美联储是一个公私合营企业. 也就是说，官商勾结的企业：　“ it is an independent entity within the government, having both public purposes and private aspects.” -ediblescape(秋吟: We are One) @安省华人论坛:安省枫下论坛 The Rolia Forum of Ontario

枫下茶话 / 政治经济 / 谁是这场金融危机的罪魁祸首-金融大资本家。 -blacksea(Blacksea); 2009-2-9 {509} (#5035486@0)
希望大家好好读读英文版本的secret of federal reserve-美联署的秘密。这是一个私人的企业，确是合法的印钞公司。它肆无忌惮的发行美钞，才造成了今天全球的金融大黑洞。再希望大家读读股票和期货的书，了解买空和卖空，最大的庄家套住无数的散户。石油地高价套住了俄罗斯，石油的底价套住了中国。中国和俄罗斯的钱和他们比起来也只是中户。巨大的美国国债最后还得由美国老百姓的税和他的债主-中国和日本来买单。这场危机变成了全球的危机-买单的是全球的百姓。就连美国的总统-欧巴马还得这两天出来道歉，他一定触犯了他的老板的利益和游戏的规则。

Even if that's true, what can you do? How can you fight against the 金融大资本家 who control everything, money, government, and guns? All you can do is trying to sleep well, eat well, don't get sick. Everything else is none of your business. -omega4(omega); 2009-2-9 (#5035596@0)

你说得很对。我们是小鱼，小鱼永远吃不过大鱼。在小鱼没有团结起来，一定要吃好，睡好，玩好。 -blacksea(Blacksea); 2009-2-9 (#5037597@0)

美联储是一个私人企业？？？？想忽悠人也不要这样忽悠吧。它是美国的中央银行，直接向国会负责。连这都不懂，也来谈金融，会笑死人啊 -91109(葡萄紫的大海); 2009-2-9 (#5036618@0)

Lol, you are so funny. Who told you all this? -garmin(garmin); 2009-2-9 (#5036637@0)

你也认为“美联储是一个私人企业”？ -91109(葡萄紫的大海); 2009-2-9 (#5036646@0)

I think it's half private. -garmin(garmin); 2009-2-9 (#5036703@0)

美联储是2500多个银行的联合体，一半（大概）是州立银行，一半（大概）是联邦银行 -binghongcha76(一只大猫); 2009-2-10 (#5039028@0)
美联储的性质是 quasi-public (government entity with private components) 。把美联储说成私人机构，有助于阴谋论一类小说畅销 -321gold(老道); 2009-2-12 (#5044652@0)

美联储是一家注册在特拉华州（Delaware）的私人企业，美联储的主席是由总统任命，国会核准的。是国家控制下的私人企业。 -kingsw(Steven); 2009-2-12 (#5044748@0)

“国家控制下的私人企业” 的实质本来是国家控制。把它混同于一般私人企业，由私人控制进而演义出阴谋家大佬。妙笔生化，小说焉能不畅销。 -321gold(老道); 2009-2-12 {540} (#5044809@0)
美联储是一个很复杂的系统。包括:

(1) the presidentially appointed Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System in Washington, D.C.; (2) the Federal Open Market Committee; (3) twelve regional Federal Reserve Banks located in major cities throughout the nation acting as fiscal agents for the U.S. Treasury, each with its own nine-member board of directors; (4) numerous private U.S. member banks, which subscribe to required amounts of non-transferable stock in their regional Federal Reserve Banks; and (5) various advisory councils.

在美国的法制体系中，是不可能得出你的结论的。私有的就是私有的，国有的就是国有的。宋的解释在某种程度上是事实。因为美联储可以放弃美国，而美国不行。关键在于你是讨论管理者（CEO）还是拥有者（OWNER） -kingsw(Steven); 2009-2-12 (#5044833@0)

既然上到法制体系高度，你至少要去读一读 feder reserve act。知之为知之,不知为不知,是知也.别的我就不多说了。 -321gold(老道); 2009-2-12 (#5044876@0)

. -kingsw(Steven); 2009-2-12 {1018} (#5044897@0)
Congress decided in the Federal Reserve Act that all nationally chartered banks were required to become members of the Federal Reserve System. It requires them to purchase specified non-transferable stock in their regional Federal reserve bank and to set aside a stipulated amount of non-interest bearing reserves with their respective reserve bank (since 1980 all depository institutions have been required to set aside reserves with the Federal Reserve and be entitled to certain Federal Reserve services - Sections 2 and 19). State chartered banks have the option of becoming members of the Federal Reserve System and to thus be supervised, in part, by the Federal Reserve (Section 9). Member banks are entitled to have access to discounted loans at the discount window in their respective reserve bank, to a 6% annual dividend in their Federal reserve stock and to other services (Sections 13 and 7). The Act also permits Federal reserve banks to act as fiscal agents for the United States government (Section 15).
Criticism -kingsw(Steven); 2009-2-12 {485} (#5044906@0)
Controversy about the Federal Reserve Act and the establishment of the Federal Reserve System have existed since prior to its passage, and include whether Congress has the Constitutional power to delegate its power to coin money or issue paper money, whether the Federal Reserve is a banking cartel established to protect large banks, or whether the Federal Reserves' mistakes increase the frequency and severity of boom-bust economic cycles such as the Great Depression of the 1930s.

美联储是一个公私合营企业. 也就是说，官商勾结的企业：　“ it is an independent entity within the government, having both public purposes and private aspects.” -ediblescape(秋吟: We are One); 2009-2-12 {1759} (#5044864@0)
本文发表在 rolia.net 枫下论坛Who owns the Federal Reserve?

The Federal Reserve System is not "owned" by anyone and is not a private, profit-making institution. Instead, it is an independent entity within the government, having both public purposes and private aspects.

As the nation's central bank, the Federal Reserve derives its authority from the U.S. Congress. It is considered an independent central bank because its decisions do not have to be ratified by the President or anyone else in the executive or legislative branch of government, it does not receive funding appropriated by Congress, and the terms of the members of the Board of Governors span multiple presidential and congressional terms. However, the Federal Reserve is subject to oversight by Congress, which periodically reviews its activities and can alter its responsibilities by statute. Also, the Federal Reserve must work within the framework of the overall objectives of economic and financial policy established by the government. Therefore, the Federal Reserve can be more accurately described as "independent within the government."

The twelve regional Federal Reserve Banks, which were established by Congress as the operating arms of the nation's central banking system, are organized much like private corporations--possibly leading to some confusion about "ownership." For example, the Reserve Banks issue shares of stock to member banks. However, owning Reserve Bank stock is quite different from owning stock in a private company. The Reserve Banks are not operated for profit, and ownership of a certain amount of stock is, by law, a condition of membership in the System. The stock may not be sold, traded, or pledged as security for a loan; dividends are, by law, 6 percent per year.更多精彩文章及讨论，请光临枫下论坛 rolia.net
http://www.federalreserve.gov/generalinfo/faq/faqfrs.htm

这段中有个很重要的话，就是必须是系统中的一员。也就是说美联储是必须和美国共同利益的。这也就是美国不允许倒闭，只能不停的从美联储借贷的依据之一。实际情况是，这些年来美国的美元盈利能力一直不错。 -kingsw(Steven); 2009-2-12 (#5044885@0)

有时间看看lz推荐的书，或者中文的《《货币战争》》，再发表评论不迟。 -huranjian(落叶他乡树,寒灯独夜); 2009-2-9 (#5036701@0)

宋鸿兵的那本书好像有人指出蓄意撒谎的部分很多，不足为信，您是否听说一二？ -binghongcha76(一只大猫); 2009-2-10 (#5038451@0)

那本书不是学术著作，但是可以提供一些思路，毕竟这次的经济危机，不是宋造成的。如果资本主义真的会垮，又关马克思什么事情？ -kingsw(Steven); 2009-2-12 (#5044676@0)

我底下链接的那个文章指出了宋鸿兵是如何撒谎的，如果文章所述属实，那这本书只能是提供一些把人变傻的思路...... -binghongcha76(一只大猫); 2009-2-12 (#5045356@0)

很多问题问得很到位，不过现实下，第一个要问的就是美国为什么会这样，还会怎样，货币单位的价值究竟应该如何定位。好比宋祖德报料，大家姑且听之，没想对了七七八八，是他太厉害吗？ -kingsw(Steven); 2009-2-12 (#5045382@0)

ok ... 原来宋鸿兵 == 宋祖德，呵呵，that's enough.... -binghongcha76(一只大猫); 2009-2-12 (#5045481@0)

别小看宋祖德哦，这个家伙满嘴胡说，却偏偏十打九中，还没有官司缠身。上次的报料谢晋和刘晓庆的私生子，也没有起诉他的。 -kingsw(Steven); 2009-2-12 {83} (#5045495@0)
说他背后没有团队，我才不信。
看，这算不算另一个阴谋论 - 宋祖德是商业包装的报料人。
宋鸿兵：除了本书，赚了钱，出了名，现任中国政府的经济研究机构环球财经研究院院长。名利位三收。那些特别关心找他书错处的人做得到吗？ -kingsw(Steven); 2009-2-12 {236} (#5045511@0)
找到他书中的错又如何，无法证明或带来相应的商业价值。无非惹出正反一堆的大辩特辩。一地鸡毛后，如果宋说对了，他又达到了一个新的高度，还完全不必自己努力。如果他错了，在现有的高度，他同样可以心安理得的呆着。
与其辩其错，不如取其对更有价值。

哈哈，兄台三寸不烂之舌着实令老夫佩服。一个骗子得逞也值得深挖其正面意义。其实俺就是想说一下宋鸿兵“蓄意撒谎“这一事实《货币战争》因为其作者撒谎而并不可信。给参与讨论的网友一个另外的视角 -binghongcha76(一只大猫); 2009-2-12 (#5045548@0)

我可没打算替他辩护，也犯不着。骗不骗的，谁先把美国那点事情说清楚了，谁才有资格说那是真相。次贷爆发前的评级机构可都是有案可循的，油价从140多跌到40多，别说是市场正常的调节。有没有阴谋，我不知道，别人说有，我未必信。 -kingsw(Steven); 2009-2-12 {288} (#5045576@0)
别人说没有，我也不会认同。市场就是博弈，国家间也是博弈。美元黄金发生了什么，不是宋说了什么，而是到底发生了什么没有。你能给出答案吗？就算货币战争再一无是处，华尔街昨天，今天，明天也都是你我看得见得。
有没有正面意义，仁者见仁，智者见智。你既然提供了一个侧面的观感，我当然给你一段我的理解。
我不是骗子，也没有能力骗你。只是提一下我的建议：管理好你的现金及不动产比例（通胀可能），准备一点黄金储备（保值功能），警惕股票，债券，外汇以及养老金等投资。 -kingsw(Steven); 2009-2-12 (#5045582@0)

正在学习中，现在不便分享。你先说说他书那蓄意撒谎，我也好有个堤防。 -huranjian(落叶他乡树,寒灯独夜); 2009-2-12 (#5045198@0)

呵呵，随便搜到的，请您过目 -- 《著名金融学家宋鸿兵的谎言集锦》 -binghongcha76(一只大猫); 2009-2-12 (#5045294@0)

棒杀，捧杀。他也算名利双收了。就一本通俗演绎，也能搞得鸡犬不宁。圣经的争论也不过如此。 -kingsw(Steven); 2009-2-12 (#5045396@0)

It's not LZ's invention, a lot of people have pointed out this very problem including US Presidential Candidate, Congressman Ron Paul who said 'the Federal Reserve is neither Federal and has no reserve', and asks for it to be abolished. -omega4(omega); 2009-2-9 (#5036996@0)

没看出这篇文章哪里说美联储是一个私人企业，相反地它也承认是“the central bank ”，只不过Ron Paul 主张废除美联储，却没有说明要用什么样的机构来代替美联储履行中央银行的职能，这种只破不立的做法不会有很大市场的 -91109(葡萄紫的大海); 2009-2-10 (#5038421@0)

美联储不可能被替代，它和美国是双生共存的。以美元的信用为依托的。在美国起决定性作用的是利益，而非政府。但是如果美国失去其价值，你会看到美联储国有化的一天。 -kingsw(Steven); 2009-2-12 (#5044698@0)

很不幸，这是事实。 -kingsw(Steven); 2009-2-9 (#5036998@0)
尽管主席由美国政府指定，不过美联储应该还是算私有企业 -buma(四眼); 2009-2-9 (#5037010@0)

企业的最大特点就是以赢利为目的，可是美联储并不以赢利为目的，应该是非盈利机构，有点象银行同业公会 -91109(葡萄紫的大海); 2009-2-10 (#5038422@0)

美联储最大的盈利能力就是对外输出美元。以美国最为最强大的后盾，保证输出美元的价值及信用。 -kingsw(Steven); 2009-2-12 (#5044752@0)

you are so funny -informix(informix); 2009-2-9 (#5037013@0)

每个人都说一句funny, 就变得不funny了。。。。 -vetra(豆泡果之多泡泡); 2009-2-9 (#5037018@0)

美国的中央银行是Federal Reserve System，也称Federal Reserve，简称Fed，它和其它国家受政府控制的中央银行不同，是一个亦公亦私的独立体，主管宏观金融政策制定，定期向国会汇报。。。 -nodream(～～～); 2007.9.25 12:46 (#3953518@0) -nodream(～～～); 2009-2-9 (#5037043@0)
在美国，很多你认为是政府/国家的东西实际上是私人的。甚至许多城市。 -gtaon08(GtaOn); 2009-2-12 (#5043980@0)

什么叫私人企业？并不是私人出资的就是私人企业。政府就是私人（纳税人）出资的，但是她不以营利为目的，不能分红，不能撤资。美联储也是，她是由银行出资组成的，但是她不盈利为目的，出资方不能撤资，也不能分红。出资方可以有一定选举权，和政府由国民选举是一样的。 -steve888(Steve曾经曰过); 2009-2-10 {260} (#5038412@0)
实际上，美联储就是政府通过法律掠夺私人财产的一种手段。和军队征用私人设备是一样的。资本是私人的，但是管理权是政府的，所有权虽然永远在私人名下，但是私人永远拿不回来。
资本主义国家，中央银行一般都是来源于私人资本。比如香港由三大银行（汇丰、渣打和中国银行）构成。

金融资本家和部分美国政客不停的演着双黄 -blacksea(Blacksea); 2009-2-10 {340} (#5040641@0)
让人们和其他国家买美元和美国国债，但拥有美元和美国国债就等于自杀。买单的不是中国，日本，俄罗斯和其他他想吃掉的国家，就是我们这些在他们体系下的美国人民，加拿大人民，欧洲人民。这场赌博玩得太大了-全球的人都不安生，如果这场火继续烧下去，要莫全军覆没，全球是一个国家，一个统治者（统治者可指定谁为谁服务-第三世界国家服务于发达国家），要莫玩火自焚

人民，才是改造历史的英雄。 -caa(移民的孙悟空lifeisok); 2009-2-10 (#5038444@0)
布什及其全球贸易政策 -zx0228(大城小爱); 2009-2-12 (#5043974@0)

美国拼命借，中国拼命赊，美国人拼命花，中国人拼命存。不管小布老胡。。。 -caa(移民的孙悟空lifeisok); 2009-2-12 (#5044858@0)

从来没想过，美元也可以当核武器使用：美元威慑！ -kingsw(Steven); 2009-2-12 (#5044910@0)

美元的地位是通过战争和强大的市场确定的，当然有威慑。 -huranjian(落叶他乡树,寒灯独夜); 2009-2-12 (#5045185@0)

呵呵，我说的是中国拿着美元在威吓。 -kingsw(Steven); 2009-2-12 (#5045333@0)

威吓什么, 没有听说现在都是债主牛? 你越抛售, 价越低, 现在受拖累是中国 -ding_ding(丁_丁); 2009-2-13 (#5046845@0)

@Ontario

美联储是一个公私合营企业. 也就是说，官商勾结的企业：　“ it is an independent entity within the government, having both public purposes and private aspects.”

Replies, comments and Discussions:

More Topics

@Ontario

美联储是一个公私合营企业. 也就是说，官商勾结的企业： “ it is an independent entity within the government, having both public purposes and private aspects.”

Replies, comments and Discussions:

More Topics

美联储是一个公私合营企业. 也就是说，官商勾结的企业：　“ it is an independent entity within the government, having both public purposes and private aspects.”