- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Milton Friedman blames the Great Depression on the Federal Reserve. But there is a paradox
Posted on 7/27/25 at 12:23 am to GumboPot
Posted on 7/27/25 at 12:23 am to GumboPot
quote:
Start abandoning Federal Reserve Notes and re-adopt US Notes.
What difference does it make what printed U,S, currency is called? Both “notes” are backed by the full faith and credit of the US government,
1
Posted on 7/27/25 at 1:21 am to GumboPot
The FED is Responsible for all wars, corruption etc….
It’s the ultimate money laundering and theft machine ever created.
Read the book
“Creature from Jeckyll Island”
Your Mind will explode with knowledge and how they do it.
It’s the ultimate money laundering and theft machine ever created.
Read the book
“Creature from Jeckyll Island”
Your Mind will explode with knowledge and how they do it.
Posted on 7/27/25 at 1:30 am to LSURussian
quote:
What difference does it make what printed U,S, currency is called? Both “notes” are backed by the full faith and credit of the US government,
Federal Reserve Notes are first loaned into existence then printed.
U.S. Notes can be printed without the requirement of going into debt.
Posted on 7/27/25 at 2:39 am to GumboPot
quote:How so? Who is the borrower and who is the lender?
Federal Reserve Notes are first loaned into existence then printed.
Posted on 7/27/25 at 8:38 am to LSURussian
quote:
Who is the borrower and who is the lender?
Bill, note and bond purchasers = lenders.
US government = borrower.
Posted on 7/27/25 at 11:16 am to GumboPot
quote:This is almost exclusively a collector’s item these days (i.e., not used). So yes, you’re advocating for the entire US population to adopt a new currency?
A U.S. Note is just as legal tender today as a Federal Reserve note. We stopped printing U.S. Notes in 1971. It was a series A $100 bill with a 1966 date. It’s still legal tender today.
Posted on 7/27/25 at 11:19 am to GumboPot
quote:The creation of a “note” necessarily implies the creation of debt. If the treasury issues a note, then that means it has created a liability on its balance sheet. That’s a debt.
U.S. Notes can be printed without the requirement of going into debt.
It’s really unclear what you’re suggesting here, so this might be wrong—are you suggesting that when one goes to redeem the note with the U.S. treasury to have them honor the note, they just print more notes for the redemption?
Posted on 7/27/25 at 11:39 am to GumboPot
quote:What does that have to do with what our currency is called?
Bill, note and bond purchasers = lenders.
US government = borrower.
Posted on 7/27/25 at 11:53 am to SlayTime
quote:
Would love to hear your opinion on the 2nd part of his post regarding Freidman suggesting going back to the decentralized monetary system of the 19th century with one major caveated, 100% reserve requirement for banks.
The system is decentralized and there is no “reserve requirement” that constrains banks from lending. The online PHDs need to update their reading material.
Posted on 7/27/25 at 11:57 am to GumboPot
quote:I hope one day you will come back and read your above post and laugh...like I just did.
Federal Reserve Notes are first loaned into existence then printed.
U.S. Notes can be printed without the requirement of going into debt.
Posted on 7/27/25 at 12:20 pm to GumboPot
quote:Yes and no. U.S. Notes can be printed without the requirement of going into debt. But they cannot be injected into the economy (domestic or international) without destabilization, USD devaluation, hyperinflation (rendering our debt to be more expensive), and loss of USD reserve status. The costs there would be severe, at least equalling, and likely far exceeding reserve currency debt costs.
U.S. Notes can be printed without the requirement of going into debt.
This post was edited on 7/27/25 at 12:34 pm
Posted on 7/27/25 at 12:28 pm to wutangfinancial
quote:The system is not decentralized in a meaningful way. The banks are still tied to the federal reserve system and the only money in circulation is federal reserve notes. Compared to the referenced alternative of having state chartered banks issue their own notes, this is VERY centralized.
The system is decentralized and there is no “reserve requirement” that constrains banks from lending. The online PHDs need to update their reading material.
The reserve requirement referenced (having 100% reserves) is a reserve requirement that would constrain banks from lending—which is what this person is advocating, so your response that reading material needs to be updated is nonsensical.
Posted on 7/27/25 at 12:41 pm to AllbyMyRelf
quote:Are you saying the largest economy in the history of the world would benefit from not having a unified, nationwide monetary and currency system?
The system is not decentralized in a meaningful way. The banks are still tied to the federal reserve system and the only money in circulation is federal reserve notes.
Posted on 7/27/25 at 1:01 pm to AllbyMyRelf
quote:
The banks are still tied to the federal reserve system and the only money in circulation is federal reserve notes.
This is unequivocally false
quote:
a reserve requirement that would constrain banks from lending
There is a reserve requirement =/= it constrains banks from lending. Much like sanctions on Russia do not constrain their ability to trade. This is fairly easy to figure out with a quick FRED search.
Posted on 7/27/25 at 1:12 pm to LSURussian
quote:
What does that have to do with what our currency is called?
I guess you can call it what you want but in the context I’m referring too Federal Reserve Notes are printed based on the creation of debt whether it’s from the FR purchasing federal debt or through the creation of money through fractional banking. U.S. Notes are not necessarily created based on debt. To add more confusion about nomenclature they were called Greenbacks under Lincoln but they were a currency issued with no debt. We can argue about the pros and cons issuing currency not attached to debt but if your sole objective is to be debt adverse U.S. Notes like Greenbacks are an option.
I have a lot more to say bout this but I’m in the middle of cooking.
Posted on 7/27/25 at 1:33 pm to GumboPot
quote:That's just not true. "Fractional reserves" has absolutely NOTHING to do with what our currency is called or how it is issued.
I’m referring too Federal Reserve Notes are printed based on the creation of debt whether it’s from the FR purchasing federal debt or through the creation of money through fractional banking.
The Treasury department tells the Treasury Department's Bureau of Engraving and Printing how much currency needs to be printed and then has to authorize the Fed to release a certain amount of currency to the 12 Federal Reserve district banks for distribution to Fed member (commercial) banks.
Until the currency notes are authorized to be released by the Treasury Department the stacks of uncirculated bills are held in the Fed's vault.
The bills authorized to be released are identified by their serial numbers to help prevent counterfeit bill clones from entering into circulation.
Those serial numbers are checked and double checked at each stage of release to the commercial banks.
Until the bills are officially authorized for release, the stacks of bills are just paper stacked up and are not considered legal tender and, as such, can't be legally used or spent.
Where in that process is "fractional reserves" involvement?
Posted on 7/27/25 at 3:10 pm to wutangfinancial
quote:Let me make a slight modification to my statement that doesn’t really affect what a normal person would have understood my post to mean:
This is unequivocally false
“All deposit taking banks are tied to the Federal Reserve System, and the only paper currency actively issued and circulated today is Federal Reserve Notes — though Treasury-issued coins and legacy forms of legal tender technically still exist.”
quote:Reserve requirements (which are currently 0 for most deposits) are not the same as a 100% reserve requirement, and banks practice fractional reserve lending. This does not mean lending would prohibited in a legal sense, but it would be constrained in a practical sense just like, yes, Russia is constrained in trade in a practical sense.
There is a reserve requirement =/= it constrains banks from lending. Much like sanctions on Russia do not constrain their ability to trade. This is fairly easy to figure out with a quick FRED search.
Posted on 7/27/25 at 3:12 pm to LSURussian
quote:Wait, so you do agree that the system is not decentralized? Ok—that was my only point.
Are you saying the largest economy in the history of the world would benefit from not having a unified, nationwide monetary and currency system?
Posted on 7/27/25 at 4:30 pm to AllbyMyRelf
quote:Define "decentralized."
Wait, so you do agree that the system is not decentralized?
Posted on 7/27/25 at 4:36 pm to LSURussian
quote:
Define "decentralized."
Whoopsi..Doo! That is not happening.
Page 2 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News