tybs
Is the Federal Reserve Part of the Government?
(for Newfags only)
this is directly from the St. Louis regional web-site so take it FWIW. The second part details who and what owns it.
Who owns or controls the Fed?
The answer is, the Federal Reserve is not "owned" by anyone. With authority derived from Congress via the Federal Reserve Act of 1913, the Fed serves as a politically independent and nonpartisan(bullshit) entity within government. (ah no it's not-it sits on it's own private piece of land among other things) It’s accountable to the public and elected representatives in its mission to promote a stable financial system and healthy economy.
The Fed can best be described as independent within the government.
How the Federal Reserve System Is Organized
The System comprises a central governmental agency, the Federal Reserve Board of Governors, as well as 12 regional Reserve banks (and many branches) located in cities throughout the U.S.
The aspect of the structure that allows the Fed to serve the public while remaining independent lies in the difference between the regional Reserve banks and the Board of Governors.
(probably the most un-factual statement here)
A Central Governing Entity: The Board of Governors
The Board of Governors in Washington, D.C., is an independent agency of the federal government. It includes seven members whose appointments must by law yield a “fair representation of the financial, agricultural, industrial, and commercial interests and geographical divisions of the country,” the Board explains, and no two governors may come from the same Federal Reserve District. Members are nominated by the president and confirmed by the Senate.
Setup and geography: By law, the Reserve banks were set up like private corporations.
(the shares in these 12 regional locations have no market and are not able to be traded on ANY exchange)
*
Each bank operates within its own geographic area—or “district”—of the U.S., and each is separately incorporated with its own board of directors. As described in our Making Sense of the Federal Reserve tutorial, six directors are elected by member commercial banks; three are appointed by the Board of Governors. Directors contribute local business experience, leadership and community involvement. They reflect the diverse interests of each Federal Reserve district.
*Member banks: Commercial banks that are members of the Federal Reserve System hold stock in their district's Reserve bank. But owning Reserve bank stock is different from owning stock in a private company: Holding this stock does not carry with it the control and financial interest given to holders of common stock in for-profit organizations. The Reserve banks are not operated for profit. In fact, ownership of a certain amount of stock is, by law, a condition of membership in the Federal Reserve System.
Reserve bank presidents: Members of each Reserve bank’s board of directors select who will serve as the regional bank’s president, subject to approval by the Board of Governors. The St. Louis Fed’s president is James Bullard; in 2018 he marked 10 years serving in this role.
The seven members of the Board of Governors. The Board chair also serves as chair of the FOMC; the current chairman is Jerome Powell.
https://www.stlouisfed.org/open-vault/2018/november/is-federal-reserve-part-government
Federal Reserve Directors: A Study of Corporate and Banking Influence
(from 1976 however the only thing that has changed is the names further down this list.)
Cap 2 reveals the linear connection between the Rothschilds and the Bank of England, and the London banking houses which ultimately control the Federal Reserve Banks through their stockholdings of bank stock and their subsidiary firms in New York. The two principal Rothschild representatives in New York, J. P. Morgan Co., and Kuhn,Loeb & Co. were the firms which set up the Jekyll Island Conference at which the Federal Reserve Act was drafted, who directed the subsequent successful campaign to have the plan enacted into law by Congress, and who purchased the controlling amounts of stock in the Federal Reserve Bank of New York in 1914. These firms had their principal officers appointed to the Federal Reserve Board of Governors and the Federal Advisory Council in 1914. In 1914 a few families (blood or business related) owning controlling stock in existing banks (such as in New York City) caused those banks to purchase controlling shares in the Federal Reserve regional banks. Examination of the charts and text in the House Banking Committee Staff Report of August, 1976 and the current stockholders list of the 12 regional Federal Reserve Banks show this same family control.
http://www.save-a-patriot.org/files/view/whofed.html
Remittances - a massive transfer of wealth out of America
Remittances are monies sent by foreign-born workers (legal immigrants and illegal aliens) back to their home country. The transfers are facilitated by sending money through banks, making investments in the home country, or by returning to the home country while retaining bank accounts and other assets in the United States.
Remittances are essentially a tax-free transfer of wealth out of the U.S. Approximately $20 billion of Mexican remittances each year disappear from the U.S. economy via the institutionalized money transfer industry, never to return. While this massive amount may be considered virtual foreign aid, it is a non-sanctioned transfer of wealth that is based on a fundamental violation of America’s immigration and employment laws.
The massize size of remittances
Projecting $26 billion sent as tax-free remittances by illegal aliens to Mexico in 2014,44 the negative impacts of this loss on the American economy would be significant. That amount would purchase 1.5 million cars or 15-million computers, and $200 billion sent back to Mexico over the past 10 years would have purchased Americans an astounding number: 15 million cars along with 150 million additional computers.45 It well could have saved countless homeowners from foreclosure. Mexico received the largest amount of remittances in 2009). Of 10 countries receiving 40 percent of total remittances and related flows from the U.S., Mexico received about 61 percent of funds. Mexico’s central bank reported remittances totaling $21.27 billion in 2010. Remittances are indeed a significant source of income to Mexico. Remittance inflows of $25.3 billion to Mexico comprised approximately 3 percent of Mexico’s 2008 GDP.
The National Population Council estimates that more than one out of 10 Mexican families in approximately 1.3 million homes depends on remittances.28 In fact, according to a poll by the Inter-American Development Bank, as many as one in five Mexican adults receives money from relatives working in the U.S.
he Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) estimated that 2009 migrants' remittances from the U.S. were approximately $48 billion, or approximately 70 percent more than total official development assistance provided by the United States. Of that amount, $38 billion consisted of personal transfers abroad. The remaining $11 billion consisted of wages paid to workers in the U.S., although some of those wages obviously were spent in the U.S.
https://www.cairco.org/issues/remittances
Boeing records zero new MAX orders following global groundings
(Reuters) - Boeing Co’s orders and deliveries sank in the first quarter, with zero new orders for the 737 MAX following a worldwide grounding in March in the wake of two fatal plane crashes.
The groundings forced Boeing to freeze deliveries of the MAX, which had been its fastest-selling jetliner until a March 10 crash on Ethiopian Airlines that killed all 157 onboard, just five months after a similar crash on Lion Air that killed all 189 passengers and crew.
Total orders, an indication of future demand, fell to 95 aircraft in the first quarter from 180 a year earlier, suggesting a wait-and-watch approach for airlines as Boeing rides out the worst crisis in its history.
Still, Boeing is ahead of its European rival Airbus, which last week said it had won 62 gross orders during the first three months of 2019 but some 120 cancellations left it with a negative net order.
Chicago-based Boeing’s first-quarter 737 deliveries tumbled about 33 percent, pushing total aircraft deliveries down 19 percent to 149 from a year earlier. Boeing delivered just 11 MAX in March before the suspension.
Deliveries are financially important because that is when planemakers receive the bulk of money from airlines’ purchases.
It is still unclear when the MAX jets will fly again, with global regulators including China saying they would join a U.S. Federal Aviation Administration panel to review the aircraft’s safety.
“A fix and removal of the grounding prior to September 2019 could be perceived positively,” Jefferies analyst Sheila Kahyaoglu said, noting that fresh scrutiny of the certification process could potentially filter into Boeing’s 777X program.
Boeing’s shares, which have lost about 13% since the crash, were down 1.66 percent at $368.32 in afternoon trading.
Goldman Sachs said it does not expect Boeing to deliver any MAXs in the second quarter and said it was difficult to expect MAX orders at the upcoming Paris Air Show in June.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-boeing-deliveries/boeing-records-zero-new-max-orders-following-global-groundings-idUSKCN1RL1Z5?feedType=RSS&feedName=businessNews