Would it actually be good for the taxpayer if we nationalized the entire financial system?
For the last several decades the banking system in the US has made huge profits. What if these profits had been going into the public coffers instead of the pockets of the corporations and their benefactors.
WITHOUT PREJUDICE - Read the following from the constitution:
"Only congress has the power to coin gold and silver and regulate the value thereof".
Consider this! - If the banking system was nationalized then the fractional reserve system would actually be working to fund the government thus relieving the financial burdens on the taxpayer. Plus it would eliminate the Federal Reserve system and provide the people with a banking system that could operate on a non-profit basis.
Question - Would it actually be good for the taxpayer if we nationalized the entire financial system including credit card companies and banks?
I get where you're going
And it is reasonable, as a matter of fact that should be our goal. However the practice that Britain and American of "nationalizing" banks is much different then what Thomas Jefferson envisions.
Here's my problem with offering "solutions" that seem reasonable: The people in power always twist the "solution" to something much different then what they advertise. For example Obama calls for "service", but in reality its servitude and any unwitting pawn caught up in that servitude web will be seeing the Middle east real soon.
What Britain has done to "nationalize" banks is to absorb all their good assets and claim them as Britains (default on your mortgage and now its owned by the UN/IMF-code for NWO) and also pay for the bad debt with funny money. They're destroying the British Economy while kicking people out of their houses and sending all the real assets to the vultures who engineered this mess.
What you're talking about in "nationalizing" is actually giving the people a say in our financial matters. That would be tremendous, but it would require a repeal of the Federal Reserve Act and TARP or, at the very least, an alteration to the bill that would enable people to audit and monitor the Fed's activities. Ron Paul has a few bills like that in session right now. I say we should find out what Ron Paul has sponsored and put pressure on our congressmen to back him in this next session. It's going to be a tough road if we all don't start screaming our heads off.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Start getting freedom today by dumping Federal Reserve Notes, Stocks, Banks and anything made outside the USA. Buy precious metals, real estate, businesses, food and guns and get your business community to use local or sound currenc
Carefully read this quote by Thomas Jefferson.
Did he really want to trust the monetary system to "private banks".
"If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around [the banks] will deprive the people of all property until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered. The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it properly belongs." TJ
He's talking about a central bank lending to private banks.
The fed was created at the behest of private bankers to be their "lender of last resort" in the event of a bank run.
If the government is always there as a back-stop, the private banks can operate with extremely low reserves.
Have you read "The Mystery of Banking"? Its a free download from the mises institute website.
http://brits4ronpaul.blogspot.com/
http://lpuk.blogspot.com/
http://northwestlibertarians.blogspot.com/
I realize the overwhelming tendency is to have a negative
knee-jerk reaction to anything that sounds like big government, especially if you don't read the post carefully and think it through. I'm just trying to think outside the box here for the benefit of exploring the true intent of the constitution.
The fact is, there are some things a government can do better than indiviuals like build roads, utilities and manage air traffic. If you look into the exact language of the constitution it appears to give only congress the power to coin gold and silver and regulate the value thereof. If you examine this statement very closely it could be interpreted that their intention was to keep that right in the hands of congress. By doing this you could actually accomplish a number of things:
1. Eliminate the Federal Reserve and the private profiteers
2. Eliminate the undue political influence of these banksters including wars
3. Eliminate the middle man and that exists between the insurer and the borrower.
Looks to me like anything that would get rid of the FED is certainly worth looking at with an open mind.
Why would I want a non-profit government monopoly bank ?
Or to have my credit card held and verified by the government. Or have the government decide what interest I get on my savings. Banks should be private and competitive. The government should coin money so there is a standard that is commodities based. Beyond that I can see no reason for the government to take over other banking functions (despite that they want to).
Anyway, The reason government seems to do better with Roads, utilities, etc, is that they can just take the land they need, and can force out the competition. There are a few things that are (should be) commons, water for instance, maybe streets (as opposed to roads) and thus controlled by some government but not too many.
Read that statement from the constitution very carefully
and you will see where it says "regulate the value thereof" - wouldn't that be the same thing as the interest rate.
The BIG POINT that most are missing is that PRIVATE INTERESTS ARE CURRENTLY IN CHARGE of the money system even if it is not so apparent to everyone and it ain't working out so good!
I think the founders intentionally meant for this to be one area of the economy that stayed in the hands of the people via the congress.
Currently we have a mixed economy so the banks
are not independent nor private. It seems that they are private because citizens have no checks or balances against their policies. If you are saying that a government Monopoly, with a few checks and balances is better than a private Monopoly, I suppose that depends on who exactly is in charge, but Ithink the answer is yes. But if you are asking me if it would be better than a true private banking system, with the congress controlling coining money.
BTW, there is nothing in the constitution that forbids competing currencies, except for gold or silver coins.
Not in the long run...
Government would have too much control.
That's waht the Communist shysters are trying to do right before our eyes.
Wells Fargo Bank did not want government money...
The CEO (bless his heart) was so angry he pounded his fist on the table...
BUT THE CRIMINAL PAULSON LOCKED THEM IN A ROOM UNTIL THEY SIGNED AND WERE FORCED TO TAKE 25 BILLION.
Paulson AND Bernanke to prison for counterfeiting.
"We have allowed our nation to be over-taxed, over-regulated, and overrun by bureaucrats. The founders would be ashamed of us for what we are putting up with."
-Ron Paul
If I can control a country''s money
I care not who makes the laws.
Andrew Jackson would not be happy with you
Uh...uh...not at all.
If you spend ten minutes researching the proponents of your suggestion you will delete this post.
The people in power have continued with their "anti free market" tirade and DP people are actually beginning to believe it?
"Free markets are dangerous." You are being hypnotized. You are looking at their solutions and believing them.
God help us.
Shut off the TV....I beg of you.....shut off the TV...if it is the last thing you ever do ....shut off the TV.
Unify
Well during slavery, the slaves
Were all employed, weren't starving and had free healthcare. I can't imagine why any of them ever ran away.
Sure it would...
if you think 911 was good for New York. We need to enforce the Constitution, not eliminate private banks. We also need to charge those who got us here with treason and apply capital punishment. That would give future generations of politicians and bankers pause before considering ignoring the Constitution.
It would be one way to elimate the FED!
!
Ralph Waldo, Russia already tried that, it doesn’t work!
hjschaapman
The Winds of Change!
Don't fall for the lies
"nationalize" in honest speak means the congress and the people have control over the system as in a constitutional republic.
"nationalize" in NWO speak means you never get your money out when you want it, more taxes, more fees, more bureaucracy, a spiraling stock market, all your money given to off shore international financiers.
check out what happened when the stock market thought Britain was going to nationalize more banks: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090120/ap_on_bi_st_ma_re/wall_s...
Remember, Nazi=National Socialism
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Start getting freedom today by dumping Federal Reserve Notes, Stocks, Banks and anything made outside the USA. Buy precious metals, real estate, businesses, food and guns and get your business community to use local or sound currenc
Unfortunately
there is no honest speak. Many nations have a FED, which they think is their national bank. If a real national bank gets rid of the FED then it is a good thing.
I know
but idealists are easily swayed by lesser men.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Start getting freedom today by dumping Federal Reserve Notes, Stocks, Banks and anything made outside the USA. Buy precious metals, real estate, businesses, food and guns and get your business community to use local or sound currenc
Good for taxpayers? ... NO
Good for freedom? ... YES
It will prove us right.
WAHOR!!
http://www.dailypaul.com/node/48994
WAHOR!!
http://www.dailypaul.com/node/48994
NO, it would be
giving power over government to one central bank, the FED, and behind that is the Rothschild banksters who want this to happen. "He who controls the money controls the world. " This is their aim, to gain control of the global monetary system.
END the FED. This private bank, the spawn of the Rothschild Bank of England, has usurped the government of the United States of America, Britain, France, Germany, Iceland, and the list grows.
The banking system is
The banking system is already nationalized just not officially. And they would not use the profits to fund government. Check out the CAFR information www.cafr1.com Walter Buriens information. They already make enough money off investments to fund government without taxes with money left over but don't do it.
They own a substantial amount of the stock market and derivatives etc. That is why they are doing bailouts, to protect their investment.
This is the gravy train that has corrupted nearly every politicians who gets elected this is the holy grail but were busy chasing every shadow they throw at us. We are in a room full of mirrors.
-----
Get Prepared!
Only dead fish go with the flow...
-----
End The Fat
70 pounds lost and counting! Get in shape for the revolution!
Get Prepared!
Article 1, Sec. 8 does *not* say that. The words "create
money" are not used. The actual wording of this provision in Article 1, Sec. 8 is:
"To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;"
If the framers of the constitution meant for Congress to have the power to "create" money, then why did they opt for the word "coin"?
The banking/finance sector is already in the process of being nationalized.....and financed by debt secured by the long suffering taxpayer(s).
_________________________________________
"An economy built on fiat money is a society on its way to ashes."
_________________________________________
"An economy built on fiat money is a society on its way to ashes."
Government Creep
Government has already all but nationalized them: that's the problem.
It used to be that the relationship with one's banker was as private as with one's doctor, and nobody else's business.
We still have small, local banks where you can get to know your banker, even though they're endangered due to government overhead and regulations.
Nationalizing the banks would simply remove all our choice and make sure we pay for all the banks. I haven't seen any signs that government can be trusted with money--have you?
Controlling our money is the way they control us.
IMissLiberty
Voting for the Lesser Evil? http://www.inductionworks.com/iw/form/qamap.php/ElectLesserEvil
IMissLiberty
They control healthcare too...
Obama is planning on eliminating the rights of a doctor to chose whether they perform abortions or not . If someone wants an abortion that is their issue, but they should have no right to force me to pay for it with a tax on work for pay. The same goes for OB-GYNs who prefer not to perform abortions for their consciences' sake, they should be free to follow their conscience within their profession, and to choose not to perform the proceedure. There are plenty of doctors who will, why force someone to violate their conscience to continue working in their chosen profession? And why should we pay for the world's abortions, especially when some are forced on the woman, as in China?!?
To compel a man to furnish funds for the propagation of ideas he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrranical.- Thomas Jefferson
Libera me, let the truth break, what my fears make--Leslie Phillips
But that man should play the tyrant over God, and find Him a better man than himself, is astonishing drama indeed!~~D. Sayers
There is no difference between an authoritarian government from the right or the left...F. A.Schaeffer
Why Nationalize Bad Bets?
You'd be putting the taxpayer on the hook for all the bad bets that degenerate gambler-bankers have been making for the last decade.
Socialists are Everywhere
Socialists are Everywhere
No I'm not suggesting we the taxpayer take on the
bad mistakes from the private bankers!
Nationalization
is similar to a disease it get's to be pretty contagious. For instance, you nationalize financial institutions then the process continues towards the auto industry further stifling capitalism. The end result full blown socialism where central planners determine the way the marketplace works.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value:zero." - Voltaire
" Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master. " - George Washington
NO!The simple solution is
NO!
The simple solution is to have the treasury issue our money and loan it to us for little or no interest. Only congress has the power to create money and regulate it's value.
We can not collapse the Federal reserve in a day but we could hav a competing currency and allow the market to dictate where people wish to put their money.
This is the short version because I don't have time to write a thesis right now.
www.rtrradio.com
www.retakecongress.com
www.revolutionbroadcasting.com
www.RJHarrismoneybomb.com
JFK
was about to do that when he was assassinated. I think that bill is still in existence.
"Tyrants fear nothing more than insubordination"
"It's just one big club... and WE ain't in it!"
Isn't the authority stated in the constitution in essence
assigning ALL monetary policies to the congress. Isn't that in essence nationalizing the money business?
Answer:
Anything the private sector ought to be doing the government can do at greater expense and less efficiently.
So no.