You are blaming the tax-payer for creating the current scenario via democracy? With all due respect, if you believe that democracy is a reality then I might aswell end the debate with immediate effect. Although I found it interesting that your initial post to which I responded, you wrote that nobody is talking about this issue because most people are not idiots, and then went on to say that you were tired of attempting to explain "what is going on". Please make your mind up, if you are tired of explaining "what is going on" then logically there must be a lot of confused people out there who lack an understanding of "what is going on", people you choose to call idiots. I will suggest to you, the reason why few people are not asking questions is because there is zero mainstream media coverage pertaining to the education of the masses with regards to the structure of "The system", contrary to the mythical wonderland where everybody is fully aware of "what is going on" and therefore not talking about these ongoing issues. However with the expansion of the internet that is slowing beginning to change and "more questions" are being asked, and therefore it is reasonable to suggest that we are moving toward a fundamental apex which will determine our collective futures in terms of the structure of global financial management, which will invariably involve fundamental changes of which won't necessarily be bad for the voting consumer.
Feel free to end what you gotta end, amico. I will cry only a bit, since this debate is so infinitely special to me, but I think I'll live. Again, it doesn't matter what you call the form of government that is currently in operation in the US. Let's call it X to avoid snags. I am saying that X is a form of government that the US citizenry benefits/benefitted from (in the form of high per-capita income, etc). Do you not think it fair that the costs associated with X should be borne by the US citizenry as well? I was speaking in jest, being bitterly ironic, whatever. I stand by my view that most people are not idiots. Before screaming nonsense slogans from the rooftops, they actually spend time to educate themselves about the functioning of the economy. That's why they don't talk about the abolition of the Fed somehow mysteriously causing the US govt debt to disappear. There are some people, however, - and this forum seems to have a concentration - that really don't understand how things work (which, IMHO, should be a requirement before you're allowed to criticize). I try to explain, time and time again, and I am tired of having to continue to do that. I will disagree with your suggestion. This isn't rocket science. Lots of information is freely available. You just need a brain and the ability to utilize the brain's critical faculty. For example, look at the original post. Initially, you might be tempted to believe what the author of the article says, because it's written somewhat authoritatively and uses economic terminology, like M1 etc. However, you just need to think critically for a second to realize that there are all sorts of flaws and fallacies in the author's arguments. Thus, zero need for mainstream media, much need for a functioning brain.
How much US govt debt is monetized by the Fed as a proportion of the total US govt debt, do you know? Has the Fed always monetized US govt's debt? Really? You don't say?! I'm scandalized! Banks borrowing money from the Federal Reserve! What's the world coming to? What's next? Britney and Justin back together? Do you happen to know how banks can borrow from the Fed? Do they have to give the Fed something in exchange?
Whether or not the original post is statistically or factually accurate, it merely continues to fuel a topic for discussion. The "voting electorate" are merely asking questions as to why they are having their homes taken away from them, they are merely asking why they are unable to appreciate stable employment, they are merely asking why they find it difficult to obtain credit in a system that is underpinned by lending and capitalism. I will suggest to you that these fruits of democracy are not what the "voting electorate" would wish to experience, don't you agree? Therefore people are beginning to investigate the cause in order to determine the origin of the above mentioned questions, merely asking if there is a better way to organise our society, which is why the US Treasury - Federal Reserve relationship is currently under increasing public scrutiny, irrespective of what mainstream media serves up for day to day consumption.
I'm sorry, this logic doesn't work for me. If I say something stupid and wrong, I can't turn around and claim that, oops, I didn't really mean to say it, but only meant to introduce a topic for discussion. Agreed, we all want to know answers to these questions... We all want to come up with ways to re-organize various systems in our society to make them work better. However, is a "statistically or factually inaccurate" blurb that, at best, offers just food for thought and a topic for discussion, a good way to think about solutions?
They say fuzzy logic is superior to linear logic. Perhaps considering the growing concerns of the "voting electorate" it is "fuzzyly" logical to assume that people with indiffering levels of awareness will provide input upon this particular topic as and when they feel confident enough to involve themselves in debate. Perhaps elitetrader is the only outlet for some people to discuss their concerns? Let us not be distracted from the fact that elitetrader is merely a public messageboard that provides an outlet for anybody who has an interest in trading, and therefore I would assume the vast majority of members don't use this website with the hope of finding a "solution" to current global economic affairs. Therefore we can suggest that the quality of postings will also reflect this assumption, whilst continuing to fuel the minds of our ever inquisitive "voting electorate".
MartinG - you are correct, and yes, many here are misinformed about the Fed. However, their concerns are not baseless. I believe you are being disingenious by stating traditional Fed operations without mentioning the recent extraordinary Fed actions. Didn't more then just the traditional banks have access to the Fed Window? What did the Fed purchase from those that went to the window and who determined the price? Is it normal for a Central Bank to flaunt securities regulations and to arrange shotgun marriages between institutions with little transparency? Who paid the price for those sham "marriages?" Who gained? How were losses and gains allocated? I appreciate your efforts in articulating the traditional role of the Fed. But these are not ordinary times, and people have a right to ask for answers. Many posters on this thread may be misinformed, but they rightly smell a rat nonetheless... I'm not so sure you do.
This is because we are the only conquerors in the history of war to not rape and pillage the wealth and riches of our adversary or enslave and tax our enemy. ie. the Brits, Romans, Spaniards and Germans all have expanded through war bettering their position. After we destroy our enemy, instead of riches we foot the bill again and pay for their restoration. We have at least three undeclared wars: Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan... All we need to do is garnish 50% of their citizen wages and their GDP until all of our war debts with interest is satisfied. In effect, we must enslave the enemy and slowly over 50 - 100 years assimilate them into our collective democracy. In our "Home of the free" country only US citizens are enslaved, having 50% of their wages garnished in the form of various taxes or face prison.