[elohiym]

Originally Posted by elected4ever

This much I know. God said,"Thou shall not steal." Sense our present system has at its core the theft of privet wealth then I know that on its face it is not of God's design.

I agree. And I think I have presented enough evidence on this thread so far that, after it is reviewed and digested, a reasonable person can conclude that deposit expansion is theft of the "borrower's" wealth. Will the reader's conclude that? Maybe not tonight. It took me years of research to finally be convinced.

Originally Posted by elected4ever

Failure to think on and consider economics and policy together would be catastrophic. One depends on the other.

I agree with this if you mean that we should consider privately controlled national monetary policy and the national political structure together because the former is used to control the latter, making the power that controls national monetary policy the power that truly rules the country. This seems self-evident.

Originally Posted by elected4ever

The present monetary policy is the enabler of our present progressive , socialist political agenda.

And it is the enabler of abortion, both directly and indirectly.

[Stripe]

Originally Posted by elohiym

Fine. If you and I make a legal and moral agreement and I don't honor the agreement is it immoral?

Not necessarily.

[Granite]

Originally Posted by drbrumley

Huh? The Federal Reserve does indeed regulate money. It does so by increasing or decreasing the Federal Funds rate and/or interest rates. So i cannot agree to that statement.

Absolutely. Since when did, say, American consumers have anything to do with the devaluation of our own currency?

[Stripe]

Originally Posted by Granite

Absolutely. Since when did, say, American consumers have anything to do with the devaluation of our own currency?

Every time they decide en-masse to alter their spending habits the value of the dollar changes.

Was it not just Christmas?

[elohiym]

Originally Posted by Stripe

Not necessarily.

Is it immoral if you do not repay your debts?

[elohiym]

Originally Posted by Stripe

Every time they decide en-masse to alter their spending habits the value of the dollar changes.

Does the value of money change when the bank adjusts interest rates? Yes or no.

Does the value of money change when the banks expand deposits (inflate the currency)? Yes or no.

If you answer yes to either of those questions, you imply that that Bob's claim that "the Federal Reserve doesn't regulate the value of money" is not true.

[Stripe]

Originally Posted by elohiym

Is it immoral if you do not repay your debts?

Not necessarily.

Originally Posted by elohiym

Does the value of money change when the bank adjusts interest rates? Yes or no.

Sure.

Does the value of money change when the banks expand deposits (inflate the currency)? Yes or no.

Sure.

If you answer yes to either of those questions, you imply that that Bob's claim that "the Federal Reserve doesn't regulate the value of money" is not true.

OK.

When you say "regulate" you mean to do exactly as the people have the power to do, right?

[GuySmiley]

Originally Posted by elohiym

To claim that a bank can increase a transaction account balance without first depositing money is to claim that a bank can create a liability on its books without having a matching asset. It is claiming that only the bank liability increases without an offsetting asset increasing. That defies logic, Bob. Consider the substance of the bank "loan":

They increase the liability by giving you money to buy a new car (out of thin air). The matching asset is your promise to pay it back. I don't understand what's wrong with that. The money created out of thin air is exponged when you actually pay it back. What's wrong?

[Paulos]

Here are a few relevant quotes from Thomas Jefferson on this subject:

"Paper is poverty...it is only the ghost of money, and not money itself." (Thomas Jefferson to Edward Carrington, 1788.)

"Bank paper must be suppressed, and the circulating medium must be restored to the nation to whom it belongs." (Thomas Jefferson to John W. Eppes, 1813.)

"The banks...have the regulation of the safety-valves of our fortunes, and...condense and explode them at their will [through manipulated cycles of inflation and recession]." (Thomas Jefferson to John Adams, 1819.)

"I sincerely believe...that banking establishments are more dangerous than standing armies, and that the principle of spending money to be paid by posterity under the name of funding is but swindling futurity on a large scale." (Thomas Jefferson to John Taylor, 1816.)

Regarding that last quote, the consequence of the FED printing paper money at will is the national debt, which currently stands at almost $14 trillion, according to one estimate. That works out to a debt of over $125,000 for every taxpayer in the country. The USA is the most indebted nation in the world.

[elohiym]

Originally Posted by GuySmiley

They increase the liability by giving you money to buy a new car (out of thin air).

Why would they have a liability if they give you their money?

Define liability.

If you gave me $100 that you could create "out of thin air" would you have a liability of $100? Yes or no.

Originally Posted by GuySmiley

The matching asset is your promise to pay it back.

If you have an asset on your books matched to a liability, does it mean that you owe someone the value of that asset? Yes or no.

Originally Posted by GuySmiley

I don't understand what's wrong with that.

Not yet.

Originally Posted by GuySmiley

The money created out of thin air is exponged when you actually pay it back.

You're making two assumptions there. Let's stick to whether or not money is really "created out of thin air." In post #42 I provided a Federal Reserve Bank publication that claims banks lend depositor's money to borrowers. Are you saying that is not true?

So far, nobody has proved that banks create money out of thin air. However, I have provided a Fed publication implying that they don't, and I have quoted another Fed publication that show the bookkeeping entries proving that they don't. What you got for proof?

Originally Posted by GuySmiley

What's wrong?

You don't understand the problem yet.

[elohiym]

Originally Posted by Stripe

When you say "regulate" you mean to do exactly as the people have the power to do, right?

Not necessarily.

[Stripe]

Originally Posted by elohiym

Not necessarily.

In what way is a bank raising or lowering prices different from a supermarket doing the same?

[Stripe]

Originally Posted by elohiym

Why would they have a liability if they give you their money? Define liability. If you gave me $100 that you could create "out of thin air" would you have a liability of $100? Yes or no. If you have an asset on your books matched to a liability, does it mean that you owe someone the value of that asset? Yes or no. Not yet. You're making two assumptions there. Let's stick to whether or not money is really "created out of thin air." In post #42 I provided a Federal Reserve Bank publication that claims banks lend depositor's money to borrowers. Are you saying that is not true? So far, nobody has proved that banks create money out of thin air. However, I have provided a Fed publication implying that they don't, and I have quoted another Fed publication that show the bookkeeping entries proving that they don't. What you got for proof? You don't understand the problem yet.

I don't think money loaned is created out of thin air. The bank has to hand over something in order to make the loan. They lose whatever they hand over in the hope that they will get it back (with interest).

[elohiym]

Originally Posted by Stripe

In what way is a bank raising or lowering prices different from a supermarket doing the same?

It is self-evident that it is different in several ways. Regardless, the only point relevant to Bob's claim that the Federal Reserve Bank doesn't regulate the value of money is the one we've already addressed. We agree they do regulate the value of money.

I'd like to avoid rabbit trails.

[elohiym]

Originally Posted by Stripe

I don't think money loaned is created out of thin air.

The Federal Reserve Bank's own published bookkeeping entries prove they don't create money out of thin air.

Even if you give me a promissory note (cash equivalent) it's not creating money out of thin air. You are monetizing your property by monetizing your labor and collateral. It is money, even by Bob's definition of money. And when you give me a promissory note you are giving me money backed by your wealth. I can sell that promissory for cash; and if you default on the loan I get the collateral.