Hmmm. Nice bill...

Would surely pass if WikiBank would release some damning info so that there wouldn't be any doubt about the massive fraud and cover-up.

All somebody has to do is step forward and prove the banks are insolvent, and this bill passes...

So, how would this affect the big banks?

Gen

If you want to understand Ron Paul all you have to do is read this book, I bought a hard copy.

I am almost certain he will co-sponsor the bill. He recommends this book. Here is the PDF version.

http://www.inlibertyandfreedom.com/PDF/B....

Edit: And Kucinich and Paul have always been twins on the wars and the banking system for the past 2 years.

Devil's Advocate here for a second...

The banksters would obviously hate every word of this Bill and fight it with everything they could muster.

So; simplest explanation: It's a put-up job.

1. Make sure a Bill gets introduced in Congress that does *exactly* what the banksters would never want to have happen and that actually solves the problem at hand.

2. Make sure it gets introduced in the dying days of the lamest of Lame Duck Congresses that we have had (numerically) in something like 66 years (all pending Legislation dies at the end of a Congressional Term - that's why it's the 111th Congress...it is *literally* the 111th Congress, a completely separate and distinct entity from the previous 110th or the newly elected 112th).

3. Make sure it gets introduced with no co-sponsors by the one Congressperson most easily associated with the term 'loon'.

Voila.

No one can say that the idea contained in the Bill was never introduced. Of course it was, it was duly considered (which legally it was, as it was filed and published), and the legislation just happened to never see the light of day (well, you all know the guy's a bit of a nut-job and all...) before the Constitutionally defined Congressional Term expired. The 111th was the 111th, the 112th is the 112th.

Whoopsies; it happens to lots good bills. Sorry, thanks for playing.

Well-played, banksters...



Ahhhhh, but I'm just a cynic.

Lucky, you're spot on. I would add that the bankers undoubtedly helped to draft this bill.

Great point, Dashing. After all, the lobbyists write all the Bills...

Quote:

I am almost certain he will co-sponsor the bill.

I'm sure if he doesn't you will still support him because God knows 20 years isn't enough time for him to really make a difference. Ron Paul, the half century con man.

I guess we can go with the "learned helplessness" approach, but I refuse to, not as long as we are armed and the gravitational constant persists..

"I'm sure if he doesn't you will still support him because God knows 20 years isn't enough time for him to really make a difference. Ron Paul, the half century con man."

Ya know, I don't like the gold standard either, but you need to pay more attention. China would like the gold standard right now as would the oligarchy. Why you are*****ing on me is of no concern of mine, I am not Ron Paul. But I bet you don't read half what I do, since you make assumptions about me, I have no problem doing the same about you.

Edit: And please try to THINK before type.

Gen, I have serious question. Is this an intellectual battle, or a monetary battle? Which should win, and for whom? I think this is a monetary battle that has been going on since sometime BC and posed as an intellectual one. That said, who will dominate the monetary policy, the intellects or the producers? I will copy this to email In case you miss it here.

KD - Is it unreasonable to expect that a representative from would NOT listen to a non-constituent from another district, in another State?? Dr. Paul has his own constituents, whom he represents. He does so well enough to keep getting re-elected each year. This is, in essence how a Republic is suppose to work. You speak of a Republic, but you seem to act as if we are a Democracy. You simply cannot have it both ways here.

If I had to hazard a guess Dr. Paul may NOT support this bill, as is, because it lacks competition (Edit: I could be wrong here). Competition results in better products. Why would we ever accept monopoly of the single most important component of a free market economy, issued by a monopoly central government?

Let's set aside the egos, and resolve to THINK AND ACT locally, the way a Republic should work, rather than having elected reps pandering to the biggest base.

Quote:

Lucky, you're spot on. I would add that the bankers undoubtedly helped to draft this bill.

Nope, I'm pretty sure Michael Hudson had more to do with this than any bankster. He was Dennis' economic advisor when he was running for President, BTW.

I'm not sure why this bill is being introduced now. I don't see how this even gets debated with the current state of things (unless there's something about to Wikibreak). But there's no harm in introducing a bill like this - that's the way Congress works.

I'd put my money on Ron Paul supporting this 100% given that Hudson himself is sort of a goldbug and Paul's been loosening up on his hard money stance. Some common ground here as I think both are looking for a competing currency to the Fed's more than anything else (i.e., metals).

What I'd like to know is what Kucinich is seeing in Ohio as far as foreclosure fraud is concerned. What does he know about the extent of the fraud (that we don't already know) that would make him seriously start questioning the Fed's QE2 and sponsoring this bill? I haven't really followed him much, but he seems to be stepping it up a notch lately, which would imply that he knows something...

This bill is nothing to get excited about. If you are betting against the Fed you will lose every time! No way they can get enough support for it.

That's a fair question... and perhaps a good subject for a Ticker..

Quote:

That said, who will dominate the monetary policy, the intellects or the producers?

See, this is why I think any debate over monetary policy should really focus on transparency more than anything else. At the end of the day, intellects and producers are still people. So does it really matter if we don't have a good accounting of money in the first place? Or, it's just hidden from everyone?

I think Bill Black mentioned this before too. How can we know what system works the best when we can't even get the real numbers because of obfuscation and fraud?

What pray tell sounds good about this? We all watched the money supply triple in the last ten years. It didn't have to happen and only happened because we got rid of the rules in place after the Great Depression.

This new plan will be so much more abusable and it will simply be abused for the gain of a different segment of the population.

I believe Mish is requesting a debate on the topic:

http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.c....

Quote:

This new plan will be so much more abusable and it will simply be abused for the gain of a different segment of the population.

Gras, that's what bothers me about it. They've already shown their hand and they're not bothered with throwing out the rules, nor does J6P care.

Gen,

Ron Paul has at least twice in the past several years introduced legislation to end the Fed and I know he's done it prior to that as well. See below, it doesn’t get any more straight forward than that.

HR 2755 http://www.opencongress.org/bill/110-h27....
HR 833 http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul504.....

He is a man of his word. To my knowledge these bills, unlike his more recent audit the fed bill (which got gutted), sadly received no co-sponsors.

He has also introduced the Free Competition in Currency Act in 2009, which is a backdoor way to end the fed. See this.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul619.....

If he doesn't co-sponsor this bill it will only be over philosophical differences as the devil is in the details. Sound money in his eyes (right or wrong in your eyes) is not fiat money, but rather that backed by gold and silver or other similar competing currencies as he often talks about. Skull f#$K the man once a week if you must and if it makes you feel good if he doesn't co-sponsor this particular bill, but I think you might be more than a bit off base on your presumptions on this one based on the man's previous track record. In my mind eliminating debt based money is a definitely a good place to start, but I don't see how giving Congress unlimited printing power equates to sound money in any way shape or form, nor was that ever the intent of the Constitution as I understand it. I suspect Ron Paul would agree. At any rate I appreciate what it is you do. Keep it up.

In liberty,

Scott

Mr. Denninger,

I am the first to admit I do not hold a candle to your insight. I read people I respect and try to understand what they are saying. Mish Shedlock has a different take on this legislation, stating that it would simply replace fiat creation by the Fed with fiat creation by Congress.

I know the interest that drives Congress (the imperial right to augment campaign contribution coffers). Therefore, this legislation seems, to me, to be an exercise in Newspeak. Give the imperial power of the fiat to crooks who no longer even pretend to be statesmen. Disguise the intent by calling the mechanism something other than what it is, so people are lulled and don't look too closely at what it actually says.

Your interpretations are so different that I am having a really hard time reconciling them. Could you comment, please?

Merry Christmas KD

Ministry - N.W.O.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wB-H7uxYG....

My question is how can this new system be gamed and who would benefit? Would this new gaming make things better,worse or just different?

to end fractional reserve banking would require a lot of public debt-free notes to be printed as private debt is paid or else there would be severe deflation. a little bit of inflation is actually good. interest-bearing national debt is bad. wealthy and powerful interests lobby for interest-bearing national debt because they like to collect tributes from the serfs. they don't lobby for inflation. ban financing of public debt with bonds and allow only financing through inflationary spending, you'd get a balance budget every time.

the danger would be congress spending 10 trillion instead of retiring the legitimate national debt, canceling the bonds not yet sold, and eliminating taxation on domestic production, taxation on income and capital gains.

this is why i wish the libertarians would burn down the austrian school of rockefeller foundation and william volker fund (world bank) fraud and get serious about writing a bill to end fractional reserve banking and replace it with public debt-free notes managed to be without deflation and inflation within a margin of error, leaning towards inflation.