You are here

Self-Destructive Insanity - The Federal Reserve to be granted NO RESERVE LIMITS???

Courtesy of 10/1/08 DailyPaul post -


This is huge, folks, and it is hidden in a small, seemingly innocuous paragraph buried within this bill:

Section 203 of the Financial Services Regulatory Relief Act of 2006 (12 U.S.C. 461 note) is amended by striking ‘‘October 1, 2011’’ and inserting ‘‘October 1, 2008’’.

I wonder if this is the real meat of the bill. What is it referring to in the Financial Services Regulatory Relief Act of 2006?


Section 19(b)(2)(A) of the Federal Reserve Act (12 U.S.C. 461(b)(2)(A)) is amended--
(1) in clause (i), by striking `the ratio of 3 per centum' and inserting `a ratio of not greater than 3 percent (and which may be zero)'; and
(2) in clause (ii), by striking `and not less than 8 per centum,' and inserting `(and which may be zero),'.


The amendments made by this title shall take effect October 1, 2011.

Here is the original bill to which this is referring:


2. Reserve requirements.

A. Each depository institution shall maintain reserves against its transaction accounts as the Board may prescribe by regulation solely for the purpose of implementing monetary policy--

i. in the ratio of 3 per centum for that portion of its total transaction accounts of $25,000,000 or less, subject to subparagraph (C); and*

ii. in the ratio of 12 per centum, or in such other ratio as the Board may prescribe not greater than 14 per centum and not less than 8 per centum, for that portion of its total transaction accounts in excess of $25,000,000, subject to subparagraph (C).

This was pointed out yesterday on Daily Kos, so I decided to look it up myself to confirm. Yes, this is legitimate. They are trying to free up the ability for the Federal Reserve to create credit with absolutely no limits.

They are removing the reserve ratio altogether. Consider that this bill has already been passed (and no one noticed) and was supposed to be enacted in 2011. This was the original timetable. That has been bumped up now. This is why the press and the leaders are so desperate to get this bill passed -- their entire plan is at stake.

We not only need to oppose this "Rescue" bill, we need to further repeal the "Financial Services Regulatory Relief Act of 2006".

Spread the word about the depths of the evil contained in this bill.



Do you know of anyone who has problems with having more than the current FDIC insurable limit of $100,000?

I don't.

Now, they want to increase that insured amount to $250,000?

Where are these people that have so much cash on hand, that they need the FDIC limits raised?

Sure as hell ain't the 47+ million w/o health insurance.

I smell a rat.

This is probably another huge con that is going to cost us immensely down the road.

The greedy bastards can't even wait till 2011 for this next grift to get up and running, the yokels are at the tent, clamoring to see the two-headed boy and the Fed will gladly oblige.

Greg Bacon

If all my "loans" are based on a fractional reserve, and I don't need to have any reserve, then I could loan "money" by creating zeros in my ledger ad infinitum.

How would any limit be imposed in such a system?

Raising the limit of FDIC insured accounts at the point when the banks are insolvent is begging people to rip-off the government. MSM is completely ignoring these aspects of the bailout.


"Stop judging by appearances, but judge justly."


"Stop judging by appearances, but judge justly."

Theme by Danetsoft and Danang Probo Sayekti inspired by Maksimer