F-ck, anyone who can count knows we are in trillion dollar deficits I really do think we are careening into national insolvency all we have to have, is 7 percent interest rates on treasuries to do it 10 years ago, that was the rate, in good times
I thought I knew and had seen bad government, but we are in an epic era of limitless corruption in America. I now know why Andrew Jackson killed the central bank, and why the corrupt insiders brought it back in the early 1900s. Andrew Jackson was a very brave and honorable man. http://www.newyorkfed.org/aboutthefed/history_article.html " The Second Bank of the United States was similar to the first, except that it was much larger; its capital was not $10 million, but $35 million. As with the First Bank of the United States, the charter was to run for 20 years, one-fifth of the stock was owned by the federal government and one-fifth of the directors were appointed by the President." "This bank was also similar to its predecessor in that it wielded immense power. Many citizens, politicians and businessmen perceived it as a menace to both themselves and U.S. democracy. One notable opponent was President Andrew Jackson, who, in 1829, when the charter still had seven years to run, made clear his opposition to the Bank and to the renewal of its charter. Jackson's argument rested on his belief that "such a concentration of power in the hands of a few men irresponsible to the people" was dangerous. This attack on the Bank's power drew public support, and when the charter of the Second Bank of the United States expired in 1836, it was not renewed. " But they brought it back. The scheming, criminal, insider, globalist elements who seek to enslave Americans and subvert American Independence: "On April 2, 1914, the Reserve Bank Organization Committee announced its decision, and twelve Federal Reserve banks were established to cover various districts throughout the country. Those opposed to the establishment of an overwhelmingly powerful New York Fed prevailed in their desire that its scope and influence should be limited. Initially, this bank's influence was restricted to New York State. Nonetheless, with over $20,000,000 in capital stock, the New York Bank had nearly four times the capitalization of the smallest banks in the system, such as Atlanta and Minneapolis. As a result, it was impossible to prevent the New York Fed from being the largest and most dominant bank in the system. However, it was considerably smaller than the New York banking community had wanted. "
The Founding Fathers were ADAMANTLY against the USA ever having a central bank. Jackson was what every president should be.... and was a great American hero! (And being as anti-DemoCrap as I am, I hardly gag at all on saying that... )
if it is really 2 trillion then USA is definitely finished, even the chinese has less than that in reserves and they supposedly has the most reserves
This is exactly why the US wants to nationalize the pension plan system. SSA would be a permanent source for the US to unload its debt.
Not sure "wants to" is the right phrase. The first step in this already happened 25 years ago, when Reagan increased payroll taxes to fund the Social Security "lock box". And what does the "lock box" contain? Treasuries. The Ponzi scheme has been operative for quite some time now - what we see today is nothing more than the natural consequence.
Goldman Sachs says "0% Interest rate is too high" January 19, 2009-: Can an interest rate of zero be too high? Unfortunately, yes. A new analysis by Goldman Sachs (GS) concludes that the Federal Reserve's cut in the federal funds rate to a record low of zero to 0.25% on Dec. 16 isn't going to be nearly enough to get the economy going again. The report says the Fed would need to reduce the federal funds rate to negative 6% by the end of 2010 to supply the needed amount of monetary stimulus. The problem: It's literally impossible to cut interest rates below zero. As a result, "we are entering a world with interest rates that are far too high for the economy's good," Goldman Chief U.S. Economist Jan Hatzius wrote in a Jan. 16 research note. More ..... http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily...op+news_top+news+index+-+temp_news+++analysis
Putting the interest rate below zero would be an even graver folly than the ultra-low interests rate now. The interest rate needs to be high enough to entice individuals to save so that there's funds in the loanable funds market for investments. If there's still investment without the savings to support it, then its unsustainable in the long term and must eventually be liquidated, leading to yet another recession.