Is it time to separate Banks and government?

[Vallista]

I was browsing youtube videos. I came across this video. I understand the video is old, however what this video revealed really got me thinking about the cozy relationship between government and finanical sector. To me this relationship shouldn't be cozy at all. Second the finanical sector shouldn't be dicating what government are allowed monitor and not the monitor. To me a lot of the financial mess we are in is because we allowed financial sector almost free range. That's is what really screwing us over. We can bicker over all we like about what political party at fault(I would say both) but, the government is made by the people for the people. Our government should have a reasonblity to protect us from financial ruin.

 

[Northern Light]

Banks and government already are separate. The Federal Reserve is private, and it was a horrible mistake to privatize it.

The opposite needs to happen. We should have a central bank under the purview of the People, via our elected officials. No more clandestine money handling by financial elites who are working against this country's economy.

 

[Lakryte]

Banks and government already are separate. The Federal Reserve is private, and it was a horrible mistake to privatize it.

The opposite needs to happen. We should have a central bank under the purview of the People, via our elected officials. No more clandestine money handling by financial elites who are working against this country's economy.

The Federal Reserve was never privatized. In order for something to be privatized, it has to first be non-private. The Federal Reserve was created by an act of Congress, and prior to that it didn't exist. So it was either always private or always not--its nature never changed, so to say it was privatized is inaccurate.

Second, the Federal Reserve is independent of the democratic process, but it is not a private institution. The fact that the Board of Governors of the Fed is appointed by the President immediately debunks the claim that it is private. Furthermore, it was created by Congress. The Federal Reserve is as private as the US Postal Service.

In actuality, the Federal Reserve is a entity of mercantilism or corporatism. It is a fusion of government and private. Without the government it would not exist. So to call it "private" is disingenuous and misses half the picture.

 

[specklebang]

Using USPS as the model's concept does not inspire me with much confidence.

The banks purchased the politicians long ago. How could you tell them apart at this point? When the economic collapse hit full force, the President, who had been hiding in his office for a long time, emerged to plead their case. When the next President was elected, getting money to the banks was his first order of business. When it came before congress, we had bi-partisanship for the first time in years. When the bankers gave themselves huge rewards for rescuing themselves with taxpayer money, I heard a slight feeble protest but the checks went out anyway.

Too late.

The Federal Reserve was never privatized. In order for something to be privatized, it has to first be non-private. The Federal Reserve was created by an act of Congress, and prior to that it didn't exist. So it was either always private or always not--its nature never changed, so to say it was privatized is inaccurate.

Second, the Federal Reserve is independent of the democratic process, but it is not a private institution. The fact that the head of the Fed is appointed by the President immediately debunks the claim that it is private. Furthermore, it was created by Congress. The Federal Reserve is as private as the US Postal Service.

 

[Bonzai]

Using USPS as the model's concept does not inspire me with much confidence.

The banks purchased the politicians long ago. How could you tell them apart at this point? When the economic collapse hit full force, the President, who had been hiding in his office for a long time, emerged to plead their case. When the next President was elected, getting money to the banks was his first order of business. When it came before congress, we had bi-partisanship for the first time in years. When the bankers gave themselves huge rewards for rescuing themselves with taxpayer money, I heard a slight feeble protest but the checks went out anyway.

Too late.

I'm curious to know what you think would have happened if there was no bailout...............................

 

[Lakryte]

Using USPS as the model's concept does not inspire me with much confidence.

The banks purchased the politicians long ago. How could you tell them apart at this point? When the economic collapse hit full force, the President, who had been hiding in his office for a long time, emerged to plead their case. When the next President was elected, getting money to the banks was his first order of business. When it came before congress, we had bi-partisanship for the first time in years. When the bankers gave themselves huge rewards for rescuing themselves with taxpayer money, I heard a slight feeble protest but the checks went out anyway.

Too late.

It's not meant to inspire confidence. I am not defending the Federal Reserve--quite the contrary. When you can't tell the government apart from a private entity, then the entity you are dealing with is corporatist/mercantilist in nature.

 

[Federalist]

To me this relationship shouldn't be cozy at all.

I agree. The government should not be involved in the banking business any more than it is in the sneaker business. That is to say that it should simply enforce the contracts entered into by the banks, the depositors, and the borrowers.

 

[AlabamaPaul]

I agree. The government should not be involved in the banking business any more than it is in the sneaker business. That is to say that it should simply enforce the contracts entered into by the banks, the depositors, and the borrowers.

Would you rather Treasury directly take over monetary policy?

 

[Federalist]

Would you rather Treasury directly take over monetary policy?

No, I would not.

 

[AlabamaPaul]

No, I would not.

Well, you need to choose some entity to oversee the payment system in an economy of this size...

 

[blaxshep]

The constitution calls for congress (The people's government) to coin the money not private banks.

 

[Federalist]

Well, you need to choose some entity to oversee the payment system in an economy of this size...

Oversee the payment system? I'm not sure exactly what service you are describing.

 

[AlabamaPaul]

Oversee the payment system? I'm not sure exactly what service you are describing.

One of the main functions of the central bank is ensuring that the payments made from one bank are honored by another...

 

[Federalist]

One of the main functions of the central bank is ensuring that the payments made from one bank are honored by another...

"Payments made by one bank are honored by another" I'm not sure exactly what service you are describing here.

 

[AlabamaPaul]

"Payments made by one bank are honored by another" I'm not sure exactly what service you are describing here.

If I have an account at one bank and you use another, what ensures that your bank will honor my bank's payment?

 

[Federalist]

If I have an account at one bank and you use another, what ensures that your bank will honor my bank's payment?

I'm not quite sure what you're asking, but in general it is the responsibility of the government to make sure that contracts are honored.

Perhaps you could describe a specific scenario that could not be handled simply by enforcing contracts between the various parties involved.

 

[AlabamaPaul]

I'm not quite sure what you're asking, but in general it is the responsibility of the government to make sure that contracts are honored.

Perhaps you could describe a specific scenario that could not be handled simply by enforcing contracts between the various parties involved.

I would suggest researching the causes of recessions/depressions that occurred before the Fed was created. Banks used to create their own currency (I have some as a collector's item), and honoring that currency was not guaranteed by other banks. Do you have any concern now that this might happen?

 

[Dooble]

I was browsing youtube videos. I came across this video. I understand the video is old, however what this video revealed really got me thinking about the cozy relationship between government and finanical sector. To me this relationship shouldn't be cozy at all. Second the finanical sector shouldn't be dicating what government are allowed monitor and not the monitor. To me a lot of the financial mess we are in is because we allowed financial sector almost free range. That's is what really screwing us over. We can bicker over all we like about what political party at fault(I would say both) but, the government is made by the people for the people. Our government should have a reasonblity to protect us from financial ruin.

Leave it to a Liberal to make government out to be the unwitting co-conspirators. :roll:

 

[Federalist]

I would suggest researching the causes of recessions/depressions that occurred before the Fed was created. Banks used to create their own currency (I have some as a collector's item), and honoring that currency was not guaranteed by other banks. Do you have any concern now that this might happen?

I don't see why a modern bank would need to create any currency. People deposit money in the bank, and the bank allows them withdraw their money or direct the bank to transfer money to a third party. It's a straightforward arrangement that should not involve anyone honoring anything. (Except the bank honoring its contract with the depositor.)

 

[AlabamaPaul]

I don't see why a modern bank would need to create any currency. People deposit money in the bank, and the bank allows them withdraw their money or direct the bank to transfer money to a third party. It's a straightforward arrangement that should not involve anyone honoring anything. (Except the bank honoring its contract with the depositor.)

Well, you don't want the Fed in charge, and you don't want the Treasury in charge. So who do you trust to implement monetary policy and keep the banking system functioning? IMV, whenever Congress gets involved is when there are issues...

 

[Federalist]

Well, you don't want the Fed in charge, and you don't want the Treasury in charge. So who do you trust to implement monetary policy and keep the banking system functioning? IMV, whenever Congress gets involved is when there are issues...

I trust the government to enforce contracts, including contracts between depositors, banks, borrowers, lenders, etc.

What else need be done?

 

[AlabamaPaul]

I trust the government to enforce contracts, including contracts between depositors, banks, borrowers, lenders, etc.

What else need be done?

How did that work out in 2008/2009? Not that good...

 

[Lakryte]

I would suggest researching the causes of recessions/depressions that occurred before the Fed was created. Banks used to create their own currency (I have some as a collector's item), and honoring that currency was not guaranteed by other banks. Do you have any concern now that this might happen?

The cause is the same as it is today. Bank's still create money, treated as US dollars. They just don't print it--its all electronic, or numbers on a ledger.

 

[Lakryte]

How did that work out in 2008/2009? Not that good...

So the Federal Reserve system did not exist in 2008/2009? What Federalist is saying should be is not what is or what has been. What are you talking about?

 

[AlabamaPaul]

The cause is the same as it is today. Bank's still create money, treated as US dollars. They just don't print it--its all electronic, or numbers on a ledger.

The difference is that they now create the same "money" under the same rules...