1912.



15

CHAPTER THREE

The Federal Reserve Act

"Our financial system is a false one and a huge burden on the people . . . This Act establishes the most gigantic trust on earth."--Congressman Charles Augustus Lindbergh, Sr.

The speeches of Senator LaFollette and Congressman Lindbergh became rallying points of opposition to the Aldrich Plan in 1912. They also aroused popular feeling against the Money Trust. Congressman Lindbergh said, on December 15, 1911, "The government prosecutes other trusts, but supports the money trust. I have been waiting patiently for several years for an opportunity to expose the false money standard, and to show that the greatest of all favoritism is that extended by the government to the money trust."

Senator LaFollette publicly charged that a money trust of fifty men controlled the United States. George F. Baker, partner of J.P. Morgan, on being queried by reporters as to the truth of the charge, replied that it was absolutely in error. He said that he knew from personal knowledge that not more than eight men ran this country.

The Nation Magazine replied editorially to Senator LaFollette that "If there is a Money Trust, it will not be practical to establish that it exercises its influence either for good or for bad."

Senator LaFollette remarks in his memoirs that his speech against the Money Trust later cost him the Presidency of the United States, just as Woodrow Wilson’s early support of the Aldrich Plan had brought him into consideration for that office.

Congress finally made a gesture to appease popular feeling by appointing a committee to investigate the control of money and credit in the United States. This was the Pujo Committee , a subcommittee of the House Banking and Currency Committee, which conducted the famous "Money Trust" hearings in 1912, under the leadership of Congressman Arsene Pujo of Louisiana, who was regarded as a spokesman for the oil interests. These hearings were deliberately dragged on for five months, and resulted in six-thousand pages of printed testimony in four volumes. Month after month, the bankers made the train trip from New York to Washington, testified before the Committee and returned to New York. The hearings were extremely dull, and no startling information turned up at these sessions. The bankers solemnly admitted that they

16

were indeed bankers, insisted that they always operated in the public interest, and claimed that they were animated only by the highest ideals of public service, like the Congressmen before whom they were testifying.

The paradoxical nature of the Pujo Money Trust Hearings may better be understood if we examine the man who single-handedly carried on these hearings, Samuel Untermyer. He was one of the principal contributors to Woodrow Wilson’s Presidential campaign fund, and was one of the wealthiest corporation lawyers in New York. He states in his autobiography in "Who’s Who" of 1926 that he once received a $775,000 fee for a single legal transaction, the successful merger of the Utah Copper Company and the Boston Consolidated and Nevada Company, a firm with a market value of one hundred million dollars. He refused to ask either Senator LaFollette or Congressman Lindbergh to testify in the investigation which they alone had forced Congress to hold. As Special Counsel for the Pujo Committee, Untermyer ran the hearings as a one-man operation. The Congressional members, including its chairman, Congressman Arsene Pujo, seemed to have been struck dumb from the commencement of the hearings to their conclusion. One of these silent servants of the public was Congressman James Byrnes, of South Carolina, representing Bernard Baruch’s home district, who later achieved fame as "Baruch’s man", and was placed by Baruch in charge of the Office of War Mobilization during the Second World War.

Although he was a specialist in such matters, Untermyer did not ask any of the bankers about the system of interlocking directorates through which they controlled industry. He did not go into international gold movements, which were known as a factor in money panics, or the international relationships between American bankers and European bankers. The
THE US FEDERAL RESERVE BANK: DIRTY SECRETS OF THE TEMPLE

Stephen Lendman
www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?
  
Years ago I read William Greider's excellent book published in 1987 on how the US Federal Reserve System works.  It was detailed and explicit and makes wonderful and informative reading, except for the solution he suggests to a huge problem.  His was far too timid.  This article proposes a much different one.  Greider called his book Secrets of the Temple with a sub-title: How the Federal Reserve Runs the Country.  A better sub-title might have been how the Fed (and other key central bankers) runs the world.  This article attempts to summarize what it does, how it does it, for whose benefit and at whose expense.  For those who don't know, prepare for some stunning information and commentary.

Let's be clear at the outset.  The US Federal Reserve, Bank of England, Bank of Japan and the European Central Bank (for the 12 European countries that adopted the single euro currency in 1999) are institutions with enormous power far beyond what most people everywhere can imagine.  These most dominant of all central banks, as well as most others, have a powerful influence on the financial conditions in virtually all countries including their own, of course, in an increasingly borderless financial world where a significant economic event in one nation can affect most others for better or worse.

One other powerful bank is also part of today's financial world.  It needs mentioning because of its importance, even though it requires a separate article to explain how it works more fully.  It's the secretive, inviolable and accountable to no one Bank of International Settlements (BIS) founded in 1930 and based in Basle, Switzerland.  This bank most people never heard of is the central banker to its member central banks - a sort of banking "boss of bosses" equivalent to what apparently exists in the shadowy world of Mafia dons.  Like most other central banks, including the Federal Reserve (explained below), it's privately owned by its members.  

It's believed by some academicians and others who've studied the BIS that the ruling elite of financial capitalism established this bank of banks to be the apex of power to exercise authority over a world financial system owned and controlled by them.  It's thought their plan was to use this bank to dominate the political system of every country and control the world economy in a feudalistic fashion.  In a word, the thinking goes that these super-elite want to rule the world by controlling its money, and they set up this supranational all-powerful bank of banks to do it.  As important as that is, that discussion remains for another time as the intent of this article is to focus solely on the US Federal Reserve.

The dominant central banks and BIS, together with most others, wield their influence in cartel-like alliance with each other to assure they all benefit more than they otherwise would without such a cozy arrangement.  With their immense power it's no play on words to say these financial institutions do indeed rule the world.  Because they're able to create money, they fund the needs of their governments, their militaries and all business activity that couldn't function without a ready supply of that most needed of all commodities.  It's money, not love, that makes the world go round, and central bankers have the power to create or remove from circulation as much or little of it as they choose and for whatever purpose they have in mind.  That kind of power can move mountains or destroy them.

No nation's central bank is more powerful today than the US Federal Reserve, but it wasn't always that way, and it now has competition for the top spot it hasn't known since WW II.  The Fed, as it's called, has existed since it was first established by an act of Congress in 1913.  But the Bank of England has been around since Britannia ruled the waves beginning in 1694 when King William III needed help funding the kind of escapade that takes lots of ready cash - war.  Back then it was with France, and the king needed a friendly banker to print it up for him to help him fight it.  He also needed financial help to facilitate trade and manage the country's debt that always mounts up when wars are fought.  The Bank of England wasn't the first central bank, but it was the modern world's first privately owned one in a powerful country.  It was called the Bank of England to keep the public from knowing that it, like our Federal Reserve, was and still is privately owned and not part of the government.  It was also the model used in the formation of our own central bank and most others.

The Brits may have had a 219 year head start on the Fed, but central bankers are only as powerful as the countries they represent and their economies.  Today the former dominant Brits must settle for a far lesser role as being just one of many junior partners to a US hegemon that emerged post WW II as the world's dominant economic power.  It still is today, even though some credible experts believe this country may have seen and past its peak and is now in decline.  Some go further and claim our decline has been accelerated by the disastrous policies of the Bush administration that irrationally believes waging war on the world without end is the way to rule it, promote endless economic growth and dominance, and thus preserve the nation's preeminent position as the reigning economic champion.  

It's easy to challenge that view and think that champ has climbed into the ring a few times too many, has endless plans for more return engagements, and is likely to meet the same fate many a former human one did who didn't know when to quit and ended up with chronic brain damage known as dementia. The lesson from history is always the same. The price for reckless behavior is high, painful and inevitable.  It's true for countries as well as individuals, but too often neither one sees it until it's too late.  The biggest difference between the US today and other nations in the past that paid dearly for not yielding when their day had passed is that we have an all-powerful arsenal others never did.  Should we decide to use it, there likely wouldn't be much left behind for a successor.  Not a pleasant thought, but a very real one.

It All Began in 1910 On Jekll Island

It sounds like the title of a horror movie, but the real life events that happened at this privately owned island off the coast of Georgia in 1910 would have challenged even the Hollywood bad dream factory to come up with.  

It was here that seven very rich and powerful men met in secret for nine days and created the Federal Reserve System that came into being three years later on December 23, 1913 by an act of Congress.  Since that time, the nation and world would never be the same, but only the rich and powerful were the beneficiaries.  That was the whole idea, and it worked as planned.

The Federal Reserve Act that began it all must surely rank as one of the most disastrous and outrageous pieces of legislation to the public welfare ever to come out of any legislative body.  It may have also have been and still is illegal according to Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution which happens to be the inviolable law of the land.  The article states that Congress shall have the power to coin (create) money and regulate the value thereof.  In 1935, the US Supreme Court ruled the Congress cannot constitutionally delegate its power to another group or body.  The Congress thus acted in violation of the Constitution it's sworn to uphold and in so doing created the Federal Reserve System that, as will be explained below, is a private for-profit corporation operating at the expense of the public welfare.  By its action, our lawmakers committed fraud against the people of the country and so far have gotten away with it without the public even knowing about the harm done.


The shameful result is that what should have arrived stillborn is now the most dominant institution on earth, and all because of what began on a privately owned island with a scary name.  But had the Congress acted responsibly, the act of Fed creation might never have happened.  The legislation establishing it was so harmful to the public interest, it likely never would have  passed if it hadn't been shepherded through a carefully prepared Congressional Conference Committee meeting scheduled for between 1:30 - 4:30 AM (when most members of Congress were asleep) on December 22, 1913.  The Act was then voted on the next day and passed although many members of the body had left for the Christmas holidays and most others who stayed behind hadn't had time to read it or know its contents.  Sound familiar?  Still it passed (like a thief in the night) and was signed into law by an unwitting or complicit Woodrow Wilson who later admitted he made a terrible mistake saying "I unwittingly ruined my country."  But it was too late for postmortems, and the American people have paid dearly ever since.  It's about time the public understood that and began to demand an end to over 90 years of damage done.



It almost happened 43 years ago when one president decided to act on behalf of the people who elected him. That man was John Kennedy, who before his death planned to end the Federal Reserve System to eliminate the national debt a central bank creates by printing money and loaning it to the government.  That debt has now risen to over $8,400,000,000,000 ($8.4 trillion) which every taxpayer must pay for and has done so in the amount of nearly $174,000,000,000 ($174 billion) in just the first three months of 2006.  This debt service is now an annualized amount exceeding two-thirds of a trillion dollars.  It's made the bankers rich (which was the whole idea) and the public poorer because we're taxed to pay the tab.  It's no exaggeration to call this the greatest financial scam in world history and one that gets greater every day.



The debt was less onerous 40 years ago, but Kennedy understood its danger to the country and the burden it placed on the public.  Thus, on June 4, 1963, he issued presidential order EO 11110 giving the president authority to issue currency.  He then ordered the US Treasury to print over $4 billion worth of "United States Notes" to replace Federal Reserve Notes.  He intended to replace them all when enough of the new currency was in circulation so he could end the Federal Reserve System and the control it gave the international bankers over the US government and the public.  Just months after the Kennedy plan went into effect, he was assassinated in Dallas in what was surely a coup d'etat disguised to look otherwise and may well have been carried out at least in part to save the Fed System and concentration of power it created that was so profitable for the powerful bankers in the country.  Those benefitting from it had good reason to be involved in the plot to save the special privilege they weren't willing to give up without a fight.  It's a plausible explanation that may explain who may have been behind the assassination and for what reason.  Whatever the truth is, the banking cartel was only in distress a short time.  Once Lyndon Johnson took office, he rescinded Kennedy's presidential order and restored the cartel's former power.  It's kept it ever since and is now, of course, more powerful than ever.  Even presidents are unable to stop it and those who would try have a lesson from history to give them pause.



The predecessors of the possible Kennedy coup plotters were the men who met on Jekyll Island in 1910. They represented some of the richest and most powerful men in the world - the Morgans, Rockefellers, Rothschilds of Europe (who dominated all European banking by the mid-1800s and became and still may be the wealthiest and most powerful family of all) and others of great influence and power.  Included was a US senator, a high ranking Treasury official, the president of the largest bank in the country at the time, a leading Wall Street figure and the man who would later become the first chairman of the Federal Reserve System.  It was quite an assemblage, and they came to accomplish one thing.  They wanted to change the ideology and course of American business that up to then was based on marketplace competition and replace it with monopoly.  They also knew what Baron M.A. Rothschild understood when he once said: "Give me control over a nation's currency and I care not who makes its laws."  They knew the wisdom of what's stated in Proverbs 22:7 as well: "The rich rule over the poor, and the borrower is servant to the lender."



This was the dawning of the age of powerful cartels when the seven financial titans meeting secretly in the island's clubhouse decided no longer to compete with each other and wanted the power to arrange it. They were already colluding informally but knew it would all work better under a legally sanctioned cartel.  They wanted a banking cartel and got one that flourishes today below the public radar with the tool they wanted most - the ability to control the nation's money supply that gave them almost unlimited power.  The cartel now works cooperatively with their governments and all other powerful transnational corporations in a dominant global alliance that allows them to control the world's markets, resources, cheap labor and our lives.



The Federal Reserve System Is Not A Government Agency - It's A Privately Owned Cartel of Powerful Banks Protected By Law



It's commonly but falsely believed the Federal Reserve System is a function of government and subject to its control.  False.  It's often referred to as a quasi-governmental, decentralized central bank, but that's just cover to disguise what, in fact, it really is: a privately held and operated cartel made to look like the government is in charge.  The fact that it's headquartered in Washington in the formidable and impressive-looking Eccles building (named after a former Fed chairman) is just part of the clever subterfuge.  Here's how it works:



The Fed is composed of a Board of Governors in Washington and 12 regional banks in major cities throughout the country (including in my own city of Chicago where anyone once but no longer could walk up to a teller's window and buy US Treasury securities).  The system also includes many and various member banks including all national banks that are required to be part of the system.  Other banks were also allowed to join and many did.  The Federal Reserve began operating in November, 1914, almost one year after the Congressional act creating the system the previous year as explained above.  It was mandated by law to have the greatest power of any institution in the country - the power to create and control the nation's money supply.  



Most people know little or nothing about money and banking, likely never think about it, and have no idea how what the Fed and bankers do affect their lives.  Before writing this article, I had little more than the modest knowledge I learned in a required course on the subject and basic accounting as part of my MBA curriculum 46 years ago.  Those courses left out the most important parts of the story and never hinted at anything sinister about how the banking system works in fact.  But no one should ever imagine banks were established or intended to be run for our benefit.  They surely are not, and anyone suggesting they are should read on.  They're about as beneficial to the public welfare as was the MX Peacekeeper ICBM (the clever language is impressive) intended to carry nuclear warheads back in the mid-80s that had the power to destroy all life on the planet and one day may do it in its old or updated form.



The Federal Reserve Act of 1913 (the law of the land) stipulates that the Federal Reserve Banks of each region are owned by the member banks in it.  These Fed banks are privately owned corporations that make a great effort to hide the fact that they, in fact, own what the public largely thinks is part of the public treasury and government.  It's easy to think that as Fed chairmen and seven of the twelve Governors are appointed by the President and approved by the Senate.  As such, the FRB is a sort of quasi-government entity, but the fact is the System is a privately owned for profit enterprise just like any other business.  It has stockholders like other public corporations that are paid 6% risk free interest every year on their equity holdings.  The public doesn't know this, and it likely wouldn't be good PR if it found out.  People might be even more upset if they learned some of the owners of our Federal Reserve are powerful foreign investors in the UK, France, Germany, The Netherlands and Italy.  They're partners with giant US banks like JP Morgan Chase and Citibank as well as  powerful Wall Street firms like Goldman Sachs in a new world order banking cartel that influences and affects business activity everywhere and our lives.



The issue of private ownership of the Federal Reserve Banks has been challenged several times in the federal courts to no avail.  Each time the courts upheld the current system under which each Federal Reserve Bank is a separate corporation owned by commercial banks in its region. One such case was Lewis v. United States that was decided by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals that ruled the Reserve Banks are independent, privately owned and locally controlled corporations.



Our Founding Fathers Had Different Ideas Than the Powerful Men who Met on Jekll Island



Throughout our history, there was disagreement over who should control the power of the nation's money supply and the right to issue it.  The Founding Fathers understood that the British Parliament was forced to levy unfair taxes on its American colonies and its own citizens because the Bank of England had run up so much debt the government needed revenue to reduce it.  Benjamin Franklin, in fact, believed that was the real cause of the American Revolution.  Most of the Founders also understood the danger that could result from bankers' accumulating too much wealth and power.  James Madison, the main drafter of our Constitution, called them "Money Changers," referring to the Bible that said Jesus twice drove the Money Changers from the Temple in Jerusalem 2,000 years ago.  Madison said:



"History records that the Money Changers have used every form of abuse, intrigue, deceit and violent means possible to maintain their control over governments by controlling money and its issuance."



Thomas Jefferson was just as strong in his condemnation when he said:



"I sincerely believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies.  Already they have raised up a money aristocracy that has set the government at defiance.  The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people to whom it properly belongs."



Jefferson and Madison understood the dangers of commercial monopolies of all types and tried to assure they never would exist in the new nation.  They, in fact, wanted two additional amendments added to the "Bill of Rights" in the Constitution but never got them.  They believed to protect the liberty of the people the nation should have "freedom from monopolies in commerce" (what are now giant corporations including the big international banks and Wall Street investment firms) and "freedom from a permanent military," or standing armies.  Try to imagine what the country would be like today if Jefferson and Madison had gotten their way - a country without giant predatory corporations exploiting everyone for profit and without a rampaging military waging war on the world, threatening to destroy it, and doing it so those corporate giants could earn even greater profits.



They never did, of course, and the people have paid dearly ever since including the great harm caused because the government relinquished its right to control the nation's money supply.  It gave it away secretly with the public none the wiser, never knowing how greatly it's been harmed.  It's been even worse since the 1980s because the power of the Fed grew under a friendly Republican president, and the corporate media led cheerleading for it hid the effect.  For them, no public demeaning of it, its giant member banks or Wall Street allies is allowed.  



Things were especially out of hand during the tenure of Alan Greenspan - a Fed chairman no one should have found much reason to cheer either before he headed the Fed when he was a presidential advisor or during the time he did.  It was only after his economic consulting firm failed that he went into government service likely because he needed a new line of work.  There he managed to become a larger than life seer of central banking who was elevated to near sainthood by the business pundits who thought under his tenure the skies were only blue and the few clouds in sight always had silver linings.  Now Alan is retired to the greener pastures of lucrative book contracts and speaking engagements, which shows when you do your job well for the rich and powerful (at the expense of the rest of us) who gave it to you, you'll be well rewarded in the end.  It's likely the new Fed chairman has taken note and will dutifully try to follow in the tradition that preceded him.  



But try imagining a different sort of Fed chairman, one who knew, believed in and practiced the words and wisdom of another American president of some note - Abraham Lincoln.  In 1886 Lincoln said the following: "The money powers prey upon the nation in times of peace and conspire against it in times of adversity.  It is more despotic than a monarch, more insolent than autocracy and more selfish than a bureaucracy. It denounces, as public enemies, all who question its methods or throw light upon its crimes.  I have two great enemies, the Southern Army in front of me and the bankers in the rear.  Of the two, the one at the rear is my greatest foe."



Lincoln also appears to have said (although some dispute it): "I see in the near future a crisis approaching that unnerves me and causes me to tremble for the safety of my country.....corporations have been enthroned and an era of corruption in high places will follow, and the money power of the country will endeavor to prolong its reign by working upon the prejudices of the people until all wealth is aggregated in a few hands and the Republic is destroyed."  Imagine what Lincoln might say today.



Given Lincoln's sentiment about the bankers and money power of the country, it would seem to beg the obvious question: did it play a role in, or was it the reason for, his untimely death at the hands of John Wilkes Booth?  The international bankers clearly disliked Lincoln after he managed to get the Congress to pass the Legal Tender Act in 1862 that empowered the US Treasury to issue paper money called "greenbacks."  Lincoln needed this legislation after he declined to pay the bankers the usurious 24 - 36% interest rates they demanded on the loans he needed to fund his war with the South.  With the new banking law, Lincoln was then able to print up the millions of dollars he needed which was debt and interest free.  Clearly this was not what the greedy bankers wanted as they can only profit when they get their pound of flesh from financial transactions they control.  Right after the war ended Lincoln was assassinated, and shortly thereafter the so-called Greenback law was rescinded, a new national banking act was passed, and all money became interesting-bearing again.



How the Federal Reserve System Works



The Federal Reserve System is the result of the Congress and President having agreed to privatize the nation's money system and relinquish the power that should have remained the government's exclusive right.  That act was so outrageous the Fed had to be deliberately designed to look like a branch of the federal government to hide the fact that it's really an all-powerful privately owned banking cartel whose member banks (including all the national ones) share in the vast profits earned from having the most important of all franchises governments alone should have - the right to print money in any amount, control its supply and price, and benefit hugely by loaning it out for a profit including to the government itself that must pay interest on the money it should never have to if it simply printed its own.  Think of what happened as the government having legalized the right to counterfeit the national currency for private gain.  It's no exaggeration to claim this is the greatest ever of all financial scams causing incomprehensible harm with the public none the wiser.  Here's how it works in simple terms:



The Fed was given the authority to conduct the nation's monetary policy with the power to control the supply and price of money.  It has three ways to do it - through open market operations, the discount rate it charges member banks, and the reserve requirement percentage of member banks assets it requires them to hold and not loan out.  The Board of Governors is responsible for handling the discount rate and reserve requirements while the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) is in charge of the open market operations of buying or selling bonds explained further below.  Using these tools, the Fed is able to influence the supply and demand for money and thus directly control the federal funds short-term rate that's always fixed unless the Fed wishes to raise or lower it.  Longer rates are controlled by the powerful institutional traders in the bond market.



The FOMC and How It Works



The Federal Open Market Committee is really key to the whole process of money creation or contraction.  It consists of 12 members - seven members of the Board of Fed Governors, the president of the New York Fed Bank (the most important one of all) and four of the remaining 11 Reserve Bank presidents who serve one year terms on a rotating basis.  The FOMC holds eight regularly scheduled meetings a year to assess economic conditions and decide how loose or tight it wants monetary policy to be to further its stated goal of sustainable economic growth and price stability.



The FOMC literally has the power to create money out of nothing.  It does it in a four step process:



Step 1 - The FOMC first approves the purchase of US government bonds on the open market.



Step 2 - The New York Fed bank buys them from sellers (financial markets always have an equal number of buyers and sellers).



Step 3 - The Fed pays for its purchases with electronic credits to the sellers' banks, which, in turn, credit the sellers' bank accounts.  These credits are literally created out of nothing.



Step 4 - The banks receiving the credits can then use them as reserves to enable them to loan out as much as 10 times their amount (if their reserve requirement is 10%) through the magic (only banks have) of fractional reserve banking and, of course, collect interest on all of it.  What a business, and it's all legal.  Imagine how rich we might all be if we as private individuals could do the same thing.  Borrow a million from the Fed and like magic it becomes 10 times as much, and we get to collect interest on all but the 10% of it we must hold in reserve.  This is the magic of fractional reserve banking money creation and explains how powerful an economic stimulus it is when the Fed wants to enhance economic growth.



When the Fed wishes to contract the economy by reducing the money supply, it simply reverses the above process.  Instead of buying bonds, it sells them so that money moves out of the buyers' bank accounts instead of into them.  Bank loans must then be reduced by 10 times if the reserve requirement is 10%.



How the Fed Harms the Public Interest



The Federal Reserve System exists only to serve its owners and member banks and in doing so is hostile to the public interest.  That's because it's a banking cartel with the power to restrict competition for greater profits gained at our expense.  It goes from our pockets to theirs, and the public loses in at least four ways:



One - Through the invisible tax of inflation that results from the dilution of purchasing power caused by newly created money entering the system reducing the value of dollars already there.  The Greenspan Fed was especially expansive, never was held to account for its excess and was able to pass a serious problem it created on to a future Fed chairman and society to deal with.  The man we now lionize as a monetary magician began sensibly.  From 1982, before he arrived in 1987, until 1992, the money supply increased on average by 8% a year.  But from 1992 - 2002, the printing press worked overtime in sync with the deregulation and growth of global markets expanding the currency by more than 12% a year.  It became even more extreme post 9/11 and since 2002 grew at a 15% rate.  It now has more than doubled in less than a decade.  It appears that the new Fed chairman has taken note and has begun reducing the rate of money expansion as he continues raising the federal funds rate to whatever level he has in mind.



Currency traders as well apparently have taken note of the rate of money supply expansion overall.  Except for a respite in 2005, it's quite likely the dollar weakness since 2002 is the result of the excess amount of them created for the Bush administration's profligate spending to fund its endless wars and reckless tax cuts for the rich.  The problem is further compounded as from 1964 to the present debt service has grown from 9% to 16.5% of the federal budget and rising; the current account deficit has gone from a 1% surplus to an almost 7% deficit; and federal indebtedness has grown by 40% just since 2001 and financed in large part by "the kindness of (foreign) strangers" that may be growing restive.  Furthermore, since March, 2006, the Fed stopped publishing the M-3 aggregate of the total amount of dollars in circulation.  With that transparency gone, big buyers of US Treasuries now have to calculate the value of the dollar based on speculation and uncertainty rather than hard data - not a way to inspire trust in the financial markets that function best in an atmosphere of openness and clarity.



Two - The public also loses because the banking cartel is able to practice usury - from it's power over a flexible currency to artificially move rates up or down to any level it chooses which many small lenders in a truly free and open market can't do.  In addition, the cartel's market dominance forces most borrowers (especially smaller ones less able to issue their own debt instruments) to come to them for loans which it's then able to make using what should be the peoples' money available to them at the lowest possible cost from many highly government regulated small lenders competing for customers.  



Three -  Through the taxes, we, the public, must pay to cover the interest on the huge national debt (now over $8.4 trillion) accumulated from the money the Fed printed and loaned to the government.  As mentioned earlier, that now totals an annualized amount exceeding two-thirds of a trillion dollars and increasing daily.  It's made the bankers rich, ordinary people poorer, and the public none the wiser it's been fleeced big time.



Four -  Compounding the above abuse, the cartel is able to get the public to bail out the system with more of its tax dollars.  It happens whenever any of the too-big-to-fail banks need financial help to survive.  The same is true for big corporations like Chrysler or Lockheed, large investment firms or hedge funds like Long-Term Capital Management or even countries like Mexico.  It's also true when a single bank goes out of business and depositors must be compensated or more seriously in the wake of a systemic financial meltdown like the one that wiped out many savings and loan banks in the 1980s.  Whether it's a single bank or many dozens at a time, public tax dollars are used to save the system or just pick up the tab to repay depositors insured against losses through government insurance protection up to a stipulated amount per account.



How Would Adam Smith Have Reacted to the Federal Reserve System



This concentration of banking cartel wealth and power is the opposite of what Adam Smith, the ideological godfather of free market capitalism, advocated in his writings including his seminal work The Wealth of Nations.  Smith wrote about an "invisible hand" that he said worked best in a free market with many small businesses competing locally against each other.  He strongly opposed the concentrated mercantilism of his day (what there was of it) which now would be the equivalent of today's giant transnational corporations and the banking cartel with the power to restrict competition, maintain higher prices than otherwise possible and earn greater profits as a result at the public's expense.  



The kind of banking cartel that exists today is precisely what Smith would have condemned.  But having a central bank is not in itself a bad thing provided the bank is government owned, controlled and operated for the public welfare.  There's only a problem when through subterfuge the bank is set up to appear government owned and run but is, in fact, for private profit the way ours is and most others as well.  And in the US, to make the arrangement work, a mostly publicly appointed governing authority runs the System acting as a shill for its private for-profit banking cartel members that wanted it in the first place and got a corrupted Congress to give it to them.  To work, the cartel needs the cover it gets from its partnership with government, but it's through that arrangement that it harms the public interest for its own private gain.



And that goes to the heart of the problem: that the Congress elected to serve the people instead betrayed them by creating an all-powerful banking cartel and gave it the authority to practice fractional reserve banking with the power to get free money by creating it out of nothing.  It then allowed its members a near-monopoly right to set the rates of interest they wish to charge borrowers. The whole process amounts to a legally sanctioned heist by the powerful banks working in league with government for its own gain.  It's also part of a more extensive government arranged process to transfer wealth from the people to the pockets of large corporations and the rich and doing it while those being harmed are unaware it's even happening.



Another Way the Federal Reserve System Harms the Public



The Fed harms the public welfare in one other important way, and again most people are none the wiser about it.  Supposedly the Federal Reserve System was established to stabilize the economy, smooth out the business cycle, maintain a healthy rate of sustainable growth while holding prices steady and benefitting everyone.  So how well has it done its job?  Since its creation in 1913, and with them in charge, we had the crashes of 1921 and the most important and remembered one in 1929.  That was followed by The Great Depression that lasted until the onset of WW II that noted conservative economist Milton Friedman explained was caused and exacerbated because the Federal Reserve oddly decided to reduce the money supply at a time of economic contraction instead of increasing it.  We then had recessions in 1953, 1957, 1969, 1975, 1981, 1990 and 2001.  We also had inflation beginning in the 1960s which became quite severe through much of the 1970s and early 1980s.  And we had a major banking crisis in the 1980s at which time more banks and savings and loan associations failed than ever before in our history.  It happened in the wake of financial market deregulation when banks were allowed to pursue their own interests without government oversight to check their willingness to assume excess risk or stop them from trying to get away with deliberate fraud.



Along with the economic stability the Fed never achieved, we've also had soaring consumer debt; record high federal budget and trade deficits; a high level of personal bankruptcies and rising mortgage loan delinquencies; interest on a mounting national debt that's a large and rising percentage of the federal budget; the loss of our manufacturing base and it's high-paying jobs with good benefits because they're being exported to low wage countries; an economy in which services now account for nearly 80% of all business that provide mostly lower paying, less skilled jobs with few or no benefits; and a widening income and wealth gap that continues to harm lower and middle income earners to benefit the rich and well-off privileged few and a government that encourages it.



Sum it all up and the conclusion is clear.  The one thing the Fed failed to accomplish above all else was what it was established to do in the first place.  But it's much worse than that if we understand a cartel's real motives.  It's not to serve the public interest.  It's to abuse it because that's how it benefits most.  It's able to do it with its legally sanctioned concentrated power and a friendly government in league with it as partners or facilitators.  It's from that cozy hidden from view arrangement that it's able to get away with the grandest of grand thefts.



A Needed Solution to A Huge Problem



From the information presented above, it's clear that the Federal Reserve System was established through stealth and deceit by a handful of corrupted politicians in service to their powerful banking and Wall Street allies.  They did it to defraud the public and without them being any the wiser about what, in fact, had been done or how harmful it was to be to their welfare and interests.  Those in the Congress and President Wilson (a man trained in the law, one-time practicing attorney, former esteemed academic and president of Princeton University) either knew or should have known that the act he and they approved establishing the Fed was in direct violation of the Constitution they were sworn to uphold. They didn't, they broke the law, and the public paid dearly for their crime ever since to this day.



So what recourse is left, and can people be mobilized to pursue it.  There's only one sensible and just solution to undo the damage done to so many for so long - abolish the Federal Reserve System and restore the power it now has to the federal government working for the public welfare.  Take it back from the powerful banking cartel working against it and never allow it to be in its hands again.  That alone is the only way.  The great German poet and playwright Bertolt Brecht would have agreed and once said it was "easier to rob by setting up a bank than by holding up (one)."  



Freeing us from the these powerful "Money Changers" would have enormous benefits for everyone.  It would establish a prudent policy of money creation that would minimize our most unfair tax - inflation which is caused by private for-profit bankers manipulating the nation's money supply to enhance their profits.  It would stabilize the economy and smooth out the extremes in the business cycle exacerbated by the cartel working for its benefit and against ours.  It would lower the cost of money for borrowers because it would end the monopoly power the cartel now has to set the rates it chooses by opening the market to more competition.  It would reduce the growing and oppressive national debt freed eventually from the extra money supply growth needed to pay it off.  It would lower the public's tax burden as less revenue would be needed for debt service.  It would be a momentous step toward reducing and hopefully one day eliminating the overwhelming power of all predatory corporate giants preying on us so they can grow and prosper.  It might even discourage wars which are only fought for wealth and power - never for glory or to make the world safe for democracy or other false motives.  Without a powerful corporate banking cartel and other industry giants that feed on the human misery they create, there would be less of a reason to pursue any.  Try to imagine that kind of world and a government working for the public welfare instead of harming it as it now must do in service to capital. That world is possible, and responsible people need to work for it as the one we now have has failed and must be changed before it's too late.



A View of the World Created by the Interests of Capital and Our Government That Supports It  



It's the ugly, corrupted world of neoliberal "free market" capitalism controlled by giant corporations; that benefits the privileged few alone causing great human misery and despair; a despotic world that can't endure nor must we allow it to much longer; one with endless wars for power and profit; where people are commodities to be used as needed and discarded like trash when they're not; with no concern for preserving an ecology able to sustain us and won't much longer because we're destroying it and ourselves for profit; where essential human needs don't matter under an economic model only valuing private gain; where democracy is incompatible with predatory capitalism; one no one should want to live in or ever have to; one we must change or perish.  In the language of capital, that's the bottom line.  Only a mass movement of committed people can change that world.  It must or we all will.  

Unless we can move from our failed economic model to a better alternative, it will end on its own one day by one means or other.  But it may be a denouement no one would wish for - it's own self-destruction taking all else with it either by nuclear holocaust or an environment so inhospitable it won't support our ability to live in it.  Our only chance is to work for change while there's still time.

A Vision of A Different Kind of World

History proves a better world is possible when committed people work hard enough for it.  It's how slavery was ended; workers won the right to organize and bargain collectively; women gained equal suffrage to men, control of their own bodies, and more rights and status in the work force; blacks and other minorities won important civil rights; and politicians once enacted important social legislation if only out of fear of what might happen if they didn't.  

Thomas Jefferson explained the "The price of liberty is eternal vigilance."  It's also the price to keep our hard won social gains.  For the past generation those gains have eroded while we weren't paying attention and only mass people action can regain them.  The goal should be for a world of caring and sharing; where peoples' lives improve because we all work together for it; one at peace and not with endless wars to benefit the rich and powerful at our expense; where all essential human needs are met because governments work for the common good to assure it; with real participatory democracy where the public and elected officials work together to keep it strong and vibrant; with no oppressive corporate giants or banking cartels because the law won't allow any; where ecological nurturing and preservation are central; with clean air, water and soil and food that's fit and safe to eat; a much simpler world, more locally based than today's where notions like globalization aren't even in the vocabulary; one based on social equity and justice for all with government, law enforcement and the courts working to assure it stays that way; one we all want to live in and hope some day we can; one we want to pass on to future generations; one we can't afford not to have because the alternative may be no world at all.  



We may now be at a key watershed moment where our fate hangs in the balance.  We can either work together for a better, sustainable world or likely become the first species in it ever to destroy itself.  If it happens, we'll likely take most others with us and not leave much behind for the few hearty ones that remain.  We no longer have the luxury of debate for the kind of world we need to survive.  The giant banks and corporations  won't give it to us nor will a hostile government allied with them.  It's up to us to go for it or likely perish if we fail.  A good beginning would be by driving the Federal Reserve "money changers" out of our temple and the corporate giants with them.  A better world is possible if we remember and live by political theorist Antonio Gramsci's inspirational words about "the optimism of the will."  With it, organized people can find a way to beat organized money.

  
SECRETS OF THE TEMPLE
William Greider

http://www.amazon.com/gp/reader/06716755...eader-link

My Books

This ground-breaking best-seller reveals for the first time how the mighty and mysterious Federal Reserve operates -- and how it manipulated and transformed both the American economy and the world's during recent crucial decades. Based on extensive interviews with all the major players, Secrets of the Temple takes us inside the government institution that is in some ways more secretive than the CIA and more powerful than the President or Congress.

[Read more on this book.]

"For anyone who worries about democracy's future"

-- Business Week


In The Soul of Capitalism, Greider examines how the greatest wealth-creation engine in the history of the world is failing most of us, why it must be changed, and how intrepid pioneers are beginning to transform it. Public outrage over crooked corporate officers, the looting of pension funds, the defrauding of stockholders, and the wholesale firing of hard-working employees has reached a new high. But Greider argues that our anger has deeper roots, as he analyzes how our relentless pursuit of unprecedented affluence has eroded family life, eaten away at our sense of personal and professional security, corroded our communities, impoverished our spiritual lives, and devastated our natural environment. The solution, he contends, will come not from activist government, the politics of the past, or more government regulation, the usual response of liberals, but from a fundamental realignment of power that, he promises, is already underway on many fronts.

[Read more on this book.]

Masterful ... monumental ... a virtuous investigative history"

-- Washington Post


Who Will Tell the People is a passionate, eye-opening challenge to American democracy. Here is a tough-minded exploration of why we're in trouble, starting with the basic issues of who gets heard, who gets ignored, and why. Greider shows us the realities of power in Washington today, uncovering the hidden relationships that link politicians with corporations and the rich, and that subvert the needs of ordinary citizens.

[Read more on this book.]

"the preeminent American writer on the impact of economic and politics on society"

-- Harvard Business Review

Today, currency traders transfer vast sums of money across the world at the touch of a button. Multinationals do not hesitate to shift production to low-wage countries, and even the most powerful governments can only look on helplessly or offer incentives to attract them, often by dismantling welfare benefits and workers' rights. There are remedies to all of these dangers, argues Greider, provided that we boldly face up to new realities.

[Read more on this book.]

  
THE CASE AGAINST THE FED
Murray Rothbard
http://www.amazon.com/Case-Against-Fed-M...58-5555028

Murray N. Rothbard "By far the most secret and least accountable operation of the federal government is not, as one might expect, the CIA, DIA, or some other..." (more)


Book Description
The most powerful case against the American central bank ever written. This work begins with a mini-treatment of money and banking theory, and then plunges right in with the real history of the Federal Reserve System. Rothbard covers the struggle between competing elites and how they converged with the Fed.
Rothbard calls for the abolition of the central bank and a restoration of the gold standard. His popular treatment incorporates the best and most up-to-date scholarship on the Fed's origins and effects.

About the Author
Murray N. Rothbard, the author of 25 books and thousands of articles, was a historian, philosopher, and dean of the Austrian School of economics. The S.J. Hall Distinguished Professor of Economics at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas, he was also Academic Vice President of the Ludwig von Mises Institute in Auburn, Alabama.


This book, written by Murray Rothbard, an economist and historian of fairly well known repute, is a scathing attack on not only the Federal Reserve, but the interests that created this institution. Rothbard is an adept writer, as he takes a concept that can be fairly daunting and makes it accessible to the those readers without an economics background. I considered trying to earn a degree in Economics, but abandoned it when I found out that most of it is tied to higher mathematics. I'm more interested in the conceptual side. Rothbard cuts out math and focuses on the real meat of the issue, the concepts that govern money supply and inflation.
The book starts by discussing the biggest problem with the Federal Reserve system, which is fractional reserve banking. Rothbard explains how this system is only functioning because people believe that it works. If there was a run on banks tomorrow, the entire financial system would collapse, because there isn't enough "real" money in reserve to cover all of the bank notes in circulation. Rothbard believes that it is the Fed that causes inflation, and that the Fed is the sole source of inflation in society. It can be a confusing issue to explain, but Rothbard makes it easy.

The rest of the book is a detailed history of the creation of the central banking system. This part can be confusing due to the numerous names that Rothbard flies through as he traces the events leading up to the creation of the Fed at Jekyll Island in 1911. Several interesting points are made during this history. Rothbard says that the Progressive movement in American history was essentially engineered by the money interests to help destroy competition. The little guy couldn't afford to put up with all the regulatory laws passed by the government. This opened the way for the giants, such as Morgan and Rockefeller to monopolize industry. Another point that Rothbard makes is that the history of the United States from after the Civil War to World War Two has essentially been controlled by two financial camps, Morgan and Rockefeller. In this way, he supports views held by many that the big money trust controls the country and owns all of the politicians, an issue that is very much in vogue today, and can be seen in the minor success of Ralph Nader's run for the White House. The book winds up by saying that the only way to restore sanity is to go back to the gold standard, where all money is backed up by an equivalent amount of either gold or silver.

I'd recommend this book to anyone with an interest in finance and economics. This book is good for anyone who just wants to understand what fractional reserve banking is and how it works. Rothbard died in 1995, but he has left a good account of himself behind for all to enjoy.

ABOLISH THE FEDERAL RESERVE
REP. Ron Paul
http://www.conspiracyplanet.com/channel....tentid=580


Mr. Speaker, I rise to introduce legislation to restore financial stability to America's economy by abolishing the Federal Reserve. I also ask unanimous consent to insert the attached article by Lew Rockwell, president of the Ludwig Von Mises Institute, which explains the benefits of abolishing the Fed and restoring the gold standard, into the record.

Since the creation of the Federal Reserve, middle and working-class Americans have been victimized by a boom-and-bust monetary policy. In addition, most Americans have suffered a steadily eroding purchasing power because of the Federal Reserve's inflationary policies. This represents a real, if hidden, tax imposed on the American people.

From the Great Depression, to the stagflation of the seventies, to the burst of the dotcom bubble last year, every economic downturn suffered by the country over the last 80 years can be traced to Federal Reserve policy. The Fed has followed a consistent policy of flooding the economy with easy money, leading to a misallocation of resources and an artificial "boom" followed by a recession or depression when the Fed-created bubble bursts.

With a stable currency, American exporters will no longer be held hostage to an erratic monetary policy. Stabilizing the currency will also give Americans new incentives to save as they will no longer have to fear inflation eroding their savings. Those members concerned about increasing America's exports or the low rate of savings should be enthusiastic supporters of this legislation.

Though the Federal Reserve policy harms the average American, it benefits those in a position to take advantage of the cycles in monetary policy. The main beneficiaries are those who receive access to artificially inflated money and/or credit before the inflationary effects of the policy impact the entire economy. Federal Reserve policies also benefit big spending politicians who use the inflated currency created by the Fed to hide the true costs of the welfare-warfare state. It is time for Congress to put the interests of the American people ahead of the special interests and their own appetite for big government.

Abolishing the Federal Reserve will allow Congress to reassert its constitutional authority over monetary policy. The United States Constitution grants to Congress the authority to coin money and regulate the value of the currency. The Constitution does not give Congress the authority to delegate control over monetary policy to a central bank. Furthermore, the Constitution certainly does not empower the federal government to erode the American standard of living via an inflationary monetary policy.

In fact, Congress' constitutional mandate regarding monetary policy should only permit currency backed by stable commodities such as silver and gold to be used as legal tender. Therefore, abolishing the Federal Reserve and returning to a constitutional system will enable America to return to the type of monetary system envisioned by our nation's founders: one where the value of money is consistent because it is tied to a commodity such as gold. Such a monetary system is the basis of a true free-market economy.

In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to stand up for working Americans by putting an end to the manipulation of the money supply which erodes Americans' standard of living, enlarges big government, and enriches well-connected elites, by cosponsoring my legislation to abolish the Federal Reserve.



WHY GOLD?
By Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr.

As with all matters of investment, everything is clear in hindsight. Had you bought gold mutual funds earlier this year, they might have appreciated more than 100 percent. Gold has risen $60 since March 2001 to the latest spot price of $326.

Why wasn't it obvious? The Fed has been inflating the dollar as never before, driving interest rates down to absurdly low levels, even as the federal government has been pushing a mercantile trade policy, and New York City, the hub of the world economy, continues to be threatened by terrorism. The government is failing to prevent more successful attacks by not backing down from foreign policy disasters and by not allowing planes to arm themselves. These are all conditions that make gold particularly attractive.

Or perhaps it is not so obvious why this is true. It's been three decades since the dollar's tie to gold was completely severed, to the hosannas of mainstream economists. There is no stash of gold held by the Fed or the Treasury that backs our currency system. The government owns gold but not as a monetary asset. It owns it the same way it owns national parks and fighter planes. It's just another asset the government keeps to itself.

The dollar, and all our money, is nothing more and nothing less than what it looks like: a cut piece of linen paper with fancy printing on it. You can exchange it for other currency at a fixed rate and for any good or service at a flexible rate. But there is no established exchange rate between the dollar and gold, either at home or internationally.

The supply of money is not limited by the amount of gold. Gold is just another good for which the dollar can be exchanged, and in that sense is legally no different from a gallon of milk, a tank of gas, or an hour of babysitting services.

Why, then, do people turn to gold in times like these? What is gold used for? Yes, there are industrial uses and there are consumer uses in jewelry and the like. But recessions and inflations don't cause people to want to wear more jewelry or stock up on industrial metal. The investor demand ultimately reflects consumer demand for gold. But that still leaves us with the question of why the consumer demand exists in the first place. Why gold and not sugar or wheat or something else?

There is no getting away from it: investor markets have memories of the days when gold was money. In fact, in the whole history of civilization, gold has served as the basic money of all people wherever it's been available. Other precious metals have been valued and coined, but gold always emerged on top in the great competition for what constitutes the most valuable commodity of all.

There is nothing intrinsic about gold that makes it money. It has certain properties that lend itself to monetary use, like portability, divisibility, scarcity, durability, and uniformity. But these are just descriptors of certain qualities of the metal, not explanations as to why it became money. Gold became money for only one reason: because that's what the markets chose.

Why isn't gold money now? Because governments destroyed the gold standard. Why? Because they regarded it as too inflexible. To be sure, monetary inflexibility is the friend of free markets. Without the ability to create money out of nothing, governments tend to run tight financial ships. Banks are more careful about the lending when they can't rely on a lender of last resort with access to a money-creation machine like the Fed.

A fixed money stock means that overall prices are generally more stable. The problems of inflation and business cycles disappear entirely. Under the gold standard, in fact, increased market productivity causes prices to generally decline over time as the purchasing power of money increases.

In 1967, Alan Greenspan once wrote an article called Gold and Economic Freedom. He wrote that:
"An almost hysterical antagonism toward the gold standard is one issue which unites statists of all persuasions. They seem to sense--perhaps more clearly and subtly than many consistent defenders of laissez-faire--that gold and economic freedom are inseparable, that the gold standard is an instrument of laissez-faire and that each implies and requires the other. . . . This is the shabby secret of the welfare statists' tirades against gold. Deficit spending is simply a scheme for the confiscation of wealth. Gold stands in the way of this insidious process. It stands as a protector of property rights."

He was right. Gold and freedom go together. Gold money is both the result of freedom and its leading protector. When money is as good as gold, the government cannot manipulate the supply for its own purposes. Just as the rule of law puts limits on the despotic use of police power, a gold standard puts extreme limits on the government's ability to spend, borrow, and otherwise create crazy unworkable programs. It is forced to raise its revenue through taxation, not inflation, and generally keep its house in order.

Without the gold standard, government is free to work with the Fed to inflate the currency without limit. Even in our own times, we've seen governments do that and thereby spread mass misery.

Now, all governments are stupid but not all are so stupid as to pull stunts like this. Most of the time, governments are pleased to inflate their currencies so long as they don't have to pay the price in the form of mass bankruptcies, falling exchange rates, and inflation.

In the real world, of course, there is a lag time between cause and effect. The Fed has been inflating the currency at very high levels for longer than a year. The consequences of this disastrous policy are showing up only recently in the form of a falling dollar and higher gold prices. And so what does the Fed do? It is pulling back now. For the first time in nearly ten years, some measures of money (M2 and MZM) are showing a falling money stock, which is likely to prompt a second dip in the continuing recession.

Greenspan now finds himself on the horns of a very serious dilemma. If he continues to pull back on money, the economy could tip into a serious recession. This is especially a danger given rising protectionism, which mirrors the events of the early 1930s. On the other hand, a continuation of the loose policy he has pursued for a year endangers the value of the dollar overseas.

How much easier matters were when we didn't have to rely on the wisdom of exalted monetary central planners like Greenspan. Under the gold standard, the supply of money regulated itself. The government kept within limits. Banks were more cautious. Savings were high because credit was tight and saving was rewarded. This approach to economics is the foundation of a sustainable prosperity.

We don't have that system now for the country or the world, but individuals are showing their preferences once again. By driving up the price of gold, prompting gold producers to become profitable again, the people are expressing their lack of confidence in their leaders. They have decided to protect themselves and not trust the state. That is the hidden message behind the new luster of gold.

Is a gold standard feasible again? Of course. The dollar could be redefined in terms of gold. Interest rates would reflect the real supply and demand for credit. We could shut down the Fed and we would never need to worry again what the chairman of the Fed wanted. There was a time when Greenspan was nostalgic for such a system. Investors of the world have come to embrace this view even as Greenspan has completely abandoned it.

What keeps the gold standard from becoming a reality again is the love of big government and war. If we ever fall in love with freedom again, the gold standard will once more become a hot issue in public debate.

http://www.house.gov/paul/congrec/congre...91002b.htm

ABOLISH THE FEDERAL RESERVE
Congressman Ron Paul
U.S. House of Representatives
September 10, 2002


FIAT EMPIRE
Why the Federal Reserve Violates the U.S. Constitution

The Gross National Debt

Find out why some feel the Federal Reserve System is a "bunch of organized crooks" and others feel some of its practices "are in violation of the U.S. Constitution." Discover why experts agree the Fed is a banking cartel that benefits mainly bankers, their clients in need of easy money and a Congress that would rather increase the Gross National Debt than seek funding from its constituents. Well-known author, G. Edward Griffin, Congressman Ron Paul (R-Texas) and Dr. Edwin Vieira, Ph.D., J.D. from Harvard (a foremost authority on the Constitution and the author of Pieces of Eight) discuss the Fed and various long-term studies which indicate that the Federal Reserve System encourages war, destabilizes the economy, generates inflation (a hidden tax) and is the supreme instrument of unjust enrichment for a select group of insiders. Dr. Theodore Baehr (founder of MOVIEGUIDE®) discusses the relationship between the Media, the Fed and the Government and why you never see these issues discussed on network TV or cable.

Accordingly, the government-licensed networks and those living off the fiat money system are probably not going to distribute FIAT EMPIRE so the burden may fall upon people like you -- responsible citizens that care.

Bear in mind that twice before in our nation's history, the People have voted down a central bank similar to the Federal Reserve System. We can do it again if we are able to explain to enough people why the national debt -- currently over $8.5 trillion -- and the trade deficit -- currently at $700 billion a year -- are going to crash the fiat empire sooner or later.

FIAT EMPIRE defines the problem and proposes a number of solutions to correct the situation and bring back a Constitutional monetary system to the United States.


FIAT EMPIRE is also up at Google Movies and the promo version has already been downloaded by over 5,300 people who have given it a collective 5 stars out of 5 stars rating. (See http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=...&hl=en) Please note, we did not authorize the placement of this on Google. Someone else commandeered it and placed it up there. Given this and the number of downloads, it's apparent that someone out there feels this subject and film may be of concern to citizens. Accordingly, we are looking for a wider distribution, perhaps on DVD or even theatrical, so if you are a distributor, or can help us find one, please contact James Jaeger at 610/688-9212 or contact@mecfilms.com. This show is not authorized for sale but may be displayed in private settings and for the purpose of promoting completion funds, distribution and future shows based upon G. Edward Griffin's book. Again, if you can help out on any of these goals, or wish to proffer comments on the film, please contact us at 610/688-9212 or email us at contact@mecfilms.com.


HOUSING BUBBLE BLOODBATH

By Mike Whitney

“The crash of the housing bubble will not be pretty. Millions of people stand to lose their homes and life savings. However, it was inevitable. The bubble created a fantasy world that could not continue. At the peak of the bubble, 160,000 people a week were buying a home, most at bubble inflated prices. The longer the bubble persists, the larger the group of people who paid way too much for their home. While it is not good that so many dreams had to be ruined, the number will be even larger if the bubble deflates slowly. So I make no apologies about hoping for the hasty demise of the bubble.” Dean Baker, “Slow Motion Train Wreck” The American Prospect, Aug 2, 2006

“No question about it, the housing downturn is here now, and it’s big.” Jim Hamilton “New Home Sales continue to Fall”, Econbrowser Aug 25, 2006



01/13/06 "Information Clearing House" -- - I wonder if Alan Greenspan takes a copy of the business page along with him on the chair-lift at the Aspen, so he can read about the plummeting housing market before swooshing down the well-groomed bunny-slopes at his favorite ski resort. After all, no one played a larger role in inflating (what the “Economist” called) the “biggest equity bubble in history” than the retired Fed-master. His low interest-rate bonanza triggered a stampede of speculation in the real estate market sending prices through the stratosphere and setting the stage for the biggest economic bust in American history.

The whole catastrophe was cooked up Sir Alan and his coterie of brandy-drooling elites at the Federal Reserve.

Thanks, guys.

Greenspan has undoubtedly taken note of the sudden spike in foreclosures which have set off alarm bells from Wall Street to the American heartland. The effects of his “cheap money” policies are finally sending tremors through America’s fragile economic landscape. In September, 2006 the US Foreclosure Market Report released a statement that over 112,000 homes had entered some stage of foreclosure “a 63% increase from September 2005!?! September was the second straight month in which more than 110,000 new foreclosure filings were reported nationwide, evidence that the spike in August was not just a one-month anomaly.”

No, it is not a “one-month anomaly” and it is bound to get considerably worse as $1 trillion of ARMs (Adjustable Rate Mortgages) reset in 2007. The rising foreclosure numbers are the result of rising monthly payments on the new-fangled loans which have low introductory interest rates, but can unexpectedly double after a two or three year period.

Imagine mortgage payments that suddenly jump from $1,300 per month to more than $2,000 on a $129,000 house. That’s what many people will be facing in 2007 when their loans reset and they are suddenly forced out of their homes and onto the streets.

The housing bubble is actually an extension of the stock market bubble; Greenspan’s earlier swindle which cost American investors $7 trillion in retirement and life-savings. Both equity balloons can be attributed to the shabby and exploitative monetary policies of the Federal Reserve. By expanding credit and money supply via low interest rates, the Fed has kept the economy whirring along creating the impression of prosperity when it’s all just smoke and mirrors. America’s opulence is built on a mountain of debt that’s piled a mile high. Regrettably, that mountain is about to cascade-down on the American people sometime in 2007-2008. There’ll be no escaping the fallout from the $4.5 trillion dollars of new mortgage debt that’s built up in the last 7 years. By the end of 2007 we should be able to identify many of the painful trends that accompany a deep recession; prices of homes will steeply decline, GDP will fall, and Greenspan’s mighty Temple of Debt will crash to earth.

Don’t believe me?

The New York Times reported last week that “about 2.2 million borrowers that took out sub-prime loans from 1998 to 2006 are likely to lose their homes”. That translates into about 10 million people! But that, of course, is just the beginning of the bloodbath. The real fun begins when the whole, ugly ball-o-corruption starts to unwind and we get an insider’s-view of a system that is rotten to the marrow. The housing industry is saturated with fraud; the banks, the mortgage lenders, the Fed and the homeowners themselves have all played a major role in this sordid confidence game.

Consider this, for example:

In 2006 the Mortgage Brokers Association for Responsible Lending (MBARL) said that “Liar’s Loans” (those based on what you TELL the bank you are earning, rather than what you are REALLY earning) “shot up to an estimated 62% of mortgage originations…A recent sampling of 100 stated income loans by an auditing firm in Virginia (based on IRS records) found that 90% of the income statements were exaggerated by 5% or more, WHILE ALMOST 60% OF THE STATED AMOUNTS WERE EXAGGERATED BY MORE THAN 50%”!?! (Dan Dorfman New York Sun)

Are you kidding me? A majority of loan applicants are grossly exaggerating their income and the banks are handing out hundreds of thousands of dollars WITHOUT EVEN CROSS-CHECKING IRS STATEMENTS?

It’s mind-boggling!

The question is, how many of these “liars” will be unable to meet their mortgage obligations when the bill comes due in 2007-2008? And, how will their (myriad) defaults affect housing prices for everyone else?

Another indication of hanky-panky appeared in the back-pages of the New York Times last week under the appropriate title “A Phantom Rebound in the Housing Market” by Daniel Gross. The article points out that while the Commerce Dept was celebrating the latest rise in new home sales (in Nov) the reality was quite different. In fact, the government is overstating sales “by up to 20%”. The Commerce Dept failed to subtract the thousands of people who signed contracts but “simply walked away from their deposits when they realized they couldn’t flip the houses for a quick profit.”

Ooops! So the government is falsifying the figures to make things look better than they really are?

You bet. And, most of the high-end home builders like Toll Bros are reporting cancellations in the neighborhood of 37%!

The Times adds that, “Mr. Zandi of Economy.com estimates that the differential is even greater. ‘Given the rise in cancellation rates, it suggests that between 150,000 and 200,000 home sales are being counted that actually did not occur.’”

“Did not occur”! So, the government is beefing up their stats with an extra 200,000 homes a month!?!

Gadzooks!

Okay, so the homeowners are lying on their loans, and the government is lying about the sales (and inventory) figures; is that it?

No. In an earlier article (The Fed’s role in the Housing Crash of ’07) we already covered how the banks are loaning out as much money as possible through all kinds of “untested” Mickey Mouse mortgages so that unqualified borrowers can get-on-board the housing gold rush. These are the ARMs; the “no-down payment, “interest-only” loans which Business Week magazine called “the riskiest and most complicated home loan product ever created”. Many of these ARMs are timed to explode sometime in the next 2 years and the aftershocks from the defaults are expected to be felt throughout the economy.

Of course, the banks never would have exposed themselves to such extraordinary risk if they weren’t able to bundle-up these dubious loans and ship them off to Wall Street. Fund managers have been more than eager to take this “collateralized debt” and use it in the booming hedge fund industry. No one really knows what will happen to the stock market when foreclosures begin to skyrocket and the banks and hedge funds are unable to recoup their losses. But a major “correction” (meltdown) is certainly not out of the question.

Once again, all of these problems originated at the Federal Reserve where interest rate manipulation and the loosey-goosey approach to money supply have created the potential for an economic firestorm.

Bubble, bubble; toil and trouble

So, what can we expect when interest rates tighten up and the market begins to slump.

Well, first off, according to the Wall Street Journal, lenders will get “more cautious in initiating new loans and have been setting aside more reserves for potential loan losses.” The banks are battening down the hatches and preparing for the worst. This just confirms that the real hurricane hasn’t even touched down yet and that America’s over-leveraged consumers should try to straighten out their financial affairs as swiftly as possible. (Get out of debt, pronto!)

A USB study indicates that a “high percentage of borrowers with delinquent, defaulted and foreclosed loans have second mortgages. These borrowers are so overburdened by the added debt that THEY HAVE TROUBLE MAKING THE PAYMENTS ON THEIR FIRST MORTGAGES. This is an ominous development since 34% of all mortgages in 2006 were second mortgages.”

In other words, it’s not simply people in the sub-prime market who are feeling the pinch. Millions of Americans either have loans that will reset at significantly higher monthly rates (which they won’t be able to pay) or they are completely maxxed-out financially after draining every last farthing out of their home equity. In fact, falling prices have decreased the amount of money that homeowners are able to take out of their home equity. (Equity withdrawals decreased by 70% in the last year alone!) That means that there is $525 billion less fueling the overall economy (GDP). As housing prices steadily decline, we can expect that America’s growth will shrink accordingly.

The American consumer is hobbled by debt and has no way to increase his revenue as long as wages remain stagnant. Additionally, US households are now showing negative savings. (minus .2%) When the home equity “punch bowl” dries up, it’ll be hard times for the average over-leveraged American consumer. He’ll have nothing left for his buying sprees but the plastic in his wallet. (Credit card debt is soaring)

It’ll be tough on the banks and Wall Street, too. After all, over 50% of all mortgages since 2003 have been these shaky, non-conventional loans which have ignored the standard criteria for loaning money (20% down payment, fixed interest rate, sufficient collateral and earnings) Now they’ll have to “pay the piper” and accept the dismal aftereffects of their profligate lending.

The banks should have spotted this disaster a mile away. Instead, they decided to improvise on mortgages so they could keep the money flowing and maximize profits. Now, there’s not a life boat big enough on Planet Earth to bail us out.

Glub, glub.

Once again, we need to remind ourselves that the housing boom was not created by market forces, but by cheap money pumped into the system (via the “creative financing” rip-off) by our friends at the Federal Reserve. They are responsible for this whole bloody boondoggle.

When the Fed cut short-term interest rates from 6.5% to 1% in 2001, they knew that they were simply leaping from one equity-bubble to another. In the next 5 years, total mortgage debt increased by a whopping 82% and total real estate value nearly doubled to $21 trillion dollars.

These are huge numbers and, of course, the Fed knew exactly where the money was going, just as they knew what the outcome would be in the long term. The effects of low interest rates and increases to the money supply are like the immutable laws of science. In this case, they act like gravity pulling the whole battered US economy into a bottomless black hole. It was entirely predictable.

So, what happens now?

What can we expect from the architects of this colossal rip-off in the next year or two?

Well, the Fed, the US Treasury and the Bush administration--the real axis of evil--would like to forestall the inevitable recession-depression until they carry out their forthcoming attack on Iran. That’s why Bush is sending another carrier group to the Gulf as well as a squadron of F-16s to Turkey. (It also explains why the US forces seized 5 Iranian hostages in Irbil, Iraq yesterday) The US is clamping down on transactions with Iran’s main banks (“unilateral sanctions”) and has coerced the Saudis into “discounting their top-line sweet crude by $1.75 to US customers” (Jim Willie “Golden Jackass.com”) to put additional pressure on Iranian oil exports. As Willie says, “This is the real story behind the falling (Gas) prices, not the silly (East Coast) weather”.

Uncle Sam is gearing up for another Middle East dust-up in Iran and the lower gas prices are (temporarily) averting a US recession.

The longer term prospects, however, are not so rosy. The “sunny Jim” reports in the media about a “soft landing” will have no affect on the impending housing collapse or on America’s downward economic spiral; the numbers are simply too enormous. By spring 2007, the Fed will have to lower rates to stop the hemorrhaging and to avoid a full-blown depression. When that happens, the last wobbly bit of scaffolding that’s propping up the greenback will be kicked-out and the dollar will slip into oblivion.

As long as the Fed keeps rates fixed, the pressure on housing will continue to intensify; pushing prices lower and inventories higher. GDP and home equity will continue to shrivel.

It’s all bleak, bleak, bleak.

I’ll leave you with a final comment from Michael Hudson’s “The New Road to Serfdom: an Illustrated Guide to the Coming Real Estate Collapse” (Harpers May 2006) Hudson, who may well be the foremost authority on the housing bubble says:

“Although home ownership may be a wise choice for many people, this particular real estate bubble has been carefully engineered to lure homebuyers into circumstances detrimental to their own best interests. The bait is easy money. The trap is a modern equivalent to peonage; a lifetime spent working to pay off debt on an asset of rapidly dwindling value. Most everyone involved in the real estate bubble thus far has made at least a few dollars. But that is about to change. The bubble will burst, and when it does, the people who thought they’d be living the easy life of a landlord will soon find that what they really signed up for was the hard servitude of debt serfdom…America holds record mortgage debt in a declining housing market. Even that might first seem okay—we can just whether the storm in our nice new houses. And in fact things will be okay for homeowners who bought long ago and have seen the price of their homes double and then double again. But for more recent homeowners, who bought at the top and now face decades of payments on houses that soon will be worth less than they paid for them, serious trouble is brewing. And they are not an insignificant bunch. The problem for recent homeowners is not just that prices are falling; it’s that prices are falling even as the buyer’s total mortgage remains the same or even increases. Eventually, the price of the house will fall below what the homeowners owe, a state that economists call negative equity. They can’t sell—the declining market price won’t cover what they owe the bank—but they still have to make those (often growing) monthly payments. Their only “choice” is to cut back spending in other areas or lose the house—and everything they paid for in it—in foreclosure. Free markets are based on choice. But more and more homeowners are discovering that what they got for their money is fewer and fewer choices. A real estate boom that began with the promise of “economic freedom” will almost certainly end with a growing number of workers locked into a lifetime of debt servitude that absorbs every spare penny.”

It can't be stated more succinctly than that.

Thanks, Michael Hudson, for your insightful analysis, but it may be too late.

THAT'S JUST MY OPINION

Mike Whitney
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info...e17182.htm

Gold traders love Dick Cheney. Every time he opens his twisted lip and barks out another threat to Iran, the dollar takes a powder while gold futures shoot to the moon. Maybe that’s the way Cheney likes it. After all, he dumped about $25 million in euro-bonds before he took office. Judging by the way he and brother-Bush have flogged dollar, he must have doubled his investment by now.

The old greenback has dropped nearly 35% in the last 6 years while gold has just about tripled. In 2000 the dollar was a trim, sinewy pillar of strength. It entered the ring like a young Mohammed Ali; darting to and fro while pummeling ihis prey with quick laser-like blows that were barely visible. Now, the greenback plods along like a 60 year old Rocky Balboa, wheezing heavily and reeling with every punch; waiting for the one roundhouse that will leave him staring up from the canvas, spitting up broken teeth and blood.

Ooooh; that hurts.

The dollar’s in a heap o’ trouble and Cheney is doing his level-best to make sure that it hits the skids before he leaves office. Just yesterday the snappish Vice President said, "It would be a serious mistake if a nation like Iran were to become a nuclear power. Then he added ominously, "All options are still on the table."

That oughta put the dollar on life support, eh?

At present, the rest of the world is really wondering if dollar’s going to pull through. Central banks in Europe, Japan, and China have increased money supply and kept rates low in order to prop up the droopy greenback. But that won’t last. Eventually, they’ll all have to raise rates to slow inflation and stop equity bubbles from going haywire. (The Chinese stock market increased by a whopping 140% in one year. They probably don’t want a Dot.com-type meltdown like we had in the US.) Regrettably, once interest rates start to rise, the dollar slip quickly from view leaving only fetid trail of vapor behind.

It’s astonishing how cavalier Cheney and the gaggle of racketeers at the Federal Reserve have been regarding the dollar. After all, why kill the goose that lays the golden egg?

As the world’s “reserve currency” the fed can simply print out a couple trillion whenever it comes up short and bring back boatloads of sleek, Chinese manufactured goods or tankers weighed down with petroleum to power our boxcar-sized SUVs. Or, maybe, Bernanke would rather crank-out another $12 billion in crisp $100 bills, shrink-wrapped and loaded onto pallets and sent off to Iraq where they can vanish in the black hole of corporate malfeasance.

No prob-Bob.

But what happens when the rest of the world sees that the “stewards of the global economic system” (that’s us) are nothing but a bunch of Texas yahoos, religious zealots, and war-mongering boneheads?

See, the funny thing about money is that it requires confidence in the provider that he will honor his part of the deal and operate in good faith. Otherwise, no one would dream of exchanging valuable resources and manufactured goods for silly, green tokens of credit-based fiat money with squiggly writing and funny looking men in powdered wigs on it.

We all expect money to have value, and yet, the Bush team continue to sabotage the currency with their unfunded tax cuts, their $9 per month war in Iraq, and their 35% expansion of the federal government. (Remember when Clinton said the “era of big government is over”?) The result of this craziness was thoroughly predictable; central banks are running for the exits.

Last Firday, the government reported that net capital inflows reversed from the requisite $70 billion to AN OUTFLOW OF $11 BILLION!

The current account deficit (which includes the trade deficit) is running at roughly $800 billion per year, which means that the US must attract about $70 billion per month of foreign investment (US Treasuries or securities) to compensate for America's extravagant spending. When foreign investment stumbles, as it did in December, it puts downward pressure on the dollar.

So what does it all mean?

It means they don’t want our stinking greenbacks. And, if they don’t resume purchasing our debt (US Treasuries or securities) the dollar will join Rocky Balboa on the canvas peering up blankly at the klieg lights.

“The full faith and credit” of the USA does not mean what it did 6 years ago. That’s a fact.

The Bush-Cheney-Federal Reserve axis believe they can keep this ponzi-scheme going by cornering the oil market (attacking Iran) and forcing the oil-thirsty world to accept our feeble banknotes. But that’s just nuts. The Chinese are already killing us by buying up oil and natural gas leasing rights around the world WITH OUR OWN DOLLARS!

It wasn’t supposed to work that way. We thought we were being clever by destroying the American labor movement and shipping our industry to China. We figured we could vanquish the middle class at home while we put the “fear o’ god” in the Chinese with our “shock and awe military” that was supposed to be out of Iraq in 3 years at the most.

How’d that work out?

Now the housing-bubble millstone is pulling millions of home owners beneath the waves while the maxed American consumer is down to his last credit card. In other words, the $11 trillion of new debt that was cleverly engineered through Greenspan’s low interest rate bonanza is about to detonate and bring the whole, wretched tower of American debt crashing to earth.

The US economy hasn’t depended on productivity for years, even though the American people work harder and longer than their better-paid counterparts in Europe. This entire mess was brought on by stagnant wages, the wealth gap, and a system that rewards the villaso-raptures at the top of the economic food-chain. Like Cheney, they believe they can keep this scam going on forever; forcing the world to take worthless sheets green scrip that’s backed up by $8.7 trillion of debt and wouldn’t even make good bird-cage liner.

But, then, that’s just my opinion.
PLAYING MONOPOLY WITH IRAQI MONEY

Loretta Napoleoni and Georgia Straight
http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?conte...cleId=5108

The biggest transfer of cash in history took place from May 2003 to June 2004 when the U.S. Federal Reserve of New York shipped $12 billion in bills of various denominations to war-torn Iraq. Over the course of one year, a fleet of C-130s carried, from New York to Baghdad, 484 pallets weighing a total of 363 tonnes and holding 281 million banknotes. This is not an advertisement for a new board game but the summary of a memorandum prepared for a meeting of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, chaired by Rep. Henry Waxman, which is examining the "reconstruction" of Iraq under Paul Bremer.

No proper record of the funds, which were distributed by the Coalition Provisional Authority, is available. They seem to have been disbursed like Monopoly money. Contractors were paid in cash from the back of pickup trucks; thousands of "ghost employees", people enlisted in ministerial jobs that did not exist, were paid salaries with bundles of currency; one million dollars was stolen from the CPA vault and nobody seemed to be bothered; $500 million was disbursed under the heading "TBD", which stands for "to be determined". An obscure consulting firm from San Diego was in charge of certifying the distribution of the money, yet it never conducted any review of internal controls, as was contractually required.

Bremer's financial adviser, retired admiral David Oliver, seems surprised by the House committee's concern, as if the billions that have vanished were really play money. When challenged by a BBC journalist about the consequences of the disappearance without trace of billions of dollars, he pointed out that it was irrelevant where the money had gone because it was Iraqi funds, not U.S. taxpayers' money. The $12 billion came from Iraqi assets seized after the first Gulf War, from the sale of Iraqi oil, and from surplus payments from the UN oil-for-food program. The $12 billion is not included in the $400 billion spent by the U.S. in Iraq since March 2003.

The procedure for unfreezing "political" money is generally very long and requires the fulfillment of several legal requirements. After a legal battle of more than a decade, waged by a group of Cuban exiles, then-president Bill Clinton finally released some of the Cuban funds frozen during Fidel Castro's 1950s revolution. Still locked in the vaults of the Federal Reserve is Iranian money seized after the Ayatollah Ruholla Khomeini ousted Mohammad Reza Pahlavi in 1979, some of Gen. Manuel Noriega's dirty money, and even some assets belonging to the recently deceased Ugandan dictator Idi Amin.

Iraqi funds were miraculously freed in less than two months. The procedure was quick and involved the approval of the United Nations, which, technically, was responsible for the oil-for-food surpluses. Those monies could have been used to bring back water and electricity to millions of Iraqis; if equitably distributed, they would have made each Iraqi man, woman, and child $15,000 richer. Instead, they were wasted by incompetent officers appointed by even more incompetent politicians.

It is surreal to think that the U.S. government rushed to fly hundreds of tonnes of cash to a country where its army could not stop people looting arsenals, banks, museums, and hospitals, to a country not yet pacified. As Waxman put it: "Who in their right mind would send 363 tonnes of cash into a war zone?"

War is not a board game; it is deadly serious business. Even more surreal is the fact that no plan existed for what to do with so much money.

Bremer claims that the CPA urgently needed the cash because the banking system had disappeared and Iraq was a cash economy. Yet his administration was not equipped to operate in a cash economy, proven by the way it wasted those billions. War zones are always cash economies. Did Bremer really think that after President George W. Bush's famous "mission accomplished"

declaration, ATM machines in Baghdad would miraculously start working again?

Those monies were also needed to inject U.S. dollars into a country where the local currency, the Iraqi dinar, was about to collapse. This is the other explanation Bremer put forward. Most currencies collapse after major conflicts. In the aftermath of the Second World War, devaluation spread like a virus among European currencies and new money had to be introduced by the central banks.

Injecting cash for the sake of injecting cash does more harm than devaluation; it can be extremely dangerous because war economies are run by militias, criminal gangs, black marketeers, and profiteers. Cash flows naturally toward these people.

Oliver, the man who was supposed to advise Bremer on these issues, is as unmoved as his ex-boss by the thought that the money they so irresponsibly distributed may have funded ethnic militias, criminal gangs, and insurgent groups in addition to "contractors" engaged in the reconstruction. Their lack of concern springs from the belief that they are not responsible for such failure because they are American and the money was Iraqi—they feel accountable to the U.S. taxpayer, not to the Iraqi people. The fact that some of those funds may have funded ambushes in which U.S. soldiers could have been killed does not cross their minds. War is a highly deceptive game.

Though the money was Iraqi, there is evidence that the CPA was eager to spend all of it before the interim Iraqi government was appointed. The House committee minutes report that one officer was handed $6.75 million in cash and told to spend it in the week before the interim government took control of the Development Fund for Iraq, where the money should have been held.

The motives behind such behaviour are clear. The primary objective was not to kick-start the reconstruction of Iraq. If it had been, the U.S. would have appointed competent people to run the CPA and the $12 billion would have gone to fund a sort of Marshall Plan, in which each penny would have been accounted for.

The objective was really another one: to establish an American bastion in the heart of the Middle East. Having incompetent U.S. officials distribute Iraqi money as if it were "funny money" instead of turning it over to the Iraqi interim government was part of this plan. Clearly, the Bush administration has never played Monopoly, or it would know the game's cardinal rules: never waste money and always invest wisely.


DOOMSDAY FOR THE GREENBACK

Mike Whitney

Global Research, April 11, 2007
http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?conte...cleId=5341


“Of all the contrivances for cheating the laboring classes of mankind, none has been more effective than that which deludes them with paper money.” Daniel Webster

The American people are in La-la land. If they had any idea of what the Federal Reserve was up to they’d be out on the streets waving fists and pitchforks. Instead, we go our business like nothing is wrong.

Are we really that stupid?

What is it that people don’t understand about the trade deficit? It’s not rocket science. The Current Account Deficit is over $800 billion a year. That means that we are spending more than we are making and savaging the dollar in the process. Presently, we need more than $2 billion of foreign investment per day just to keep the wheels from coming off the cart.

Everyone agrees that the current trade imbalances are unsustainable and will probably trigger major economic disruptions that will thrust us towards a global recession. Still, Washington and the Fed stubbornly resist any change in policy that might reduce over-consumption or reverse present trends.

It’s madness.

The investor class loves big deficits because they provide cheap credit for Bush’s lavish tax cuts and war. The recycling of dollars into US Treasuries and dollar-based securities is a neat way of covering government expenses and propping up the stock market with foreign cash. It’s a “win-win” situation for political elites and Wall Street. For the rest of us it’s a dead-loss.

The trade deficit puts downward pressure on the dollar and acts as a hidden tax. In fact, that’s what it is--a tax! Every day the deficit grows, more money is stolen from the retirements and life savings of working class Americans. It’s an inflation bombshell obscured by the bland rhetoric of “free markets” and deregulation.

Consider this: In 2002 the euro was $.87 on the dollar. Last Friday (4-6-07) it closed at $1.34-- a better than 50% gain for the euro in just 4 years. The same is true of gold. In April 2000, gold was selling for $279 per ounce. Last Friday, at the close of the market it skyrocketed to $679.50---more than double the price.

Gold isn’t going up; it’s simply a meter on the waning value of the dollar. The reality is that the dollar is tanking big-time, and the main culprit is the widening trade deficit.

The demolition of the dollar isn’t accidental. It’s part of a plan to shift wealth from one class to another and concentrate political power in the hands of a permanent ruling elite. There’s nothing particularly new about this and Bush and Greenspan have done nothing to conceal what they are doing. The massive expansion of the Federal government, the unfunded tax cuts, the low interest rates and the steep increases in the money supply have all been carried out in full-view of the American people. Nothing has been hidden. Neither the administration nor the Fed seem to care whether or not we know that we’re getting screwed --it’s just our tough luck. What they care about is the $3 trillion in wealth that has been transferred from wage slaves and pensioners to brandy-drooling plutocrats like Greenspan and his n’er-do-well friend, Bush.

These policies have had a devastating effect on the dollar which has been slumping since Bush took office in 2000. Now that foreign purchases of US debt are dropping off, the greenback could plunge to even greater depths. There’s really no way of knowing how far the dollar will fall.

That puts us at a crossroads. We are so utterly dependent on the “charity of strangers” (foreign investment) that a 9% blip in the Chinese stock market (or even a .25 basis point up-tick in the yen) sends Wall Street into a downward spiral. As the housing market continues to unwind, the stock market (which is loaded with collateralized mortgage debt) will naturally edge lower and foreign investment in US Treasuries and securities will dry up. That’ll be doomsday for the greenback as central banks across the planet will try to unload their stockpiles of dollars for gold or foreign currencies.

That day appears to be quickly approaching as the 3 powerhouse economies are overheating and need to raise interest rates to stifle inflation. This will make their bonds and currencies all the more attractive for foreign investment; diverting much needed credit from American markets.

Just imagine the effect on the already-hobbled housing market if interest rates were suddenly to climb higher to maintain the flow of foreign capital?

The ECB (European Central Bank), Japan and China are all cooperating in an effort to “gradually” deflate the dollar while minimizing its effects on the world economy. In fact, China even waited until the markets had closed on Good Friday to announce another interest rate increase. Clearly, the Chinese are trying to avoid a repeat of the 400 point one-day bloodbath on Wall Street in late February ‘07.

Japan has also tried to keep a lid on interest rates (and allowed the carry trade to persist) even though commercial property in Tokyo is “red hot” and liable to spark a ruinous cycle of speculation.

But how long can these booming economies avoid the interest rate hikes that are needed for curbing inflation in their own countries? The problem is, of course, that by fighting inflation at home they will ignite inflation in the US. In other words, by strengthening their own currencies they weaken the dollar--it’s unavoidable.

This is bound to hurt consumer spending in the US which will ripple through the entire global economy.

The problems presented by the falling dollar can’t be resolved by micromanaging or jawboning. In truth, there’s no more chance of a “soft landing” for the dollar than there is for the over-bloated real estate market. Greenspan’s bubble economy is headed for disaster and there’s not much that anyone can do to lessen the damage. As housing prices fall and homeowners are no longer able to tap into their equity, consumer spending will slow, the economy will shrink and the Fed will be forced to lower interest rates.

Unfortunately, at that point, lowering rates won’t be enough. Interest rates need at least 6 months to take hold and, by then, the steady drumbeat of foreclosures and falling real estate prices will have soured the public on an entire “asset class” for years to come. Many will see their life savings dribble away month by month as prices continue to nose-dive and equity vanishes into the ether. These are the real victims of Greenspan’s low interest rate swindle.

The Federal Reserve is fully aware of the harm they have inflicted with their low interest rate boondoggle. In a 2006 statement the Fed even acknowledged that they knew that trillions of dollars in speculation was being funneled into the real estate market:

"Like other asset prices, house prices are influenced by interest rates, and in some countries, the housing market is a key channel of monetary policy transmission."

“Monetary transmission” indeed?!? Trillions of dollars in mortgages were issued to people who have no chance of paying them back. It was a shameless scam. Still, the policy persisted in a desperate attempt to keep the US economy from collapsing into recession. The upshot of this misguided policy was “the largest equity bubble in history” which now threatens America’s economic solvency.

Author Benjamin Wallace commented on the Fed’s activities in an article in the Atlantic Monthly, “There Goes the Neighborhood: Why home prices are about to plummet—and take the recovery with them”:

"Let's assume for a moment that enough people get fooled, and the refinancing boom gets extended for another year. Then what? The real problem hits. Because if you think Greenspan's being cagey on refinancing, the truth he's really avoiding talking about is that we're in the midst of a huge housing bubble, on a scale only seen once before since the Depression. Worse, the inflated housing market is now in an historically unique position, as the motor of the rest of the economy. Within the next year or two, that bubble is likely to burst, and when it does, it very well may take the American economy down with it."

Or this from Robert Shiller in his “Irrational Exuberance”:

"People in much of the world are still overconfident that the stock market, and in many places the housing market, will do extremely well, and this overconfidence can lead to instability. Significant further rises in these markets could lead, eventually, to even more significant declines. The bad outcome could be that eventual declines would result in a substantial increase in the rate of personal bankruptcies, which could lead to a secondary string of bankruptcies of financial institutions as well. Another long-run consequence could be a decline in consumer and business confidence, and another, possibly worldwide, recession”.

If it is not handled properly, the housing collapse could result in another Great Depression. America no longer has the (manufacturing) capacity to work its way out of a deep recession. While the Fed was sluicing $11 trillion into the real estate market via low interest loans; America’s manufacturing sector was being carted off to China and India in the name of globalization. Without capital investment and increased factory production, economic recovery will be difficult if not impossible. The so-called “rebound” from the 2001 recession was due to artificially low interest rates and easy credit which inflated the housing market. It had nothing to do with increases in productivity, exports, or paying off old debts. In other words, the “recovery” was not real wealth creation but simply credit expansion. There’s a vast chasm between “productivity” and “consumption” although Greenspan never seemed to grasp the difference.


A penny borrowed is not the same as a penny earned—although both may cause a slight bump in GDP. Greenspan’s attitude was aptly summarized by The Daily Reckoning’s Addison Wiggin who said, “GDP measures debt-fueled consumption--it really only measures the rate at which America is going broke”.

Bingo.

America’s biggest export is its fiat-currency which foreigners are increasingly hesitant to accept.

Can you blame them?

They have begun to figure out that we have no way of repaying them and that the “full faith and credit” of the United States is about as reliable as a Ken Lay-managed 401-K retirement plan.

The fragility of the US economy will become more apparent as Greenspan’s housing bubble continues to lose air and consumer spending remains flat. As we noted earlier, home equity withdrawals are drying up which will slow growth and discourage foreign investment. The meltdown in subprime loans has drawn more attention to the maneuverings of the banks and mortgage lenders and many people are getting a clearer understanding of the Federal Reserve’s role in creating this economy-busting monster-bubble.

The 10% to 20% yearly increases in property values are unprecedented. They are “pure bubble” and have nothing to do with increases in wages, demand, productivity, capital investment or GDP. It was all “froth” generated by the world’s greatest Frothmeister, Alan Greenspan.

As Addison Wiggin notes, “There is only one real source of wealth: a healthy and competitive environment involving the exchange of goods coupled with control over deficit spending.”

Elites at the Federal Reserve and in the Bush administration have steered us away from this “tried and true” course and put us on the path to debt and catastrophe. It won’t be easy to restore our manufacturing base and compete again in the open market, but it must be done. Strong economies require that their people produce things that other people want. This is a fundamental truism that has been lost in the smoke and mirrors of Greenspan’s shenanigans at the Fed.

Regrettably, we are probably facing a decades-long economic downturn in which the dollar will weaken, stocks will fall, GDP will shrivel, and traditional standards of living will decline.

The trend-lines in the real estate market will most likely be the inverse of what they have been for the last 10 years. This will dramatically affect consumer spending (70% of GDP) and put additional pressure on the dollar.

The dollar is already in big trouble--the only thing keeping it afloat is foreign purchases of US debt by creditors who don’t want to be left holding trillions in worthless paper.(US debt is Japan’s single greatest asset!) These “net inflows” have created a false demand for the dollar which will inevitably dissipate as central banks continue to diversify.

Last week the IMF issued a warning that there would have to be a “substantial” decline in the dollar to bring the trade deficit to sustainable levels. That, of course, is the intention of the Fed and Team Bush—to reduce the debt-load by deflating the currency. It’s a crazy idea. No one destroys the buying power of their currency to pay off their debts. It just illustrates the recklessness of the people in charge.

Also, on March 20, 2007 the Governor of China’s Central Bank Zhou Xiaochuan announced “that China will not accumulate more foreign reserves and will cut a small amount of current reserves for the formulation of a new currency agency”. Zhou’s statement is a hammer-blow to the dollar. The US needs roughly $70 billion in foreign investment per month to cover its current trade deficit. China is one of the largest purchasers of US debt. If China diversifies, then the dollar will fall and the aftershocks will ripple through markets across the world.

The Chinese are very careful about how they word their economic statements. That’s why we should take Zhou’s comments seriously. Three weeks ago he issued an equally ominous statement saying, “China will diversify its $1 trillion foreign exchange reserves, the largest in the world, across different currencies and investment instruments, including in emerging markets.” (Reuters)

This should have been a red flag for currency traders, but the media buried the story and the markets dutifully shrugged it off. The truth is that our relationship with the Chinese is changing very quickly and the days of cheap credit and a “high-flying” dollar are coming to an end.

70% of China’s currency reserves are in US dollars. The effect of “diversification” will be devastating for the US economy. It increases the likelihood of hyperinflation at the same time the housing market is in its steepest decline in 80 years. When currency crises arise at the same time as economic crises; the problems are much more difficult to resolve.

Doomsday for the Greenback

It is impossible to fully anticipate the effects of the falling dollar. The dollar is a currency unlike any other and it is the cornerstone of American power—political, economic and military. As the internationally-accepted reserve currency, it allows the Federal Reserve to control the global economic system by creating credit out of “thin air” and using fiat-scrip in the purchase of valuable manufactured goods and resources. This puts an unelected body of private bankers in charge of setting interest rates which directly affect the entire world.

Iraq has proven that the US military can no longer enforce dollar-hegemony through force of arms. New alliances are forming that are reshaping the geopolitical landscape and signal the emergence of a multi-polar world. The decline of the superpower-model can be directly attributed to the denominating of vital resources and commodities in foreign currencies. America is simply losing its grip on the sources of energy upon which all industrial economies depend. Iraq is the tipping point for America’s global dominance.

When foreign central banks abandon the greenback the present system will unwind and the “unitary” model of world order will abruptly end.

This may be a painful experience for Americans who will undoubtedly see a sharp fall in current living standards. But it also presents an opportunity to disband the Federal Reserve and restore control of the nation’s currency to the people’s legitimate representatives in the US Congress.

This is the first step towards removing the cabal of powerbrokers in both political parties who solely represent the narrow ambitions of private interests.

The War on Terror is a public relations ploy that is intended to disguise the use of military and covert operations to secure dwindling resources to maintain dollar supremacy. It is a futile attempt to control the rise of China, India, Russia and the developing world while preserving the authority of western white elites.

The strength of the euro portends increasing competition for the dollar and a steady decline in America’s influence around the world. This should be seen as a positive development. Greater parity between the currencies suggests greater balance between the states--hence, more democracy. Again, the superpower model has only increased terrorism, militarism, human rights violations and war. By any objective standard, Washington has been a poor steward of global security.

The falling dollar also suggests growing political upheaval at home brought on by economic distress. We should welcome this. America needs to remake itself—to recommit to its original principles of personal freedom, civil liberties and social justice--to reject the demagoguery and warmongering of the Bush regime—to reestablish our belief in habeas corpus, the presumption of innocence and the rule of law. Most important, we need to reclaim our honor.

Big changes are coming for the dollar; it’s just a matter of whether we allow those changes to bog us down in recriminations and pessimism or use them to create a new vision of America and restore the principles of republican government. It’s up to us.


Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Reference URL's