LouieB Posted November 20, 2012 Share Posted November 20, 2012 After getting beat over the head by Sparky for months about the Fed, the Fed, the Fed, I figure it is time for a real discussion. I don't believe the President of the United States can unilaterally close down the Federal Reserve Bank system. Maybe someone more up on this than me can illluminate this issue and how we coudl actually get along without a central banking structure at this point in advanced capitalism. Ideas or actual facts? LouieB Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Tweedling Posted November 20, 2012 Share Posted November 20, 2012 Louie, you are one brave soul. With that being said, this should be one wild ride and I'm not educated enough on the issue so I'll be watching this from the sideline. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Winston Legthigh Posted November 20, 2012 Share Posted November 20, 2012 The POTUS cannot unilaterally close down the Federal Reserve Bank, as it was created by an act of Congress, The Federal Reserve Act, which has been amended many times. If Congress wants the Fed to have more transparency, they should create an amendment that accounts for that. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
LouieB Posted November 20, 2012 Author Share Posted November 20, 2012 Well me too actually. I mean I could dig around a bit on this issue, but after all the crap thrown at us about is in the Presidental thread, I read up on the history of the Fed just enough to be totally dangerous. It was created in the early 20th century, which means it has 100+ years as an institution of government, meaning it is pretty entrenched. I would assume it would take an act of Congress to desmantle it. As always, there is only so much the President can do about this stuff. LouieB The POTUS cannot unilaterally close down the Federal Reserve Bank, as it was created by an act of Congress, The Federal Reserve Act, which has been amended many times. If Congress wants the Fed to have more transparency, they should create an amendment that accounts for that.Seems right. The President can't close down parts of the government that are created by laws; transparency is always a good thing. I guess my point is, how come we kept hearing about this SO MUCH during the Presidental campaign when neither Obama, Romney or any of the third party candidates could ever do anything about it? LouieB Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Winston Legthigh Posted November 20, 2012 Share Posted November 20, 2012 I guess my point is, how come we kept hearing about this SO MUCH during the Presidental campaign when neither Obama, Romney or any of the third party candidates could ever do anything about it? LouieB Did we?Or was it just Sparky? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Atticus Posted November 20, 2012 Share Posted November 20, 2012 not the overeating thread I was expecting. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
LouieB Posted November 20, 2012 Author Share Posted November 20, 2012 Did we?Or was it just Sparky?Well yea, he did, but others talked about the Fed with him. Even now I don't understand why that was part of the discussion. it's like alot of stuff that he threw at us for months. The job description for POTUS is not all that flexible really. They manage the Executtive Branch of government, not the Congress, not the judiciary and not even some of the other government departments (I am think the FBI, the Pentagon, etc.) even when ostensibly they ARE under the President. LouieB Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ih8music Posted November 20, 2012 Share Posted November 20, 2012 People who talk about getting rid of the Fed are completely delusional, sorry. I think we should have external audits and corrective actions when necessary, but to say that the entire institution needs to be abolished makes no sense at all. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
LouieB Posted November 21, 2012 Author Share Posted November 21, 2012 Somehow this thread has not been a Sparky magnet. LouieB Quote Link to post Share on other sites
KevinG Posted November 21, 2012 Share Posted November 21, 2012 Somehow this thread has not been a Sparky magnet. LouieB Haven't seen Sparky around lately. I am pretty sure he gave up. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
gogo Posted November 21, 2012 Share Posted November 21, 2012 I wouldn't be surprised to hear that Sparky is still recovering from the hurricane. I believe his last post said his neighborhood was pretty hard hit. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Mr. Heartbreak Posted November 21, 2012 Share Posted November 21, 2012 I read an interesting article on this a while back. It basically dispelled the notion that ending the Fed would do any good whatsoever. The article's main point was that, if you ended the Fed, the powers that be would just form something else with a different name, but just as nefarious - if not more so - than the existing system. Entrenched powers will do what it takes to hold on to their power.And the gold standard ain't coming back. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
LouieB Posted November 21, 2012 Author Share Posted November 21, 2012 I wouldn't be surprised to hear that Sparky is still recovering from the hurricane. I believe his last post said his neighborhood was pretty hard hit.That's too bad. Trying to remember folks we have not met in person (someone maybe has met him in real life I hope) have real troubles and cope with real tragedy. But it is difficult not to imagine the internet Sparky, the libertarian, liberal government hating personna's reaction to such government programs as FEMA and the whole raft of first and second responders that the rest of us think the government should support instead of leaving that up to the private sector. As clean-up continues and those affected by the hurricane are going to need long term help from the government (local, state and federal) to rebuild or relocate, not to mention those in more need, I wonder what his feeling is now having to be housed and fed by the government. So best wishes to the real Sparky: just wondering how the internet Sparky is coping with all that government "help" which is either forthcoming or not coming fast enough. Not specific to this situation, but I still find it vaguely humorous that those states that went to Romney, are the biggest recipients of federal aid. LouieB Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.