"Bernanke should go around in a Devil suit."
Lew Rockwell, discusses the Ron Paul Revolution and Revolutionaries, the myth of the government exception from the moral law, the connection between central banking and war, the growing awareness among the American people of the connection between central banking and war, the terrible consequences of inflation, what Ron Paul would probably do about it, the savings to be had in ending the empire, the War Party players and red state fascists who support Rudy Giuliani instead and Ron Paul’s position on defending America from al Qaeda.
That Ron Paul. He’s catchin on. I’m tellin ya.
Ron Paul is going to win it all.
Has anyone read Frum’s attack on Paul over the gold standard? I support Paul mostly because of Iraq and I don’t understand enough economic theory to say why Frum is wrong. Obviously, the “Axis of Evil” neocon is a monster, but does anyone have a rebuttal for Frum’s argument that a gold standard just substitutes miners for central bankers as the people who determine the money supply? Also Frum says it won’t work because the gov’t will dump the policy at the first hint of recession, inevitably causing people to hoard gold, meaning people will never accept gold backed notes in the first place. Why is that wrong? I think I know.. Isn’t that almost like saying that peace is wrong because a gov’t at peace can change it’s policy and declare war, therefore peace is unworkable? Obviously policies can change I don’t see how that invalidates what Paul is saying about the central bank. Any economists out there?
I am a Baptist now converting to Roman Catholicism, and I can say that most of the conservative Catholics and Protestants do not want war anymore than the common “Joe” on the street. Pat Robertson, who now endorses one of the worst immoral candidates Rudy Giuliani, has a group of people who will vote for whomever he endorses, but I believe his “followers” have gone down in numbers the last couple of years. He is appearing to be somewhat senile. No matter what the national polls are indicating, if Ron Paul can succeed in waking up people state-by-state, starting in New Hampshire, then, upset that primary, that will be his thrust into the consideration of being a serious candidate. Of course, I believe he can do this. I believe he will prove that he can garnish a wide appeal among the Republican bases of conservative Catholics and Protestants, in comparison to Giuliani or Romney, whom they probably won’t support. McCain won’t do much better, since he supported Amnesty for the Illegals, the Patriot Act, and on August 20, 1999, he said, “I would not support repeal of Roe v. Wade, which would then force X number of women in American to (undergo) illegal and dangerous operationsâ€, yet he says he is pro-life. Ron Paul’s ads will need to bring these points HOME to the citizens of New Hampshire, in a way that will set himself apart. I hope someone is reading this. Quotations need to be in their radio ads and TV ads…..all to win!
Anti… Ron understands economics very well… He has studied it for a long time… Short version, He believes in a “Hard Currency” That can be Gold, or Silver (By the constitution)… There are correct ways of introducing a sound currency and he will know and have very good sound money advisers to help him… Another thing (and very important) the money would be spent into existence (not loaned). If it is loaned into existence, it must be repaid (with interest) and when paid back you are at your original position, with the same problem you started with (No medium of exchange)and you still owe the interest! If paid into existence (To build a interstate, bridge or other means I’m not knowledgeable about) the money can stay in the population as a medium of exchange… No interest due either! There is a lot more to it…
)!!!
Frum says miners could manipulate the market… Perhaps he should read up on the subject… There are ways to do this to avoid that from happening… Anyway, Bankers are doing it now . So, is he saying that he thinks Bankers are less greedy than miners
AF: Lew here: http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/016722.html
It is much much more difficult for miners to dig up more gold than it is for the fed to create more paper money. So Frum is just blowing smoke.
Anti-Fascist
Very briefly: all trade began as barter but unless you could find someone who had exactly what you wanted and you had exactly what he wanted (a double coincidence of wants), no exchange could take place. Thus to make trade more efficient, people began seeking a better means of exchange. Ultimately, gold emerged as a good that more and more people were willing to exchange their goods for (a medium of exchange) just so they could then use it to purchase what they were really after. Keep in mind though, they were only willing to take gold because it already had value (jewlry and other commercial uses). No one would have been willing to exchange their real goods for worthless pieces of scrap paper (fiat money) that can be produced in huge amounts for virtually nothing. In order to inflate the currency at will, governments have to outlaw gold. Because, again, if not coerced people will insist on trading value for value verses value for nothing. Hope this makes some sense. For much more detail, go to mises.org
It is true that the value of hard money can vary with supply and demand of the assets upon which it is based. But the value of fiat money can vary with the speed of the printing press that counterfeits it.
For Frum to suggest that since both can vary, they are morally or practically the same is so dishonest, or ignorant, that it is pathetic. Centuries of experience has convinced most traders that gold (including gold-backed I.O.U.s) is the best money. That is the market choice. It does not need to be legislated. What “needs” to be legislated (legal tender laws) is phony Fed un-backed money. Ron Paul proposes that other forms of money be allowed to compete. He knows that once the market is free to choose a money (once individuals are free to choose what they will take in trade for use in future trades) they will choose gold and gold-backed I.O.U.s. (or possibly also other precious or scarce metals). Fed notes will not be wanted since their value is zero and their future scarcity is easily manipulated by printing. The value of gold, however is very hard to manipulate. Only if someone digs up an enormous new supply of gold would its market value shift a bit, but it would be a one-time shift and fully understood and “discounted” immediately by the market. It would do no harm.
Read Murray Rothbard at mises.org
@anti — first, one thing Frum neglects to mention is that the Fed has been the cause of recessions. Contrary to popular belief, business cycles and recessions are not things that have to happen. They are instead by-products of central banks and inflation. Second, the suggestion that the money supply would be in the hands of miners is absurd! Most of the gold ever mined still exists above ground. Miners can add to that stock at some small fraction per year. That’s one of the great things about gold, is that the supply can’t be suddenly changed — that’s why it’s a stable foundation for money.
Frum would apparently prefer the current approach, where the Fed facilitates stealing from the poor and enriching banks, large corporations and the upper tiers of society. Inflation is a hidden tax. It allows government to steal from its people without the hassle of a real tax. How does money come into existance today? As an example, if you deposit $100,000 in your local bank, that amount is considered part of the bank’s reserves. It can then create out of thin air an additional $900,000, and loan it out with interest. To the bank, and to the people receiving the loans, that’s great. But for you, the resulting inflation has diminished the value of your original deposit. The bank is using inflation to steal from you for its benefit and for the benefit of the borrowers. A gold-backed currency prevents this sort of theft and distortion.
I found Frum’s piece to reek of something rotten–with phrases about “miners not central bankers” and with the assertion that “foreigners would be induced to buy more from us.” Our industrial and manufacturing base has declined sharply, and yet he sees a rosy picture. What do we have other than services(until 6 p.m. when even those services are outsourced) that most foreigners would want?
The problem is, there are people and countries speculating against our dollar. The gov’t has made it illegal for alternative currencies. What ever happened to the free market? Frum and his pals get to use your assets to invent their own assets out of thin air, paying you a small interest rate–while turning those invented assets around at larger interest rates.
Then he withers out another stumper– “the burden falls most heavily on those with the most wealth to lose.” No David, they get the benefit of the money before it has lost its value through inflation. Sure, there are some risks, but you don’t have to advocate taking high risks as a reason why the floating currency is better. Fixed currency is still the answer.
Then he states ” If something bad happened in the world or US economy, the dollar could not adjust.(on gold)”
This is interesting on its face, but it distorts the time factor in the adjustment period of the currency by positing a false conclusion. It may not adjust as quickly as some would like it, but as the old saying goes, “high prices fix high prices”. He should consider being a bit more patient, or at least a bit more diversified.
…Another worn out Polemic along those original lines, is after all to be expected from the likes of Frum…Maybe they’ll end up Outsourcing him? Bottom line Gentlemen: They’re bankrupting the Nation over this Goddamed War that they have not the slightest intention of ending!…After all, it was Richard Cheney when asked about the mounting cost…ya know, in Dollars remarked: “…Reagan proved the deficit doesnt matter.” Uh huh, sure…That’s the mentality you’re up against.