Question:
What caused the US Housing market collapse?
Answer:
The Real
Causes of the Housing Market Collapse
The National Debt now exceeds $9.2 trillion dollars. In Fiscal Year
2006 the U.S. Government spent $406 billion on interest payments.to
holders of that debt. Why do we have such a gigantic debt? Because
Democrat and Republican officeholders spend far more than the Government
receives in revenue.
In 2007 alone,
the US government paid out roughly $430 billion in interest to pay
for money borrowed to finance previous deficits. The interest total
for just the last 20 years – back to 1988 - is well over $6.5
trillion. Interest payments in 2008 alone will again exceed $400 billion.
Where on earth will all that money come from? If the government borrowed
it all from the credit markets (i.e., sold US Treasury bills, bonds
and notes – government IOUs) to raise the money it would dry
up all available credit. Interest rates would skyrocket and the economy
would collapse. So how does it do this year after year without such
dire effects?
Here is the trick.
Take, for example, a year like this year in which the government runs
a $400 billion dollar deficit. The Treasury Department has to sell
$400 billion in US Treasury bills, bonds and notes (government IOUs)
to buyers at a rate of interest sufficient to attract their money
(and beat the interest competition of other banks’ CDs and other
governments’ bills, bonds and notes). To avoid a credit squeeze,
the Federal Reserve System Open Market Committee in Washington directs
the NY Federal Reserve Bank to purchase roughly 10% of that total
(or $40 billion in our example) in existing US bills, bonds, and notes
from the current holders. To pay for them it creates the $40 billion
out of nothing, merely with keystrokes on a computer. Through more
keystrokes, this new $40 billion is deposited into the banks of the
various bill, bond, and note sellers, thereby increasing the reserves
of those banks by $40 billion.
Pursuant to the
Federal Reserve Act of 1913 those banks must keep only 10% of those
new deposits on "reserve." (Because these banks do not have
to keep 100% on reserve, this banking system is called a “fractional
reserve” system.). So of the $40 billion deposited, the banks
must keep 10% on reserve ($4 billion) and may loan out $36 billion
(90%), for business loans, mortgages, credit card loans, to purchase
government bonds - for whatever borrowers want. Those loans (and payments)
are in turn deposited in banks (very few folks put their money in
mattresses). So of the $36 billion loaned out and then re-deposited,
the banks receiving the new deposits can then loan out 90% or $32.4
billion, retaining 10% or $3.6 billion as reserves.
Banks repeat this
redeposit-reloan process, reduced 10% each time, until the 10% reserves
retained have reduced the funds available for loan to zero. This cunning
process allows the banks to create out of nothing nine times the original
$40 billion in new deposits received from the Federal Reserve (the
“Fed”), or $360 billion dollars. This total is concealed
from the public by the only partial expansion of the loan total at
each repetitive step.
We can easily
see that even by the second re-loan step mentioned above, the banks
have loaned out $68.4 billion based on the original $40 billion deposited.
The end result of the process is that the banks receiving the deposits
and re-deposits collectively have loaned out $360 billion dollars,
which they created out of nothing, and have retained $40 billion in
reserve. The Fed created the first $40 billion, the banks $360 billion,
equaling $400 billion dollars. Thus the credit markets are stabilized
even though the US government has borrowed $400 billion.
But notice, the
Fed only created the initial 10% ($40 billion). Privately owned banks
created 90% ($360 billion) out of nothing, and loaned it out at interest.
At even 6% that is $21.6 billion dollars per year in interest. Some
of this profit goes to the private stockholders of the banks. However,
the banks conceal much of this vast profit from the public as undistributed
or retained earnings. Five banks hold over 50% of all deposits in
the United States. This means that in a year with a $400 billion deficit
(such as FY 2007-2008), those five banks will receive over 50% of
approximately 6% interest on the newly created $360 billion: over
$10 billion per year, from now on, for creating money out of nothing.
This is profoundly unjust, and dangerous to any government, especially
in a country that prides itself on being a democracy.
Note that the
Fed, not the United States Treasury, created the initial $40 billion
in our example. The 12 Federal Reserve banks are private corporations
the stock of which is owned by private banks in their districts, not
by the United States Government. The United States Treasury pays the
Fed interest on the US bills, bonds, and notes the Fed buys with the
money it creates out of nothing. The Fed routinely holds about 10%
of the United States National Debt (US Treasury bills bonds, notes),
which it has accumulated to provide the base for the rest, as explained
above.
6% interest on
the nearly trillion dollars in bonds it now owns provides the Fed
with roughly $50 billion in revenue. With this money the Fed (1) pays
some money to its private banks stockholders, (2) uses some to create
giant unaudited slush funds to manipulate currency and stock markets
(ostensibly to help avoid economic crises such as the one we are currently
in), and (3) then takes out whatever it wishes - without any Congressional
oversight or external audit - for expenses, salaries, perks, jets,
lavish parties, etc.. The rest it returns to the US Treasury. In this
manner the Federal Reserve operates independently of our elected Congress
and external oversight.
A well-meaning,
but later-disillusioned President Woodrow Wilson signed into law The
Federal Reserve Act of 1913 that authorized this profoundly unjust
system. This law transferred money creation from our elected government
to private banks. The vast economic wealth that contorted and deliberately
complex law of 1913 concentrated in the hands of the privately-owned
national banks is almost incalculable. It is concentrating the wealth
of the nation in fewer and fewer hands as they create over 90% of
our new money, year after year, and receive the interest tribute on
it from the American people to whom they have loaned it.
Deficits fuel
the fire of economic injustice by requiring borrowing which requires
new money creation, by the private banks. Wars fuel deficits. Conflicts
and fear fuel wars. The mass media fuels conflicts and fear. The bankers
own and/or control the mass media. Full circle.
Apart from the
horrific greed of the banks and mortgage companies making the deceptive
sub prime loans, the creation of new money to pay for wars and other
deficit-spending results in inflation. Too much money at a time with
the same amount of goods for sale drives up prices. To combat this
the Fed raises interest rates. Higher interest rates hurt the housing
market. Repeated and large deficits require repeated interest rate
interest hikes to avoid severe inflation. Since Americans were on
the edge economically already, the housing market was killed.
Now that the housing
market is dead, can the Fed resurrect it? Perhaps. Certainly lower
interest rates and tax breaks (to a much lesser degree) will help.
But so many Americans are already bankrupt, or unemployed, or broke,
that they simply cannot qualify for or afford any loan, house, or
even, increasingly, a rental. They are now homeless, or living in
homes owned by the banks, so that most Americans are now debt slaves
on the continent their great, great, great, grandfathers conquered.
The bankers own it all, or very nearly so. Once the "recession"
has been halted - if it can be - the Fed will have to raise interest
rates, rather quickly, to avoid severe inflation caused by all the
deficits. Again, full circle. Besides the concentration of wealth
into fewer and fewer hands it causes, fractional reserve banking is
the primary cause of the inherent instability in our economic system
and of its boom-bust “cycles.”
Until the American
people cease being foolish consumers and realize how the banking system
in the United States really works – and fight to reform it -
they will remain slaves to the bankers, who will become increasingly
harsh taskmasters and injustice and wars will multiply. Soon, very
soon, America will consist - like the 3rd world countries - of only
the very few very rich and the very many very poor.
Understand now
why the banks are the largest buildings in every town in the US?,
why the bankers fought tooth and nail to get the Federal Reserve Act
of 1913 passed, giving them the power to create the great majority
of the US money supply (excepting the tiny fraction in coin issued
by the U.S. mint)?, why banks like wars and deficit spending, and
why we unfailing have deficits every single year, regardless of which
bank puppets they get elected using the mass media they own and control?
Each generation
is faced with the same choice. Our forefathers made their choice -
to be free. Have we made ours - to be slaves? (copyright 2008)
Question:
Who owns the Federal Reserve Banks?
Answer:
The Federal Reserve Banks of each region are owned by (issue their
stock exclusively to) the member banks of that same region. The member
banks are privately owned corporations. Thus the Federal Reserve Banks
are privately owned. This is a matter of law and anyone may
read the Federal Reserve Act of 1913 for themselves (see below).
Question:
Why then do some people deny that the Federal
Reserve Banks are owned by private corporations?
Answer:
Three groups of people deny this fact, for differing reasons:
- The first group
consists of the private owners of the Federal Reserve Banks, and
their shills. It is obviously not in their interest that the American
people realize that private bankers own what most people regard
as a part of the public treasury and government. The people would
doubtless not like it if they knew that the stockholders of the
Federal Reserve Banks receive 6% interest (raised higher in the
past) per year on their stock ownership, risk free. The people would
be legitimately concerned to know that the member bank stockholders
elect six of the nine members (i.e., 2/3rds) of the Boards
of the reserve banks of their regions. Rather than regulating or
controlling the activities of private banks in their regions, the
opposite is the case.
- The second
group consists of those persons who, in their ignorance, have believed
the propaganda of the Federal Reserve Banks, which sometimes issue
ambiguous, doublespeak statements attempting to obfuscate their
private bank ownership. Here is a typical example from the NY Fed
website, quite easily seen through: “Although they are set up
like private corporations and member banks hold their stock, the
Federal Reserve Banks owe their existence to an act of Congress
and have a mandate to serve the public. Therefore, they are not
really "private" companies, but rather are "owned"
by the citizens of the United States…Member banks do, however, receive
a fixed 6 percent dividend annually on their stock and elect
six of the nine members of the Reserve Bank's of their region…
the Reserve Banks issue shares of stock to member banks.”
- The third group
consists of those people who consider that because the Chairman
of the Federal Reserve Board of Governors is appointed by the President
and approved by the Senate that the Fed is firmly under government
control and that this is sufficiently equivalent to ownership to
put them at ease (never mind the outright private bank control of
the 12 regional Federal Reserve Banks). Let’s hear how the Fed itself
regards such indirect “government control” (again from the NY Fed
website): The Federal Reserve System is not "owned"
by anyone and is not a private, profit-making institution. Instead,
it is an independent entity within the government, having
both public purposes and private aspects.
If you are a little
uncomfortable with “your” Fed having “private aspects,” you are not
alone. Notice also the contradiction with the other NY Fed quote above,
which claims the citizens of the US own the Fed – here it claims no
one owns it (same website). The truth and the law is that the member
banks own and control all 12 Federal Reserve Banks. Another interesting
doublespeak quote from the NY Fed website: Therefore, the Federal
Reserve can be more accurately described as "independent within
the government.” A little independence is a good thing,
unless that independence is in reality virtually total and the entity
involved controls the nation’s money and economy. Think about it:
if the Fed is independent from the government that created it, then
who controls it – it has no brain of its own – it is not a person.
If it is not controlled by our government, then by whom?
Question:
Doesn’t the fact that the President appoints
the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System make it a quasi-governmental
sort of entity?
Answer:
Yes, but how “quasi” is quasi-enough? The Board of Governors of the
System consists of 7 members, one appointed every two years (one term
begins every two years, on February 1 of even-numbered years, a full
year after inauguration day) by the President and confirmed by the
Senate for 14 year terms. Wow…those are really long
terms. Why? Let’s see: if a new President comes into office pledged
to reform the Fed, end its independence from effective government
oversight, throw the rascals out and replace them with his own appointees,
he had better be very patient, as he can only replace one member every
two years. So in his four year term (10 years less than Fed Governors’
terms) he can replace only two of the 7 members. Of course, he had
better be able to sustain the ire of the remaining Governors (almost
all connected to financial institutions indirectly in various academic
and think-tank institutions financed by banks and bank grants or loans,
or which they hope to join in revolving door relationships after their
single terms are up), who can run the economy up, down or sideways,
in the interim.
But assuming the
President can sustain the fight with the Fed, its bank-PAC financed
cheerleaders in the Senate, voters upset over a suddenly sinking economy,
the banks who control the Fed and the media giants they also own,
then all this brave but foolhardy President has to do is get elected
to a second term, and hang on long enough to appoint two more Board
members. Thus, assuming all of this goes well, in the span of seven
years (a glacial pace in American politics), near the end of his second
term, he can finally begin some reform – if he manages to get his
four appointees confirmed, is still in office and has any allies left
– even in his own party. We think the prefixed word quasi-governmental
is a good one, if you understand quasi- to mean pseudo.
Keep in mind also
the distinction between the 12 regional Federal Reserve Banks, and
the Federal Reserve System as a whole. The private ownership of the
12 Federal Reserve banks we addressed above. "Federal Reserve
System" usually refers to the entire framework established by
the Federal Reserve Act of 1913, including those 12, privately owned
Federal Reserve Banks, and the Board of Governors of the system, which
meets in Washington D.C. The Fed Board of Governors was also established
by the Act of 1913. These are the 7 members with 14-year terms, also
mentioned above. Two of them are appointed by the President to 4-year
terms as Chairman and Vice Chairman of the Board (largely nominal
positions - no extra votes). They, of course, are not owned like corporation
stock is owned. So when someone is trying to mislead folks by denying
any private ownership of the Fed, they will inevitably refer to the
Federal Reserve System (rather than to the Federal Reserve Banks)
and declare it is not privately owned (which is partly true [the Fed
Board of Governors is not "owned"], and partly false [the
12 Federal Reserve banks are]). We have addressed these two elements
in detail, above.
Question:
Have the Courts had to decide whether
the Federal Reserve Banks are privately owned or not?
Answer: Yes,
in several cases. Here is one of them on point which went up to the
9th Circuit Court of Appeals: LEWIS v. UNITED STATES
John L. LEWIS,
Plaintiff/Appellant v. UNITED STATES of America, Defendant/Appellee.
No. 80-5905. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted
March 2, 1982; Decided April 19, 1982; As Amended June 24, 1982
"Plaintiff,
who was injured by vehicle owned and operated by a federal reserve
bank, brought action alleging jurisdiction under the Federal Tort
Claims Act. The United States District Court for the Central District
of California, David W. Williams, Jr., dismissed holding that federal
reserve bank was not a federal agency within meaning of Act and that
the court therefore lacked subject-matter jurisdiction. Appeal was
taken. The Court of Appeals, Poole, Circuit Judge, held that federal
reserve banks are not federal instrumentalities for purposes of the
Act, but are independent, privately owned and locally controlled corporations.
Affirmed.
. . .Examining
the organization and function of the Federal Reserve Banks and applying
the relevant factors, we conclude that the Reserve Banks .
. . are independent, privately owned and locally controlled corporations.
Each Federal
Reserve Bank is a separate corporation owned by commercial banks
in its region. The stockholding commercial banks elect
two-thirds of each Bank's nine member board of directors. The remaining
three directors are appointed by the Federal Reserve Board. The Federal
Reserve Board regulates the Reserve Banks, but direct supervision
and control of each Bank is exercised by its board of directors. 12
U.S.C. § 301. The directors enact by-laws regulating the manner
of conducting general Bank business, 12 U.S.C. § 341, and appoint
officers to implement and supervise daily Bank activities. These activities
include collecting and clearing checks, making advances to private
and commercial entities, holding reserves for members banks, discounting
the notes of members banks, and buying and selling securities on the
open market. See 12 U.S.C. §§ 341-361.
. . .
The Banks are listed as neither "wholly owned" government
corporations under 31 U.S.C. § 846 nor as "mixed ownership"
corporations under 31 U.S.C. § 856, . . .
Additionally,
Reserve Banks, as privately owned entities, receive no appropriated
funds . . ."
Let’s
sum up: The Federal Reserve consists of 12 regional banks,
the stock of which is owned and the Boards controlled by the member
banks, which are privately owned bank corporations. These institutions
receive 6% profit on their funds paid into the Fed, rain or shine,
peace or war (sometimes more).
The
Federal Reserve Board of Governors is an independent (its
own word) entity “within” the government (i.e.,
something much like an independent, internal parasite in a host organism),
with 14 year, reform-proof terms (i.e., only one of 7 can
be replaced every two years).
The
Fed was deliberately designed to appear as a sort of government body
to hide the fact that it is a private banking cartel whose member
banks share in the vast profits of seigniorage (i.e., the difference
between the cost of printing/minting or otherwise creating money [a
few cents per $100], and its face value). Yes, the Department of the
Treasury does still mint our coins (at the US mint) but that represents
under 1% of the US money supply, the great bulk of which is simply
bankbook entries - electronic keyboard impulses in computer memories
- created by banks on-the-spot to fund loans they make in response
to loans applications their "customers" submit (hence the
competition by banks for your loan applications and credit card borrowing).
Wouldn't you love to have that exclusive ability - simply to type
numbers on your keyboard creating bank accounts, and then write checks
or charge purchases to those accounts (actually, no - it is gravely
unjust to everyone else and is impoverishing the world for that power
to be in private hands).
The Federal Reserve Notes we all accept as currency (there are no
U.S. Notes printed since passage of the ill-advised, 1994 Reigle Act
abolished Lincoln's greenbacks) are actually sold to the Fed at the
cost of printing - a few cents per sheet - by the Treasury Department
Bureau of Engraving and Printing. Seigniorage is properly a benefit
solely to government (and indirectly then to the people) - not to
private bankers - that the Federal Reserve Act, passed by misrepresentation
and deception, transferred to the bankers. Thus, rather than the government
receiving the vast benefits of creating all of our money, private
banks create over 98% of our money supply - literally billions of
dollars annually - and pocket the interest charged on loaning that
new money, as their private profit. Our government is left with only
the insignificant seigniorage from minting coins.
Since
the bankers actually wanted to control the new, national central bank
(called the Federal Reserve Banks), to accomplish this they had to
make it appear governmental, which accounts for the occasional
use of the term quasi-govenmental, to describe this governmental
facade. This also explains the construction of the Federal Reserve
headquarters building on the Mall in Washington, DC, right in the
midst of the authentically governmental buildings there.
The
real problem is, thus, not the Fed itself (it only makes about 2%
of the money supply – the base for the rest), it’s the
private banks that, pursuant to the fractional reserve banking authorized
by the Federal Reserve Act of 1913, make/create-from-nothing-for-their-private-profit
the other roughly 98% of the US money supply. The Fed is just a quasi-governmental
smokescreen (and central organizing body) for the private banking
cartel's money-creation operation.
But
don’t believe the above on our word alone, read it for yourself:
[Note:
Additional FAQ and Answers follow these Federal Reserve Act excerpts.]
FEDERAL
RESERVE ACT SECTION 5—Stock
Issues; Increase and Decrease of Capital 1. Amount of Shares;
Increase and Decrease of Capital; Surrender and Cancellation of Stock
The capital stock
of each Federal reserve bank shall be divided into shares of $100
each. The outstanding capital stock shall be increased from time to
time as member banks increase their capital stock and surplus or as
additional banks become members, and may be decreased as member banks
reduce their capital stock or surplus or cease to be members. Shares
of the capital stock of Federal reserve banks owned by member banks
shall not be transferred or hypothecated. When a member bank increases
its capital stock or surplus, it shall thereupon subscribe for an
additional amount of capital stock of the Federal reserve bank of
its district equal to 6 per centum of the said increase, one-half
of said subscription to be paid in the manner hereinbefore provided
for original subscription, and one-half subject to call of the Board
of Governors of the Federal Reserve System. A bank applying for stock
in a Federal reserve bank at any time after the organization thereof
must subscribe for an amount of the capital stock of the Federal reserve
bank equal to 6 per centum of the paid-up capital stock and surplus
of said applicant bank, paying therefore its par value plus one-half
of 1 per centum a month from the period of the last dividend. When
a member bank reduces its capital stock or surplus it shall surrender
a proportionate amount of its holdings in the capital stock of said
Federal Reserve bank. Any member bank which holds capital stock of
a Federal Reserve bank in excess of the amount required on the basis
of 6 per centum of its paid-up capital stock and surplus shall surrender
such excess stock. When a member bank voluntarily liquidates it shall
surrender all of its holdings of the capital stock of said Federal
Reserve bank and be released from its stock subscription not previously
called. In any such case the shares surrendered shall be canceled
and the member bank shall receive in payment therefore, under regulations
to be prescribed by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve
System, a sum equal to its cash-paid subscriptions on the shares surrendered
and one-half of 1 per centum a month from the period of the last dividend,
not to exceed the book value thereof, less any liability of such member
bank to the Federal Reserve bank.
SECTION
10—Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System1. Appointment
and Qualification of Members
The Board of Governors
of the Federal Reserve System (hereinafter referred to as the “Board”)
shall be composed of seven members, to be appointed by the President,
by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, after the date of
enactment of the Banking Act of 1935, for terms of fourteen years
except as hereinafter provided, but each appointive member of the
Federal Reserve Board in office on such date shall continue to serve
as a member of the Board until February 1, 1936, and the Secretary
of the Treasury and the Comptroller of the Currency shall continue
to serve as members of the Board until February 1, 1936. In selecting
the members of the Board, not more than one of whom shall be selected
from any one Federal Reserve district, the President shall have due
regard to a fair representation of the financial, agricultural, industrial,
and commercial interests, and geographical divisions of the country.
The members of the Board shall devote their entire time to the business
of the Board and shall each receive an annual salary of $15,000, payable
monthly, together with actual necessary traveling expenses.
Prior to the
enactment of the Banking Act of 1935, approved Aug. 23, 1935, the
Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System was known as the
Federal Reserve Board. See note to the third paragraph of section
1. The portion of this paragraph dealing with salaries of Board members
has in effect been amended numerous times, most recently by Executive
Order. Prior to the act of December 27, 2000, section 1002 of which
revised the executive schedule, the salary of the chairman of the
Board was set at executive schedule level 2 and the salary of other
members at level 3. The salary of the chairman of the Board is now
set at executive schedule level I, and the salary of other members
at level II (see 2 USC 358 and 5 USC 5313 and 5314).]
SECTION
19—Bank Reserves
[(2)(A)(i&ii)
below, authorizes fractional reserve banking]
Reserve Requirements
(2)
Reserve requirements.
(A)
Each depository institution shall maintain reserves against its transaction
accounts as the Board may prescribe by regulation solely for the purpose
of implementing monetary policy—
(i)
in the ratio of 3 per centum for that portion of its total transaction
accounts of $25,000,000 or less, subject to subparagraph (C); and
(ii)
in the ratio of 12 per centum, or in such other ratio as the Board
may prescribe not greater than 14 per centum and not less than 8 per
centum, for that portion of its total transaction accounts in excess
of $25,000,000, subject to subparagraph (C). [MM
Note: this section authorizes banks to make loans while retaining
only 8-14% reserves (it is presently set by the Fed Board at 10% for
most types of loans). This is the legal authority for fractional reserve
banking. The result is that private banks (not the government) create
over 90% of the US money supply. A proper reform, as detailed in the
Money Masters video, would raise this to 100%, providing the necessary
liquidity to do so by retiring the national debt with US Notes.]
(B)
Each depository institution shall maintain reserves against its non
personal time deposits in the ratio of 3 per centum, or in such other
ratio not greater than 9 per centum and not less than zero per centum
as the Board may prescribe by regulation solely for the purpose of
implementing monetary policy.
(D)
Any reserve requirement imposed under this subsection shall be uniformly
applied to all transaction accounts at all depository institutions.
Reserve requirements imposed under this subsection shall be uniformly
applied to non personal time deposits at all depository institutions,
except that such requirements may vary by the maturity of such deposits.
(6)
Exemption for certain deposits. The requirements imposed under
paragraph (2) shall not apply to deposits payable only outside the
States of the United States and the District of Columbia, except that
nothing in this subsection limits the authority of the Board to impose
conditions and requirements on member banks under section 25 of this
Act or the authority of the Board under section 7 of the International
Banking Act of 1978 (12 U.S.C. 3105).
Question:
How does the Fed “create”
money out of nothing?
Answer:
It is a four-step process. But first a word on bonds. Bonds are simply
promises to pay — or government IOUs. People buy bonds to get
a secure rate of interest. At the end of the term of the bond, the
government repays the principal, plus interest (if not paid periodically),
and the bond is destroyed. There are trillions of dollars worth of
these bonds at present. Now here is the Fed moneymaking process:
Step 1. The Fed
Open Market Committee approves the purchase of U.S. Bonds on the open
market.
Step 2. The bonds
are purchased by the New York Fed Bank from whomever is offering them
for sale on the open market.
Step 3. The Fed
pays for the bonds with electronic credits to the seller’s bank,
which in turn credits the seller’s bank account. These credits
are based on nothing tangible. The Fed just creates them.
Step 4. The banks
use these deposits as reserves. Most banks may loan out ten times
(10x) the amount of their reserves to new borrowers, all at interest.
In this way, a
Fed purchase of, say a million dollars worth of bonds, gets turned
into over 10 million dollars in bank deposits. The Fed, in effect,
creates 10% of this totally new money and the banks create the other
90%.
This also explains
why the Fed consistently holds about 10% of the total US Treasury
bonds. It had to buy those (with accounts or Fed notes the Fed simply
created) from the public in order to provide the base for the rest
of the money the private banks then get to create, most of which eventually
winds up being used to purchase Treasury bonds, thus supplying Congress
with the borrowed money to pay for its expenditures.
Due to a number
of important exceptions to the 10% reserve ratio, some loans require
less than 10% reserves, and many no (0%) reserves, making it possible
for banks to create many times more than ten times the money they
have in “reserve”. Due to these exceptions from the 10%
reserve requirement, the Fed creates only a little under 2% of the
total US money supply, while private banks create the other 98%.
To reduce the
amount of money in the economy, the process is just reversed —
the Fed sells bonds to the public, and money flows out of the purchaser’s
local bank. Loans must be reduced by ten times the amount of the sale.
So a Fed sale of a million dollars in bonds, results in 10 million
dollars less money in the economy.
Question:
If private banks create over 90% of the US money supply, then are
they not a greater threat to our democracy than the Fed itself?
Answer:
Of course. The Fed was simply a smoke-screen designed to hide the
stark reality that behind the Federal Reserve
Act of 1913, signed by an unwitting President Wilson (who later deeply
regretted that act) was a monumental power grab by the largest bankers
who designed the Act at their secret meeting at Jekyll Island, Georgia
(detailed in the video/DVD). The Federal Reserve Act allowed
the Fed to establish a reserve requirement of between only 8% and
14% (presently set at 10% for most types of loans). That made it lawful
for banks to loan far more than they had in deposits – to practice
fractional reserve banking. The Fed centralized, nationalized and
standardized this fraud on the people, and restricted its practice
to banks only. In fact, the roughly 2% of the US money supply the
Fed creates actually is owned by the government (as it should be),
but this tiny fraction obscures the fact that it is the base for the
creation of the other 98% created by private banks as loans. Thus,
simply having a Federal Reserve or similar national Central Bank,
in itself, is not a bad thing (it can be a good thing) – but
allowing private banks to practice fractional reserve banking (pursuant
to the Federal Reserve Act of 1913 or
any other such law) is the real problem, which is impoverishing all
Americans and now all peoples worldwide, except the bankers. For clarity,
it should be renamed the Fractional Reserve Banking Act. The exponential
concentration of wealth, in the US and abroad, is due almost exclusively
to fractional reserve banking by privately owned banks such as Bank
of America, Wells Fargo, Citigroup, J.P. Morgan Chase, etc. The Fed
is simply part of the mechanism screening this grave injustice from
public knowledge and scrutiny.
Question:
How do private banks create money?
Answer:
Focusing on the majority of the US money supply, the method is as
follows:
The Federal Reserve
Notes and equivalent Federal Reserve Deposits (mentioned above) are
deposited in local banks or to their credit at one of the 12 Fed banks.
These funds serve as the base of bank loans, which require a 10% reserve.
For example, if $1,000,000 of Federal Reserve notes or Fed deposits
are entered on the books with the Fed to the credit of a bank (usually
the bank of the person or company which just sold the Fed a Treasury
bond/bill or note), that bank may loan all of that money out (at interest),
except for 10% which is kept as its reserve. Thus $900,000 in this
example may be loaned out by that bank.
In the usual case,
the borrower of the $900,000 will not, of course, keep the money under
the mattress, rather, it is deposited either in the same bank or in
others. This $900,000 in new deposits may then be loaned out at interest
by these banks, except for the 10% reserve. Thus $810,000 is loaned
out a second time ($90,000 of the $900,000 being retained as reserves).
The newly loaned
$810,000 is then deposited in these or other banks, allowing them
to lend out $729,000 a third time (retaining 10% = $81,000 as reserves),
and so on. This process gets repeated over and over, each time the
lending bank(s) retains 10%. It takes a series of 66 loans to reduce
the funds available for relending to less than $1,000 by retention
of 10% each time as bank reserves. In actual practice, due to numerous
exceptions to the 10% reserve requirement, banks may lend the money
even more times, resulting in even more money being created by them.
Thus, in our example,
an original purchase by the Fed of $1,000,000 in Treasury bonds on
the open market, by a series of deposits and loans in one or more
banks, results in an expansion of the US money supply (via bank accounts
simply created as loans by the lending banks) by a factor of 10x.
After the process is completed, the total money in the US economy
has been expanded by ten million dollars ($10,000,000), in this example.
The Fed got to create 10% of this total, and private banks the other
90%, to lend at interest. In each individual bond purchase by the
Fed, not just one bank profits from this scheme, rather the banking
system as a whole does. However, in practice, the 4 largest international
banks get roughly 80% of the profit, leaving the crumbs (still million$)
to the smaller banks in your community.
What did the banks
do to obtain this right to lend, relend, and relend again and again
the same money (less 10% reserved each time)? Nothing, except lobby
and mislead the public, the majority of Congress and President Wilson
to think they were supporting legislation to reform banking to a more
just form under the Federal Reserve Act of 1913.
They continue to hide, obfuscate and mislead the public, to
the same purpose, using media they purchased for this purpose, and
corrupting the political system in the process.
This critically
important piece of legislation – the Federal Reserve Act of
1913 - had to be disguised to accomplish the bankers' scheme, and
so it was. That story is contained in the video/DVD, The Money Masters.
For more detailed
information (prepared and freely distributed by the Federal Reserve
Bank of Chicago but now out of print) we recommend readers read Modern
Money Mechanics.