***Alert***Employers Increasingly moving away from traditional pay methods***

Is it time for the FED to go negative?

[link to online.wsj.com]

Ben Bernanke, chairman of the Federal Reserve Bank, has a lot more tools for supporting U.S. economic activity through expansionary monetary policy than he discussed in his Jackson Hole speech, which alluded only to more quantitative easing and credit easing—increasing the size and changing the liquidity composition of the Fed's balance sheet.

Perhaps out of fear of resurrecting the moniker "Helicopter Ben," Mr. Bernanke did not refer to the combined fiscal-monetary stimulus that (almost) always works: a fiat money-financed increase in public spending or tax cut. Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner can always send a sufficiently large check to each U.S. resident to ensure that household spending rises. By borrowing the funds from the Fed, there is no addition to the interest-bearing, redeemable debt of the state. As long as households are confident that these transfers will not be reversed later, "helicopter money drops" will, if pushed far enough, always boost consumption.

To restore monetary policy effectiveness in a low interest rate environment when confronted with deflationary or contractionary shocks, it is necessary to get rid of the zlb [zero lower bound to interest rates] completely. This can be done in three ways: abolishing currency, taxing currency and ending the fixed exchange rate between currency and bank reserves with the Fed. All three are unorthodox. The third is unorthodox and innovative. All three are conceptually simple. The first and third are administratively easy to implement.

The first method does away with currency completely. This has the additional benefit of inconveniencing the main users of currency—operators in the grey, black and outright criminal economies. Adequate substitutes for the legitimate uses of currency, on which positive or negative interest could be paid, are available.

Regulator says banks slow to buy back bad loans

[link to www.komonews.com]

I've been working for 30 some odd years and the job I have now is the first one where I get a "debit card" instead of a check.

I don't like it.

Wife was forced to either go direct deposit of have $4 taken out of her pay to get a paper check.

So, they can not only track your transactions, but can take it from you if you have any outstanding debts.

I share an account now, because the gov seized my old account.
I was outta work for 14 months, and they took what little I had left. >:

I'm afraid to put money in the bank anymore under my name.

Last Edited by Jami Cat on 09/15/2010 07:33 PM

Electronic funds. Little bleeps on which you live.

Then, CME takes out all electronics, globally.

Cashless "slavery" society.

I have been using an alternative method for years. My employees sign their checks and I cash them right on the spot. They don't have to run to the bank or endure the possibility for some reason the bank won't cash the check etc..

You are a wonderful person. Thank you for watching out for your "people".

That's a great way to do it. When I had a retail business of course we cashed our own checks out of our deposits too. Very very convenient and a side benefit of working retail.

This is the 1st step in forcing a consumption tax.

If your entire paycheck is stuck in a CHARGE CARD ACCOUNT, and you have to pay a FEE to spend it or turn it to cash, then -

That FEE is a forced CONSUMPTION TAX.

HOW TO FIGHT BACK. Tell your employer that you demand a 5% cost of living increase to cover this hidden CONSUMPTI0N TAX if they refuse to pay you by check or cash. If they don't like it, then tell them to take this job and shove it!

Go on welfare and crash the gov't!

They can't butt fuck you, if you ain't bent over!

Welcome to the beast system.Got mark?

I've had direct deposit for the last 20 years. Quit whining babies. LOL!

The change is slowly being made for new electronic currency!