Fractional Banking and the Federal Reserve System Explained!

#endthefed 

First I have to mention that: The president is the punching bag for
monetary policy even though he did not directly affect monetary policy.
The Federal Reserve is rarely mentioned on television as being the
mastermind of the economy but nevertheless it is the second punching bag.
That is to say another institution we can vent our anger when things go
economically wrong. The real Culprits are the hidden owners of certain
insider private commercial banks who have control of the Federal Reserve
and the presidency.

The FEDERAL RESERVE was not created so that it profits. RATHER it was
created so that a select few private insider commercial banks become
extremely profitable as the result of their ties to the FEDERAL RESERVE,
and its ability to subsidize FRACTIONAL RESERVE LENDING. These commercial
banks control the Federal Reserve and its policies. The FED, for example,
carry out policies that causes little banks to fail. These failed banks
are taken over by the big insider banks furthering the consolidation of the
nation's monetary reserve.

The manner in which banks create money ex niholo (out of thin air) is by
the use of a scheme called fractional reserve lending. When you rent a DVD
movie, you are explicitly told not to copy and distribute the movie. Why
is that illegal? Because if you copy and distribute the movie, the movie
creators would loose profit as a result of the EFFECT of the
counterfeiting. A long time ago it was decided that a deposit to a bank is
legally a loan to the bank. Since case law (though English, but USA courts
have followed almost similarly) established in 1811 (Carr vs Carr, in case
you were wondering) that the money you put in your bank account no longer
legally belongs to you – instead, you are lending it to the bank, which in
turn is paying interest on the loan. Money is a fungible item, and it is
not treated as a bailment when you deposit your money in the bank.

This means that if you have $100k and deposit it in a bank, the bank can
loan the $100k to someone else. What happens, though, is that the person
that borrows the money soon uses it to buy something, a house, perhaps and
the seller of the house takes that money and most likely deposits it in a
bank, perhaps the same bank or a different bank. What happens is that the
bank that just received that $100k will loan that money out again, and the
inflationary cycle continues. The Money supply expands. In this situation
there are two conflicting titles to the money 1)the person that deposits it
and 2) the person that borrows it. This is precisely why the FEDERAL
RESERVE was created, so that this conflict can be reduced to a
government/public subsidy. Further problem is that as the money supply
expands, but only the principle exist in the money supply. In order for
every borrower to pay back the debt, they need to depend on more credit to
provide the interest payments. If the credit stops the economy goes into a
recession-depression, and the money supply shrinks. This is officially
called the BUSINESS CYCLE. The money supply created by private banks is
over 95% of the money in the economy. Just take the M0 money supply and
subtract from the M2 or M3.

THE INCOME TAX
NOW there are two conflicting ideas about where income tax revenues goes.
The most elaborate, indepth research is the Grace Commission Report:
"100% of what is collected is absorbed solely by interest on the Federal
Debt … all individual income tax revenues are gone before one nickel is
spent on the services taxpayers expect from government."
-Grace Commission report submitted to President Ronald Reagan – January 15,
1984

Then, there are reports from the government that show a pie chart of what
the income tax revenues is used for: 38% goes to HUMAN RESOURCES; 30%
goes to CURRENT MILITARY, 18% goes to PAST MILITARY; 8% goes to GENERAL
GOVERNMENT; and 6% goes to PHYSICAL RESOURCES.

I really honestly do not know which is true, but what i do know is that the
NATIONAL DEBT is fraudulent, because the treasury makes bonds which are
purchased by private commercial banks using money from the selling of old
bonds, and the multiplicity effect of the fractional reserve scheme. This
scheme is inflationary on both ends, the expansion of credit and the
introduction of new money into the system. If you are going to have an
inflationary system why not for the public good, for public programs?

Every loan the government does, u pay with your current amount of money
without you noticing it. Why pay taxes if u print money out of thin air?

Debt = money. end the federal reserve central bank model its a perpetual
debit machine devaluating our currency. Inflation. 

You misunderstood my statement. I will fight for my freedoms to the death
before I kneel and serve the Federal Puppets of the Special Interests.
Right now I am going to school to get some fake paper they made up that
declares I payed enough money to them to be classified as "smart". However
I receive VA benefits because my father was crippled in this fake war they
started so I am being paid to go to "school". My real fight will begin
shortly after I get this note of payment for my "education".

Vechs sent me!

another good one to watch is – The american dream .. its here on youtube .
End the FeD ron paul for America.

Well done! Can you believe that 4 years ago the subject of banking
fractional reserve was not even an issue? "Fractional reserve? What's
that?" LOL

instead it adds to 10, in reality if i put 10billion dollars in the bank i
wont come for it all back the next day, i might come for 10 thousand, but
the 1 billion is still on reserve, so physical money is not produced, but
the credit is

It doesn't go "to $9 instead of $100." 10% of 10B is 1B. So, they hold 1B
in reserve and lend out 9B (and a loan/debt of 9B has been created). That
9B is then deposited into another account . From there, 10% of 9B (.9B) is
held in reserve and they lend 8.1B and so on.

So the government borrows 10 billion and deposits it into a bank account.
The bank lends out 90% of this money (9 billion) and keeps 10 billion in
deposits. What I don't get is the part about the original 10 billion never
being lent out, instead 9 billion of new money is created…

If you only need 10% in reserves, and you have $10 billion, wouldn't you be
able to lend out $100 billion!?!?! I don't get how it goes to $9 instead of
$100? Someone please clarify?

Ron Paul FTW!

But the question that I still have is: If, as it says, all debt is paid off
and money ceases to exist, then where does all the value go in the goods
and services that exist? How do people get rewarded for their work, how do
people "pay" for goods / services?

There are two alternatives to fractional reserve banking. Zero reserve
banking, in which the M3 is multiplied indefinitely by the system. Or, no
more lending at all, zip, nada. I know Americans hate the middle ground,
but fractional reserve banking is the only rational answer.

Extremely Bias?

Great movie.

@plutonium210 We can have a banking system where people have money in the
bank for the sole purpose of growing it while -at the same time – knowing
they can lose it. It could be a risky savings account. The difference
between a bank and brokerage firm would be that the bank would not invest
the money loosely. Also, if you just want to have an account for the
purpose of buying stuff using a debit card the bank could charge a very low
monthly fee, if any, for providing that service.

internal economy is more powerful than a nuclear weapon in its power to
completely and utterly destroy entire nations that have become victim to
its perversion.

@TheJerrydat I Second your remarks

Its pretty funny that for all these years criminals have been trying to
"copy" or "print" their own fake counterfeit dollar bills when all they
really had to do is open a bank to counterfeit money legally using a
computer.

WHY ARE THERE ONLY 576 VIEWS? PEOPLE NEED TO WAKE UP…

challenge accepted ;D

yea and you know what else is weird? we are in debt to the banks, the
federal reserve. Also the rothschilds said they don't care who writes the
laws as long as they control a nations money supply. so they lent money to
governments to wars. Heres where it gets fishy…If the government
supposedly owed the banks money, whether it be by the banks owning
industries or whatever, couldn't the government over take the bank by
force? Its common sense