Appointments to the Board
The seven members of the Board of Governors are appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate to serve 14-year terms of office. Members may serve only one full term, but a member who has been appointed to complete an unexpired term may be reappointed to a full term. The President designates, and the Senate confirms, two members of the Board to be Chairman and Vice Chairman, for four-year terms.
Representation
Only one member of the Board may be selected from any one of the twelve Federal Reserve Districts. In making appointments, the President is directed by law to select a "fair representation of the financial, agricultural, industrial, and commercial interests and geographical divisions of the country." These aspects of selection are intended to ensure representation of regional interests and the interests of various sectors of the public.
Responsibilities
The primary responsibility of the Board members is the formulation of monetary policy. The seven Board members constitute a majority of the 12-member Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC), the group that makes the key decisions affecting the cost and availability of money and credit in the economy. The other five members of the FOMC are Reserve Bank presidents, one of whom is the president of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. The other Bank presidents serve one-year terms on a rotating basis. By statute the FOMC determines its own organization, and by tradition it elects the Chairman of the Board of Governors as its Chairman and the President of the New York Bank as its Vice Chairman.
The Board sets reserve requirements and shares the responsibility with the Reserve Banks for discount rate policy. These two functions plus open market operations constitute the monetary policy tools of the Federal Reserve System.
In addition to monetary policy responsibilities, the Federal Reserve Board has regulatory and supervisory responsibilities over banks that are members of the System, bank holding companies, international banking facilities in the United States, Edge Act and agreement corporations, foreign activities of member banks, and the U.S. activities of foreign-owned banks. The Board also sets margin requirements, which limit the use of credit for purchasing or carrying securities.
In addition, the Board plays a key role in assuring the smooth functioning and continued development of the nation's vast payments system [see Fedwire and Payment System Risk Policy].
Another area of Board responsibility is the development and administration of regulations that implement major federal laws governing consumer credit such as the Truth in Lending Act, the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act and the Truth in Savings Act [see Consumer Information and Community Development].
apparently, in my zeal to share around my feel-good, innocuous water cooler, i misrepresented the federal reserve and its structure. this is my retraction. i still think that the movie is going to be an eye opener.
7 comments:
I would suggest, if you are truly interested in learning about the global powers that be, researching the IMF, the World Bank and the various regional and national "donor" agencies (i.e, the Asian Development Bank, the US Agency for International Development, etc.). These organizations (particularly the multilateral financial institutions like the IMF and the poverty-reduction institutions like the World Bank) are not "democratic" in any meaningful sense of the term. As for the income tax alluded to in the video, quite legal (constitutional amendment was passed in 1913). That being said, there have been many interesting debates about the efficiency of the income tax (many jurisdictions do not have an income tax, but they tend to be very small, in both size and geographical area).
Hey betmo, always remember this - it is better to be "innocuous" and "good" than a rancid clown. Just my opinion, even though it's worth nothing in the eyes of your histrionic and somewhat vitriolic friends. Geez, whatever happened to having a civil debate? I guess fanatical minds can't.
By the way, I'll still be visiting your blog, but I am not going to engage in the comments section. I'll still have your link up.
Wow, what a ride!
But it wasn't a simple matter of mis-speaking.
My "vitriol" (I like that word, and I'm glad it caught on) is derived from frustration and indignation at a method of opining, a method that is NOT innocuous, and not good, as much as our penchant for camaraderie would like to allow us to believe. Thank you for finally addressing one of my points and for not running away from it, though if that's one's inclination, it's probably better she remain silent anyway.
Do you not see the danger in those clips, in the harm of rallying support using propaganda?
First, you viewed movie clips whose intent was to manipulate you.
One or all of those movie clips inspired you to make false claims.
When another reader called you on your disinformation, you quickly dismissed him (or her) and tersely defended your misinformation, again incorrectly.
Then I called you on your disinformation, and you again defended it - even before you did additional research. Whatever you had seen had so sufficiently convinced you that you were right, that you didn't entertain the notion that I (Me!) wouldn't have actually read a reliable source to back up my contention BEFORE mouthing off.
THEN - irony of all ironies - you quote the exact piece I had read, but you somehow miss the sentence immediately preceding the snippet you quoted, a sentence that lays waste to your misinformation.
Why? Because you're impaired? Because you think I am? Because you're of the same manipulative, hateful persuasion as the other propagandists?
I don't think so.
I think it's because - and this whole little dust up has made my point quite clearly - it's because propaganda is a lowly, harmful, inexcusable method of discussing complex ideas, a method that necessarily stands in the way of meaningful discourse.
And I'm sorry, but I will not muster up undeserved pleasantries in the context of of discussion that insists upon manipulative rhetoric and irresponsible blathering, especially - (another irony) when it's disguised as an attempt to call attention to "Fascism".
Rather than berating me with names, or insisting I mind my manners like a good girl, or hiding behind my own self-effacing description of my temperament in these contexts (not that you've done any of that, exactly), I had hoped someone would engage with the facts I presented, which we now see - after all this - you understand, agree with, and concede to.
Was there a nicer way to realize this same end? Definitely. But not when I'm going up against propaganda and the people who have fallen victim to it.
my point is simply this- i am not above making mistakes. i certainly want to be called on my mistakes. i believe that i sufficiently addressed my mistake. my problem was with your tone- which i emailed you about. yes- some things are propaganda and should be dismissed. i blog about things that i find interesting and i found this movie to be interesting, intriguing and worth a look. i also enjoy michael moore's movies- and i am quite aware that these vehicles are strident and are to provoke a reaction. i like to provoke reaction too- i like to provoke a dialogue. while i understand that you were adding to the dialogue, and had valid points in your discourse- i don't enjoy being spoken down to in a condescending manner on my own blog. especially by someone i consider a dear friend. you know that we have had many debates and discussions and we both have disagreed or agreed in a respectful manner. i don't know what it is about this format that brings out the beast in you- but please don't use it with me on my blog. disagree, make valid points, give me great info- just don't talk down to me on my blog. i realize that some things are lost in words only- such as inflection, body language, etc. but there is no disguising your tone in this debate. i do not censor on my blog. unless it is a personal attack or outright destructive comments- i won't delete(unless it's spam). anyone here is welcomed to self censor- that is your right. i encourage everyone to talk, debate and disagree- and hopefully we all learn something in the end. i appreciate you trying to save me from myself- and on that- i end it.
Again, with my tone. I addressed it, too, and after re-evaluating, it is the inexorable consequence of living conscientiously. I'm glad to address this publicly.
You said, "disagree, make valid points..."
I did that. So did another reader. It was not welcome, you were receptive to neither fact nor logic, you continued to believe in the supremacy of your unfounded convictions, which you took from propaganda. It was astonishing. Talk about a blog bringing out The Beast. You were dismissive - a disrespect in and of itself - until clobbered over the head and forced to admit you were mislead and so spouted untruth, and even now you're denying the seriousness of it and attempting to re-direct the conversation to a discussion of your feelings.
Personal blog or not, this is on the web, and it is a public forum. Littered with incorrect information, premature and ignorant opining, and a method of thought antithetical to the values you claim to hold dear, it is a disservice to everyone, especially your readership.
Having said that, I am not ashamed of my behavior on anyone's blog. This technology is being abused by people who talk way too much and think far too little, whose perspectives encompass little more than their very own livelihoods. Enough. Of all our nation's causes of shame, our ignorance and receptivity to charlatans are most embarrassing. We elected the worst President in history to a second term because certain people have dictated that our political discussion need not be anything more than an illogical, superficial, fact-impaired mish-mash of manipulative soundbites and hurt feelings. It is not condescending to call bullshit on bullshit - loudly, when necessary - and I'm not going to sit back and shut up while people mis-use a very powerful tool to the benefit of their personal needs and the detriment of worldly goals.
And I may be alone on this blog, but I'm not in the world. Here, I seem to be the lone ranger, the party-pooper, the "rancid clown". Knowing me, I find it difficult to the point of impossible to believe that you would think I would spear-head this kind of dialog without careful consideration, over-thinking and asking everyone's opinions. Truth be told, the thoughts I have voiced here belong to at least a dozen others, all of whom have vocations and interest in the intersection of education, technology and culture and most of whom have been following this particular blog for over a month.
Talk about the cats, talk about the weather, but when it comes to topics that affect all of us, the collective good requires a higher standard than mere "interest". You obviously have the ability to create that, and I can't understand why you have allowed this to become a place hospitable to bullshit.
so- don't read it. create your own forum. i have no idea why you are on a rampage with me over this. this blog has not changed since day one. it exists to give me a platform to express my views, my opinions and my thoughts. i am not glossing over anything- you called me on my shit- fine. you and i both get on our high horses when our backs are up- well- mine is up now. you know that you are always more than welcomed to come here and comment. i simply asked you not to come here and be condescending and rude. if you believe strongly in whatever is the topic- fine- state your case. you have the skills to do that without being nasty to me or anyone else here. this blog is nothing that it didn't start out to be. i am not on a crusade to save the world necessarily. i don't think that it can be saved. i admit that i had wrong information and i corrected it- i thought. i make mistakes and hey- you are right- it is a public forum. i need to be held accountable on the facts. my opinions are my own and i will continue to talk about what i find interesting- whether it be politics, religion, science, weather, cats, or whatever. your opinion is welcomed- i just don't see why you come in here like a bat out of hell. you don't like the stodgy atmosphere- well i am a moderate. i thought that you knew that. i am not out to save the world and i don't necessarily care about the common good. i am here in this forum to write what i want to write and say what i want to say- period.
Post a Comment