Isn't the Fed unconstitutional now?Submitted by tischmi on Sun, 07/08/2012 - 00:37
I am confused. Since the supreme court ruled on Obamacare that if, "it walks like a tax and talks like a tax, therefore it is a tax", then couldn't the Feds ability to charge interest on loans to supply currency to banks be considered a tax too? These so called loans just provide a means to draw money back to the "Reserve" so the trustees of the Fed can spend it at their will. Isn't that just taking money from people just like taxes do? They even create money out of thin air. Sure sounds like it walks and talks like a tax to me.
If it is considered a tax, what gives them the authority to do so? I thought (I could be wrong) that only Congress has that authority and no other body can levy taxes. So doesn't the supreme court ruling also mean by implied interpretation that the Federal Reserve Act is unconstitutional?