|
Comments (7) The Fed and
the Debased “Imperial Dollar”: Future
Inflation, Timid
Economic Growth and Higher Interest Rates Ahead
To
read Dr. Tremblay's new book The Code for Global Ethics, Ten Humanist Principles and
to order the book, click on: Also,
read: The New American Empire USA
New
U.S. (and Global) Economic Woes
Posted, Tuesday, November 9,
2010 5:28 pm
Your article is quite informative and I appreciate
your honesty. However, one exception that I have with regard to the Federal
Reserve System is that it is not a federal government agency at all. It is
entirely a privately owned, for profit entity composed of a consortium of
banks (Goldman Sachs, JPM/Chase, Bank of America, NYB Mellon, CitiBank,
WellsFargo, etc.) who are independent bankers and unanswerable to the U.
S. Government. Senate majority leader Dick Durbin (D), famously
said - on national TV - that: "The big banks own the U. S.
Senate"! (Google it). It is well-known that the U. S.
Constitution states that the Congress shall issue, regulate and control the
nation's money supply. –Not private corporate bankers. The FDIC could
do this, with Congress' direction, and lend money - at no interest - to the
nation. North Dakota has done this, as a state, since 1919. Two very recent books that explore this subject are,
the excellent "Web of Debt" -(Ellen
Hodgson Brown, JD) and "Griftopia" - (Matt
Taibbi,"Rolling Stone"). Ellen's book explores exactly how we can
become free from the web of debt-based money. See: www.webofdebt.com. Bob ____________ Answer
by R.T.: I
am surprised that nobody seems to call for nationalizing the 1913 Fed. You
are right that private bankers in the 12 districts and even on the Federal
Reserve Board play a central role. The U.S. President, however, nominates the
members of Fed Board, and recently, the President acquired the power to
nominate the President of the all-powerful New York Federal Reserve Bank. Bankers
carry a lot of influence in Washington D.C. For example, the new financial
consumer protection agency could have been placed at the FDIC, but Bernanke
and the bankers insisted to have it under their control. They won. New
A Short Supply of Honest, Competent
Leaders
Posted, Tuesday, November 9, 2010 12:20 pm Your recent hard-hitting articles stand in contrast
to those of when you first started. Good! The essence of what you are writing is that those
who appear to be in charge, at all levels of government, are nefarious and/or
incompetent. Some U.S. commentators have recommended that those
living in urban areas should organize their community. This involves the
creation of a small non-profit banks, as in North Dakota, and to support
local merchants. They appear to abandon the idea that the U.S. as a whole can
fix itself. Sounds workable, but any organization demands leaders. We appear
to have a short supply of honest, competent and trustworthy people to take
charge. When private companies in
Canada (the steel company in Hamilton) want to cut worker pensions, and the
U.S government wants to lower Social Security, this does not bode well for
the avoidance of civil unrest, or even riots. There is a Spanish saying, “We are always
seven meals away from anarchy”. That is a a
serious concern for thinking citizens. Ray
___________ Answer by R.T.: I
think my articles have been quite consistent. If you go on the site of my blog, you can see that this is the case. I
gave an interview
recently in the U.S. about the danger of moving away from defined benefit
pension plans to purely contributory plans. In
Canada with ideologue Stephen Harper just as in the U.S. with clueless Barack
Obama, we face the same problem, i.e. a bad economic model that can
ultimately destroy our standard of living. If we can defeat Harper, Canada
has a better chance than the U.S. to correct the problem. In the U.S.,
permanent political gridlock means that nobody is in charge, except the
lobbyists and the bankers. As
you say, “this does not bode well”, although I think the
U.S. economy is resilient and will not collapse. New
An Open Letter to Prof. Dr. R. Tremblay
Posted, Monday, November 8, 2010 12:21 pm Open letter to prof. Dr. Rodrigue Tremblay Dear professor emeritus Dr. R. Tremblay, Thank you very much for your excellent (as always)
article “The Fed and the Debased Imperial Dollar.” As usually,
perhaps always, you are correct again in your economic and financial analysis
and predictions. You said it very simply and made it easy to comprehend. However, I am a little surprised that neither you
nor the majority of erudite professional economists fail to hit the nail on
head. I mean, hitting so hard that the nail is completely in the wood and is
difficult, if not impossible, to get out. In other words, to put elementary economic issues
into the form of a simple unquestionable equation such as 4+4= 8. That is
what today’s economics needs and is not getting. Otherwise, it seems
the musings and writings of even the most brilliant men / economists is
nothing more than child’s play, building big and perhaps beautiful sand
castles on a sunny beach. Nice to see and admire the skills of the builder,
but of no practical value. To be more concrete and open: Why are there no, or
only a very few, professional economists who would say: Capitalism is in its
final, terminal stage, historically obsolete and is quickly going out of
usage. It does not work properly or effectively any longer and it does not
serve humankind any more; if it ever did, it did so only to a limited extent.
And it will not. Like the previous outdated socio-economic systems of slavery
and feudalism, capitalism is now in “bad health”, effectively in
a coma and has to be buried with all the honors of a fallen
“hero”. The present-day capitalistic socio-economic system
hinders humankind’s progress, development, wellbeing, happiness and
fairness / justice. It is modern slavery mixed with some elements of
feudalism or even worse. There is a permanent global war, officially
sanctioned by the true rulers of the world, i.e. the rich, the bankers and
other members of the world plutocracy/oligarchy. Only they need wars, because
only they benefit from them. The formal “national” governments,
the executors of the wars, are
solely their obedient servants, whom somebody defined as
“psychopathocracy”, masquerading as democracy. To return to the economic turf: Anybody and
everybody with an elementary knowledge of economics knows that the Big
Bankers, namely the American FED & co., and other financial sharks, with
very generous assistance from the crooked Government or governments, are
scooping enormous benefits – profits – wealth through shrewd,
albeit primitive and totally immoral, often criminal financial (and
other-type) machinations. Trillions of dollars have poured, are still pouring
and will pour to the coffers of bankers and other rich, immoral parasites of
mankind. Of course, printing or otherwise “issuing” new money (by
FED or any other bank) can only create or exacerbate inflation. We, the somewhat older generation, which cannot
remember the Weimar republic’s hyperinflation, still remember the
chaos, inflation/hyperinflation and misery in postwar Europe. People in Latin
American countries have their own experience. A few people gained, but the
majority of people lost terribly. This is what we face today. I was
predicting these events and the present economic situation/chaos for decades.
Regretfully, my sibyline predictions have come to fruition. Personally, I am
not surprised by the state of affairs in the current world. I saw it coming a
long time ago. (Although I am not a professional economist, I studied
economics and even taught Political Economy some time ago.) We know that the big World Economic Crisis, the
“Great Depression” of the 1930s, effectively never ended. Only
was somewhat mitigated, first through the Great War, then changed forms. An informed and wise person knows and
honestly admits that the current capitalist system is in crisis, as I pointed
above, and needs to be either thoroughly overhauled or, even better,
completely replaced. With what? Socialism, of course. Or, rather, Socialism
With Human Face as we tried to establish in the sixties in the then
Czecho-Slovakia led by a Slovak, Alexander Dubcek. We failed not because of
the inherent faults of the projected socialism, but mainly because both the
communist Soviet Union (the bloc) and the western capitalist countries
(governments, establishment) were mortally afraid of it. Can you imagine what would have happened if there
were a socio-economic system based on principles of peoples’ genuine
power, a “government by the people for the people” as well as a
national economy run not primarily for profits but for citizen’s
wellbeing? The
world community of plutocrats, oligarchs and all the immoral privileged
trembled because they knew what we, the people, know. That that would be the end of exploitation and
deprivation, “proletarization” of masses and the end of swindles,
deceptions, racketeering, undeserved profits, benefits and wealth of the few
privileged. Is it an Utopia? Perhaps. But maybe not. What we need today, and
will need even more in the near future, is open-mindedness, moral integrity,
courage and determination of public opinion influencers, namely also
economists, to tell the world the full truth about what’s going on in
the present capitalist world and its sick, ineffective and socially harmful
economy. Jan __________ Answer
by R.T.: In
my most recent book “The Code for Global
Ethics”, I have a whole section about how an efficient
economic system should function. You
are well aware of Vladimir I. Lenin's book about capitalism
and imperialism: “Imperialism, the Highest
State of Capitalism”. The same applies to J. A.
Hobson's (1858-1940)1902 book entitled “Imperialism”. I also appreciate that you raise the issue of 20th
Century Germany. In my previous book “The New
American Empire”, I drew a clear parallel between the USA today
and 20th Century Germany. I am not a marxist, but the reliance on hegemonic
wars by the U.S. to feed its military-industrial complex appears to me to be
very dangerous. From my perspective, the U. S. political system is broken.
—It is corrupt and in a permanent gridlock. The lobbies write their own
laws. Bankers did it under Reagan, Clinton, and Bush, and the result was a
most severe financial crisis. That system has not been reformed and is one of
the reasons why the U.S. economy languishes. As for economists, I for one try to call it as I see
it. I hope my articles make people think. New
The Canadian Dollar
Posted,
Sunday, November 7, 2010 9:31 am I take your point, and share your view about the
shakey state of the American dollar however I cannot understand why it is, in
these circumstances, that currencies like the Canadian dollar have not long
ago broken parr and left the USA dollar in the dust. Is it all down to
currency manipulation? If so, as I suspect, who is doing this? Brian
__________ Answer by R.T.: Indeed,
your question is well taken. The
Australian dollar has broken above parity with the U.S. dollar while the
Canadian dollar has hit parity to retreat immediately under it. It's true
that Australian interest rates are higher than those in Canada. However,
there used to be a large spread favoring the Canadian dollar not long ago. My
feeling is that the Bank of Canada, assisted maybe by the large Canadian
banks, has a policy of preventing the Canadian dollar from going much above
parity. Other speculators may also think that with rising U.S. long-term
interest rates, the U.S. dollar is bound to rebound and that this will keep
the Canadian dollar from staying too long above the U.S. dollar. I
still think, however, that the Canadian dollar is about to complete its
2007-2010 double top around 1.10 US. This is all contingent on not having a
double-dip recession and an absence of trade wars. Since the stalemate at the
G-20 meeting in Seoul in mid-November, such fears seem to resurrect. New
The Semi-Private Semi-Public Fed
Posted, Sunday, November 7, 2010 11:45 am What is your interest in
maintaining or promoting the myth that the Federal Reserve is a semi-public,
semi-private Organization (Dr. Tremblay's statement below)? "But, for better or
worse, the Federal Reserve Board (Fed) seems to be the only branch of the
U.S. government left that can still function properly, i.e. that is not
caught in a permanent political gridlock. As a consequence, for the time
being at least, bankers are in charge of the U.S. economy. Since they are the
ones who created many of the current problems, this is not very reassuring. Let's
remind ourselves that the Fed is a semi-public, semi-private
Organization..." Is it because the U.S.
Government Website or one of its affiliated sites pretends it? Does that mean it is true? Is it
because the 'banksters' subsidized universities such as the London School of
Economics, Harvard and...Stanford? How many economists (or
pseudo-economists) have been brainwashed or bought to sell that lie? There are quantities of books
and links to denounce that big lie: The Creature from Jekyll Island
by G. Edward Griffin is one of these books. Here are a couple of links that
explain very well the imposture and the criminal racket of the Fed: Of course, Mr. Tremblay could
say that is coming from social credit nuts (as most supposed competent
economist say)… So, here are other links that
are not associated to Louis Even or the Social Credit movement: There are many more… Louis ____________ Answer by R.T.: Even
though the Fed was designed by J.P. Morgan and half a dozen of bankers in
1913, it was enacted by the U.S. Congress, with the U.S. President naming the
Fed Board of Governors and, recently, naming the president of the New York
Fed. It
is true that the Fed is not a department of the U.S. government in the way
that other departments are. In fact, the Fed is completely independent of any
branch of the U.S. government, although it works closely with the Treasury
Department. The President and the U.S. Congress have the power to change the
statutory authority of the Fed. As a matter of fact, the Federal Reserve Act
has been amended two hundred times since its adoption in 1913. —This is
the public part. However,
large private banks do own the twelve U.S. banking district so-called
“reserve banks” and five bankers rotate on the Fed Board.
—This is the private part. Of course, the private part may be stronger
than the public part depending on who is in charge of the U.S. government at
a given time. I would propose that, for the 100th anniversary of
the Fed in 2013, the Fed be nationalized, as is the case of most central
banks around the world. Also, the 1978 Humphrey-Hawkins Act that added a
second objective to monetary policy, i.e. smoothing the business cycle,
besides the control of inflation, should be reviewed. A semi-private
institution should not have the responsibility of managing the entire
economy. This is too dangerous. New
Really enjoyed your perspective on the Fed
actions
Posted,
Sunday, November 7, 2010 2:01 pm Amazed and stunned at the hubris of Ben Bernanke and
the world changing disaster his policies are creating. I am also stunned by
Bernanke's blinders, the other day in Georgia it took a college student to
challenge him on the deflation he is "terrified of", who asked him
how his logic squared with the huge run ups in gold and silver. I've been
wanting to ask him that question all year. After scouring the Internet for perspective that
made sense or connected the dots, the "debased imperial dollar" article
really put things together in a way that makes sense. I'm a long time Chicago
based options trader, with a couple partners, and we are onto something huge
based off of the "cluesless" (german official called it) nature of
Bernanke's dollar destructive policy. For near two months now we have been
positioning bearish long bond options, which closed near their highs on
Friday. It's clear to us that the long bond, now without
government support or friend to be found in almost two years, is poised for a
quick and nasty fall, and we are expecting a near 10% loss in long bonds this
week alone, which would increase the value of our positions to produce life
changing returns for all of us. Nice article, if you would like to talk
sometime about the trading end of things, please let me know. Steve ___________ Answer by R.T.: One has to remember that the
official definition of inflation was changed by the Reagan administration, in
1982. The gold market does know that. New
Ceterius Paribus
Posted,
Saturday, November 6, 2010 3:36 pm Yes, if we were in a rational environment--what you
say might be so. But we are in the matrix--and the matrix [including
it's so called financial fundamentals] go the way of the wirepullers [13
trillion$ in "Tarp" bailouts]. See the attached to begin to
understand the nature of the dilemma: I don't think anything is suppose to work--it's a
takeover. Thanks for the heads-up on
long term rates--but I still think dollar is headed lower. Gary __________ Answer by R.T.: Paradoxically, I think the US dollar is close to an
intermediate bottom as longer-term interest rates have begun to climb and
other countries' central banks resist the Fed's actions. |