do you know what the federal reserve is?

[davelj]

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]
Second, did you do any research on “Jekyll Island” author Griffin? I notice you didn’t respond to my post showing his background and a definite lack of credibility.

[snip]

Griffin is a crank, pure and simple. His professional background, such as it is, does not make him a credible source, but you seem all too willing to jump on the bandwagon and cry out about some evil, perfidious scheme going on at the Fed. The Wiki entry regarding the “secret voice vote” is hooey, hence my suggestion to do more research (which you clearly did not), as is your assertion that a “complete” Fed audit has not been done. You never answered what a “complete” or “real” Fed audit would look like, just that one needs to be done.[/quote]

I haven’t read “Jekyll Island” (full disclosure), although I recall bringing it up (I was thinking of reading it) several years back (like a decade ago, if memory serves) with a former professor of mine whose specific area of expertise is the Fed and monetary policy. He said something on the order of, “Only someone who knew very little about the Fed would take the book seriously. Don’t bother.” He also said, “Greider’s book is flawed, but much better.” (Referring to “Secrets of the Temple,” which I subsequently read.)

Now, I don’t like pitting “expert vs. expert” while discussing an issue like this because then it turns into a game of which expert deserves more credit, which is difficult to prove to anyone’s satisfaction. I also don’t like to play the game of “who has greater credentials.” However… Griffin’s background in finance is pretty much limited to being a Certified Financial Planner. I’m not saying you have to have a PhD in economics for your views on the Fed to be taken seriously (see Greider for just one very obvious example), but… sometimes having a more formal, technical education in a field is helpful in understanding the nuances (“sometimes” being the operative word). [In fairness, however, Greenspan and Bernanke have doctorates and a fat lotta good that’s done us – in fact, it’s probably been harmful. But that’s a different topic.] So, to be clear, LOTS of folks without a formal education in economics and finance have valid intelligent opinions regarding the Fed and all sorts of other financial topics that don’t necessarily jibe with conventional wisdom. LOTS of them. But… if you’re going to write a book about the Fed that’s as conspiratorial and off-the-reservation as the reviews indicate, you better make sure it’s tighter than tight, particularly if your academic/research/professional credentials are a little light (pardon the rhyme) given the topic…

Anyhow, it took me all of 30 seconds to find this criticism of Jekyll Island, specifically, and Fed conspiratorialists in general (see “Myths” at the bottom):

http://www.publiceye.org/conspire/flaherty/Federal_Reserve.html

My point is an obvious one (and applies to BOTH sides of any issue): Just because it’s in writing don’t make it so. Lots of legitimate thinkers clearly think Griffin’s a quack and his book is toilet paper. (Doesn’t make them right, but it’s a data point to consider when deciding whether to hang your hat on some specific author’s views.)

[SK in CV]

[quote=investor] Someone mentioned, I think you, that you admire barney frank and dodd. How do you feel about franks promotion of easy mortgage loaning during the 1990’s and 2000’s that has lead directly to our current mess? I admit that bush should not have gone to war in iraq. Can you put aside your political leanings and admit that frank, for reasons of trying to promote black home ownership- a worthwhile goal- screwed up big time and should be kicked out of all power over banking in the US congress?

[/quote]

I don’t have any recollection of any legislation in the 90’s that lead to the current mess, other than the Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act in 1999, which passed with a veto proof majority. Frank voted against it.

You’ll have to identify specifically his “promotion of easy mortgage loaning during the 1990’s and 2000’s that has lead directly to our current mess”, that can be laid at his feet, and not others, at least equally. Congress screwed up. As did another dozen groups, with even great responsibility. (as an aside, I have to laugh in this era of libertarian craziness, when conservatives blame the financial crisis on the government for not regulating business.)

Despite his support for both fannie and freddie, he attempted early this decade to limit their involvement in sub-prime lending by sponsoring bipartisan legislation with Mike Oxley, which never got a vote in the Senate and was opposed by the administration. Had it passed, it would have kept 10’s of thousands as renters instead of buyers who couldn’t afford their loans.

The whole fannie/freddie is to blame is a long debunked canard. (kinda like acorn and voter fraud) Neither ever made a single subprime loan. When subprime volume skyrocketed, their total loan portfolios shrunk as percentage of the market.

Frank isn’t perfect, far from it. He understand finance much better than most congressmen, but not as well as he should. But no, I don’t think he should be kicked out of all power over banking in congress. I’m not aware of any significant failures he’s had in that position that would warrant that. I’d be glad to rethink that position if you can identify them specifically.

[SK in CV]

[quote=investor] Someone mentioned, I think you, that you admire barney frank and dodd. How do you feel about franks promotion of easy mortgage loaning during the 1990’s and 2000’s that has lead directly to our current mess? I admit that bush should not have gone to war in iraq. Can you put aside your political leanings and admit that frank, for reasons of trying to promote black home ownership- a worthwhile goal- screwed up big time and should be kicked out of all power over banking in the US congress?

[/quote]

I don’t have any recollection of any legislation in the 90’s that lead to the current mess, other than the Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act in 1999, which passed with a veto proof majority. Frank voted against it.

You’ll have to identify specifically his “promotion of easy mortgage loaning during the 1990’s and 2000’s that has lead directly to our current mess”, that can be laid at his feet, and not others, at least equally. Congress screwed up. As did another dozen groups, with even great responsibility. (as an aside, I have to laugh in this era of libertarian craziness, when conservatives blame the financial crisis on the government for not regulating business.)

Despite his support for both fannie and freddie, he attempted early this decade to limit their involvement in sub-prime lending by sponsoring bipartisan legislation with Mike Oxley, which never got a vote in the Senate and was opposed by the administration. Had it passed, it would have kept 10’s of thousands as renters instead of buyers who couldn’t afford their loans.

The whole fannie/freddie is to blame is a long debunked canard. (kinda like acorn and voter fraud) Neither ever made a single subprime loan. When subprime volume skyrocketed, their total loan portfolios shrunk as percentage of the market.

Frank isn’t perfect, far from it. He understand finance much better than most congressmen, but not as well as he should. But no, I don’t think he should be kicked out of all power over banking in congress. I’m not aware of any significant failures he’s had in that position that would warrant that. I’d be glad to rethink that position if you can identify them specifically.

[SK in CV]

[quote=investor] Someone mentioned, I think you, that you admire barney frank and dodd. How do you feel about franks promotion of easy mortgage loaning during the 1990’s and 2000’s that has lead directly to our current mess? I admit that bush should not have gone to war in iraq. Can you put aside your political leanings and admit that frank, for reasons of trying to promote black home ownership- a worthwhile goal- screwed up big time and should be kicked out of all power over banking in the US congress?

[/quote]

I don’t have any recollection of any legislation in the 90’s that lead to the current mess, other than the Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act in 1999, which passed with a veto proof majority. Frank voted against it.

You’ll have to identify specifically his “promotion of easy mortgage loaning during the 1990’s and 2000’s that has lead directly to our current mess”, that can be laid at his feet, and not others, at least equally. Congress screwed up. As did another dozen groups, with even great responsibility. (as an aside, I have to laugh in this era of libertarian craziness, when conservatives blame the financial crisis on the government for not regulating business.)

Despite his support for both fannie and freddie, he attempted early this decade to limit their involvement in sub-prime lending by sponsoring bipartisan legislation with Mike Oxley, which never got a vote in the Senate and was opposed by the administration. Had it passed, it would have kept 10’s of thousands as renters instead of buyers who couldn’t afford their loans.

The whole fannie/freddie is to blame is a long debunked canard. (kinda like acorn and voter fraud) Neither ever made a single subprime loan. When subprime volume skyrocketed, their total loan portfolios shrunk as percentage of the market.

Frank isn’t perfect, far from it. He understand finance much better than most congressmen, but not as well as he should. But no, I don’t think he should be kicked out of all power over banking in congress. I’m not aware of any significant failures he’s had in that position that would warrant that. I’d be glad to rethink that position if you can identify them specifically.

[SK in CV]

[quote=investor] Someone mentioned, I think you, that you admire barney frank and dodd. How do you feel about franks promotion of easy mortgage loaning during the 1990’s and 2000’s that has lead directly to our current mess? I admit that bush should not have gone to war in iraq. Can you put aside your political leanings and admit that frank, for reasons of trying to promote black home ownership- a worthwhile goal- screwed up big time and should be kicked out of all power over banking in the US congress?

[/quote]

I don’t have any recollection of any legislation in the 90’s that lead to the current mess, other than the Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act in 1999, which passed with a veto proof majority. Frank voted against it.

You’ll have to identify specifically his “promotion of easy mortgage loaning during the 1990’s and 2000’s that has lead directly to our current mess”, that can be laid at his feet, and not others, at least equally. Congress screwed up. As did another dozen groups, with even great responsibility. (as an aside, I have to laugh in this era of libertarian craziness, when conservatives blame the financial crisis on the government for not regulating business.)

Despite his support for both fannie and freddie, he attempted early this decade to limit their involvement in sub-prime lending by sponsoring bipartisan legislation with Mike Oxley, which never got a vote in the Senate and was opposed by the administration. Had it passed, it would have kept 10’s of thousands as renters instead of buyers who couldn’t afford their loans.

The whole fannie/freddie is to blame is a long debunked canard. (kinda like acorn and voter fraud) Neither ever made a single subprime loan. When subprime volume skyrocketed, their total loan portfolios shrunk as percentage of the market.

Frank isn’t perfect, far from it. He understand finance much better than most congressmen, but not as well as he should. But no, I don’t think he should be kicked out of all power over banking in congress. I’m not aware of any significant failures he’s had in that position that would warrant that. I’d be glad to rethink that position if you can identify them specifically.

[SK in CV]

[quote=investor] Someone mentioned, I think you, that you admire barney frank and dodd. How do you feel about franks promotion of easy mortgage loaning during the 1990’s and 2000’s that has lead directly to our current mess? I admit that bush should not have gone to war in iraq. Can you put aside your political leanings and admit that frank, for reasons of trying to promote black home ownership- a worthwhile goal- screwed up big time and should be kicked out of all power over banking in the US congress?

[/quote]

I don’t have any recollection of any legislation in the 90’s that lead to the current mess, other than the Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act in 1999, which passed with a veto proof majority. Frank voted against it.

You’ll have to identify specifically his “promotion of easy mortgage loaning during the 1990’s and 2000’s that has lead directly to our current mess”, that can be laid at his feet, and not others, at least equally. Congress screwed up. As did another dozen groups, with even great responsibility. (as an aside, I have to laugh in this era of libertarian craziness, when conservatives blame the financial crisis on the government for not regulating business.)

Despite his support for both fannie and freddie, he attempted early this decade to limit their involvement in sub-prime lending by sponsoring bipartisan legislation with Mike Oxley, which never got a vote in the Senate and was opposed by the administration. Had it passed, it would have kept 10’s of thousands as renters instead of buyers who couldn’t afford their loans.

The whole fannie/freddie is to blame is a long debunked canard. (kinda like acorn and voter fraud) Neither ever made a single subprime loan. When subprime volume skyrocketed, their total loan portfolios shrunk as percentage of the market.

Frank isn’t perfect, far from it. He understand finance much better than most congressmen, but not as well as he should. But no, I don’t think he should be kicked out of all power over banking in congress. I’m not aware of any significant failures he’s had in that position that would warrant that. I’d be glad to rethink that position if you can identify them specifically.

[eavesdropper]

[quote=investor]…. SV in CV; I did some more research from the wikipedia site for the fed. What I heard from a mike malony youtube.com about the fed being passed on a voice vote of 3 may or not be correct. The bill was passed as you/wikipedia state and I don’t know if the final settlement between the two houses of congress was on a voice vote or not but the main thrust of the point was that the bill was carried with both houses and I agree with your point. It doesn’t change the main concern about the fed tho. The secrecy of the people who control the most important currency in the world and the lack of a complete audit of where the money goes and ownership of the fed. Someone mentioned, I think you, that you admire barney frank and dodd. How do you feel about franks promotion of easy mortgage loaning during the 1990’s and 2000’s that has lead directly to our current mess? I admit that bush should not have gone to war in iraq. Can you put aside your political leanings and admit that frank, for reasons of trying to promote black home ownership- a worthwhile goal- screwed up big time and should be kicked out of all power over banking in the US congress?[/quote]

Investor, I constantly come across claims, such as the one you make above, that the economic crisis in which we now find ourselves, was the direct result of actions by Barney Frank and Chris Dodd – as you put it, their “promotion of easy mortgage lending”. If you honestly believe this, you need to put away “the creature book” in which you place such credence, and get yourself back to school.

The causes of the economic meltdown are numerous and complex. To think that a meltdown of this magnitude could be caused by 2 members of Congress is naive and self-serving. What was the rest of the worldwide financial community doing during this time?

I could get into a lengthy discourse on the history and purpose of the Community Reinvestment Act, how both bankers and politicians took advantage of it, move into Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac territory, and evaluate the damage caused by unscrupulous mortgage brokers, reckless derivatives traders, and non-existent oversight, but, based on your posts, I don’t think you’ll read them. You ask SK to put aside his political leanings, but, overall, I have found his posts on this thread to be pretty much politics- free, and directed at correcting errors in some of the other posts. You’re the one who inquired of SK, “How do you feel about franks promotion of easy mortgage loaning during the 1990’s and 2000’s…” (sic). Incidentally, I find your use of the phrase, “promote black home ownership” when speaking of Sen. Dodd and Rep. Frank noteworthy.

Please read this sentence carefully: I believe that Sen. Dodd and Rep. Frank used the CRA’s mandate to advance a political agenda. However, they were not alone in that; quite a few others were jumping on that bandwagon, and I include a YouTube clip for your illumination, and viewing pleasure:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kNqQx7sjoS8&feature=related

While I believe that Sen. Dodd and Rep. Frank should acknowledge their role, I’m not holding my breath. And I believe that there were many who played roles that were much more suspect, and I won’t wait around for them to own up to their part in this debacle, either.

You’ve commented elsewhere in this thread about your great faith in the book, “The Creature From Jekyll Island”, and its author, G. Edward Griffin, while exhibiting your frustration with Allan for his seeming inability to grasp basic concepts from it. My reading of this forum has led me to believe that Allan is well-educated, widely-read, and has a strong professional background in the financial arena. Has it occurred to you that, based on these qualifications, Alan read the book, compared the author’s claims against the body of knowledge he has acquired, and then made a decision to reject them? It happens. There are those of us walking the earth who constantly question, and realize that finding the answer does not consist solely of seeking out sources that are in accord with our personal beliefs, morals, and creeds. Painful as it is, we often have to critically evaluate the writings of those to whom we are diametrically opposed in our beliefs.
This is especially important these days when woefully unqualified people are writing books that laughably one-dimensional, not to mention error-ridden, in their content.

You are playing a dangerous game with your freedom when you remain in selective ignorance by placing all your trust in authors whose writings mirror your own thoughts, philosophies, and prejudices.

[eavesdropper]

[quote=investor]…. SV in CV; I did some more research from the wikipedia site for the fed. What I heard from a mike malony youtube.com about the fed being passed on a voice vote of 3 may or not be correct. The bill was passed as you/wikipedia state and I don’t know if the final settlement between the two houses of congress was on a voice vote or not but the main thrust of the point was that the bill was carried with both houses and I agree with your point. It doesn’t change the main concern about the fed tho. The secrecy of the people who control the most important currency in the world and the lack of a complete audit of where the money goes and ownership of the fed. Someone mentioned, I think you, that you admire barney frank and dodd. How do you feel about franks promotion of easy mortgage loaning during the 1990’s and 2000’s that has lead directly to our current mess? I admit that bush should not have gone to war in iraq. Can you put aside your political leanings and admit that frank, for reasons of trying to promote black home ownership- a worthwhile goal- screwed up big time and should be kicked out of all power over banking in the US congress?[/quote]

Investor, I constantly come across claims, such as the one you make above, that the economic crisis in which we now find ourselves, was the direct result of actions by Barney Frank and Chris Dodd – as you put it, their “promotion of easy mortgage lending”. If you honestly believe this, you need to put away “the creature book” in which you place such credence, and get yourself back to school.

The causes of the economic meltdown are numerous and complex. To think that a meltdown of this magnitude could be caused by 2 members of Congress is naive and self-serving. What was the rest of the worldwide financial community doing during this time?

I could get into a lengthy discourse on the history and purpose of the Community Reinvestment Act, how both bankers and politicians took advantage of it, move into Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac territory, and evaluate the damage caused by unscrupulous mortgage brokers, reckless derivatives traders, and non-existent oversight, but, based on your posts, I don’t think you’ll read them. You ask SK to put aside his political leanings, but, overall, I have found his posts on this thread to be pretty much politics- free, and directed at correcting errors in some of the other posts. You’re the one who inquired of SK, “How do you feel about franks promotion of easy mortgage loaning during the 1990’s and 2000’s…” (sic). Incidentally, I find your use of the phrase, “promote black home ownership” when speaking of Sen. Dodd and Rep. Frank noteworthy.

Please read this sentence carefully: I believe that Sen. Dodd and Rep. Frank used the CRA’s mandate to advance a political agenda. However, they were not alone in that; quite a few others were jumping on that bandwagon, and I include a YouTube clip for your illumination, and viewing pleasure:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kNqQx7sjoS8&feature=related

While I believe that Sen. Dodd and Rep. Frank should acknowledge their role, I’m not holding my breath. And I believe that there were many who played roles that were much more suspect, and I won’t wait around for them to own up to their part in this debacle, either.

You’ve commented elsewhere in this thread about your great faith in the book, “The Creature From Jekyll Island”, and its author, G. Edward Griffin, while exhibiting your frustration with Allan for his seeming inability to grasp basic concepts from it. My reading of this forum has led me to believe that Allan is well-educated, widely-read, and has a strong professional background in the financial arena. Has it occurred to you that, based on these qualifications, Alan read the book, compared the author’s claims against the body of knowledge he has acquired, and then made a decision to reject them? It happens. There are those of us walking the earth who constantly question, and realize that finding the answer does not consist solely of seeking out sources that are in accord with our personal beliefs, morals, and creeds. Painful as it is, we often have to critically evaluate the writings of those to whom we are diametrically opposed in our beliefs.
This is especially important these days when woefully unqualified people are writing books that laughably one-dimensional, not to mention error-ridden, in their content.

You are playing a dangerous game with your freedom when you remain in selective ignorance by placing all your trust in authors whose writings mirror your own thoughts, philosophies, and prejudices.

[eavesdropper]

[quote=investor]…. SV in CV; I did some more research from the wikipedia site for the fed. What I heard from a mike malony youtube.com about the fed being passed on a voice vote of 3 may or not be correct. The bill was passed as you/wikipedia state and I don’t know if the final settlement between the two houses of congress was on a voice vote or not but the main thrust of the point was that the bill was carried with both houses and I agree with your point. It doesn’t change the main concern about the fed tho. The secrecy of the people who control the most important currency in the world and the lack of a complete audit of where the money goes and ownership of the fed. Someone mentioned, I think you, that you admire barney frank and dodd. How do you feel about franks promotion of easy mortgage loaning during the 1990’s and 2000’s that has lead directly to our current mess? I admit that bush should not have gone to war in iraq. Can you put aside your political leanings and admit that frank, for reasons of trying to promote black home ownership- a worthwhile goal- screwed up big time and should be kicked out of all power over banking in the US congress?[/quote]

Investor, I constantly come across claims, such as the one you make above, that the economic crisis in which we now find ourselves, was the direct result of actions by Barney Frank and Chris Dodd – as you put it, their “promotion of easy mortgage lending”. If you honestly believe this, you need to put away “the creature book” in which you place such credence, and get yourself back to school.

The causes of the economic meltdown are numerous and complex. To think that a meltdown of this magnitude could be caused by 2 members of Congress is naive and self-serving. What was the rest of the worldwide financial community doing during this time?

I could get into a lengthy discourse on the history and purpose of the Community Reinvestment Act, how both bankers and politicians took advantage of it, move into Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac territory, and evaluate the damage caused by unscrupulous mortgage brokers, reckless derivatives traders, and non-existent oversight, but, based on your posts, I don’t think you’ll read them. You ask SK to put aside his political leanings, but, overall, I have found his posts on this thread to be pretty much politics- free, and directed at correcting errors in some of the other posts. You’re the one who inquired of SK, “How do you feel about franks promotion of easy mortgage loaning during the 1990’s and 2000’s…” (sic). Incidentally, I find your use of the phrase, “promote black home ownership” when speaking of Sen. Dodd and Rep. Frank noteworthy.

Please read this sentence carefully: I believe that Sen. Dodd and Rep. Frank used the CRA’s mandate to advance a political agenda. However, they were not alone in that; quite a few others were jumping on that bandwagon, and I include a YouTube clip for your illumination, and viewing pleasure:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kNqQx7sjoS8&feature=related

While I believe that Sen. Dodd and Rep. Frank should acknowledge their role, I’m not holding my breath. And I believe that there were many who played roles that were much more suspect, and I won’t wait around for them to own up to their part in this debacle, either.

You’ve commented elsewhere in this thread about your great faith in the book, “The Creature From Jekyll Island”, and its author, G. Edward Griffin, while exhibiting your frustration with Allan for his seeming inability to grasp basic concepts from it. My reading of this forum has led me to believe that Allan is well-educated, widely-read, and has a strong professional background in the financial arena. Has it occurred to you that, based on these qualifications, Alan read the book, compared the author’s claims against the body of knowledge he has acquired, and then made a decision to reject them? It happens. There are those of us walking the earth who constantly question, and realize that finding the answer does not consist solely of seeking out sources that are in accord with our personal beliefs, morals, and creeds. Painful as it is, we often have to critically evaluate the writings of those to whom we are diametrically opposed in our beliefs.
This is especially important these days when woefully unqualified people are writing books that laughably one-dimensional, not to mention error-ridden, in their content.

You are playing a dangerous game with your freedom when you remain in selective ignorance by placing all your trust in authors whose writings mirror your own thoughts, philosophies, and prejudices.

[eavesdropper]

[quote=investor]…. SV in CV; I did some more research from the wikipedia site for the fed. What I heard from a mike malony youtube.com about the fed being passed on a voice vote of 3 may or not be correct. The bill was passed as you/wikipedia state and I don’t know if the final settlement between the two houses of congress was on a voice vote or not but the main thrust of the point was that the bill was carried with both houses and I agree with your point. It doesn’t change the main concern about the fed tho. The secrecy of the people who control the most important currency in the world and the lack of a complete audit of where the money goes and ownership of the fed. Someone mentioned, I think you, that you admire barney frank and dodd. How do you feel about franks promotion of easy mortgage loaning during the 1990’s and 2000’s that has lead directly to our current mess? I admit that bush should not have gone to war in iraq. Can you put aside your political leanings and admit that frank, for reasons of trying to promote black home ownership- a worthwhile goal- screwed up big time and should be kicked out of all power over banking in the US congress?[/quote]

Investor, I constantly come across claims, such as the one you make above, that the economic crisis in which we now find ourselves, was the direct result of actions by Barney Frank and Chris Dodd – as you put it, their “promotion of easy mortgage lending”. If you honestly believe this, you need to put away “the creature book” in which you place such credence, and get yourself back to school.

The causes of the economic meltdown are numerous and complex. To think that a meltdown of this magnitude could be caused by 2 members of Congress is naive and self-serving. What was the rest of the worldwide financial community doing during this time?

I could get into a lengthy discourse on the history and purpose of the Community Reinvestment Act, how both bankers and politicians took advantage of it, move into Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac territory, and evaluate the damage caused by unscrupulous mortgage brokers, reckless derivatives traders, and non-existent oversight, but, based on your posts, I don’t think you’ll read them. You ask SK to put aside his political leanings, but, overall, I have found his posts on this thread to be pretty much politics- free, and directed at correcting errors in some of the other posts. You’re the one who inquired of SK, “How do you feel about franks promotion of easy mortgage loaning during the 1990’s and 2000’s…” (sic). Incidentally, I find your use of the phrase, “promote black home ownership” when speaking of Sen. Dodd and Rep. Frank noteworthy.

Please read this sentence carefully: I believe that Sen. Dodd and Rep. Frank used the CRA’s mandate to advance a political agenda. However, they were not alone in that; quite a few others were jumping on that bandwagon, and I include a YouTube clip for your illumination, and viewing pleasure:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kNqQx7sjoS8&feature=related

While I believe that Sen. Dodd and Rep. Frank should acknowledge their role, I’m not holding my breath. And I believe that there were many who played roles that were much more suspect, and I won’t wait around for them to own up to their part in this debacle, either.

You’ve commented elsewhere in this thread about your great faith in the book, “The Creature From Jekyll Island”, and its author, G. Edward Griffin, while exhibiting your frustration with Allan for his seeming inability to grasp basic concepts from it. My reading of this forum has led me to believe that Allan is well-educated, widely-read, and has a strong professional background in the financial arena. Has it occurred to you that, based on these qualifications, Alan read the book, compared the author’s claims against the body of knowledge he has acquired, and then made a decision to reject them? It happens. There are those of us walking the earth who constantly question, and realize that finding the answer does not consist solely of seeking out sources that are in accord with our personal beliefs, morals, and creeds. Painful as it is, we often have to critically evaluate the writings of those to whom we are diametrically opposed in our beliefs.
This is especially important these days when woefully unqualified people are writing books that laughably one-dimensional, not to mention error-ridden, in their content.

You are playing a dangerous game with your freedom when you remain in selective ignorance by placing all your trust in authors whose writings mirror your own thoughts, philosophies, and prejudices.

[eavesdropper]

[quote=investor]…. SV in CV; I did some more research from the wikipedia site for the fed. What I heard from a mike malony youtube.com about the fed being passed on a voice vote of 3 may or not be correct. The bill was passed as you/wikipedia state and I don’t know if the final settlement between the two houses of congress was on a voice vote or not but the main thrust of the point was that the bill was carried with both houses and I agree with your point. It doesn’t change the main concern about the fed tho. The secrecy of the people who control the most important currency in the world and the lack of a complete audit of where the money goes and ownership of the fed. Someone mentioned, I think you, that you admire barney frank and dodd. How do you feel about franks promotion of easy mortgage loaning during the 1990’s and 2000’s that has lead directly to our current mess? I admit that bush should not have gone to war in iraq. Can you put aside your political leanings and admit that frank, for reasons of trying to promote black home ownership- a worthwhile goal- screwed up big time and should be kicked out of all power over banking in the US congress?[/quote]

Investor, I constantly come across claims, such as the one you make above, that the economic crisis in which we now find ourselves, was the direct result of actions by Barney Frank and Chris Dodd – as you put it, their “promotion of easy mortgage lending”. If you honestly believe this, you need to put away “the creature book” in which you place such credence, and get yourself back to school.

The causes of the economic meltdown are numerous and complex. To think that a meltdown of this magnitude could be caused by 2 members of Congress is naive and self-serving. What was the rest of the worldwide financial community doing during this time?

I could get into a lengthy discourse on the history and purpose of the Community Reinvestment Act, how both bankers and politicians took advantage of it, move into Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac territory, and evaluate the damage caused by unscrupulous mortgage brokers, reckless derivatives traders, and non-existent oversight, but, based on your posts, I don’t think you’ll read them. You ask SK to put aside his political leanings, but, overall, I have found his posts on this thread to be pretty much politics- free, and directed at correcting errors in some of the other posts. You’re the one who inquired of SK, “How do you feel about franks promotion of easy mortgage loaning during the 1990’s and 2000’s…” (sic). Incidentally, I find your use of the phrase, “promote black home ownership” when speaking of Sen. Dodd and Rep. Frank noteworthy.

Please read this sentence carefully: I believe that Sen. Dodd and Rep. Frank used the CRA’s mandate to advance a political agenda. However, they were not alone in that; quite a few others were jumping on that bandwagon, and I include a YouTube clip for your illumination, and viewing pleasure:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kNqQx7sjoS8&feature=related

While I believe that Sen. Dodd and Rep. Frank should acknowledge their role, I’m not holding my breath. And I believe that there were many who played roles that were much more suspect, and I won’t wait around for them to own up to their part in this debacle, either.

You’ve commented elsewhere in this thread about your great faith in the book, “The Creature From Jekyll Island”, and its author, G. Edward Griffin, while exhibiting your frustration with Allan for his seeming inability to grasp basic concepts from it. My reading of this forum has led me to believe that Allan is well-educated, widely-read, and has a strong professional background in the financial arena. Has it occurred to you that, based on these qualifications, Alan read the book, compared the author’s claims against the body of knowledge he has acquired, and then made a decision to reject them? It happens. There are those of us walking the earth who constantly question, and realize that finding the answer does not consist solely of seeking out sources that are in accord with our personal beliefs, morals, and creeds. Painful as it is, we often have to critically evaluate the writings of those to whom we are diametrically opposed in our beliefs.
This is especially important these days when woefully unqualified people are writing books that laughably one-dimensional, not to mention error-ridden, in their content.

You are playing a dangerous game with your freedom when you remain in selective ignorance by placing all your trust in authors whose writings mirror your own thoughts, philosophies, and prejudices.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

[quote=eavesdropper]
You are playing a dangerous game with your freedom when you remain in selective ignorance by placing all your trust in authors whose writings mirror your own thoughts, philosophies, and prejudices.[/quote]

Excellent quote, eavesdropper. Investor, I’d use the example of selecting a surgeon for a very dangerous brain operation. I’d imagine you’d do a great deal of research on this doctor, including verifying that he/she is a Fellow with the American College of Surgeons (FACS), has done this operation (and with success) numerous times before, and is well regarded as a leader in the field of brain surgery.

I cannot imagine you’d simply pick someone because they told you they’d read some books on the subject, found it interesting, and would like to take a crack at trepanning you for the hell of it.

You mentioned that I like to fight. I actually don’t. I enjoy debating tremendously and I hate being misquoted. In this case, I found your lack of intellectual curiosity frustrating, especially given your slavish adherence to what amounts to a crackpot (hence my suggestion to do a little digging into Mr. Griffin’s background). Further, you had professionals like SK (CPA) and Davelj (banking and finance) weighing in and offering excellent insights on the subject and you’re retorting with Wiki entries and an added dollop of Griffin.

As with anything else: DIG. Even more important, find the facts. “In God We Trust. Everyone Else Bring Data”. A most excellent tagline, don’t you agree?

[Allan from Fallbrook]

[quote=eavesdropper]
You are playing a dangerous game with your freedom when you remain in selective ignorance by placing all your trust in authors whose writings mirror your own thoughts, philosophies, and prejudices.[/quote]

Excellent quote, eavesdropper. Investor, I’d use the example of selecting a surgeon for a very dangerous brain operation. I’d imagine you’d do a great deal of research on this doctor, including verifying that he/she is a Fellow with the American College of Surgeons (FACS), has done this operation (and with success) numerous times before, and is well regarded as a leader in the field of brain surgery.

I cannot imagine you’d simply pick someone because they told you they’d read some books on the subject, found it interesting, and would like to take a crack at trepanning you for the hell of it.

You mentioned that I like to fight. I actually don’t. I enjoy debating tremendously and I hate being misquoted. In this case, I found your lack of intellectual curiosity frustrating, especially given your slavish adherence to what amounts to a crackpot (hence my suggestion to do a little digging into Mr. Griffin’s background). Further, you had professionals like SK (CPA) and Davelj (banking and finance) weighing in and offering excellent insights on the subject and you’re retorting with Wiki entries and an added dollop of Griffin.

As with anything else: DIG. Even more important, find the facts. “In God We Trust. Everyone Else Bring Data”. A most excellent tagline, don’t you agree?

[Allan from Fallbrook]

[quote=eavesdropper]
You are playing a dangerous game with your freedom when you remain in selective ignorance by placing all your trust in authors whose writings mirror your own thoughts, philosophies, and prejudices.[/quote]

Excellent quote, eavesdropper. Investor, I’d use the example of selecting a surgeon for a very dangerous brain operation. I’d imagine you’d do a great deal of research on this doctor, including verifying that he/she is a Fellow with the American College of Surgeons (FACS), has done this operation (and with success) numerous times before, and is well regarded as a leader in the field of brain surgery.

I cannot imagine you’d simply pick someone because they told you they’d read some books on the subject, found it interesting, and would like to take a crack at trepanning you for the hell of it.

You mentioned that I like to fight. I actually don’t. I enjoy debating tremendously and I hate being misquoted. In this case, I found your lack of intellectual curiosity frustrating, especially given your slavish adherence to what amounts to a crackpot (hence my suggestion to do a little digging into Mr. Griffin’s background). Further, you had professionals like SK (CPA) and Davelj (banking and finance) weighing in and offering excellent insights on the subject and you’re retorting with Wiki entries and an added dollop of Griffin.

As with anything else: DIG. Even more important, find the facts. “In God We Trust. Everyone Else Bring Data”. A most excellent tagline, don’t you agree?

[Allan from Fallbrook]

[quote=eavesdropper]
You are playing a dangerous game with your freedom when you remain in selective ignorance by placing all your trust in authors whose writings mirror your own thoughts, philosophies, and prejudices.[/quote]

Excellent quote, eavesdropper. Investor, I’d use the example of selecting a surgeon for a very dangerous brain operation. I’d imagine you’d do a great deal of research on this doctor, including verifying that he/she is a Fellow with the American College of Surgeons (FACS), has done this operation (and with success) numerous times before, and is well regarded as a leader in the field of brain surgery.

I cannot imagine you’d simply pick someone because they told you they’d read some books on the subject, found it interesting, and would like to take a crack at trepanning you for the hell of it.

You mentioned that I like to fight. I actually don’t. I enjoy debating tremendously and I hate being misquoted. In this case, I found your lack of intellectual curiosity frustrating, especially given your slavish adherence to what amounts to a crackpot (hence my suggestion to do a little digging into Mr. Griffin’s background). Further, you had professionals like SK (CPA) and Davelj (banking and finance) weighing in and offering excellent insights on the subject and you’re retorting with Wiki entries and an added dollop of Griffin.

As with anything else: DIG. Even more important, find the facts. “In God We Trust. Everyone Else Bring Data”. A most excellent tagline, don’t you agree?

[Author]

Posts