Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

6569Re: [tips_and_tricks] Fed's admissions of fraud and confidence games.

Expand Messages
  • Frog Farmer
    Sep 2, 2004
      On Sep 1, 2004, at 11:24 PM, David L. Miner wrote:

      > Nilbux --
      >
      > You have decided that since the FRN is not backed by gold it is
      > therefore a
      > fraud. That is your decision and you are welcome to it. But the rest
      > of
      > the world will think you are a couple cans short of a six-pack.

      Actually, quite the opposite is true - when people the world over
      (think "lowest common denominator") are asked about "dollars" they say
      that they believe that they are gold-backed. And few distinguish
      between the old "dollar bills" and the new FRNs because most do not
      understand the meanings of the words or the significance of the seals
      and signatures on the pieces of paper (like you do??). Most FRNs in
      circulation the world over are clever imitations of dollar bills which
      were backed by gold and silver. Only recently have new FRNs exhibited
      a less similar appearance.

      > You and I can agree to deal in chicken eggs, and establish a "price
      > list" of
      > various goods and services based on chicken eggs. There is no gold
      > backing
      > up the chicken eggs, but that does not mean that dealing in chicken
      > eggs is
      > a fraud. Especially not a fraud executed by me upon you.

      Funny how chicken eggs come more easily to mind as an example medium of
      exchange than does already proven gold or silver coinage.

      > The Fed Reserve is "licensed" to create a medium of exchange that is
      > convenient, predictable and usable all over the world.

      It's a medium of confiscation, no more convenient than the system it
      tries to replace, is predictable in that it guarantees a loss to its
      users, even if difficult for the average man to perceive, and is
      "usable" all over the world due to a general level of illiteracy.

      "By a continuing process of inflation, governments can confiscate,
      secretly
      and unobserved, an important part of the wealth of their citizens.
      There
      is no subtler, no surer means of overturning the existing basis of
      society
      than to debauch the currency. The process engages all the hidden forces
      of economic law on the side of destruction, and does it in a manner
      which
      not one man in a million is able to diagnose."
      - John Maynard Keynes, `The Economic Consequences of The Peace'

      > The Fed Reserve has
      > done exactly that. Just because both you and I believe that is a
      > violation
      > of the Constitution does not make it fraud. Except maybe to you.

      The fraud is not committed by the Federal Reserve - they actually tell
      people what they are doing with FRNs. The fraud is on the part of the
      people who use FRNs while representing them as "dollars" by which they
      confiscate the wealth of others who are tricked into becoming
      speculators on an unpayable debt. Think of it as good tasting
      cherry-flavored poison. The maker (the Fed) has a warning label that
      plainly says "poison - not for human consumption" and the user feeds
      the bad stuff to children who don't know any better without disclosing
      the warning. Sure, it's a slow-acting poison. But it tastes so darn
      good!

      The Fed says FRNs are not dollars and were never meant to be, so why do
      so many people call them dollars? A real dollar is an asset
      represented by the number +1. The FRN is a unit of debt represented
      by the number -1. Sure, they both have the "1" in common, but one of
      them is the exact opposite of the other when the facts are known. FRNS
      reprsent the absence, not the presence, of dollars. +1 and -1 are not
      the same thing. But many will tell you that they are. This is because
      they benefit and do not care if it is at the expense of others.

      > And just because the Fed Reserve admits that the exchange of FRNs is
      > little
      > more than a computer entry somewhere does not make it a fraud. And it
      > CERTAINLY doesn't mean the Fed is ADMITTING it to be a fraud. Except
      > maybe
      > to you.

      I think you misread what the Fed admitted. You made the false jump of
      logic equating FRNs with checkbook deposits - they did not, but they
      hoped you would, and you did. The Fed has spilled the beans and the
      people (in general) aren't educated enough to comprehend it.
      However, enough educated people have written enough about it for the
      interested reader to learn the truth.

      > I am very aware of what Modern Money Mechanics states.

      It does not state that FRNS are mere bookkeeping entries. It does not
      equate checkbook deposits with FRNs. What it does do is tell the truth
      about what each is. They hope the public will make the false
      conclusion that deposits ARE FRNs. But this would be easily shown to
      be a major mistake on the part of most people were they to go to their
      banks and ask for FRNs in an amount covering all the "deposits". Last
      I read, less than 1% of deposits could be covered by FRNs.
      Historically, the amount has been between 3 and 5%. Even so, the math
      puts the lie to the claims that they are compelled upon a majority of
      people. No, people choose to accept them, unless one is a creditor in
      a court judgment.

      > In fact, I am
      > teaching from it again this coming Monday evening. You, however, DO
      > NOT
      > seem to be aware of what Modern Money Mechanics states. That document
      > states very clearly the nature of FRNs as being an agreement to honor
      > at
      > face value all over the world. There is no hard asset backing FRNs.
      > The
      > ENTIRE WORLD KNOWS THIS! And the entire world has agreed to honor
      > FRNs at
      > face value and use them as a means of exchange.

      Amazing! The WORLD hasn't agreed upon anything else, but this they
      agree upon? Puhleeze!
      You are mistaking FRNs for "dollars". It is "dollars" that the world
      accepted, not their clever imitations!

      The Fed will not "honor at face value"! They leave it to everyone else
      to do that, while they refuse to do it.
      Do you claim the ENTIRE WORLD knows THAT?

      FRNS fail in one very important feature of real money, that being a
      store of value.

      > You call it imaginary. But I usually refrain from using that word for
      > something that I can touch, taste and spend. Most people do the same.
      > Except maybe you.

      The FRNs value is definitely imaginary, because it fluctuates
      constantly. But beware of tasting too many of them (you might not pass
      an employee drug test), since a large majority have been proven to have
      traces of cocaine on them spread by the rollers of counting machines.
      Most people do not taste their FRNs. Most people don't even know what
      FRNs are, but once is is explained to them, these same people believe
      that bank deposits ARE FRNs, proving that just because "most people"
      believe something does not make it true.

      > There is no question that sooner or later the "confidence" of the
      > entire
      > world will end, as far as the FRN is concerned.

      Will you be the last on your block to trade real things for FRNS? When
      will you bail? When the percentage of true beleivers is 49%, 25%, or
      1%?

      > At that time, America will
      > have an economic collapse like nothing ever seen in history. This is
      > why
      > people like you and me purchase hard assets and land. Gold, silver
      > and what
      > I can grow on my land will be the only means of survival when that time
      > comes. And you can help people prepare for that time by encouraging
      > them to
      > purchase gold, silver and land.

      Do your really believe that you own (as in "absolute ownership") that
      which you "purchase" with FRNs?
      That would be a big mistake. Debt cannot pay a debt. There's a court
      case to that effect for people who need the court to explain the
      obvious to them. Payment extinguishes debt, while discharge merely
      passes it on to another party. FRNs fail at the former, and succeed at
      the latter.

      > But if you start the conversation by telling them that their checking
      > account is imaginary, then they will think you are stupid or insane.
      > You
      > will never be able to help them.

      Yes, the majority today will reject truth as stupid or insane, and
      that's no accident. It took a long time to dumb down the American
      public as a whole, but it has succeeded. You seem to recognize this,
      that they are not ready for truth, yet you use what they believe as a
      justification for using FRNs. One would think that more could be
      learned from setting an example that FRNs are unnecessary to use and
      accept.

      > The Fed Reserve never admitted, in Modern Money Mechanics or anywhere
      > else,
      > that the monetary system on which the entire world is standardized is
      > a con
      > game.

      Oh, yes they did. You missed it. They came right out and told how the
      first fraud was perpetrated by the goldsmiths who issued false
      receipts, which the bankers then emulated. Remember, "the process
      engages all the hidden forces of economic law on the side of
      destruction, and does it in a manner which not one man in a million is
      able to diagnose."

      You are apparently not that one man in a million.

      > Get over it, deal with reality. You will help more people understand
      > the
      > truth that way.

      The reality is that the Fed system is crumbling. The imaginary value
      of its paper has declined in the minds of the world's people by 25%
      just since this January (against another imaginary unit based upon
      it!!). You're right if you say that doesn't make sense, but then you
      expect a concensus to be correct instead of mistaken.

      That same concensus says that you owe income tax. Yet you brag about
      not paying it. Where is that faith in the crowd you seem to profess?

      It's really too bad that Americans will staunchly defend schemes
      designed to reduce them to poverty. FRNs and fractional reserve
      banking practices have been a spectacular success in that regard.
    • Show all 6 messages in this topic