Explore the escalating Sino-US trade war under Trump’s unprecedented tariffs, its economic implications, and the geopolitical tensions shaping global relations in 2025.
"We all know that since the establishment of the Federal Reserve in 1913, Wall Street has completely controlled the United States. They control the United States not through guns and bullets, but through currency.".
Prior to 1913, commercial banks created all money in the US.
Subsequent to 1913, commercial banks create almost all money in the US.
So how did they become MORE powerful, after some some of their money creation power was removed?
The right to issue currency has been an important power since ancient times. The power of this power lies in that bankers can dilute people's wealth by regularly overissuing currency. After the financial era, bankers and financiers can join forces to regularly go long and short the stock market to seek huge profits.
Financial crises have always been an "effective way" for bankers to manipulate the market and reap the wealth of ordinary people. This is even more true after the establishment of the Federal Reserve. By regularly loosening and tightening the money supply, bankers can reap the wealth of the American people at will. What Trump has done is to take back the currency issuance rights controlled by the Federal Reserve from the hands of bankers to save the United States of America, which is on the verge of extinction.
It's just that Trump was too impatient and radical in the process of implementing policies, which caused inestimable huge losses and counter-effects. This is a common mistake made by many reformers. Whether it is the Gracchus brothers' reforms at the end of the Roman Republic or Kang Youwei and Liang Qichao's reforms at the end of the Qing Empire, they all made such mistakes, and Trump and Musk are just the latest practitioners of this mistake.
"This is even more true after the establishment of the Federal Reserve. By regularly loosening and tightening the money supply, bankers can reap the wealth of the American people at will.".
The US had no central bank from 1841ish to 1913.
During that time, monetary expansions and contractions were 100% the results of commercial banking activities.
Since 1913, monetary expansions have been 95ish% the results of commercial banking activities.
That being the case, how is the ability of bankers to enrich themselves at our expense even more true after the establishment of the Federal Reserve?
Thomas Jefferson, the author of the immortal American Declaration of Independence at the age of 33 and the third president of the United States, once said a warning:
"If the American people eventually allow private banks to control the issuance of the country's currency, then these banks will first deprive the people of their property through inflation and then deflation, until one morning when their children wake up, they have lost their homes and the continent their fathers once conquered."
Today, in 2025, Thomas's prediction has become a reality. The United States and the American people are heavily in debt and face an extremely uncertain future.
I did not say that. In fact, before the establishment of the Federal Reserve in 1913, the issuance of US currency was dominated by commercial banks. In fact, both the Federal Reserve and commercial banks have caused unimaginable harm to the financial stability of the United States. This is the serious consequence of the government's inability to control the right to issue currency.
The United States and many countries in the world have adopted the so-called "fractional reserve system", which allows commercial banks to create and expand the money supply "out of thin air" after the central bank issues currency, which is often called the "money multiplier" in economics. Let's assume that the money multiplier is 7, then when the central bank, such as the Federal Reserve, issues one dollar, commercial banks can "issue" 7 dollars of bank credit. The specific method is to release the corresponding currency through loans, which is discussed in great detail in Keynes's "Macmillan Report".
Trump's radical policies may lead to two results: either Trump will encounter strong resistance from both inside and outside the Republican Party, or step down in disgrace and go to prison, or be assassinated. Or Trump will force reforms, causing the domestic situation to deteriorate extremely and trigger an internal implosion. In either case, the United States of America will not be able to continue to exist, and a new American Empire may be established.
Just like the failure of the Gracchus brothers' reforms led to the demise of the Roman Republic and the establishment of the Roman Empire.
And, the Bank of the United States (both the first and the second) did issue US dollar denominated notes prior to 1841 when President Jackson allowed their corporate charter to expire.
But from 1841 to 1862 private banks issued bank notes, which were legal tender, but were not strictly speaking US dollars.
The United States uses guns and currency. I don’t think that our recent legacy is something tobe proud of.
Since the US went off the gold standard, the money became fiat money, backed by nothing. The money transitioned from something to save to something to spend, a credit instrument. The banks are enormously powerful because they control the supply of credit.
Loose credit creates inflation. 5% inflation means prices double every ~20 years. Tight credit slows the economy. Credit can be given industry by industry where be banks feel that they can make the most money. It backfires on them when people default on their loans en mass such as with commercial real estate. However the banks can ride it out, holding the distressed asset for resale at a profit at a later time. Citizens cannot impact this situation.
"I don’t think that our recent legacy is something to be proud of.".
I'm not sure there has even been an empire where that statement was not true.
"The banks are enormously powerful because they control the supply of credit.".
Yes, and interestingly, the original poster seems to understand this very poorly and for some reason thinks bankers obtained a tight grip on the US economy starting in 1913. I was trying to help him see past this interesting blind spot.
China is “de-risking” , not “decoupling”, rhetoric matters. Why let the West blame China for the “decoupling”. Just say that China is following the EU’s example and “deriding”! Ha ha 😝
DJT is simply following the script laid out for him. We can see "continuity of agenda" in the actions & policies of the presidencies of Reagan, Clinton, the Bushes, Obama, Trump 1, Biden & Trump 2. The figurehead is only that & serves as a great distraction to the actual policy which marches on fairly unabated.
War with China has been on the agenda & offered in think tank policy papers at least since 2009 & I would argue well before that. However, the USA seems decidedly weaker now militarily than it seemed 15 years ago, so I'm not sure why the delay. In that time USA has managed to flatten Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan & Ukraine & raise havoc elsewhere. Why it didn't attack China in 2009 could be due to the high investment of USA & multi-nat'l manufacturing in China. A lot of money was being made then. But now China has managed to capture much of that money itself & USA policy enriches the wealthy & starves the state.
USA will not "win" a war with China now. Chinese leaders seem willing to let USA exhaust itself in bellicose rhetoric & threatening military actions. Meanwhile, supplies of crucial elements to make war machines have been cut off. China controls them. How the USA will fizzle is up to conjecture.
One cannot slap the Chinese Dragon in the face and escape unharmed. Dragons really don’t like that! Dragons have very long lives, so they play the long game.
Thank you for writing this article. The US Congress created the Federal Reserve so they are complicit in its successes and failings.
Inquiry: are these the 100 year bonds that are redeemable in gold?
Xie xie. Unless the bonds are exchangeable for either digital commodity tokens or an actual commodity, I doubt they will be marketable. I wouldn’t buy one :-)
Well, this is how nay-sayers have been successfully eliminated in the past. Perhaps, when there is enough to resist, the strategy fails. Usually resistance breeds persistence, though, so an entirely new strategy needs to be devised. Problems are solved through different mentality than they are created.
I can give you a suggestion. You can keep the US dollar and buy some RMB and gold as a hedge. RMB-US dollar-gold is the iron triangle of investment. No matter how the situation changes, you will not suffer losses.
"We all know that since the establishment of the Federal Reserve in 1913, Wall Street has completely controlled the United States. They control the United States not through guns and bullets, but through currency.".
Prior to 1913, commercial banks created all money in the US.
Subsequent to 1913, commercial banks create almost all money in the US.
So how did they become MORE powerful, after some some of their money creation power was removed?
The right to issue currency has been an important power since ancient times. The power of this power lies in that bankers can dilute people's wealth by regularly overissuing currency. After the financial era, bankers and financiers can join forces to regularly go long and short the stock market to seek huge profits.
Financial crises have always been an "effective way" for bankers to manipulate the market and reap the wealth of ordinary people. This is even more true after the establishment of the Federal Reserve. By regularly loosening and tightening the money supply, bankers can reap the wealth of the American people at will. What Trump has done is to take back the currency issuance rights controlled by the Federal Reserve from the hands of bankers to save the United States of America, which is on the verge of extinction.
It's just that Trump was too impatient and radical in the process of implementing policies, which caused inestimable huge losses and counter-effects. This is a common mistake made by many reformers. Whether it is the Gracchus brothers' reforms at the end of the Roman Republic or Kang Youwei and Liang Qichao's reforms at the end of the Qing Empire, they all made such mistakes, and Trump and Musk are just the latest practitioners of this mistake.
"This is even more true after the establishment of the Federal Reserve. By regularly loosening and tightening the money supply, bankers can reap the wealth of the American people at will.".
The US had no central bank from 1841ish to 1913.
During that time, monetary expansions and contractions were 100% the results of commercial banking activities.
Since 1913, monetary expansions have been 95ish% the results of commercial banking activities.
That being the case, how is the ability of bankers to enrich themselves at our expense even more true after the establishment of the Federal Reserve?
Thomas Jefferson, the author of the immortal American Declaration of Independence at the age of 33 and the third president of the United States, once said a warning:
"If the American people eventually allow private banks to control the issuance of the country's currency, then these banks will first deprive the people of their property through inflation and then deflation, until one morning when their children wake up, they have lost their homes and the continent their fathers once conquered."
Today, in 2025, Thomas's prediction has become a reality. The United States and the American people are heavily in debt and face an extremely uncertain future.
Are you suggesting that in 1912 private banks did not control the issuance of the nations currency?
At a time when they issued 100% of it?
I did not say that. In fact, before the establishment of the Federal Reserve in 1913, the issuance of US currency was dominated by commercial banks. In fact, both the Federal Reserve and commercial banks have caused unimaginable harm to the financial stability of the United States. This is the serious consequence of the government's inability to control the right to issue currency.
In your original post you said:
"We all know that since the establishment of the Federal Reserve in 1913, Wall Street has completely controlled the United States.".
"...since the establishment of...".
The United States and many countries in the world have adopted the so-called "fractional reserve system", which allows commercial banks to create and expand the money supply "out of thin air" after the central bank issues currency, which is often called the "money multiplier" in economics. Let's assume that the money multiplier is 7, then when the central bank, such as the Federal Reserve, issues one dollar, commercial banks can "issue" 7 dollars of bank credit. The specific method is to release the corresponding currency through loans, which is discussed in great detail in Keynes's "Macmillan Report".
Trump's radical policies may lead to two results: either Trump will encounter strong resistance from both inside and outside the Republican Party, or step down in disgrace and go to prison, or be assassinated. Or Trump will force reforms, causing the domestic situation to deteriorate extremely and trigger an internal implosion. In either case, the United States of America will not be able to continue to exist, and a new American Empire may be established.
Just like the failure of the Gracchus brothers' reforms led to the demise of the Roman Republic and the establishment of the Roman Empire.
When did USA ever print its own money, the fabled "greenback"' so fondly recalled? Supposedly Andrew Jackson did it & maybe Lincoln. Any other time?
FWIW, the greenback didn't exist until 1862.
And, the Bank of the United States (both the first and the second) did issue US dollar denominated notes prior to 1841 when President Jackson allowed their corporate charter to expire.
But from 1841 to 1862 private banks issued bank notes, which were legal tender, but were not strictly speaking US dollars.
Thanks. I thought you had this clearly in mind & were bringing this to the attention of the author.
The United States uses guns and currency. I don’t think that our recent legacy is something tobe proud of.
Since the US went off the gold standard, the money became fiat money, backed by nothing. The money transitioned from something to save to something to spend, a credit instrument. The banks are enormously powerful because they control the supply of credit.
Loose credit creates inflation. 5% inflation means prices double every ~20 years. Tight credit slows the economy. Credit can be given industry by industry where be banks feel that they can make the most money. It backfires on them when people default on their loans en mass such as with commercial real estate. However the banks can ride it out, holding the distressed asset for resale at a profit at a later time. Citizens cannot impact this situation.
Thank you Kevin for your thoughts.
"I don’t think that our recent legacy is something to be proud of.".
I'm not sure there has even been an empire where that statement was not true.
"The banks are enormously powerful because they control the supply of credit.".
Yes, and interestingly, the original poster seems to understand this very poorly and for some reason thinks bankers obtained a tight grip on the US economy starting in 1913. I was trying to help him see past this interesting blind spot.
We can all help each other evolve :-)
China is “de-risking” , not “decoupling”, rhetoric matters. Why let the West blame China for the “decoupling”. Just say that China is following the EU’s example and “deriding”! Ha ha 😝
DJT is simply following the script laid out for him. We can see "continuity of agenda" in the actions & policies of the presidencies of Reagan, Clinton, the Bushes, Obama, Trump 1, Biden & Trump 2. The figurehead is only that & serves as a great distraction to the actual policy which marches on fairly unabated.
War with China has been on the agenda & offered in think tank policy papers at least since 2009 & I would argue well before that. However, the USA seems decidedly weaker now militarily than it seemed 15 years ago, so I'm not sure why the delay. In that time USA has managed to flatten Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan & Ukraine & raise havoc elsewhere. Why it didn't attack China in 2009 could be due to the high investment of USA & multi-nat'l manufacturing in China. A lot of money was being made then. But now China has managed to capture much of that money itself & USA policy enriches the wealthy & starves the state.
USA will not "win" a war with China now. Chinese leaders seem willing to let USA exhaust itself in bellicose rhetoric & threatening military actions. Meanwhile, supplies of crucial elements to make war machines have been cut off. China controls them. How the USA will fizzle is up to conjecture.
One cannot slap the Chinese Dragon in the face and escape unharmed. Dragons really don’t like that! Dragons have very long lives, so they play the long game.
Thank you for writing this article. The US Congress created the Federal Reserve so they are complicit in its successes and failings.
Inquiry: are these the 100 year bonds that are redeemable in gold?
Thank you
No, these century-old government bonds can neither be sold nor exchanged for gold or silver.
Xie xie. Unless the bonds are exchangeable for either digital commodity tokens or an actual commodity, I doubt they will be marketable. I wouldn’t buy one :-)
At gunpoint you might!
Probably absolutely not, I might die resisting, but it will be the best attempt to outlast outwit outplay on my part :-)
Well, this is how nay-sayers have been successfully eliminated in the past. Perhaps, when there is enough to resist, the strategy fails. Usually resistance breeds persistence, though, so an entirely new strategy needs to be devised. Problems are solved through different mentality than they are created.
I can give you a suggestion. You can keep the US dollar and buy some RMB and gold as a hedge. RMB-US dollar-gold is the iron triangle of investment. No matter how the situation changes, you will not suffer losses.
I liked your variations in mentality for problem creation versus solution, it is very true. Good point