Ellen Brown on Sovereignty, Dollar Creation and the Fallacy of Keeping a Private Fed Bank

I have been corresponding with Ellen Brown, who has some great ideas for solving the economic problems we have today. I argued that we need to nationalize the central bank in Why Limited Government Types Are Naive. More about that down the page.

But first, Ellen Brown has made the case that those who are seeking fiscal responsibility at the highest levels of government really are just wanting more dollars placed into the hands of the private sector. In the article: IMF Austerity Comes To America. Ellen argues that Peter Peterson, who was the former Chairman of the NY Fed and a top official in the CFR wants a mandatory Social Security tax to be taken from already strapped working class folks and managed by the financial firms that need more and more funds in order to take risk.

Ellen also shared with me her view about raising interest rates. She mentioned that raising rates by one percent would cost 600 billion dollars in interest. The method, then, of controlling monetary excess in an overheated economy is essentially taken out of the Fed's hands because we have a national central bank that does sell our bonds to foreign governments and banks. We pay a heavy price for having a private Federal Reserve, and any change in interest rates to the upside is very expensive as we are forced to borrow that which congress has the right to create free! If we had a nationalized bank, we would keep the treasuries that are created with the central bank in times of trouble, and not let them be sold to private banks and foreign governments so we then have to pay a bucket load of interest.

And unless the government or the Fed holds the bonds, since the Fed returns most of the interest when it holds bonds, we cannot afford for the private Federal Reserve to continue to raise interest rates. The only solutions are to 1. throw off the private Federal Reserve and keep our bonds or 2. nationalize the Fed and do not allow the Fed to purchase treasuries through the broker dealers like Goldman, JP Morgan, etc. Some of the broker dealers are not even US banks! When the Fed buys the bonds, investment banks use the money created to speculate and drive up commodity prices. S

I also believe that Ellen has hit on another issue that is really diabolical. She has stated in the article that the US can fix our liquidity problems by issuing public money, and that other countries who operate with a currency that is not their own cannot do so. My conclusion is that there is a reason that the central private banks want currencies that transcend sovereign control. And that is, that the member nations cannot fix their own problems without relying on the private debt creation of the central banks. The Euro and the fictional Amero, then, are products of a sinister system to keep countries from booting out or nationalizing the private central banks which sell treasury bonds and force the governments to then pay interest on the sold bonds. Europe is a slave to the Euro and there can be no Andrew Jackson coming to the rescue of America from the private bank as long as a currency transcends national sovereignty and as long as governments continue to allow the selling of government bonds.

Indeed, Obama could send the Fed packing, but not if we had the Amero. Our only hope for the freedom from the private central banks is a failure of the Euro! I have argued here that I am rooting for Greece to reject the European Union's pressure. But apparently they have been sufficiently threatened to pass terrible austerity measures imposed from on high(meaning the international banks who hold their debt). We can only hope that larger countries like Spain will throw off the bonds of European slavery and kick the Euro, and the private central bank diabolical plan, out.

Peter Schiff is wrong in wanting to do away with liquidity. The libertarians refuse to stop speculation and want a money supply that cannot be expanded. The problem with that is that it actually increases debt! It would be better to increase liquidity but to take the punch bowl away from futures speculation!

There is not enough gold and silver in the world to do what Schiff wants, and of course he buys gold and has a self interest in seeing it go up in value!

For further study:

http://bgamall.hubpages.com/hub/The-Libertarians-Have-It-Backwards-Liquidity-is-Good-but-Speculation-Is-Bad