The KEY element here is making each district bank INDEPENDENT of the DC governing board, thereby diffusing its power. This occurs at an initial Convention. Secondary regional Conventions will then be held to see if the regions wish to retain the district banks.

Looking for additional participants as well as potential moderators.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NationalConstitutionalConvention06

detrimental. How is it detrimental and to whom? What will curtailing its power do for the benefit of working class people? I am not being negative to you, I just wondered how the Fed related to the exploitation of the lower classes. Thanks...

The member banks of the Federal Reserve are pretty much the big Wall Street investment banking firms as well as a number of European banks. Has the Wall Street bailout benefitted the working classes that much so far? I don't think so. Moreover, our current Treasury Secretary, Timmy Geitner, is the former head of the NY Fed, and according to Catherine Austin Fitts, a former HUD official with vast knowledge of insider workings, the NY Fed is responsible for about 80% of the current economic mess we're now in. Should the rest of the country have to pay the price for the NY Fed's bad decisions? I don't think so.

Is the Fed what is wrong with our system or is our entire system what is wrong? I see the Fed as a small symptom of the big ailment - Capitalism. I do not think that "tweaking" capitalism will help anything - it will only prolong the oppression and postpone what is coming.

Sorry, but this whole business of the Fed and taxation and this elite group and that elite group and pyramids on the dollar bills and shit strikes me as diversions from the real tasks at hand...

but I don't believe libertarianism is the fix.

:adore:

If only we could get some good ones, ya know, bankers who weren't greedy. That would fix everything.........:shot:

OUR TEAM WINS!!!!! YEA!!!!

Or some such fluff...

:lmfao:

I think that most folks here don't want to fix this system, we want to end this system. Replacing one group of bankers with another group of bankers means almost nothing to the poor and working class. We don't want our oppressors to replace their hard-soled shoes with soft-soled sneakers; we want them to take their foot off of our necks.

So Fed or no Fed, liberals or no liberals, Democrats or Republicans, all of these supporters of the status quo will never let us up unless they are made to do so by force - that's just the way it is...

Welcome to PI...

No, I believe capitalism can work, but it HAS to be regulated. And this is where the Congress has failed our country miserably. The House and Senate Banking Committees in particular failed to do their jobs, but of course their members were getting political contributions from the very people they were designated to regulate. Derivatives and credit default swaps are still being utilized by the way.
And the Federal Reserve too has to be reformed. Their is simply too much power being wielded by the NY Fed and DC governing board. Too much secrecy etc. Congress has outsourced its power to pring money to a group of bankers and their allegiance doesn't necessarily coincide with the best interests of our nation or its people.

I agree. Liberarians by and large are laissez faire capitalists and this is what has gotten us into this big mess.

Well it's like everything else. The problem with banks is that they are very large operations. There are competing agendas within departments etc. You could have a very ethical work force, but if you have a schmuck as CEO you're going to have problems . . . and vice-versa.

We're on the same page, believe me. A new paradigm is needed . . . and fast. I think the important thing at this point is for the TRUE progressives to separate themselves from the DINOs(Democrats in name only).

http://i.pbase.com/o4/98/583898/1/63713938.qaEEdjG9.popcorn.gif

Anytime I start seeing words like liberty and constitution flying around I get nervous. I'm stuck in Brazoria County right now, home of Ron Paul.

I do not consider myself a "progressive" at all ("true" or otherwise). I am a prole turned peasant (Mao would sternly shake his head and say, "Wrong direction!" - but what you gonna do?). I want to be separate from all Democrats, regardless of any epithetic acronym...

It can only work for the owners and the oppressors of the workers. If you think capitalism is in any way good, then you and I have nothing to talk about.

ciao...

that's where you lose most of us Eric. We're ready to move on because most of the world is suffering while just a few reap the rewards. That "paradigm shift" we're looking for is worldwide socialism, not "better regulated" capitalism.

Capitalism combined with an offsetting and strong organized labor component does offer a great concept. But today it is all about CEOs, investors and their power and we the serfs who work for them are a sideline. That needs to change.

We don't have "capitalism" in the USA. We have "crony" capitalism where the well connected have their palms and wallets open to politicians asking for US taxpayer aid in the new ventures.

Speaking of capitalism, when was the last time a corporation or business in the USA actually put all personal capital at risk instead of taxpayer money? The real concept of capitalism is about risking personal wealth for a business plan. Today the USA has a new philosophy where business plans always include taxpayer funds to make them viable. This is not capitalism unless we taxpayers get a proportional cut of the profits. Instead we only receive the socialized liability.

Oh...and BTW I agree totally that these usurious Federal Reserve Bankers are a major part of the USA's problem, and definitely not part of the solution. Banks are always enamored with the opportunities presented by an indebted society (and government) not a society that is fiscally conservative and resists consumption and indebtedness.

I am not being negative to you, I am being helpful - you should read up a little on what Capitalism actually is and how it actually works. Then come back and tell me you support it.

There is nothing positive about capitalism for the working class, period. If you think that capitalism can somehow be made to "work" for the underclasses, you are completely mistaken. The only thing that capitalism can do for the working class is cease to exist - and it ain't gonna' do that, on its own...

But you can prove me wrong by locating some "non-crony" or "non-disaster" capitalism.

"They" do have capitalism here in Amerika. It's exactly what "we" are enduring. Nothing that you see around you is due to any flaw in the system. It is working.

But in any case hope you are doing well. Serf's up. Cheers.

Individuals seem compelled to come on this board and make statements about capitalism, and related matters, that are so out of bounds or beyond the pale - they obviously do not know what they are talking about! My question is: Why do they do this? If they read only a few of the threads they ought to "get" what is going on here. So, why these silly attempts at...what? What are they attempting, do you think?

What we have is an economic system which brings out the 'schmuck' in a person, rewards bad behavior. As long as we have this system we will have 'bad bankers'. The logic of capitalism guarantees this, as it guarantees human misery and ecological catastrophe.

capitalism?

:shrug:

http://www.fresno.k12.ca.us/divdept/sscience/images/MSCSTReview/slavery.jpeg

I agree with your opposition to capitalism. In the USA form it works only to maximize the power of the rich and the elite, while denigrating the quality of life and political power of most of society.

As the rich become richer their political power become even more pervasive and today it is happening on a global scale. But the use of private capital, that capitalism in its purest sense requires, is probably the most efficient method to assess risk/reward to develop, innovate and arrive at best product. But the aspect of pure greed needs constrained. Only organized labor ( even with its problems) has the ability to offset the power of the capitalists. But thanks to the concerted policies of Reagan, Bush's, and Clinton, and possibly Obama, the political power of PRIVATE SECTOR organized labor has been made weaker instead of stronger.

Today there is no political balance in our country as was once provided by the Democratic Party when it was the workers' party, and their leaders fought for policies that kept a strong working class. Today the DLC Democratic Party is at much in bed with the Wall Street financial class as the Republicans are in bed with the US Chamber of Commerce.

When organized labor lost numbers (much helped by open trade and Bill Clinton's NAFTA) the Democratic Party lost interest in labor. When labor had major influence with the Democratic Party it provided the political balance that prevented Wall Street and Korporate America from totally controlling the political agenda to the benefit of their own elite.

That's one of the main differences that you see today between Europe and the US. Workers have some rights in Europe such as pensions, healthcare, reasonable work laws, vacations, etc that they don't have here. CEOs and bankers are held more accountable in Europe.

If we had strong PRIVATE SECTOR unions in America there would be no $50 million compensation for CEOs and Wall Street bankers; there would not be a tax payer funded bailout for incompetent bankers who then receive huge bonuses. There would have been oversight.

We need balance in society and that has been lost where most average private sector working Americans have far less, while others have significantly more.

BTW I disagree that public sector unions have been helpful to society in general. Politicians have been overly generous to this sector for votes and have forced a less financially secure private sector taxpayer base to fund their generous pensions and benefits. California is the first state to really feel this pinch.

Sorry for the rambling message.