FEDERAL RESERVE

[truth109]

Has anyone heard anything new about our alleged non-existing income tax law? I was reading in the newspaper the other day that the US treasury is proposing to give the federal reserve new powers and even more authority over the US's financial system. With this new authority, they would be able to "send SWAT teams into any corner of the industry or any institution that may pose a risk..." The plan would give the fed some authority over wall street as well.

What do you think of this?

[Naruto]

Dude you better watch out or they'll send a SWAT team after you. You're even so careless as to tell them where you live? Madness!

[Dingfod]

Cite, please?

[ChuckF]

I think that is fucking awesome.

[Dingfod]

You would.

[godfry n. glad]

"....alleged non-existing income tax law?"

Try the 16th Amendment. Try alleging in the face of this:

The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.

Please note for future reference that the Internal Revenue Service, which collects income taxes for our federal government is part of the U.S. Department of Treasury, not the Federal Reserve.

The Federal Reserve, by contrast, is part of the monetary controls of the US government. They attempt to control the cost of money through mechanisms of borrowing, lending and setting interest rates (the cost of money). The U.S. Treasury, is the fiscal authority of the U.S. government and prints and spends money at the direction of the executive department.

The Department of Treasury does not determine what the Federal Reserve does or does not do....Congress does.

The Federal Reserve is, to a certain extent, largely outside the "checks and balances" of the tripartate governmental structure, standing outside the executive department. But, its powers derive from Congress and the executive....and have little to nothing to do with taxes and fiscal policy. The Chair of the Federal Reserve is nominated by the president and approved by the senate...for a seven year term. I don't know if the president can fire him, but I do know that they are subject to impeachment, trial and removal by Congress, just like every other presidential appointee.

No connection, in other words, between the federal income tax and the Federal Reserve System.

[Legs]

The CAPS attracted me.

[ChuckF]

I thought we'd already had our income tax denier for the month.

The CAPS attracted me.
:lol:

[ShottleBop]

Has anyone heard anything new about our alleged non-existing income tax law? I was reading in the newspaper the other day that the US treasury is proposing to give the federal reserve new powers and even more authority over the US's financial system. With this new authority, they would be able to "send SWAT teams into any corner of the industry or any institution that may pose a risk..." The plan would give the fed some authority over wall street as well.

What do you think of this?

"[b]In effect[b/]" it would be able to send SWAT teams. Not real SWAT teams. Learn to read. From the Boston Globe (http://www.boston.com/business/articles/2008/03/29/white_house_to_seek_expansion_of_powers_for_federal_reserve/): The Bush administration will propose Monday that Congress give the Federal Reserve broad new authority to oversee financial market stability, in effect allowing it to send swat teams into any corner of the industry or any institution that might pose a risk to the overall system.

The proposal is part of a sweeping blueprint to overhaul the nation's hodgepodge of financial regulatory agencies, which many experts say failed to recognize rampant excesses in mortgage lending until after they ignited what has become the worst financial calamity in decades.

According to a summary provided by the administration, the plan would consolidate what is now an alphabet soup of banking and securities regulators into a powerful trio of overseers responsible for everything from banks and brokerage firms to hedge funds and private equity firms.

While the plan could expose Wall Street investment banks and hedge funds to greater scrutiny, it carefully avoids a call for tighter regulation.

The plan would not rein in practices that have been implicated in the housing and mortgage meltdown, like packaging risky subprime mortgages into securities carrying the highest ratings.

The plan would give the Fed some authority over Wall Street firms, but only when an investment bank's practices posed a threat to the entire financial system.

And the plan does not recommend tighter rules over the vast and largely unregulated markets for risk-sharing and hedging, like credit-default swaps, which are supposed to insure lenders against loss but became a speculative instrument themselves and gave many institutions a false sense of security.

Some of the reforms could actually reduce the power of the Securities and Exchange Commission, which is charged with maintaining orderly stock and bond markets and protecting investors. The proposal would merge the SEC with the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, which regulates exchange-traded futures for oil, grains, currencies, and the like.

The blueprint also suggests several areas where the SEC should take a lighter approach to its oversight. Among them are allowing stock exchanges greater leeway to regulate themselves and streamlining the approval of new products, even allowing automatic approval of securities products that are being traded in foreign markets.

The proposal began to take form last year as an effort by Treasury Secretary Henry M. Paulson Jr. to make American financial markets more competitive against overseas markets by modernizing a creaky regulatory system. His goal was to streamline the different and sometimes clashing rules for commercial banks, thrifts, and nonbank mortgage lenders.

Almost every element of the proposal would have to be approved by Congress.

Paulson's proposal for the Fed echoes ideas championed by Representative Barney Frank, Democrat of Massachusetts, the chairman of the House Financial Services Committee.

Both see the Fed taking a central role in overseeing risk across the entire financial spectrum, but Frank is likely to favor a stronger Fed role, and to subject investment banks to the same rules that commercial banks now must follow, especially for capital reserves.

© Copyright 2008 Globe Newspaper Company.

[ShottleBop]

Has anyone heard anything new about our alleged non-existing income tax law? I was reading in the newspaper the other day that the US treasury is proposing to give the federal reserve new powers and even more authority over the US's financial system. With this new authority, they would be able to "send SWAT teams into any corner of the industry or any institution that may pose a risk..." The plan would give the fed some authority over wall street as well.

What do you think of this?

"In effect" it would be able to send SWAT teams. Not real SWAT teams. Learn to read. From the Boston Globe (http://www.boston.com/business/articles/2008/03/29/white_house_to_seek_expansion_of_powers_for_federal_reserve/): The Bush administration will propose Monday that Congress give the Federal Reserve broad new authority to oversee financial market stability, in effect allowing it to send swat teams into any corner of the industry or any institution that might pose a risk to the overall system.

The proposal is part of a sweeping blueprint to overhaul the nation's hodgepodge of financial regulatory agencies, which many experts say failed to recognize rampant excesses in mortgage lending until after they ignited what has become the worst financial calamity in decades.

According to a summary provided by the administration, the plan would consolidate what is now an alphabet soup of banking and securities regulators into a powerful trio of overseers responsible for everything from banks and brokerage firms to hedge funds and private equity firms.

While the plan could expose Wall Street investment banks and hedge funds to greater scrutiny, it carefully avoids a call for tighter regulation.

The plan would not rein in practices that have been implicated in the housing and mortgage meltdown, like packaging risky subprime mortgages into securities carrying the highest ratings.

The plan would give the Fed some authority over Wall Street firms, but only when an investment bank's practices posed a threat to the entire financial system.

And the plan does not recommend tighter rules over the vast and largely unregulated markets for risk-sharing and hedging, like credit-default swaps, which are supposed to insure lenders against loss but became a speculative instrument themselves and gave many institutions a false sense of security.

Some of the reforms could actually reduce the power of the Securities and Exchange Commission, which is charged with maintaining orderly stock and bond markets and protecting investors. The proposal would merge the SEC with the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, which regulates exchange-traded futures for oil, grains, currencies, and the like.

The blueprint also suggests several areas where the SEC should take a lighter approach to its oversight. Among them are allowing stock exchanges greater leeway to regulate themselves and streamlining the approval of new products, even allowing automatic approval of securities products that are being traded in foreign markets.

The proposal began to take form last year as an effort by Treasury Secretary Henry M. Paulson Jr. to make American financial markets more competitive against overseas markets by modernizing a creaky regulatory system. His goal was to streamline the different and sometimes clashing rules for commercial banks, thrifts, and nonbank mortgage lenders.

Almost every element of the proposal would have to be approved by Congress.

Paulson's proposal for the Fed echoes ideas championed by Representative Barney Frank, Democrat of Massachusetts, the chairman of the House Financial Services Committee.

Both see the Fed taking a central role in overseeing risk across the entire financial spectrum, but Frank is likely to favor a stronger Fed role, and to subject investment banks to the same rules that commercial banks now must follow, especially for capital reserves.

© Copyright 2008 Globe Newspaper Company.

[godfry n. glad]

In other words, the Federal Reserve is sending "SWAT teams" of bank inspectors and regulators into the national private banking system in an attempt to straighten out the fuck-up they've allowed themselves to be dragged into in the search for easy profits.

They ain't coming after taxpayers, but sleazy banking practices of commercial banks which have been allowed to run rampant in this era of "minimal regulatory interference by the federal government in banking practices", thanks to the dumbass Republican sentiments since the dumbass "Reagan Revolution".

I'm supportive.

However, I'd bet it's too little, too late.

[truth109]

im shaking in my boots

[truth109]

thanks for the clarification

[Uthgar the Brazen]

It's Monday. Never mind.