• The world economy collapses -- when?

    From Wayne Harris@2:221/6 to Bj”rn Felten on Thu Jul 2 17:53:10 2020
    Björn Felten - Lee Lofaso <0@2.203.2> writes:

    [...]

    I know all there is to know about fiat money. I have a university
    degree to show for it. I also know that there's a limit to how many
    trillions (US -- not metric) of dollars the FED can print and get away
    with it.

    Great to know! I will probably have a lot of question. If I may start
    with one, where can we find out when money is printed and how much?
    (This must be public information, I suppose.) Does the question make
    sense? Thank you!

    ---
    * Origin: nntps://news.fidonet.fi (2:221/6.0)
  • From Björn Felten@2:203/2 to Wayne Harris on Thu Jul 2 21:16:04 2020
    If I may start
    with one, where can we find out when money is printed and how much?

    That's an easy one. It's your central bank that "prints" your money.

    The US however does not have a real central bank, they have a regular, private bank called the Federal Reserve, and that is a really interesting story, that will not fit into a regular Fidonet message. Google for "Federal Reserve Act" to find out more.

    Not even the US citizens (save for perhaps a few percent) know about this incredible institution that has such enormous impact on their economy:

    "It is well enough that people of the nation do not
    understand our banking and monetary system, for if
    they did, I believe there would be a revolution
    before tomorrow morning."

    -- not Henry Ford 8-)


    ..

    --- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; sv-SE; rv:1.9.1.16) Gecko/20101125
    * Origin: news://eljaco.se (2:203/2)
  • From Wayne Harris@2:221/6 to Bj÷rn Felten on Fri Jul 3 04:24:44 2020
    Forgive my lack of knowledge of character encoding. I usually use
    UTF-8, but it seems I cannot encode your name properly with it. I don't
    know why. This message might be sent in raw-text, if this is an
    encoding at all.

    Bjrn Felten - Wayne Harris <0@2.203.2> writes:

    If I may start with one, where can we find out when money is
    printed and how much?

    That's an easy one. It's your central bank that "prints" your
    money.

    But I was wondering whether there was any index somewhere (say, online,
    or that it could be checked) the dates and the amounts. For instance,
    the Federal Reserve of New York published recently due to the pandemic
    that they would be buying treasure bonds in a certain amount and they
    reported how much they had bought each day they did.

    Is money printing being published somewhere?

    The US however does not have a real central bank, they have a
    regular, private bank called the Federal Reserve, and that is a really interesting story, that will not fit into a regular Fidonet
    message. Google for "Federal Reserve Act" to find out more.

    I will read the Federal Reserve Act and I'll come back.

    Not even the US citizens (save for perhaps a few percent) know
    about this incredible institution that has such enormous impact on
    their economy:

    "It is well enough that people of the nation do not understand our
    banking and monetary system, for if they did, I believe there would be
    a revolution before tomorrow morning."

    -- not Henry Ford 8-)

    In that case, I will also read

    How Internationalists Gain Power
    Russell Maguire
    https://www.unz.com/print/AmMercury-1957oct-00079/?View=PDF

    to see if I can get the context.

    Thank you!

    ---
    * Origin: nntps://news.fidonet.fi (2:221/6.0)
  • From Wilfred van Velzen@2:280/464 to Bj”rn Felten on Fri Jul 3 10:34:10 2020
    Hi Bj”rn,

    On 2020-07-02 22:19:59, you wrote to Lee Lofaso:

    But all fiat money is still just virtual, weather printed on (toilet?) paper or ending up as a number in a computer data base.

    If it was printed on toilet paper, at least it would have some real intrinsic value! ;-)

    Bye, Wilfred.

    --- FMail-lnx64 2.1.0.18-B20170815
    * Origin: FMail development HQ (2:280/464)
  • From Wayne Harris@2:221/6 to Wayne Harris on Sat Jul 4 18:43:52 2020
    Wayne Harris - Björn Felten <0@6.221.2> writes:

    [...]

    Not even the US citizens (save for perhaps a few percent) know
    about this incredible institution that has such enormous impact on
    their economy:

    "It is well enough that people of the nation do not understand our
    banking and monetary system, for if they did, I believe there would be
    a revolution before tomorrow morning."

    -- not Henry Ford 8-)

    In that case, I will also read

    How Internationalists Gain Power
    Russell Maguire
    https://www.unz.com/print/AmMercury-1957oct-00079/?View=PDF

    to see if I can get the context.

    Not very interesting text. I was expecting a lecture, but it was
    someone stating an opinion. The Henry Ford quote doesn't come with
    evidence that Henry Ford actually said that. Quick read, though.

    ---
    * Origin: nntps://news.fidonet.fi (2:221/6.0)
  • From Lee Lofaso@2:203/2 to Kurt Weiske on Mon Jul 6 00:14:00 2020
    Hello Kurt,

    Time for you to meet the Creature from Jekyll Island.
    By G. Edward Griffin. It is quite a tome, but well worth
    the read. Happy Hunting.

    Wow. GEG's wikipedia page is the most severe hatchet job I've read in
    a long time. Time for some balanced editing.

    I did try to warn him ...

    --Lee

    --
    Pussy grabs back!

    --- MesNews/1.08.05.00-gb
    * Origin: news://eljaco.se (2:203/2)
  • From Wayne Harris@2:221/6 to Wayne Harris on Tue Aug 4 23:46:42 2020
    Wayne Harris - Lee Lofaso <0@6.221.2> writes:

    Lee Lofaso - Wayne Harris <0@2.203.2> writes:

    Hello Wayne,

    [...]

    I know all there is to know about fiat money. I have a university
    degree to show for it. I also know that there's a limit to how many
    trillions (US -- not metric) of dollars the FED can print and get away >> >> with it.

    Great to know! I will probably have a lot of question. If I may start >> WH> with one, where can we find out when money is printed and how much?
    (This must be public information, I suppose.) Does the question make >> WH> sense? Thank you!

    Jekyll Island. Meet the Creature. Learn everything you have always
    wanted to know ...

    Thank you for the recommendation. I completely read part I and II and
    continue the reading, but I think I can open some tangents on my reading
    to ask some clarification and do some verifications.

    On page 192 of the 5th edition, George Edward Griffin begins to describe
    the ``Mandrake Mechanism''. I was warned that the process might not
    make much sense, but I'm not trying to find any sense in this. My
    interest in only in clarity.

    ``First, the Fed takes all the government bonds which the public does
    not buy and writes a check to Congress in exchange for them. (It
    acquires other debt obligations as well, but government bonds comprise
    most of its inventory.)''

    Let me take each step carefully. The government issues bonds. Some
    people buy it. Some bonds are not bought. How does Congress get
    involved in this? Is it the case that Congress buys all those people
    did not buy? With what money does Congress buy? Is Griffin saying that
    the Fed itself ``writes a check to Congress'' so that Congress can
    afford it?

    Let me begin with these questions only. Thank you.

    ---
    * Origin: nntps://news.fidonet.fi (2:221/6.0)
  • From Wayne Harris@2:221/6 to Lee Lofaso on Wed Aug 5 15:29:12 2020
    Lee Lofaso - Wayne Harris <0@2.203.2> writes:

    [...]

    On page 192 of the 5th edition, George Edward Griffin begins to describe the ``Mandrake Mechanism''. I was warned that the process might not make much sense, but I'm not trying to find any sense in this. My interest in only in clarity.

    ``First, the Fed takes all the government bonds which the public does
    not buy and writes a check to Congress in exchange for them. (It
    acquires other debt obligations as well, but government bonds comprise
    most of its inventory.)''

    Let me take each step carefully. The government issues bonds. Some people buy it. Some bonds are not bought. How does Congress get involved in this? Is it the case that Congress buys all those people did not buy? With what money does Congress buy? Is Griffin saying that the Fed itself ``writes a check to Congress'' so that Congress can afford it?

    Let me begin with these questions only. Thank you.

    The Congress does not spend money. It merely appropreates funds.
    That is what most folks fail to realize, or simply do not understand.
    Bankers understand the process, and how to make money work for them.
    You see, money is nothing more than a medium of exchange. And as you
    know, no real money ever passes hands in Congress.

    I think you answer the questions above, but not in an explicit way as I
    need to. I'm slow. I need more explicit help. You might be saying the
    Fed provides Congress with the money for buying out the bonds the people
    did not buy, but it's not clear. If you're saying that, I'd need you to
    say it explicitly and hopefully with a pointer of the accounting events
    that would show it.

    ---
    * Origin: nntps://news.fidonet.fi (2:221/6.0)
  • From Lee Lofaso@2:203/2 to Wayne Harris on Thu Aug 6 01:07:24 2020
    Hello Wayne,

    [..]

    Let me begin with these questions only. Thank you.

    The Congress does not spend money. It merely appropreates funds.
    That is what most folks fail to realize, or simply do not understand.
    Bankers understand the process, and how to make money work for them.
    You see, money is nothing more than a medium of exchange. And as you
    know, no real money ever passes hands in Congress.

    I think you answer the questions above, but not in an explicit way as I need to. I'm slow. I need more explicit help. You might be saying the Fed provides Congress with the money for buying out the bonds the people did not buy, but it's not clear. If you're saying that, I'd need you to say it explicitly and hopefully with a pointer of the accounting events that would show it.

    Griffin does not have a very good grasp on how things work. The
    Congress does not spend money. It appropriates funds. The Department
    of the Treasury is part of the Executive Branch, not the Legislative
    Branch. How can the Department of the Treasury sell what it cannot
    own?

    It's kinda like robbing Peter to pay Paul. There has to be a victim,
    even if that victim never realizes he/she is the victim.

    Paper bills and coins made of metal have no real value. People are
    able to spend it as "legal tender" only because government endorsed
    it. Otherwise, those paper bills and coins made of metal would be
    just as worthless.

    IOW, people spend it because they believe it has value. If they did
    not believe it had value, it would be used for something else.

    Some people like to save it rather than spend it. But what they
    are actually doing is allow other people to spend it since they are
    not spending it themselves.

    See how that works? Are you catching on yet?

    What Griffin calls the "Mandrake Mechanism" is his way of trying
    to put the blame on inflation as being the root cause of all evil.
    But if you take the time to analyze what is really happening, you
    will find deflation to be far more destructive than inflation.

    If you want to make money you have to spend money. Preferably
    other people's money. Saving money is losing money, since all money
    loses value over time. And you are talking about paper bills, which
    have no value to begin with.

    Austerity has never worked in the past. It will not work now.
    And it will never work in the future. What happens, is people just
    wait. And wait. And wait. For prices to drop. And drop. And drop.
    That is no way to build an economy.

    The idea of fiat money, or scrip, is nothing new. People place
    value on objects of their own choice, or what the leaders of their
    tribe have dictated. Even primitive societies use fiat money.

    We could just as well be using snake oil. The people of Yap use
    giant round stones as their currency. They haul these giant stones
    from island to island, hoping their canoe does not sink along the
    way.

    How much gold is stored at Ft. Knox? Or at any vault in the US?
    If Germany requested the US to return its stash of gold being held
    in US vaults, would the US comply? I doubt it.

    Suppose the US no longer has the gold it was storing for Germany.
    What would happen to whatever investments the US has in Germany?
    If I was holding your gold, and you wanted it back, and I couldn't
    find it, you would not be a happy camper.

    Back to the original question.

    How can the Fed give money to the Congress when the Fed has no
    money of its own?

    The Fed can print money. Or what it calls money. As much, or as
    little, as it wants. It can raise interest rates. It can lower interest
    rates. It can do lots of other things. It can create, and control, what
    is commonly called "money". But what happens when all the money that
    is printed gets out of control?

    We know what happened in Germany. People had so much money they did
    not what to do with it. Then came Hitler, who gave Germans everything
    he promised, and more.

    We also know what happeed in the USA. People had no money, and did
    not know what to do. Then came FDR, who gave Americans everything he
    promised, and more.

    Yep. If you want to make money, gotta spend money, preferably other
    people's money. Kinda like robbing Peter to pay Paul.

    --Lee

    --
    Say it loud! Say it clear! / Refugees are welcome here!

    --- MesNews/1.08.05.00-gb
    * Origin: news://eljaco.se (2:203/2)
  • From Lee Lofaso@2:203/2 to Wayne Harris on Thu Aug 6 17:10:48 2020
    Hello Wayne,

    [..]

    Griffin does not have a very good grasp on how things work.

    It was you who recommended me the book. :-)

    Highly. Very highly. It is the best. The very best. And I am not
    the only one who recommends reading this book. It is a true classic,
    and is extremely popular among many, including some US Senators.

    https://tinyurl.com/st3feq3


    The Congress does not spend money. It appropriates funds. The
    Department of the Treasury is part of the Executive Branch, not the
    Legislative Branch. How can the Department of the Treasury sell what
    it cannot own?

    It's kinda like robbing Peter to pay Paul. There has to be a victim,
    even if that victim never realizes he/she is the victim.

    Paper bills and coins made of metal have no real value. People are
    able to spend it as "legal tender" only because government endorsed
    it. Otherwise, those paper bills and coins made of metal would be
    just as worthless.

    IOW, people spend it because they believe it has value. If they did
    not believe it had value, it would be used for something else.

    Some people like to save it rather than spend it. But what they
    are actually doing is allow other people to spend it since they are
    not spending it themselves.

    See how that works? Are you catching on yet?

    What Griffin calls the "Mandrake Mechanism" is his way of trying
    to put the blame on inflation as being the root cause of all evil.
    But if you take the time to analyze what is really happening, you
    will find deflation to be far more destructive than inflation.

    If you want to make money you have to spend money. Preferably
    other people's money. Saving money is losing money, since all money
    loses value over time. And you are talking about paper bills, which
    have no value to begin with.

    Austerity has never worked in the past. It will not work now.
    And it will never work in the future. What happens, is people just
    wait. And wait. And wait. For prices to drop. And drop. And drop.
    That is no way to build an economy.

    The idea of fiat money, or scrip, is nothing new. People place
    value on objects of their own choice, or what the leaders of their
    tribe have dictated. Even primitive societies use fiat money.

    We could just as well be using snake oil. The people of Yap use
    giant round stones as their currency. They haul these giant stones
    from island to island, hoping their canoe does not sink along the
    way.

    How much gold is stored at Ft. Knox? Or at any vault in the US?
    If Germany requested the US to return its stash of gold being held
    in US vaults, would the US comply? I doubt it.

    Suppose the US no longer has the gold it was storing for Germany.
    What would happen to whatever investments the US has in Germany?
    If I was holding your gold, and you wanted it back, and I couldn't
    find it, you would not be a happy camper.

    Back to the original question.

    How can the Fed give money to the Congress when the Fed has no
    money of its own?

    The Fed can print money. Or what it calls money. As much, or as
    little, as it wants. It can raise interest rates. It can lower interest
    rates. It can do lots of other things. It can create, and control, what
    is commonly called "money". But what happens when all the money that
    is printed gets out of control?

    We know what happened in Germany. People had so much money they did
    not what to do with it. Then came Hitler, who gave Germans everything
    he promised, and more.

    We also know what happeed in the USA. People had no money, and did
    not know what to do. Then came FDR, who gave Americans everything he
    promised, and more.

    Yep. If you want to make money, gotta spend money, preferably other
    people's money. Kinda like robbing Peter to pay Paul.

    I appreciate your attention. You're not answering the question, but I take responsibility for it. I didn't express myself well. The question has been snipped, so I'll have to recover it.

    That's okay. The article I cited above does give a very concise, and
    accurate, answer.


    --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
    On page 192 of the 5th edition, George Edward Griffin begins to describe
    the ``Mandrake Mechanism''. I was warned that the process might not
    make much sense, but I'm not trying to find any sense in this. My
    interest in only in clarity.

    ``First, the Fed takes all the government bonds which the public does
    not buy and writes a check to Congress in exchange for them. (It
    acquires other debt obligations as well, but government bonds comprise
    most of its inventory.)''

    Let me take each step carefully. The government issues bonds. Some
    people buy it. Some bonds are not bought. How does Congress get
    involved in this? Is it the case that Congress buys all those people
    did not buy? With what money does Congress buy? Is Griffin saying that
    the Fed itself ``writes a check to Congress'' so that Congress can
    afford it?
    --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---

    As I tried to convey above, I'm interested in understanding each step of the process with a maximum of clarity.

    The process is very simple. Robbing Peter to pay Paul.

    I'll give you a recent example.

    President Obama had to deal with a huge financial crisis when he
    took office. One of the programs he initiated (through the Congress)
    was his "Cash for Clunkers" program. People could trade in their
    old cars that did not run for a few thousand bucks, no questions
    asked. This program saved US car companies, which had been having
    a very difficult time selling their new cars. See how that works?
    Robbing Peter to pay Paul.

    Child A slapped child B in school and there is no question as to the
    fact --- it's been filmed by a security camera and many people have already seen it. Parents are making a whole fuss about it. A meeting
    has been scheduled. Some claim it was an act of evil and others said
    it's just normal children stuff. These are all profound questions. All I'm asking is to see the video: it must show the fact and I haven't seen it yet.

    My own attempt at answering the question might clarify, but it won't be
    as clear as I would like it to be, so please rewrite it or fill it in as you can.

    The writer of the article cited above answers your question in a way
    that is direct and to the point.

    Governments eventually find themselves having spent all the resources
    they had. More resources are coming all the time through the revenue service, so when pockets are empty they could first check with the Department of Treasury whether they've earned some more in the meantime. Suppose the answer is no: the government has spent it all from their ``last paycheck''. They'll need a plan B.

    There is no plan B. When government runs out of revenue, no services
    can be provided. IOW, there is no government. All that is left is
    "laughable bullshit". Nothing more, nothing less. Time to hang it up
    and milk the cows. All by yourself.

    As a plan B, the government decides to sell bonds. Some people buy it because it's considered by many a very good investment, after all it's
    the treasury promising to pay it back with an interest. However, after selling all securities people were willing to buy, they still didn't
    raise all they needed, so they need a plan C.

    There is no plan C any more than there was a plan B.

    As a plan C, the Treasury approaches the Federal Reserve to provide the resources they couldn't raise by themselves. The Federal Reserve
    provides the Treasury with _something_ that allows the Treasury to let government start spending, which they do. From here on money starting flowing hand in hand as payments are made and banks go on lending it to whoever borrows and earning interests over their ``excess reserves'' --- for sure the best business model there is.

    The Fed does not have an army. And all armies need to get paid.
    No money, no soldiers. No soldiers, no army. It really is that simple.

    So, when Griffin says ``the Fed takes all the government bonds which the public does not buy and writes a check to Congress in exchange for
    them'', perhaps he means that the Federal Reserve buys all bonds the public did not buy, letting the Treasury raise the resources they wanted to, but couldn't do it themselves alone (because people just didn't buy
    it all.)

    Griffin is taking one kernel of truth and then adding a whole lot
    of "laughable bullshit" to his argument. His ideas are unsupported
    and unsubstantiated. No credence whatsoever. But his book is a very
    fun read. Loads and loads of fun.

    It should be clear now that I'm interested in the process. I may not
    know whether we are counting cats or dogs, but I should be able to see
    the arithmetic in clear steps. If I've counted 3 things already in day
    1 and then I count 4 more things in day 2, then putting these two days together, I've counted 3 + 4 = 7, which I verify by looking up my
    addition table, which is something I assume to be correct.

    Oh, I am sure you and others are able to count just fine. Next post
    I am going to roast Griffin's "mandrake mechanism" over very hot coals.
    And see if there is anything left when the flames subside. Feel free
    to comment on my upcoming analysis.

    Thank you!

    Griffin argues for abolishing the Fed, citing seven reasons in his
    book. However, all his arguments are "laughable bullshit", as noted
    by critics of his work.

    According to Griffin, the real problem is ideologies and philosophies
    such as collectivism (the group is more important that the individual).
    His view is to get rid of anything and everything that even smells of collectivism. Kind of like a John Bircher on steroids.

    The Federal Reserve was created in late 1913 as a central banking
    system in response to a string of fincancial crises. Then came WWI.
    And the US entry into that war. Then the Spanish Flu pandemic of
    1918/19.

    Now, if only President Trump had a PhD like Woodrow Wilson, we might
    somehow survive ...

    --Lee

    --
    We're Great In Bed

    --- MesNews/1.08.05.00-gb
    * Origin: news://eljaco.se (2:203/2)
  • From Wayne Harris@2:221/6 to Lee Lofaso on Thu Aug 13 03:40:48 2020
    Hi, Lee.

    Lee Lofaso - Wayne Harris <0@2.203.2> writes:

    Hello Wayne,

    [..]

    Griffin does not have a very good grasp on how things work.

    It was you who recommended me the book. :-)

    These are his stated beliefs. Make of them what you will.
    From his very own homepage -

    https://freedomforceinternational.org/position-statements/


    Enjoy his entire site. Lots there.

    Here is a talk by him, on a different site -

    https://www.bigeye.com/griffin.htm

    Thanks. Incidentally, I had already read this talk. That does clarify
    his meanings of some of his description in chapter ten of ``The Creature
    from Jekyll Island''.

    That should be enough to give you an idea as to where he is
    coming from. In all his writings, he is consistent with his POV.

    Yes, thanks.

    But, you see, I'm not worried about his position or ``where he is coming from''. Of course it's a very interesting thing to understand a person
    deeply, but for Wayne Harris right now the moment is to verify
    arithmetic. We begin verifying that ``2 + 2 = 4'' and then then we move
    to claims such as ``17 is a prime number''. We'll leave interesting
    stories of how Gauss really found the normal distribution for a more retrospective moment of life. The moment is to know it exists and to
    use it to calculate probabilities. In other words, most of the causes
    Griffin lays out in his talks and books are not important to the
    beginner: what matters most is how things work and how we can verify it.

    So here's a pretty simple question. Is there an _official_ reporter of
    the US national debt? (If so, where does it show it the amount?) A
    follow-up question would be: how can we get an official history of the increases in the national debt? (That is, where is the accounting
    statements for the number over the last few decades?)

    Thanks so much.

    [...]

    ---
    * Origin: nntps://news.fidonet.fi (2:221/6.0)
  • From Lee Lofaso@2:203/2 to Wayne Harris on Fri Aug 14 11:25:26 2020
    Hello Wayne,

    Griffin does not have a very good grasp on how things work.

    It was you who recommended me the book. :-)

    Highly. Very highly. It is the best. The very best. And I am not
    the only one who recommends reading this book. It is a true classic,
    and is extremely popular among many, including some US Senators.

    https://tinyurl.com/st3feq3

    This page doesn't recommend the book. Ron Paul might, I don't know if
    he does. In any case Ron Paul does seem serious about understanding things because he seems to invite serious people who do seriously work
    on understanding things.

    Like his son, Paul is on old-school kind of guy. Wants to go back
    to the gold and silver standard. No more need to even have a federal
    reserve. But if we are going to have a federal reserve, best to let
    the bankers run it. In private. No need to tell anybody what they
    are doing, or are up to.

    ``What is money?'' by Joseph Salerno https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vowbrq_g5NM

    ``What is constitutional money?'' by Edwin Vieira https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k6gMkKmQSW4

    ``What about money causes economic crisis?'' by Peter Schiff https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=npJ0CUT8d_Y

    The Congress does not spend money. It appropriates funds. The
    Department of the Treasury is part of the Executive Branch, not the
    Legislative Branch. How can the Department of the Treasury sell what
    it cannot own?

    It's kinda like robbing Peter to pay Paul. There has to be a victim,
    even if that victim never realizes he/she is the victim.

    Paper bills and coins made of metal have no real value. People are
    able to spend it as "legal tender" only because government endorsed
    it. Otherwise, those paper bills and coins made of metal would be
    just as worthless.

    IOW, people spend it because they believe it has value. If they did
    not believe it had value, it would be used for something else.

    Some people like to save it rather than spend it. But what they
    are actually doing is allow other people to spend it since they are
    not spending it themselves.

    See how that works? Are you catching on yet?

    What Griffin calls the "Mandrake Mechanism" is his way of trying
    to put the blame on inflation as being the root cause of all evil.
    But if you take the time to analyze what is really happening, you
    will find deflation to be far more destructive than inflation.

    If you want to make money you have to spend money. Preferably
    other people's money. Saving money is losing money, since all money
    loses value over time. And you are talking about paper bills, which
    have no value to begin with.

    Austerity has never worked in the past. It will not work now.
    And it will never work in the future. What happens, is people just
    wait. And wait. And wait. For prices to drop. And drop. And drop.
    That is no way to build an economy.

    The idea of fiat money, or scrip, is nothing new. People place
    value on objects of their own choice, or what the leaders of their
    tribe have dictated. Even primitive societies use fiat money.

    We could just as well be using snake oil. The people of Yap use
    giant round stones as their currency. They haul these giant stones
    from island to island, hoping their canoe does not sink along the
    way.

    How much gold is stored at Ft. Knox? Or at any vault in the US?
    If Germany requested the US to return its stash of gold being held
    in US vaults, would the US comply? I doubt it.

    Suppose the US no longer has the gold it was storing for Germany.
    What would happen to whatever investments the US has in Germany?
    If I was holding your gold, and you wanted it back, and I couldn't
    find it, you would not be a happy camper.

    Back to the original question.

    How can the Fed give money to the Congress when the Fed has no
    money of its own?

    The Fed can print money. Or what it calls money. As much, or as
    little, as it wants. It can raise interest rates. It can lower interest
    rates. It can do lots of other things. It can create, and control, what
    is commonly called "money". But what happens when all the money that
    is printed gets out of control?

    We know what happened in Germany. People had so much money they did
    not what to do with it. Then came Hitler, who gave Germans everything
    he promised, and more.

    We also know what happeed in the USA. People had no money, and did
    not know what to do. Then came FDR, who gave Americans everything he
    promised, and more.

    Yep. If you want to make money, gotta spend money, preferably other
    people's money. Kinda like robbing Peter to pay Paul.

    I appreciate your attention. You're not answering the question, but I
    take responsibility for it. I didn't express myself well. The
    question has been snipped, so I'll have to recover it.

    That's okay. The article I cited above does give a very concise, and
    accurate, answer.

    If you're talking about

    https://tinyurl.com/st3feq3

    then you can't be serious.

    There are different schools of thought on this subject. And each
    school is quite serious, in its own way.

    In the 1930s, government intervention was FDR's response to the
    Great Depression, using the basics of Keynesian economics of government spending and regulation to bring everything under control.

    After Nixon was elected, things changed. Less government spending,
    and less regulation, became the way. Supply-side economics to promote
    economic prosperity.

    Clinton and Obama tried to bring some level of Keynesian economics
    back into play, but both faced too much opposition in Congress to do
    everything they wanted.

    GWB was a failure when it came to economics. When he took office,
    he had a surplus. Eight months later, before the events of 9-11, he
    had a deficit. All because he gave it all away in a tax cut for the
    wealthy.

    Today, what we have is a total economic disaster. Not just a failure
    that can be turned around by competent leadership. 61% of the national
    debt will mature within the next four years. This country does not
    have the funds to pay for it. Which means, the debt will have to be
    refinanced, at a higher interest rate.

    This is all due becase an incompetent president gave away all our
    money in a tax cut for the wealthy.

    Fortunately, the American people have a solution ...

    This page ridicules the work and doesn't answer anything.

    With interest rates being basically zero, there is no growth.
    And yet, the very wealthy are getting richer. At the expense of
    the poor. This fact proves Griffin's "mandrake mechanism" is
    flawed thinking on his part.

    I'm perplexed you'd say this page answer the question.
    We must be having a serious miscommunication here.

    How can an economy continue to grow when there is no increase
    in production? Griffin argues that interest rates are an increase
    in production. But there is no increase in interest rates. People
    are losing jobs. Businesses are closing.

    And our national debt continues to increase, along with our
    inability to pay.

    [...]

    It should be clear now that I'm interested in the process. I may not
    know whether we are counting cats or dogs, but I should be able to see
    the arithmetic in clear steps. If I've counted 3 things already in day
    1 and then I count 4 more things in day 2, then putting these two days
    together, I've counted 3 + 4 = 7, which I verify by looking up my
    addition table, which is something I assume to be correct.

    Oh, I am sure you and others are able to count just fine. Next post
    I am going to roast Griffin's "mandrake mechanism" over very hot coals.
    And see if there is anything left when the flames subside. Feel free
    to comment on my upcoming analysis.

    Sounds great! Thanks! (I haven't any new posts on this, though.)

    Libertarian economic ideologicals favor even less government
    intervention than conservatives. Preferably none at all. Which
    makes them almost anarchists.

    What if President Trump tells Americans that a vaccine has been
    developed, and tells every American to get themselves innoculated.
    How many would listen, or comply? Should it even be an option?

    --Lee

    --
    I won't fan the flames of hate, ~Joe Biden

    --- MesNews/1.08.05.00-gb
    * Origin: news://eljaco.se (2:203/2)
  • From Lee Lofaso@2:203/2 to Wayne Harris on Fri Aug 14 11:25:32 2020
    Hello Wayne,

    Griffin does not have a very good grasp on how things work.

    It was you who recommended me the book. :-)

    These are his stated beliefs. Make of them what you will.
    From his very own homepage -

    https://freedomforceinternational.org/position-statements/


    Enjoy his entire site. Lots there.

    Here is a talk by him, on a different site -

    https://www.bigeye.com/griffin.htm

    Thanks. Incidentally, I had already read this talk. That does clarify his meanings of some of his description in chapter ten of ``The Creature from Jekyll Island''.

    That should be enough to give you an idea as to where he is
    coming from. In all his writings, he is consistent with his POV.

    Yes, thanks.

    His position is to eliminate the fed. Go back to the gold and silver
    standard, in accordance to what is stated in the US Constitution.

    But, you see, I'm not worried about his position or ``where he is coming from''. Of course it's a very interesting thing to understand a person deeply, but for Wayne Harris right now the moment is to verify
    arithmetic. We begin verifying that ``2 + 2 = 4'' and then then we move to claims such as ``17 is a prime number''. We'll leave interesting stories of how Gauss really found the normal distribution for a more retrospective moment of life. The moment is to know it exists and to
    use it to calculate probabilities. In other words, most of the causes Griffin lays out in his talks and books are not important to the
    beginner: what matters most is how things work and how we can verify it.

    How things work are how those in power intend for things to work.

    So here's a pretty simple question. Is there an _official_ reporter of the
    US national debt? (If so, where does it show it the amount?)

    The Department of the Treasury.
    The stats can be viewed online.

    A follow-up question would be: how can we get an official history of the increases in the national debt? (That is, where is the accounting statements for the number over the last few decades?)

    Same source. They keep the books, remember?

    Thanks so much.

    You'll have to do your own math to figure it all out.

    --Lee

    --
    Popular vote!

    --- MesNews/1.08.05.00-gb
    * Origin: news://eljaco.se (2:203/2)
  • From Wayne Harris@2:221/6 to Lee Lofaso on Fri Aug 14 23:49:24 2020
    Hi, Lee.

    Lee Lofaso - Wayne Harris <0@2.203.2> writes:

    [...]

    So here's a pretty simple question. Is there an _official_ reporter of the
    US national debt? (If so, where does it show it the amount?)

    The Department of the Treasury.
    The stats can be viewed online.

    That makes perfect sense. I get to

    https://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/faqs/Markets/Pages/national-debt.aspx

    and then I go to

    https://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/pd/pd.htm

    The question is which report tells me the total national debt and where.
    I'm not interested in budget deficits or anything. I just to see how
    and where does the Treasury report the total national debt. Can you
    point an accurate arrow to it? I appreciate that! Thanks!

    ---
    * Origin: nntps://news.fidonet.fi (2:221/6.0)
  • From Lee Lofaso@2:203/2 to Wayne Harris on Sat Aug 15 14:19:06 2020
    Hello Wayne,

    [...]

    So here's a pretty simple question. Is there an _official_
    reporter of the
    US national debt? (If so, where does it show it the amount?)

    The Department of the Treasury.
    The stats can be viewed online.

    That makes perfect sense. I get to


    https://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/faqs/Markets/Pages/national-debt.aspx

    and then I go to

    https://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/pd/pd.htm

    The question is which report tells me the total national debt and where. I'm not interested in budget deficits or anything. I just to see how
    and where does the Treasury report the total national debt. Can you
    point an accurate arrow to it? I appreciate that! Thanks!

    Here is a site that breaks it down in chunks, year by year -

    https://www.thestreet.com/politics/national-debt-year-by-year-14876008


    You can find the same info at the Department of the Treasury site,
    but it is not nearly as colorful. :)

    "Deficits don't matter." ~Dick Cheney

    --Lee

    --
    Dieting doesn't work, Weight Watchers does

    --- MesNews/1.08.05.00-gb
    * Origin: news://eljaco.se (2:203/2)
  • From Wayne Harris@2:221/6 to Wayne Harris on Sat Aug 15 23:45:06 2020
    Wayne Harris - Lee Lofaso <0@6.221.2> writes:

    Hi, Lee!

    Lee Lofaso - Wayne Harris <0@2.203.2> writes:

    Hello Wayne,

    [...]

    So here's a pretty simple question. Is there an _official_
    reporter of the US national debt? (If so, where does it show
    it the amount?)

    The Department of the Treasury.
    The stats can be viewed online.

    That makes perfect sense. I get to
    https://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/faqs/Markets/Pages/national-debt.aspx
    and then I go to
    https://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/pd/pd.htm

    The question is which report tells me the total national debt and where.
    I'm not interested in budget deficits or anything. I just to see how >> WH> and where does the Treasury report the total national debt. Can you
    point an accurate arrow to it? I appreciate that! Thanks!

    Here is a site that breaks it down in chunks, year by year -

    https://www.thestreet.com/politics/national-debt-year-by-year-14876008

    Wonderful! Thanks so much for this.

    You can find the same info at the Department of the Treasury site,
    but it is not nearly as colorful. :)

    I suppose. I'll do this confirmation as my next step.

    The Treasury on

    https://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/pd/pd_debttothepenny.htm

    reports the national total debt as far back as 2009. If we look at the
    table built by thestreet.com, we see that in 2009 they picked the number

    11,909,829,003,511.70

    and the Treasury reports that number on September 30th 2009:

    09/30/2009's total debt of $11,909,829,003,511.75

    We can see thestreet.com rounds down the cents. If we compare 2018, we
    see thestreet.com picked the number

    21,516,058,183,180.20

    and the Treasury reports that number on September 29th 2018:

    09/28/2018's total debt of $21,516,058,183,180.23.

    The Treasury is currently offering a new data provider at

    https://fiscaldata.treasury.gov/datasets/debt-to-the-penny/

    where we can get the data going back to 1993. That seems to be all they
    can offer at the moment. Thestreet.com did a nice summary over those
    very interesting years. I wish I could drop the author a thank you
    note, something which wouldn't even come up were not for Lee Lofaso's
    advising and assistance. My sincere THANKS!

    I've just verified that 2 + 2 = 4. My most profound step so far.

    ---
    * Origin: nntps://news.fidonet.fi (2:221/6.0)