Dizzy
Well-known member
Quote:
Now IIRC (just finished my summer semester so my brain is shot to bits), the Federal Reserve is an independent government agency, but is also defined as an independent corporation. It doesn't get any funding from Congress, but that's probably because it creates money, so it technically gives Congress money.
Anyway, I digress.
The original plan for the Federal Reserve as proposed by Alexander Hamilton was to have one central banking system, much like England's banking system, so that currency could be uniform which would allow for free and easy commerce between states. If you look through the early days of US colonialism (I want to say during the days of the Articles of Confederation, but I could be wrong here) each state was entitled to create its own currency which meant that discerning how much $1 Virginia dollar was against $1 South Carolina dollar was impossible since they were backed by faith, not by anything of real value.
But as time progressed, they needed to back money with something more than faith, which is why sometime in the early 1900s all gold was ordered to be given to the gov't in order to back our money (currently held in Fort Knox, but that's up for debate as there's been many conspiracy theroies that the gold is gone). This was where the Federal Reserve began to truly operate as a corporation (a business that functions as an entity seperate of its owners/creators complete with tax # and subject to certain laws, etc)- now that our money was backed by gold, they could (to a certain extent) control the direction of our economy (either by selling or redeeming Treasury notes, amongst other ways). This also creates problems because our money is made with interest- meaning that from the very first dollar we create, we already owe more than the dollar is worth. Hence the reason for huge criticism here.
Now here's the other problem: Nobody really wants to touch the Fed because of the people who run it. President Kennedy was going to try, but obviously he met his end too soon to really make an impact. Congressman Ron Paul has been a huge opponent to having a Federal Reserve for the sheer reason that we shouldn't have a entity not of our government creating our money, amongst other issues (he has actually written quite a bit about it if you're interested. Very intriguing stuff).
That, essentially, the Fed, its flaws, one reason it's flawd, and people who've tried to change it in a very small nutshell. I'd have gone into more (and probably clearer, lol) detail, but I don't know if Specktra chatter is the place for essays like mine.
Now on the federal income tax? I have my own issues with that, but the biggest one is that the original creators of our government intended for taxation to be a state's right, not a federal one. Since there is no decree that grants the express right to have the feds tax citizens (even though, IIRC and I could be wrong, people were originally intended to be citizens of their states first and of the country second), I still think that it should be up to the state and not the Federal Gov't.
Originally Posted by kuuipo1207
My other question is this (which doesn't really pertain to the IRS): Why does the federal reserve exist? Why is it that the government gave this institution the power to create money when the government has the power to do that itself? |
Now IIRC (just finished my summer semester so my brain is shot to bits), the Federal Reserve is an independent government agency, but is also defined as an independent corporation. It doesn't get any funding from Congress, but that's probably because it creates money, so it technically gives Congress money.
Anyway, I digress.
The original plan for the Federal Reserve as proposed by Alexander Hamilton was to have one central banking system, much like England's banking system, so that currency could be uniform which would allow for free and easy commerce between states. If you look through the early days of US colonialism (I want to say during the days of the Articles of Confederation, but I could be wrong here) each state was entitled to create its own currency which meant that discerning how much $1 Virginia dollar was against $1 South Carolina dollar was impossible since they were backed by faith, not by anything of real value.
But as time progressed, they needed to back money with something more than faith, which is why sometime in the early 1900s all gold was ordered to be given to the gov't in order to back our money (currently held in Fort Knox, but that's up for debate as there's been many conspiracy theroies that the gold is gone). This was where the Federal Reserve began to truly operate as a corporation (a business that functions as an entity seperate of its owners/creators complete with tax # and subject to certain laws, etc)- now that our money was backed by gold, they could (to a certain extent) control the direction of our economy (either by selling or redeeming Treasury notes, amongst other ways). This also creates problems because our money is made with interest- meaning that from the very first dollar we create, we already owe more than the dollar is worth. Hence the reason for huge criticism here.
Now here's the other problem: Nobody really wants to touch the Fed because of the people who run it. President Kennedy was going to try, but obviously he met his end too soon to really make an impact. Congressman Ron Paul has been a huge opponent to having a Federal Reserve for the sheer reason that we shouldn't have a entity not of our government creating our money, amongst other issues (he has actually written quite a bit about it if you're interested. Very intriguing stuff).
That, essentially, the Fed, its flaws, one reason it's flawd, and people who've tried to change it in a very small nutshell. I'd have gone into more (and probably clearer, lol) detail, but I don't know if Specktra chatter is the place for essays like mine.
Now on the federal income tax? I have my own issues with that, but the biggest one is that the original creators of our government intended for taxation to be a state's right, not a federal one. Since there is no decree that grants the express right to have the feds tax citizens (even though, IIRC and I could be wrong, people were originally intended to be citizens of their states first and of the country second), I still think that it should be up to the state and not the Federal Gov't.
