But in contrast to the shitizens, the spokespersons of Fed -- the bankers’ replies dumbfoundingly. Please look at the following conversation.
Shitizen Liu Dasheng says ‘The incremental printed paper money is the product of living and manufacturing demand of all the nationals. The ownership of it should belong to all the nationals and it should be given to the nationals averagely. But in fact, it has been put by the Fed who is just an example of the central banks of all countries into its own pocket. It is quite unreasonable.’
The spokesman of Fed says ‘We didn’t put it into our own pockets, neither did we spend any incremental printed paper money. Instead, we exchange it into the government bonds and the IOUs of commercial bank.’
Shitizen Liu Dasheng says ‘But the government bonds and the IOUs of commercial bank must be repaid principal and paid interest on loans which is a great fortune. How can it be occupied by the central banks-- such as the Fed for free?’
The spokesman of the Fed says ‘We exchange the incremental printed paper money for it. How can you say we occupy it for free? ’
Shitizen Liu Dasheng says ‘But you didn’t pay for the incremental printed paper money.’
The spokesman of the Fed says ‘Indeed, we didn’t pay it. But it has been taken by the government and commercial banks. We don’t have it.’
In here, the incremental printed paper money is that roast duck. The government bonds, the IOUs of commercial bank and their interests are like the roast chickens. Shitizen Liu Dasheng is the waiter while the Fed and its bankers are the freeloaders.
The above conversation is not made up and it is summarized according to the replies from some bankers or banking experts to my banal work Who has the ownership of incremental printed paper money. If you don’t believe it, please read the following message replied on the website Lawforum.
