Ready to uncover the intriguing and clandestine origins of the Federal Reserve System, crafted by the world's wealthiest men on a secluded island? Want to discover how the Federal Reserve, despite its promise of economic stability, has been at the heart of numerous bailouts, often protecting banks while the public bears the burden? Join us as we unravel the complex interplay of economic interests and geopolitical dynamics, revealing the enduring tension between private financial interests and public welfare.

The Creature from Jekyll Island: A Second Look at the Federal Reserve

Imagine a cold November night in 1910 at a New Jersey railway station. The scene is set for a secretive journey to a tiny island off Georgia's coast, Jekyll Island, where a group of powerful financiers and bankers gather discreetly. This clandestine meeting, cloaked under the guise of a duck hunt, was where the blueprint for the Federal Reserve System was crafted. 

The attendees, representing a significant portion of the world's wealth, included Nelson Aldrich, Abraham Piatt Andrew, Frank Vanderlip, Henry Davison, Benjamin Strong, and Paul Warburg.

These men were not just bankers; they were visionaries aiming to establish a banking cartel that would protect its members from competition, provide a more elastic money supply, and pool the reserves of the nation's banks. Their ultimate goal was to control the nation's financial resources and shift the financial burden of bank failures from themselves to the taxpayers.

Fast forward to modern times, the Federal Reserve has been at the heart of numerous bailouts, rescuing financial giants like Penn Central, Lockheed, and Chrysler, among others. Each time, the narrative was the same: without intervention, the economy would suffer catastrophic consequences. The reality, however, was that these bailouts primarily served to protect the interests of the banks and their shareholders, transferring the risk and losses to the taxpayers.

The Federal Reserve's role as the "lender of last resort" means that it can create money out of thin air, a power it has used repeatedly to bail out banks and financial institutions during crises. This process, while preventing immediate economic collapse, contributes to inflation, which silently erodes the purchasing power of the dollar and transfers wealth from the public to the financial elite.

Today, the legacy of that secretive meeting on Jekyll Island continues to influence our financial system. The Federal Reserve, conceived as a mechanism to stabilize the economy, has often been criticized for doing the opposite, leading to calls for its reform or even abolition. The story of its creation serves as a reminder of the enduring tension between private financial interests and public welfare.

Did the Secretive Meeting on Jekyll Island Create a Financial Cartel?

In the early 20th century, the U.S. government intervened heavily in the housing market, creating a ripple effect that led to the Savings and Loan (S&L) crisis. It began with the Great Depression when politicians, fearing the growing popularity of socialism, decided to protect depositors by establishing the Federal Home Loan Bank Board. This intervention was meant to stabilize the housing industry, but it distorted the free market, leading to unintended consequences.

During this period, loans on private homes were subsidized, pushing middle-class housing prices up and creating an illusion of prosperity. Politicians promised a house for every family, gaining voter support while ignoring the economic imbalance they were fostering. The Federal Reserve's manipulation of interest rates further diverted funds towards housing, favoring it over other industries, which was good politics but disastrous economics.

The situation worsened as the government insured deposits, removing risk from managers and encouraging reckless lending. By the late 1970s, S&Ls were in deep trouble, unable to cover their losses due to falling interest rates and rising defaults. Instead of allowing the market to rectify itself, the government responded with more regulation and bailouts, further entangling itself in the housing market.

The crisis became evident in the 1980s when S&Ls began failing en masse. The government, unable to meet its insurance promises, chose to hide the problem with accounting tricks and continued bailing out failing institutions, a move that cost taxpayers dearly. The public, unaware of the true scale of the crisis, watched as the federal government tried to stabilize the system.

A similar pattern unfolded on the international stage with the IMF and the World Bank. These institutions, created at the Bretton Woods Conference in 1944, aimed to stabilize the global economy but instead facilitated the transfer of wealth to developing nations under the guise of aid. This strategy was part of a larger plan to create a world central bank and diminish national sovereignty, ultimately working towards a global government.

The narrative of the S&L crisis and the international lending practices of the IMF and World Bank reveals a consistent theme: government intervention, while well-intentioned, often leads to unintended economic consequences, benefiting a select few at the expense of taxpayers. The need for transparency and accountability in financial systems is more crucial than ever to avoid repeating these costly mistakes.

From Great Depression to Global Crisis: How Government Intervention Shaped Economic Turmoil

In the past, gold emerged as the universal form of money due to its intrinsic value, durability, and scarcity, making it a reliable medium of exchange. Governments, however, often attempted to debase their gold coins or clip them to increase the money supply, leading to inflation and economic instability. Despite this, gold's ability to maintain a stable value over time has been proven, with historical examples demonstrating its resilience as a standard for monetary systems.

Before the advent of money, societies relied on barter, trading goods and services directly based on their intrinsic value. As trade evolved, certain commodities, like livestock or metals, became commonly accepted as money due to their practicality and inherent worth. Metals, particularly gold, became the preferred form of money, meeting the essential criteria for convenient trading and precise measurement.

Gold's supremacy as money is attributed to its perfect balance in quantity and intrinsic value, making it ideal for coinage. Contrary to the misleading theory that more money requires more gold, any amount of gold can suffice for a monetary system, as it serves as a stable measure of value. Increasing the money supply without corresponding goods only reduces the purchasing power of each monetary unit, leading to inflation, not economic growth.

Throughout history, gold-backed money has guaranteed price stability, automatically regulated by the free market. Examples like gold coins in ancient Greece and the Byzantine Empire's solidus demonstrate the long-term stability and prosperity achieved with sound money. Conversely, debased currencies like those in the Roman Empire led to economic chaos and political upheaval.

Fiat money, paper currency not backed by precious metals, has repeatedly caused inflation and economic turmoil. In colonial America, the issuance of fiat money led to rampant inflation, legal tender laws, and economic depression. The Revolutionary War exacerbated these issues, highlighting the hidden tax of inflation and the political unrest it fosters.

Fractional money, backed by precious metals for only part of its value, introduced by early European goldsmiths, inevitably degenerates into fiat money. This transition reflects the temptation for bankers to create more money than they have in reserves, leading to economic instability.

History teaches us that sound money, ideally backed by gold, ensures price stability and economic prosperity. Any form of money manipulation, whether through debasement or the issuance of fiat money, leads to inflation, economic hardship, and political disunity. Thus, the natural laws governing money emphasize the importance of maintaining honest monetary practices to achieve long-term stability and prosperity.

Could Gold Be the Key to Economic Stability in Today's World?

The history of fractional-reserve banking began in early Greece but evolved significantly in Venice by 1361. The Venetian Senate took measures to prevent bankers from using depositors' funds for personal gain, requiring them to keep coins available for public viewing. 

Despite these precautions, the largest bank, Pisano and Tiepolo, failed in 1584. The government then established the Banco della Piazza del Rialto, which prospered by not issuing loans and relying instead on fees for services.

This model was replicated by the Bank of Amsterdam in 1609 and the Bank of Hamburg in Germany, both practicing honest banking by refusing to make loans and thriving on service fees. However, the temptation of easy profit from money creation led to dishonest practices, resulting in economic collapses and bank failures.

In England, the Bank of England was established in 1694, becoming the first central bank. It introduced a partnership between bankers and politicians, creating money out of nothing for government use while receiving interest in return. This practice led to inflation, economic booms, and busts. Despite repeated failures, the central-bank mechanism became the model for other countries, including the United States with its Federal Reserve System.

The Federal Reserve creates money by purchasing government bonds and other debts, converting them into spendable money. This process, called the Mandrake Mechanism, leads to inflation and hidden taxes, as the money supply expands without corresponding increases in goods and services.

The result is a continuous boom-bust cycle, benefiting political and monetary scientists while the public remains largely unaware of the process. The system's reliance on debt means that reducing the national or consumer debt would cripple the economy, ensuring perpetual indebtedness. Yet, the hidden inflation tax falls disproportionately on those least able to afford it, highlighting the need for reform.

From Venice to the Fed: The Hidden History of Banking and Inflation

The House of Rothschild rose to prominence in Europe by mastering the art of profiting from both sides of armed conflict. This formula involved converting war into debt and debt back into war. Financiers, including the Rothschilds, would lend money to warring governments at high interest rates, but the real payoff came from political favoritism and commercial profits like mining concessions and monopolies.

Mayer Amschel Rothschild, the dynasty's founder, famously said, "Let me issue and control a nation's money and I care not who writes the laws." His five sons expanded the family business across Europe, becoming the personal bankers of many crowned heads and financing governments in multiple countries. They also mastered the art of smuggling and dealing in black-market goods, often with government protection. The Rothschilds profited handsomely from wars and economic collapses, moments when others faced significant losses.

Napoleon Bonaparte, who sought to free France from banker control, became a target for the financial rulers of Europe. His refusal to borrow money led to a coalition financed by vast amounts of fiat money created by the Bank of England. Napoleon was ultimately defeated, and the Rothschilds continued to thrive.

One notable episode involved Nathan Rothschild smuggling gold to finance the Duke of Wellington's army, demonstrating the family's cunning and influence. After the Battle of Waterloo, Nathan manipulated the stock market, acquiring England's entire debt at a fraction of its worth.

Benjamin Disraeli's novel "Coningsby" depicted a financier named Sidonia, mirroring Rothschild's influence. Rothschilds were known to profit from wars, lacking patriotism and driven solely by gain. The Rothschild Formula motivates financiers to propel governments into perpetual war for profit, balancing power to ensure ongoing conflict.

The legacy of the Rothschilds and their formula is evident in the history of central banking, influencing governments towards perpetual war and debt.

Next, the Lusitania's sinking during World War I epitomizes the manipulation of war for profit. J.P. Morgan, acting for the Allies, profited from both ends of the cash flow: selling bonds and purchasing war materials. When Germany's submarines threatened the Allies' shipping, Morgan's profits were jeopardized. To save the British Empire and Morgan's investments, the United States had to enter the war.

A secret agreement between British officials and Colonel House, with President Wilson's concurrence, committed America to war. Wilson campaigned on a pacifist platform but pressured Congress for war as soon as re-elected. Morgan and other bankers controlled major media segments, pushing for war sentiment.

The Lusitania, a British passenger liner carrying munitions, was deliberately exposed to German attack. The British Admiralty, led by Winston Churchill, withdrew her destroyer protection, making her an easy target. The sinking killed 195 Americans, fueling outrage and pushing the U.S. into war. Congress quickly extended $1 billion in credit to the Allies, much of which went to Morgan.

The Federal Reserve System created the money to finance the war, leading to inflation and a hidden tax on Americans. The war brought vast profits to the banking cartel, demonstrating the power of the Rothschild Formula in modern times.

Thus, the Lusitania's sinking exemplified the intertwined motives of political power, profit, and the dream of world governance, leading America into World War I.

Did the Rothschilds and J.P. Morgan Manipulate History for Profit and Power?

In 1904, amidst the Russo-Japanese War, a clandestine network of powerful financiers began weaving a complex web of influence and intrigue that would stretch from New York to Moscow. 

Behind the scenes, figures like Jacob Schiff, a prominent New York banker, orchestrated massive loans to Japan, tipping the scales in their favor. Yet, the true spectacle was unfolding in the shadows of Russia, where the seeds of revolution were being sown not by the hands of the oppressed masses, but by foreign financiers with a vested interest in upheaval.

The Bolshevik Revolution, long romanticized as a grassroots uprising, was in reality a coup d'état masterfully manipulated by external forces. As the Russian Empire teetered on the brink of transformation, the so-called Red Cross Mission—a deceptive front for American and British interests—played a pivotal role in supporting the Bolsheviks. This alliance was not born out of ideological solidarity, but rather a calculated move to secure lucrative post-revolution contracts and concessions.

Behind the façade of humanitarian aid, Wall Street sharks and British financiers were hedging their bets, ensuring they would emerge victorious regardless of which faction seized power. Their motivations were clear: profit and power. As Russia bled through civil unrest, these financiers reaped the benefits, exploiting the chaotic landscape to cement their influence and control.

This tale of manipulation and betrayal serves as a stark reminder of the intricate dance between power and politics, where the true puppeteers remain hidden in the shadows, orchestrating events to their advantage. As history continues to unfold, the echoes of this era remind us that the pursuit of power often comes shrouded in the guise of benevolence, leaving us to question the true motives behind the masks of diplomacy and aid.

The Hidden Hands Behind the Bolshevik Revolution: Jacob Schiff and the Red Cross Mission

The American colonies experienced severe monetary chaos with the use of fiat money, leading the founding fathers to prohibit paper money without backing. They created the Constitution, established a true American dollar based on gold and silver, and prosperity followed.

In the golden days of radio, Edgar Bergen would ask his dummy, Mortimer Snerd, "How can you be so stupid?" Mortimer would reply, "Well, it ain't easy!" This sentiment rings true when reflecting on the monetary chaos seen today—evaporating dollar value and collapsing financial institutions. How did we get into this mess? The answer lies in understanding where we started, beginning with the Constitution.

The Constitution granted Congress the power to coin money and regulate its value but prohibited states from issuing fiat money or making anything but gold and silver coin a tender in payment of debts. However, it did not specifically prevent the federal government from issuing fiat money—a significant oversight. The delegates to the Constitutional Convention were passionate about money, remembering the chaos caused by fiat money in the colonies.

The first colonial experience with fiat money led to skyrocketing prices and great hardship. When the British Parliament forced the colonies to cease fiat money production, prosperity returned as gold coins were used again. However, this changed with the onset of colonial rebellion. The Continental Congress issued massive amounts of fiat money, leading to severe inflation and economic devastation.

The Constitution's monetary blueprint established a national monetary unit based on the Spanish dollar, with a defined silver content. Free coinage allowed Americans to convert raw silver and gold into national coins certified by the government. This led to a period of sound money and great economic prosperity.

However, the first central bank, the Bank of North America, was formed before the Constitution was drafted and was riddled with fraud. It eventually ceased to operate, but the advocates of fiat money persisted. The First Bank of the United States was created in 1791, leading to massive inflation. The opposition to the bank grew, and its charter was defeated in 1811. The War of 1812 saw wildcat banks create money to purchase government bonds, leading to further inflation and economic chaos.

The second central bank, the Second Bank of the United States, was established in 1816. It led to the nation's first boom-bust cycle, with monetary expansion followed by deliberate contraction. Andrew Jackson, elected on an anti-bank platform, battled the bank's head, Nicholas Biddle, who created a depression to frighten the public into keeping the bank. Jackson ultimately won, and the bank's charter expired in 1836.

America's experience with central banking led to significant economic turmoil, but it also highlighted the importance of sound money principles. The founding fathers handed us a treasure map to economic security and prosperity, but history shows that this map was often discarded, leading to repeated cycles of boom and bust.

Did America's Founding Fathers Predict Today's Financial Meltdown?

In the mid-1800s, America faced economic turbulence as President Andrew Jackson dismantled the Second Bank of the United States, intending to stabilize the banking system. 

Despite efforts to regulate bank operations and promote the use of gold and silver, banking practices continued to evolve, often circumventing new regulations. Fractional-reserve banking, where banks issued more money than they had in actual reserves, led to inflation and subsequent economic collapse. This period of instability contributed to the conditions that sparked the Civil War.

The conflict between the industrial North and the agrarian South was primarily about economic interests rather than the widely accepted narrative of slavery. Northern politicians imposed tariffs on European goods to protect their industries, forcing the South to buy from the North at higher prices. This economic strain, combined with retaliatory measures from Europe, pushed the South towards secession.

As the war escalated, President Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation, transforming the war into a moral crusade against slavery to revive Northern support. However, this war had significant financial implications. To fund the war, the Union turned to printing fiat money known as greenbacks, leading to inflation and economic hardship. Meanwhile, the Confederacy relied heavily on printing its own money, resulting in even greater financial devastation.

Lincoln's assassination is shrouded in mystery, with links to secret societies and potential involvement of powerful interests both within and outside the government. The legacy of this tumultuous period includes the establishment of the National Banking System, which entrenched America in perpetual debt and laid the foundation for modern central banking. The Civil War's economic roots and its aftermath set the stage for the ongoing struggle between political power and financial control in the United States.

From Jackson to Lincoln: Economic Turmoil and the Roots of Civil War

The period between the Civil War and the establishment of the Federal Reserve System was marked by economic chaos and volatility. The National Banking Acts of the 1860s had given rise to federally chartered banks with significant power, but they operated with minimal gold backing and were a halfway house to central banking. 

The notion of generating prosperity by creating more money was popular, and financier Jay Cooke even suggested the national debt could be a blessing. However, his Northern Pacific Railroad went bankrupt, triggering the panic of 1873. This was one of several such contractions, with panics also occurring in 1884, 1893, and 1907.

During these panics, banks often lacked adequate reserves, and Congress responded by decreasing reserve requirements rather than increasing them. The myth that these panics were due to seasonal demands for farm loans was debunked by the reality that fractional-reserve banking was the real issue.

In this tumultuous environment, J.P. Morgan emerged as a dominant figure, managing to prosper when others failed. Morgan’s firm was closely tied to England and the House of Rothschild. It handled British war bonds in the U.S. and was involved in controversial activities like shipping munitions to England during World War I.

Morgan’s rise began with George Peabody, an American merchant who succeeded in London and formed a firm that Junius Morgan later joined. Junius’s son, John Pierpont Morgan, was groomed in international finance and eventually took over the firm, establishing J.P. Morgan & Company. Despite appearing American, the firm had strong British ties and often collaborated with the Rothschilds.

The creation of the Federal Reserve System was influenced by this background. Benjamin Strong, a Morgan man, became the first Governor of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. He formed a close alliance with Montagu Norman, Governor of the Bank of England. Their collaboration aimed to save the British economy from depression by creating inflation in the U.S., leading to the Great Crash of 1929.

The concept of a central bank was sold to the public as a measure to protect them, but it was actually a means to protect the banks. The Federal Reserve Act was crafted to appear as a decentralized system, but it was designed to operate as a central bank. The first draft, the Aldrich Bill, faced opposition due to Aldrich’s associations with Wall Street, leading to its rebranding under a different political guise.

In essence, the Federal Reserve System was created to stabilize the banking system by pooling reserves, creating a lender of last resort, and ensuring government protection for the banks. It was a strategic move by Wall Street to secure control over the nation’s financial resources and prevent competition from smaller banks.

Could J.P. Morgan's Influence and the Birth of the Federal Reserve Have Sparked the Great Crash of 1929?

In 1912, the presidential election became a showcase of power politics and voter manipulation. Republican President William Howard Taft, backed by big businesses and banking interests, was up against Woodrow Wilson, the Democratic challenger. 

Taft earned the ire of powerful Republicans when he refused to support the Aldrich Plan, which aimed to establish a central bank controlled primarily by bankers with minimal government oversight. The bankers needed a president who would champion their cause and work to pass their legislation, leading them to support Wilson.

Teddy Roosevelt, a former Republican president, was persuaded by banking interests to run against Taft as the "Bull Moose" candidate. This strategic move was designed to split the Republican vote, ensuring Wilson's victory. Roosevelt’s campaign, heavily financed by the likes of J.P. Morgan and Kuhn, Loeb & Co., diverted votes from Taft, allowing Wilson to win the election with less than a majority vote.

Once Wilson was in office, Edward Mandell House, a key figure connected to Wall Street bankers, moved into the White House. House played a crucial role in transforming the Aldrich Plan into the Glass-Owen Bill, which was presented as a Democratic effort to reform banking but retained the core elements of the original plan. Despite public opposition, the bill passed, marking the creation of the Federal Reserve System.

The Federal Reserve System, intended to decentralize banking power, soon came under the control of the New York Reserve Bank, led by Benjamin Strong, who had deep ties to Wall Street. The Fed's policies led to a massive expansion of the money supply in the 1920s, primarily to assist the British government. This expansion fueled speculative investments in the stock market and real estate, leading to an inevitable crash.

In secret meetings in 1929, the Federal Reserve and the Bank of England anticipated the market collapse and advised their insiders to withdraw investments. Meanwhile, the public was assured of a stable economy. When the crash occurred on October 29, 1929, millions of investors were wiped out, while insiders who had been forewarned profited immensely by buying undervalued stocks.

The Great Depression followed, exacerbated by government interventions and policies that stifled the free market. The depression persisted until the economic stimulus of World War II. The Federal Reserve's actions during this period highlight its role in destabilizing the economy, contrary to its intended purpose.

Ultimately, the creation of the Federal Reserve marked a significant shift in economic power to a centralized system controlled by a few influential bankers, leading to periods of economic boom and bust that profoundly impacted the nation.

How Banking Titans Orchestrated the 1912 Election: The Birth of the Federal Reserve

The United States faces a looming crisis, deeply entrenched in debt, with federal deficits skyrocketing since 1950. By 2010, the federal debt had reached an unfathomable $202 trillion when including all liabilities. This debt has created a dire situation, with interest payments consuming a significant portion of federal revenue, leading to higher taxes and inflation that burden American families.

Government spending is out of control, with expenses far exceeding revenue, forcing reliance on selling government bonds and deeper debt each year. This uncontrolled growth of debt is a ticking time bomb, with interest payments compounding and consuming a larger share of personal income taxes.

The situation is exacerbated by the growing size of the government, which now employs more people than manufacturing companies in the private sector. Welfare benefits, entitlements, and other government programs have expanded, with more citizens receiving government checks than paying income taxes. This imbalance threatens the stability of the nation, as the point of no return approaches where the system begins to self-destruct.

The ultimate doomsday mechanism, however, is the Federal Reserve System. Every cent of the money supply exists because it was lent to someone, and will disappear once the loans are repaid. If the national debt were paid off, the money supply would be undermined, leading to devastating consequences for the economy.

To address this crisis, a plan is proposed to abolish the Federal Reserve System and restore a sound monetary system. This involves converting fiat money to real money, backed by precious metals, and implementing steps to stabilize the economy. These steps include repealing legal-tender laws, freezing the supply of Federal Reserve Notes, defining the dollar in terms of precious metal content, and paying off the national debt with Federal Reserve Notes created for that purpose.

The transition will be challenging, with potential economic turmoil, but ultimately, it aims to establish a stable, honest money supply, eliminate the national debt, and foster prosperity without inflation. This requires a concerted effort to spread awareness, educate the public, and take proactive measures to avert disaster.

The future of the nation depends on the willingness of its citizens to act and implement these changes. The time for armchair patriotism is over. It's crucial to mobilize, educate, and fight for a return to economic sanity and freedom.

Can the United States Overcome Its $202 Trillion Debt Crisis?

Reflecting on the formation of the Federal Reserve, it’s striking how a secretive meeting of powerful financiers led to its creation, aiming to protect their interests and shift financial burdens onto taxpayers. This institution, originally intended to stabilize the economy, has often been criticized for contributing to economic instability through its interventions and bailouts, which primarily safeguard banking interests.

The historical manipulation of money, especially through fiat currency and debasing of gold, shows a recurring theme of economic control leading to inflation and instability. The Federal Reserve's ability to create money contributes to inflation, which subtly erodes public wealth while benefiting financial elites.

The involvement of international financiers in significant historical events, like the Bolshevik Revolution, reveals how financial power can shape political outcomes. The complex interplay of economic interests often influences geopolitical dynamics, underlining the persuasive power of finance over public policy and welfare.

The narrative of repeated economic crises, from the Savings and Loan crisis to international lending practices of institutions like the IMF and World Bank, underscores the unintended consequences of government intervention. These actions often benefit a select few at the taxpayer's expense, highlighting the need for greater transparency and accountability in financial systems.

The historical evolution of money, especially the role of gold, illustrates the stability it provides compared to fiat money. The lessons from history emphasize the importance of limiting government intervention in the money supply to maintain economic stability.

The story of the Federal Reserve's creation and its subsequent impact on the economy serves as a reminder of the ongoing tension between private financial interests and public welfare. It highlights the need for vigilance in protecting public interests from the encroachments of powerful financial entities.

Home

Trending Books

News & Mags

Relax

Curated

Collections

Key Ideas & Notes

Insights

Highlights & Bookmarks

Listening History

Key Ideas

#1