~ Where the Sun Will Never Set on Our liberty ~
There's this idea of “welfare” that we've known through our generations, one that has been promoted by great leftist Progressives since Woodrow Wilson.
Some Historical Truths, Background:
You see, money has always had a cost attached to it. That cost in pre-modern financial systems was servitude and slavery, an entire denial of freedom and property rights, better known as the Feudal System.
The cost eventually became just an interest rate with the advent of the United States of America, where everyone is to be treated equally, even Our Founders seeking to end slavery by passing the Constitution (See Federalist 42 discussing Article I, Section 9, http://thomas.loc.gov/home/histdox/fed_42.html, which I mention often because it is an actual record of history demonstrating a genuine due care and proactive position of Our Founders to end slavery some 70 years before the Civil War.).
Money was once held by very few, Noble classes, whose relationship was either by patronage (the trading of favors, “Soprano” mafia style) or self-proclaimed blood lines, the “blue blood” principle, both resulting in a rich class of power who manages a poor subject class. Those who were “well-to-do” and received “homage” (“respect money”), or a peasant could find themselves hanging from the gallows as a victim of public spectacle, oversaw, ascertained the preservation of mankind by an elitist notion of preservation of their heirs – centralized power such as is in Cuba, North Korea, and virtually every Communist Country that recent history has shown results in hereditary dictatorships as a modern day example of the very same oppression, the “absolute power corrupts absolutely” principle.
The “Dark Ages” weren't followed by “The Age of Enlightenment,” because they didn't engender something significant.
The Dark Ages were a time when books were in libraries kept by these well-to-do and/or the Church (often a Noble was a Bishop as well, some 80% of the time). Now when I say “library” do not see the image of the modern library where people walk in and check out a book. No, in the Dark Ages the books were chained to the shelf and the reader had to often stand with the heavy volume reading it by candlelight, and then only if they were a student of either the church or the Noble Classes whose family paid the owner of the library for the privilege to be educated.
Modern Progressive Dilemma:
While the Federal Reserve Act caused the Federal Reserve to exist (as it would not exist without an Act of Congress, even if the Act was passed according to a very sparse attendance of Congress on December 23, 1913), the reality is that it would not be an act without being signed into law by then President Woodrow Wilson.
His Colonel House was instrumental in assuring a Progressive agenda.
Please make sure you understand clearly that the Federal Reserve Act is an act done in promoting the Progressive agenda.
First, the purpose of the Federal Reserve Act is to have distinct regions (that now overlay the Federal Circuits of the court system with the same boundaries), each run by an autonomous body with membership based entirely on each member's investment in the capital stock to capitalize the regional central bank. These member banks are guaranteed 6% per annum (year) profit on their capital stock owned in their Federal Reserve Regional Bank. The single dollars still show the seal with the letter of a particular federal reserve bank in black, those are the regional banks, 12 distinct letters today representing each location.
Now, the way the Federal Reserve Bank runs is to have a zeroing of accounts occur every day at midnight eastern time (where the Federal Reserve of New York is located, the time designation due to the heavy financial activity of the New York Stock Exchange and international commerce that it manages). The zeroing of these accounts is by “redistribution of wealth” principles. A profitable bank will have its profits transferred to the bank that lost money, at least as a bookkeeping entry for the region, and if that region cannot settle its accounts, then the regional banks balance the losses from profitable banks in another region.
You see, when the Federal Reserve Act was passed, the presumption was that the loss in one area or region would be because the money moved to another area or region, foreign banks were prohibited from involvement; even foreign ownership in an American bank was prohibited. To illustrate, Bank of America was originally an 8-bank chain in the San Francisco Bay area. If you look at the history of this bank ala Moody's hardbound editions from the 1930's that can often be found in the local public library, you'll discover that an insurance company, Transamerica, once owned (if not to this day, haven't looked recently) a large share in Bank of America. Well, this was to use a genuine loophole in the Federal Reserve Act, for Transamerica was, at that time, 100% owned by the Bank of Italy, and was named “Transamerica” to express its function for the Bank of Italy as a 100% American incorporated insurance company.
Eventually, foreign banks were allowed to invest directly in American banks, and the issues of money being taken out of America were exacerbated (in gold at the time of Transamerica being used for the purpose of owning Bank of America which was decades before the Federal Reserve Act was amended to allow direct “foreign capital” to invest in American banks.).
One could easily see this as the Progressive agenda by the mere shift to foreign investment in our banking system. What may be missed is that the reason we had this closed system, the Federal Reserve System, created in the first place because of an uproar over the Agricultural Depression of 1907 (another “crisis not to go to waste”), where farmers were upset they had to pay 7% interest on their loans after a bad crop due to harsh weather. The banks carried on business according to the law, and protecting their investors and depositors, would foreclose on these farmers when they failed to make payments. This would mean less food was produced because bankers are not farmers.
“Welfare” in the form of a banking system that is nationalized, centralized, and affords all profits above that 6% per annum that the banks receive to go to the United States Treasury is how the Federal Reserve Act is the first prong of Progressive, Fascist and/or Communist economic, political, and government structures, which opens up the closed financial system of the United States to foreign influence by losses of both gold and currency to nations abroad.
At first blush it is alarming that Dzhokhar Tsarnaev and his entire family, who were in America on the grounds of asylum, appear to have been put immediately on welfare, while the mother is accused of shoplifting and the brothers appear to have been affording their suspected terrorist plot by continuing these public welfare benefits (establishing that Welfare Reform is a National Security Issue). And yet, what I've just illustrated above is that foreign influence has been receiving American aid to destroy America, for instance, terrorizing us with the 1929 stock market crash, aided and abetted by our National Government!
This doesn't mean the Federal Reserve Act idea is bad in and of itself, for it originally prohibited foreign investment, but whether it was necessary or not, whether the Federal Reserve System was something that the Government wanted for itself, and thereby is a direct violation of the Constitution, is why I bring this up. Obamacare and the Federal Reserve Act may share this attribute of merely being acts of an agenda, of an ideological purpose and intention.
I urge you to read this Amendment to the Federal Reserve Act where, finally, the relationship of the other 94% of the profits of the Federal Reserve to the United States Treasury is publicized:
12 United States Code Section 289
“(1) In general
“The Federal reserve banks shall transfer from the surplus funds
of such banks to the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve
System for transfer to the Secretary of the Treasury for deposit
in the general fund of the Treasury, a total amount of
$3,752,000,000 in fiscal year 2000.
“(2) Allocated by Fed
Of the total amount required to be paid by the Federal reserve
banks under paragraph (1) for fiscal year 2000, the Board shall
determine the amount each such bank shall pay in such fiscal
“(3) Replenishment of surplus fund prohibited
During fiscal year 2000, no Federal reserve bank may replenish
such bank's surplus fund by the amount of any transfer by such
bank under paragraph (1).” -- See http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/12/289 to read the full text.
Ask yourself why lawsuits didn't fly and make headlines every day after this amendment was passed, for you'll find that the Federal Reserve has questioned the “homage” the United States Government wants from them, but, due to no federal statute existing to challenge the government-taking, they could do nothing. However, now, with this Amendment they can seek an administrative remedy within the Federal Reserve System. This may help explain the more public denouncing of the Federal Reserve over the last decade as well with the banks bucking the United States Government's socialized economic principle of taking 94% of the profit of the Federal Reserve System into the United States Treasury.
So now, I submit to you that this is a continuation of the Dark Ages and oppressive government by the United States government that is inconsistent with the foundations of our country, with Our Founder's purpose and intention in We the People establishing government, defining “general Welfare” as our sense of our government, of our pride in self-government that is uplifted by a government acting according to Our Written Constitution, and thereby we'd be more productive, industrious, and an even more prosperous nation.
As per usual (most of the time), my apologies for the length of this, but I found it necessary for accuracy, and thank you for reading,