Ron Paul Debates MSNBC’s Panel of Experts

In a seemingly unbridgeable clash of two widely divergent world views, Ron Paul talks with three experts on MSNBC’s Morning Joe, repeating his assertion that we’re on the wrong path and that printing more money will eventually destroy the dollar.

Source: Morning Joe
Channel: MSNBC
Date: 1/27/2009


Host: Educate please this “panel of experts” here. And I say that with quotes around it. About, why this sort of throwing money at the issue bailing, bailing, bailing out, may be potentially reckless and damaging for the future of this nation’s economy.

Ron Paul: Well, in order to understand that, you have to understand how we got into this mess. We got into this mess by spending too much, borrowing too much and inflating too much. Government was too big and we had too many regulations. We had rejected the market economy for decades now. We had rejected the notion of sound money for decades. And we got into a mess this way. So what is the proposal? Spend more money, borrow more money, print more money, regulate more so. So, it makes no sense whatsoever. So we’re going to make the problems much worse. We’re doing exactly what we did in the 1930s. We are determined to take a serious recession and turn it into a depression if we don’t change our ways. When governments spend money, they spend it in a non-productive manner. And every penny the government spends, they have to take it out of a productive source of money. The money has to come from somewhere. Everybody talks about the money that’s going to be spent, and about how many wonderful things will happen, but they never say, where does that $825 billion dollars come from? That’s the question they have to ask and they have to find an answer to that to fully understand why what we’re doing is absolutely wrong.

Expert #1: Alright. Alright

Host: OK. OK.

Expert #1: Congressman, let me ask you. I understand where you’re coming from here, I think, sort of. You know, but the house is already on fire and I think no matter who…

Host: Yeah, I mean look at these headlines.

Expert #1: No matter how the fire begins. The house is on fire. The house is on fire. So let’s take one industry specifically. Let’s take the automotive industry in this country. Are you saying, spend no money on the automobile industry in this country that American automobile manufacturing, let it disappear?

Ron Paul: Well, I think you’re correct. The house is on fire and you think you’re putting water on it and I think you’re putting kerosene on it. And that’s the big argument. No, you take the car industry. Yes, I think we should put more money on the car industry, but it should come from private sources. It shouldn’t come from government because government will divvy out the money politically. But there are private sources of money, if there’s anything of value, it will be bought up. But you don’t, you can’t value anything when the government buys up assets that aren’t sellable. You buy up worthless assets, so there’s some worthless assets in these car companies, so if you want good money to go into car companies you have to allow real capital to flow into it. So yes, you do want that, you just don’t want the government to do it.

Expert #2: So what systemic changes, if you look at tax policy which alters flow of capital as you know well. If you look at whether it’s spending or any other aspect of the use of money, interest rates, monetary supplies, etc. What substantive change would you put in? Would you exploit this opportunity to change the system of capitalism in America for the better? How would you change it?

Ron Paul: Get rid of the income tax…

Expert #2: I agree with that.

Ron Paul: … get rid of corporate taxes and really lower taxes. But you have to lower spending. You can’t lower-

Expert #2: Would you add a consumption tax to make up for that? Would you put a consumption tax in?

Ron Paul: Oh no…

Expert #2: And how would you make up for the loss revenue on income. I agree with you on in cutting business tax. I just don’t know where to get the revenue elsewhere. And I would argue with consumption.

Ron Paul: I am not interested in getting the revenues, I want to cut spending. But the problem is, is nobody wants to cut the American empire. Even Obama’s administration wants to increase spending overseas, increase military spending. As long as you want to run the world empire, at a trillion dollars a year, believe me, you cannot solve this problem. And that is where the crux of the matter is. So yes, you got to cut spending along with cutting taxes. So, to say well let’s have a consumption tax, that’s just transferring the penalty to new victims. But you want to get taxes down, you want to get rid of regulations. You don’t want to do what we did after the Enron failure, pass Sarbanes-Oxley, you know by the Conservative Republicans. That’s the fault, that’s in the thinking that we need so much government.

Expert #3: Congressman, are you really saying that given the meltdown on Wall Street and some of the craziness that we saw at Citigroup, at Merrill and other places that there should be less regulation, not more in some cases?

Ron Paul: Yeah, we should have more on the Federal Reserve so that we know what they’re doing. They’re exempt from regulation as is treasury. We give treasury $350 billion and we don’t even know where they spend it. That’s the type of regulation you want.

Expert #3: What about on Wall Street, Congressman? What about on Wall Street. Do you not want to see on some of these derivative products? Do you not want to see there’ll be some kind of regulations in terms of what the banks can do?

Ron Paul: Sure. Sure. Anybody who commits fraud goes to jail just as they did in Enron. We did’t need Sarbanes-Oxley to prosecute everybody in Enron through the laws of fraud. If they commit fraud they go to prison. Just like Madoff, you know we had all those regulations, SEC and everything else, and he got by. It proves SEC didn’t work.

Guy2: But Congressman, it’s not just fraud in some cases. In some cases people had very little equity put down and were leveraging things up tremendously. Should there not be regulation about how much equity you effectively have to put in a deal or how much capital you have to have on your balance sheet?

Ron Paul: Yeah, sure. If you understand leveraging up equity and debt, you have to look in factionary reserve banking, that’s where you pyramid debt. So they’re doing exactly what the Federal Reserve does, is they create money out of thin air and they pyramid debt. That’s where the bubble comes from. That’s why you have to look at monetary policy. But you’re looking at the symptoms rather than the cause.

Expert #1: Congressman, hang with me for a couple of seconds here. I am extremely limited. And 90% of this conversation that you’ve been having with Dylan and Carlos has gone way above my head. But your basic theory, let’s get government out of nearly everything. Let’s swing back to what I do nearly every morning. I drive to work on roads filled with pot holes, beneath bridges that are crumbling. What’s the answer here? Do I go out and try and find six carpenters and some percolators and some masons to fix those roads and bridges? Government’s gotta do it. What’s the deal here? What is your point of view about stuff like that? Basic reconstruction of this country.

Ron Paul: Okay, I know I can’t have my perfect society quickly, but what I would do is quit bombing bridges in Iraq and then paying to rebuild them, and then wasting money on rebuilding over there. I would take that money, save it on the deficit, cut the deficit and spend some on our infrastructure. That’s what I would do, and we could do that. But as long as you do it through debt financing it’s impossible. Ideally, roads and bridges should have been taken care of by our states. It wasn’t designed in the constitution that the Federal government would take care of every bridge and every road. But that isn’t the worst type of spending. And I think in the end we certainly could. We could cut the spending overseas. But we’re going to bring ourselves to our knees, we’re going to have a dollar crisis, we’re doing exactly what Osama Bin Laden wanted to do. What he did to the Soviets. He’s bringing about financial chaos to this country. And we’ve got to realize the excessive spending that is a problem. It’s not that we need more government spending. That to me is foolish.

Expert #2: Congressman, I want to ask you the same question I have been asking myself. Everybody on this set, I asked Tucker, I asked Pamela, ask you. In reality, forget your perfect society, mine or anybody else’s. In reality, we’re gonna lose millions of jobs over the next year or two. In reality our banks have been mismanaged horribly as a result of both the bankers and the politicians in my opinion, and we’re now dealing with that. What would you do? In other words, saying what you don’t think should happen has a value to a point. But in reality today, what do you think the American politicians and bankers ought to be doing.

Ron Paul: I wouldn’t pretend that pouring kerosene on the fire is working…

Expert #2: You started with that word “wouldn’t”. I’m sorry to interrupt you but I wanted it to start with “I would”.

Ron Paul: Okay, what I would do is allow the liquidation of debt to occur. You want the people to spend more money and buying up assets. You want these assets priced in the marketplace so we know what their values are. That’s why that first package of the…

Expert #2: But no one in the market will do that. As you know. I want that too.

Ron Paul: Then there’s no value there. That’s a good information then there’s no value. So why should you dump that on the American taxpayers? That’s a strong message that if it’s worthless, you don’t dump it on the taxpayers. That’s why our slump is getting worse.

Expert #2: Agree. But how do you get this country healthily to your perfect society where there’s limited taxes and free markets and innovation reigns supreme. And me and Willy are on the beach, you know, getting drinks served to us from some robots. But that’s not where we are today. How do you get that? How do you deal with the reality of the problems of this country?

Ron Paul: Well, the reality is you have to liquidate debt and get rid of the malinvestment. If you don’t do that then you can’t do it. But what you’re doing now is you’re working on the destruction of the dollar. There’s a pretense that you’re going to improve things, but you’re really going to destroy the dollar in a financial crisis that we have today is going to be a dollar crisis.

Expert #2: I know the risks.

Host: Yeah

Expert #3: Congressman, quick question. Would you be willing to accept unemployment in the double digits, 14 to 15% for several years, if in your mind that’s what it took to fix our fiscal house?

Ron Paul: Well, it’s better than 20. But I wouldn’t be responsible. The people who created the bubble would be responsible. Go talk to Greenspan and ask him if he is accepting the responsibility for the 14%. So you can’t blame the people who are trying to correct the problem on the unemployment. You got to blame the people who created the bubble. The people who were delighted with all the billions of dollars they were making in the last decade.

Host: I’m just watching for ways to accept that.

Expert #2: My frustration is. I agree with a lot of what he says, but the frustrating part of this is to try to figure out the constructive way forward. Identifying the problems we could, but how?

Host: The conversation keeps going to everybody throughout the show it keeps going backwards.

Expert #1: To Obama’s credit he’s trying to move forward and it’s going to be an interesting conversation.

Host: Congressman Ron Paul, thank you.

  • ukerry

    Sean; if priting money is the solution, then increase the printing. Isn’t it what they did in Germany when you needed a truck load of money to buy a loaf of bread. And by the way, the US gov’t doesn’t print money; only the Federal Reserve (which is neither reserve nor federal), a private bank, has the sole authority to print money. So when the gov’t needs money, it has to borrow it from the Reserve and pay interest or issue treasuries and pay the interest. Since the government is in debt and deficit they pay interest by having more money printed or issuing more treasuries. And it is like a snowball rolling down a hill, the further down it rolls, the bigger it gets. At crash time, just one roll adds a heck of a lot of snow to itself. The price has to be paid one day either by going bankrupt, leaving a huge debt to our children and grandchildren or huge inflation or a combination of all. Having more money chasing the same amount of goods or even less goods simply result in inflation and increase in prices. To add to all of this, americans are also highly indebted and when stocks and houses tumble, and jobs are lost, guess what?

  • Tyler

    HEY RON,

    When these jokers throw roads/infrastructure in your face you should debunk that right off the bat by telling them that infrastructure is a constitutional role of government and therefore would be a critical role of your ideal small government. Then move on to talk about how if we stopped all the non constitutional spending we would have money coming out of our ears.

    I hate how people use infrastructure as if it is an example of how nothing you say will work and I hate that you don’t smack that junk down, instead you go past it into your overall platform/plan which I think leaves them thinking that they had a valid point and you avoided directly addressing it.

    Put that baby to bed when the first bring it up and state that infrastructure is a perfect example of stuff the govt should spend money on and would be one of the few critical roles of the govt that you speak of.


  • longshotlouie

    He’s a troll that practices deflection in debate.
    Make that a Keynesian troll. His sole mission on this site is to seed doubt. He’s having a tough time selling a failing philosophy, though. But hey, it’s what his profressor told him …. it must be true.

    He has seen all of his arguments shredded, but he continues on a site where he seems to disagree with almost everything.

    Maybe he is trying to save us?

    lmao …. check’s in the mail, Sean

    Advice to all: Let him rant, but don’t ‘entertain’ him.

  • Ken Freeman

    I can’t figure out if Sean is just learning disabled in a peculiar way or a very, very clever troll…..

  • Sean

    trade deficit of.. 59 billion a month or around 7 trillion dollar total trade deficit since the late eighties.

  • Sean

    There is a report written in 2003 about why the dollar value started falling. This is because we started a trade deficit. We peaked oil in the nineties and started going to foreign countries for oil instead of being the major export of oil in the world… Our trade deficit made our dollar weaker making oil more expensive. That is what caused alan greenspan to raise interest rates causing this recession.

    • Sean
    • Nate

      So completely wrong again. I gotta get to sleep but the main reason the dollar started to lose value is the same reason why all other currencies start to lose value. Governments and banks start expanding the supply of money and credit (inflation). This is the reason why the dollar today is worth 4 cents compared to the dollar the FED inherited.


      • Sean

        I’m not sure that you are correct. The GDP stayed within boundries and the dollar drasticly made changes. It was the lost of production of oil since the seventies that raised the trade deficit that caused the value of the dollar to drop. Our trade deficit revealed uncertaniny with other countries and caused our exchange reserve to dramatically reduce in the late 90’s.. Alan Greenspan testified in court, warning that the trade deficit in the 90’s was going to cause a major decline in the dollar. The bush administration welcomed the weaker dollar and said that our payments would balance themself out.. Since our dollar was weakened so much, it brought foreign investors from all over the world, buying what assets they could. This really brought the value of the dollar down causing oil to become more expensive or what is known as core inflation. Alan greenspan then had to raise interest rates to try to slow down our oil consumption and pay interest for the foreign securities that were recently purchased.. The problem is, we ran out of oil… We have a systematic problem that no monetary policy can fix wheather it be fiat or hard currency.

        • Sean

          We now have a trade deficit of 59 trillion..Cutting our trade deficit in half would grow GDP from 3 to 25% yearly.. Oil makes up 42% of our trade balance. Capital and foreign goods represents the rest, NOT THE WAR! The money spent on the war is comming back to America, not in the hands of iraqis.

  • Sean

    “If we had a truth-in Government act comparable to the truth-in-advertising law, every note issued by the Treasury would be obliged to include a sentence stating: “This note will be redeemed with the proceeds from an identical note which will be sold to the public when this one comes due.”
    – Walter Wriston Chairman of Citicorp bank

    • Nate

      Do you think this quote strengthens the supposed integrity and validity of your position? That quote clearly demonstrates that Governments/Central banks rob the public through the use of fiat money.

      It destroys your absurd contention that “we aren’t required to pay back our debts”. All debts have to be repaid. With fiat money, the government is able to transfer the debt to the people. This is one method of wealth redistribution.

      • Sean

        that quote came from this page. you should read it to understand… The point is, we don’t have to pay the deficit, only interest on the deficit.. we do have to pay debts, or loans we make from the bank, but not the national deficit..

        • Nate

          Deficits do have to be paid back. When governments run deficits, they borrow and spend more than they bring in. How is this done? They can’t possibly do it through direct taxation because they would have a revolution on their hands if they tried. They can borrow money from other countries or private citizens by selling government bonds. They can also finance deficits through inflation. That is, by expanding the supply of money and credit. The result? The people pay higher prices and foreign creditors get pissed. Yet again we see how the misdefinition of inflation corrupts your thinking.

          • Sean

            you should learn about rollover bonds

          • Nate

            “a roll-over can be referred to as what happens when a borrower does not have enough money to pay back the loan when it is due. The borrower then borrows more money and the same rules apply (i.e. interest).”

            Rollover bonds are just another form of government deficit financing and inflation. If you think rollovers are not detrimental, you are truly lost.

            Governments can’t rollover forever because one day (and it’s fast approaching if it hasn’t come already) they’ll roll right over a cliff.

          • Sean

            haha!. Your looking at this in a totally wrong way. First of all, the deficit isn’t a bad thing, its a good thing. Its an investment. There are two different ways to invest. One way is that you can transfer your 401k into savings bonds. This is called debt held by the public. The other way is for foreign investors buy sovereign bonds. This is refered to debt held by foreigners. So its actually an investment. People get paid interest for these bonds, and make alot of money, so they keep their money invested after the bond time expires. It is simply replacing an old bond with a new bond. Just rolling over or rewriting the contract. This isn’t rollover minutes with at&t.. The major concern is the value of the dollar.. when the value of the dollar drops too fast, investors cash in their bonds to save money.

          • Sean

            And not only do other countries invest in our bonds (national debt), we also invest in other developing countries and export our money.

          • Nate

            “First of all, the deficit isn’t a bad thing, its a good thing. Its an investment.”

            This is just nonsense. Running deficits is never a good thing. They may be necessary in order to finance new productive capabilities but even this action should be taken with the greatest of care. The US has not been borrowing to produce. We have been borrowing to consume. It is analagous to a guy racking up a bunch of credit card debt, realizing he made a huge error, and resolving to get yet another credit card with a higer limit so he can continue to finance his extravagant lifestyle. It is insanity.

            You are correct to say that the great concern is the value of the dollar. But you fail to see that running deficits is a major cause of the devaluation of the dollar. Again, this isn’t shocking considering you do not understand inflation.

            Also, stop clicking the “thumbs up” icon in your own posts. It must be embarrassing.

          • Sean

            Haha, i’m not clicking the thumbs up. Some people i guess actually understand what i’m talking about. You don’t know a word of what your talking about. You think your common sense understands this but its not common sense. You obviously don’t know what your talking about. You proved yourself to not knowing a thing about investment bonds, monetary implications, push pull, cost push, or core inflation. I prove you wrong on everything you say so you nit pick definitions and words in between the lines. If you read any of my posts, i have been stressing the importance that we ran out of oil. We are not PRODUCING oil AND THAT IS THE PROBLEM. So don’t act like your correcting anything when you mimic me in a round about way. Your a waste of my time. This is like talking to an inconsiderate hillbilly.

          • Sean

            You can complain and cry all you want, but we’re never going back to the gold standard. Its just not feasible. Gold standard is not going to fix our trade deficit, and the gold standard is not going to fix our oil dependency. I was once like you, I wouldn’t of believed a word I was saying a couple years ago. I studied economics in college and have been learning about monetary policy longer than you’ve known who ron paul is. Don’t let your fear and ignorance control your life because you will never get anywhere.

          • Sean

            The only thing i like about ron paul is his idea’s on foreign policy. That is where he gets his respect. For all other issue’s on the table, he lost public confidence. A majority of people think he is a right wing nut. I think he is a great man, but he blurs the truth and uses one sided broad thinking and doesn’t realize the precautions taken to get where we are.. Anyone can speak of liberty, its an ongoing fight. Just like the war on drugs and the war on terrorist. We’re never going to be free because of degenerates. Our country is supposed to be the most free? Even before central banks, we have always had the most homicides, we’ve enslaved people and have always been racist, we’re greedy, we’re lazy, and we fear everything. We were unfit for civilization and it’s rules so we try to make a world free of rules. How long do you think that is supposed to last??. Since when in our history have we been free. How do you know what free is? Once your free, there’s always going to something to complain about. Most of us feel liberty. We have good lives and can’t complain. Its those who find something to complain about who will always be caged and left behind.. Get your head out of your ass and say something positive for a change.

  • Vangel

    The mindset is absolutely amazing. Dr. Paul made it clear that you fix the problem by letting liquidation take care of the malinvestments and letting the market buy up assets at whatever is the appropriate price. Yet, the commentators and ‘experts’ have this need to DO SOMETHING to prevent the market from working and are under the misconception that doing more of what got the US in the mess that it is in will somehow get it out of trouble.

    I really hope that you guys have bought some gold because from what I see the country is still hurtling towards the abyss with a new driver at the wheel.

  • Nate

    Apparently Sean doesn’t know what website he’s posting on when he thinks sayings like “majority rules” will fly with the freedom and liberty crowd.

    • Sean

      i’m more about freedom than you. How does loosing money justify freedom? I just understand that you have to fix the problem for good in order to become free.. We have a problem with oil and it causes central bank invervention and demenishes our economic freedom. So we need to fix the problem so we can maintain lower unemployment rates and then government can sit back and relax and let the country work for itself. I don’t know what you do for a living, but i’m an engineer. My mind thinks in constructive ways.. I’ve read thousands of articles on monetary policy and banking practices.

      • Sean

        Did you know there is like 5 billion searches on google every day.. Where do you think people got this information before the internet?

      • Nate

        Well then you’ve either didn’t comprehend the articles or you read the wrong ones. I’m leaning toward the latter. Perhaps your engineer’s mind does make it difficult for you to understand how the free market functions so well. But planned/engineered economies don’t work. It’s an impossible task for a small group of people to run or plan an economy.

        Perhaps you should give “The Pretense of Knowledge” a read.

        • Sean

          You dont understand. It is possible that the fed controls the amount of money in the economy through interest rates. Ron paul agree’s with this. What we hate is interest rates, it is an old greek debate about the morality of making money off of money. It’s simply wrong. BUT, we have an oil crisis we are trying to work with, even if it means tinkering with the economy.
          We’re dealing with a much larger stronghold than banks or governments. We are on the brinks of running out of oil, and the consequence is absurd.

          • Sean – oil is trading at $40/barrel. In 1970 dollars (pre OPEC Crisis #1) that equates to $6.75/barrel. Oil is dirt cheap, aided by huge military expenditures. There is at least 200 years of more oil – but it isn’t worth it to extract at these prices. Google “Canada Sand Oil” and “Shale Oil” – these two sources alone are five times today known reserves the world over – but extracting it is expensive. Once we know the true price of oil, then alternatives look better, but we are not running out of the stuff.

          • Sean

            Oil was 150 or so odd dollars a barrel around time the economy collapsed.. Thats around 20 dollars a barrel in 1970. THats OUTRAGOUS!!! There isn’t 200 more years of oil. You should check out .. why don’t you read about peak oil in an encyclopedia or watch this movie.. (winner of 7 international movie awards) We consume 20 million barrels of oil a day and thats 25% of the worlds consumption. This number is dramatically increasing because of developing countries. Every reserve found other than the middle east only contains a couple hundred million and would only last a couple days.

          • I’ve seen those websites. I find their arguments compelling. But don’t confuse $150/oil with running out of the stuff. There is at least a 200 year supply but it will cost a TON to get it out the shale and sand. That’s why I recently invested in oil – because I expect the price to rise rapidly in the coming years.

          • Sean

            How much oil did they find?? Remember we consume 80 million barrels a day.. DId u watch that movie that won 7 international awards? did you read an encyclopedia?

          • Sean

            that website has articles form the IEA, International Energy Agency… Do you think this is all some sort of hocus pocus??

      • Nate

        Again, you claim to be for freedom and liberty but you still support a central bank with the ability to print fiat money out of thin air. You endorse policies that result in legal plunder and the redistribution of wealth. You support a system that won’t even allow people to do as they please with their own money. How you can so easily deceive yourself?

        • Sean

          I’m not endorsing the central bank. I’m excusing their actions. They are trying to save us from disaster far further than economic related. I do believe in fractional reserve banking practices, and that doesn’t demolish our freedoms, oil problems causing intervention is destroying our freedoms. Your just blaming the middle man.. I’m not sure your thoughts about redistribution of wealth of how you figured i was for it, but you’ve proved yourself over and over to put words in my mouth. If you watched the whole video. It exposed the evil of interest rates, not fiat money. THey actually described how to change the structure of fiat so it would work.. There is no sound money in the world in existence today, it is all fiat money, in every country.. money, gold, silver has no value. Its worthless, its a piece of shiny crap and paper. A home, a car, infrastructure is value. These are things we invest our hourly wages into, they have purpose and meaning. Money gets written into existence to pay for these things.. Money is just a means of exchange. You sound like the type who would take advantage of someone for a quick buck. If you were the son of a rockefeller, you would be just as or even more evil. Greed is a deadly sin, you should try to find what true value is.

          • Sean, you need to look at the current cost of gold. Today it is trading over $920/ounce. Hard to call that worthless. You also need to look at our Constitution – if you believe in that the Federal Reserve is unConstitutional. It says in Section 8 – Powers of Congress: “To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;”

            The Constitution goes on to say (SECTION 9 – Powers prohibited of States) “make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts;”

            So how do states pay back debt with Federal Reserve Notes – the answer is they don’t do so legally. I would LOVE to see someone demand their state income tax refund is paid back in gold or silver coin.

            If I can’t convince you of the evils of the Federal Reserve, the easy credit they give – and the ease of funding wars and such, then maybe Thomas Jefferson can. One of my favorite quotes is: “The central bank is an institution of the most deadly hostility existing against the Principles and form of our Constitution. I am an Enemy to all banks discounting bills or notes for anything but Coin. If the American People allow private banks to control the issuance of their currency, first by inflation and then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the People of all their Property until their Children will wake up homeless on the continent their Fathers conquered. ”

            The fact that you are on this board and debating – regardless if you find our opinion intellectually more prudent – is a testament to your willingness to learn and I commend you for it.

          • Nate

            I don’t put words in your mouth. You just don’t understand the implications of what you say and the consequences of the policies you support. I can’t help you if you believe absurdities like “money is JUST a means of exchange” and “we aren’t required to pay back debt”.

            Let’s now address your misunderstanding of interest rates. Again, an interest rate is simply the price paid to borrow money. As such, it is not interest rates themselves that are objectionable. It’s the manipulation of interest rates that is problematic. Governments/Central Banks are engaged in price fixing when they manipulate the interest rate. The only way to properly determine prices (interest rates are prices) is through the free market. Govs/Central Banks are charged with an impossible task. It is no suprise that they fail.

          • Sean

            I know gold is worth money. It has no purpose though… I don’t believe in the fed reserve and don’t endorse them, i just said that. So this whole comment you posted is worthless.

          • Sean

            Lets clear up our understandings of interest rates… Money gets put into the economy through car, home, and business loans. When the fed raises interest rates, it is a manipulation to slow down the flow of loans and new money put into the economy… you should read this about national debt.


          • Sean wrote “There is no sound money in the world in existence today, it is all fiat money, in every country.. money, gold, silver has no value. Its worthless, its a piece of shiny crap and paper.”

            I responded “Sean, you need to look at the current cost of gold. Today it is trading over $920/ounce. Hard to call that worthless.”

            Sean replied “I know gold is worth money. It has no purpose though… I don’t believe in the fed reserve and don’t endorse them, i just said that. So this whole comment you posted is worthless.”

            Can’t say this conversation is stimulating. I’ll have more chance of converting the lamp next to me. There comes a time in a discussion where you just have to hope they’ll see the light and an intellectual discussion, at this time, is simply not possible.

          • Sean

            You dont’ know what your talking about. Your the one avoiding intellectual conceptions.

          • Andrew

            Debt Doomsday myth??? Hard to see it as a myth since it’s already happened before.

            Sean you would make a great MSNBC “Expert.”

          • Sean

            This is what we have to worry about. This is why the price of gas got more expensive and caused central banking intervention..
            Read the third paragraph down, what it says about oil. Then you can read the whole article if you would like..


  • Sean

    We can’t lower the price of homes, alot of people would lose alot of money. Majority rules…If we lowered assets, than we stunt the flow of money and thats one of the major problems in the first place. We aren’t going to destroy wealth because of poverty and people’s bad decisions and commitments. Thats thinking backwards.

    • Yashar

      So Sean you believe that we should fix prices? Doesn’t sound much like capitalism to me, and it definetly does not follow the supply and demand principle you were describing above. There are plenty of people in the US that did not make bad decisions and get themselves into ARM loans and the like, why should they have to pay for the mistakes of others? I for one do not believe that everybody else should have to pay so that people who got themselves into these mortgages can keep their inflated home values. Prices need to correct themselves, price fixing is not capitalism. And you speak of majority, you should really read this, even though I truly believe in this case the majority are the ones holding the short stick, the minority are the filthy rich people who get to keep and spend their money first before we hit hyper inflation.

      • Sean

        Like 95%+ of home owners will lose money. Its not true capitalism if there was subprime lending involved, so we should correct the mistakes instead of making it worse and ripping off 95% of the people doing the right things making the right choices… Just like you said, “There are plenty of people in the US that did not make bad decisions… why should they have to pay for the mistakes of others?”

        • Nate

          Wow…just…Wow. So completely wrong I don’t know how to respond.

        • neo

          Whether you like it or not, the home owners have already lost money. The question here is that weather or not, government has to come in between and buy a 100K house at 400K just to save the banks? It seems that they have already planned to go ahead with buying those assets. However the result could be that in couple of years, you will find that 400$ is only able to buy 100$ worth of goods which you can buy now. So in a way you are inflating dollar to save some bad decisions.

          • Nate

            I think we have to be more accurate with our words. If you own a mortgage on a house, you do not own the house. The bank does. You only own it once the mortgage has been paid.

            Home prices have to fall to the level properly set by the market.

  • Sean

    We’re not trying to get out of debt. thats not how the system works. We are trying to put more money into the economy because so much was taken out by high trade deficits and not enough put in bc of high interest rates.

    • Sean – I don’t not mean to be condescending, but you really have to know more about economics. Trade deficits do not take money out of the economy – dollars are floating around the whole world. Printing more money only devalues the dollar and raises inflation. Unless the Chinese are burning our dollars because they are feeling extremely generous, they still exists.

      Now, who is going to buy another $2 trillion of US debt to fund the CURRENT bailout (not counting the next trillion coming with the new bailout)? Foreigners, like the Chinese. Who will DEMAND certain deals – for example: “Mr. Obama, we’ll buy your debt to keep the dollar from falling to zero, but in return we expect your naval fleet to be out of the Taiwan Strait in a year”

      Or maybe Obama says “No” and we go into hyperinflation as the world loses confidence in the dollar. When the Arabs start asking for wheat and corn instead of dollars for their oil, it will be too late – grab your gun and fight for the Constitution, because the fascists will be ready.

      • Sean

        Yes it does, a trade deficit takes money out of america’s total money supply. The only reason we havn’t felt such a large impact is because saudi arabia has invested and owns 2%+ of our country.. I don’t think you understand that we aren’t aquired to pay back debt. I’m sure you know nothing about rollover bonds and how debt is just a number to most economists.

        • Sean – you’re confusing National Debt with a Trade Deficit. A trade deficit is not owed by the taxpayers.

          Think about a trade deficit when there IS NOT a National Debt. What can Saudi Arabia, China, Japan, England, etc. do with our dollars? If they can’t buy our debt they have only three choices. 1) They can sit on it and stick it in vaults. 2) They can use it to buy other goods either from other nations, which essentially makes the dollar a reserve currency. 3) They can invest it back into our country – reversing the trade deficit.

          Who cares if some country buys all of Florida. Do you really think they would destroy it? People invest to make MORE money, not to destroy or hurt their investment. The reason so many 3rd world countries can’t develop is no one wants to invest in them. Foreign investment is good, not bad.

          National Debt is bad. We can thank every President since Calvin Coolidge for increasing our debt (no, you can’t give Clinton a free ride since the Social Security funds were used – though I can say he was better than most Presidents when it comes to fiscal policy).

          • Sean

            What are you talking about? We give saudi arabia our dollars for gas. They can exchange the currency or whatever. We still give it to them. THey do invest it in America, they even have an embassy right next to the capital in dc, but they don’t invest near enough money as they take out. THey invest it in their own country. They even said in 1999 that they were in fear of running out of oil so they were going to start spending it on their economy and different ways to continue making money.. Thats money that could of gone here to invest in our country, not theirs, like it had been for the past 100 years before we started going to saudi for oil.

          • “Milton Friedman, regarded as the father of Monetarism, on the other hand argues trade deficit as many fear, is not that critical. It is rather an attempt to drive the macroeconomic strategies that are favorable for exporting industries.

            In his opinion the trade deficits are not critical as the money drawn out by imports always come back to the country of its origin in some form or the other. He says that even the worst situation of the money never coming back to the country can be the best possible result, as it would be same as an exporting country not using the revenue it has earned or never returning it for circulation in the market.”

          • Sean

            actually, the reason why trade deficits are accepted is because we can print as much money as we want.. With high interest rates, we are unable to print money..

          • Nate

            Yes just like I can pump heroin into my system, we can print as much money as we want. However, just like shooting heroin, there are consequences for printing money (inflation). We are now suffering those consequences.

            “With high interest rates, we are unable to print money..”

            Wait I thought we could print as much money as we want? Make up your mind.

            Anyway, you confuse cause and effect. Central banks printing (or not printing) money influences interest rates. You have it backwards…again.

          • Sean

            the fed creates the money but the banks distribute the debt thru loans. Thats how money gets into our economy.. with high interest rates, it stunts the flow of loans and cash. That money is not replacing the money we are spending over seas, our trade deficit… Read this article.


  • Dan H

    I would rather not fall in the hole we’ve dug (especially not after we dig it deeper). Really, I would prefer we find a solution that fills in the hole without us falling in. I’m open to suggestions!

    But to suggest that the shovel of too much spending which dug the hole (to overly simplify the situation) is the right shovel to fill the hole is insanity.

    You can’t personally spend your way out of debt. Neither can the government.

  • Sean

    These experts know what they are talking about. The point is, we can take risks that have proven to work, or we can just forfeit with huge reprocutions.. I’m pretty sure they know alot more than everybody here, so bad talking them doesn’t make anyone any smarter.. They are both right, ron paul understands both sides of the coin but he is focused more on the risk which the experts do agree on.. But seriously, the worst thing that could happen is doing what ron paul wants by creating high unemployment. If we stimulate the economy and the dollar fails, we can recreate the system just how ron paul truely wants. This is what all of us want, not a high unemployment just to put off this systems collapse even further.. If the stimulus works, it works. If not, we can devise a new better system. Putting off the collapse at the cost of high unemployment doesn’t sound constructive to me at all. It’s time to relax and let the elected officals take charge on this one.

    • Yashar Saberi

      Considering the track record of most of our elected officials I can do anything but “relax” and let them take charge on anything. I don’t think you understand the repocussions of this situation when the dollar fails. Note I say when, because the way the strategy they are taking now will cause exactly that. And god knows they will not come to Ron Paul when they want to reinvent the system because of a failed dollar. I mean I would not be surprised if these central bankers are already talking about a global or regional currency like the Euro that would just surrender our sovereignty to them. I don’t really think the experts know what they are talking about, I remember people saying the same thing when Peter Schiff was explaining the bubble way before it happened and he was basically laughed off the show. I will take my chances with Dr. Paul, he seems to have a much better idea of how we got into this mess and what it really takes to get out of it, and not just this current mess, but abolishing the ways of our leaders that got us into this mess in the first place.

      • Sean

        You really think we the people would let happen? You should know that europe has always had a poor economy because of the lack of confidence in the market. Thats why the european union was created, so people could invest or work in whatever country they desired and they used the euro for an equal trade balance. You should know that will never happen here because we have to high of standards for living. Our wreckless spending is what makes us wealthy and attracts investors from all over the world. THat is why our dollar will not collapse and the “experts” understand that as well, so it really eliminates the risk.. You talk about the cause of the problem but thats funny because i’ve never heard dr paul explain how we got into this mess.. He blames alan greenspand for raising interest rates but he never says why. He has never brought up the fact that oil prices caused interest rates to rise, he just blames interest.

        • Nate

          “Our wreckless spending is what makes us wealthy and attracts investors from all over the world”

          How can you be serious with this nonsense? Can you not read your own words?

          Production is what makes countries wealthy. Not spending. You must first produce in order to consume. You have it backwards.

          • Sean

            Your right, production does make a country wealthier faster. In fact, it can be dangerous fast like all japans economic disasters in the early nineties.. But what I said makes perfect sense, anybody should be able to understand.. MOre CONFIdenCE in the MARKET bring more INVESTORS. Thats money pouring into the country. An economist point of view is that high trade deficits isn’t bad for an economy because it brings more investments.. The problem is our trade deficit has become unreal. We spend more money on oil than we can create because of high interest rates created bc of oil. We’ve been running out of oil since the nineties and saudi arabia has been in fear of running out of oil since 1999. Thats our problem right there. Of course iraq got invaded, suddam was sitting on fuel that he wouldn’t sell. And thats fuel that keeps us surviving. Suddam invaded Kuwait for their oil instead of drilling in his home country because he had outstanding war debts from iran.. Remember when gas got so high all summer, 30 countries tapped into iraq in late august and the prices went down. Its because saudi arabia is in fear of running out soon and we needed those reserves in order to maintain a balanced deficit.

          • Sean said “An economist point of view is that high trade deficits isn’t bad for an economy because it brings more investments..”

            First of all, no one here is talking about high trade deficits. I LOVE high trade deficits. As Milton Friedman has said (and I paraphrase) “We print money that is not backed by any commodity and get a product in return. Who wouldn’t want a car for the price of paper.”

            But we are NOT talking about trade deficits – we are talking about DEBT. Our national debt is nearly 100% of our GDP. In ALL OF HUMAN HISTORY, only ONE country has ever emerged out of that situation without a civil war or the gov’t breaking up. It happened to the Romans, 1920 Germany, 1930 Spain – only England grew their way out of such debt in the 1820’s because of the Industrial Revolution. I can’t see any huge productivity technology on our horizon that will fix this problem.

            If we let the politicians continue bailing everyone out with more printed money, the dollar WILL COLLAPSE. There will not be time to revert to Ron Paul’s method of fixing the problem – we will have the rise of fascists the world over. And don’t think it can’t happen right here – it wasn’t until 1964 that black citizens in the South were given rights. A white man in 1950 Mississippi could gun a black man down in the street and never go to jail – if you think fascism can’t take hold in this country you think to highly of your fellow citizens. The constitution – most people haven’t read it. They might be able to say “Freedom of speech” but that’s about all they know.

          • Sean

            We have a trillion dollar a year deficit. The federal reserve warned us about gas prices saying it will “deteriorate” our trade deficit. That means that we are giving away more money over sea’s than we are creating.. This is the reason the fed raised interest rates in the first place causing this recession…

    • Dan H

      Sean – The proposed stimulus you talk about, though is fake. Most of it won’t be spent until midterm elections! Obama and the Democrats have structured it to pay out when congress is running for office. It’s supposed to be a jolt to the system but 3-15% of it is all that will be spent in 2009…

      It’s a political move not a solution. Why does $600,000,000 of it need to be earmarked “to help prepare America for Universal Healthcare” rather than fixing roads or other instant boosts? Relax and let the elected officials srew up again??? Remember the $700 billion bailout? That didn’t fix the problem and it didn’t slow it. CitiGroup is worth 9% of what it used to be….

      You are like the rest of liberals who want the ouchies to never happen. We screwed up. We need to heal the wounds by fixing the system and not by digging a deeper hole. All you suggested is to keep digging BEFORE we fall in. Brilliant.

      • Sean

        If you knew your history, you would understand that the great depression lasted so long because banks didn’t lend and there wasn’t any stimulus.. We are not trying to make that mistake twice.. So we try to “bailout” the banks to get them to lend. I’m sorry but if u knew monetary policies, you would understand that our economy isn’t going to get better without banks lending bc thats our only means of cash flow. ANd if you understood macro economics, you would know that supply and demand determines the outcome of the economy. Without demand, there is no spending and jobs get lost. This is the sole intention of a stimulus going to our hands.. The reason he is only spending 3-15% this year on infostructure is to avoid hyper inflation. What ron paul has been warning us about…

        • Sean – you’ve been spoon fed our public education system. The depression occurred FIRST of all, because in 1913 we created the Federal Reserve and a fractional banking system. This allows banks to create money out of thin air. When this system collapsed, politicians – that know nothing of economics – first decided to do what the public though right. ONE – Raise Tariffs on foreign goods. Two – Run up deficits the likes never seen in our history. When those didn’t work they listened to the Federal Reserve board and said “Take us off the gold standard”. Of course that was 1934 when this gov’t made it ILLEGAL for a U.S. Citizen to OWN GOLD (real free country). Of course this didn’t work either, so we spent more money and dictators rose around the world (I’ll give American Citizens credit for sticking with the system). Then we got a World War, and this country that could NEVER be turned to fascism decided to lock up every U.S. Citizen of Japanese descent – with not a single outcry about our Constitution.

          If you look at EVERY depression in our country they have always occurred when we were dealing with BANKS making money out of thin air. The Depression on 1830’s was fixed when Andrew Jackson ended the 2nd National Banks of the United States. The Long Depression of 1870’s was due to the worthless paper both the Union and Confederates were printing during the war. The Depression of the 1930’s can be squarely blamed on the Federal Reserve – as well as the stagflation of the 1970’s and 1990’s (Savings & Loan) and today.

          As Ron Paul says in the book “Revolution” fiat currencies not only invite debt and inflation, they also make it easier to wage war. Since the creation of the Fed, this country has only fought one necessary war (World War 2). If we actually had to find the gold to make coins and fund a war, we never would have entered Korea, Vietnam or Iraq. We may still have gone into World War 1 because we loaned so much money to the English and French that the bankers and industry executives were worried they would never get repaid.

          To learn more about economics go to

          • Sean

            haha what are you talking about?? It was marginal stocks that caused the great depression. Investors only had to put down 10% of the stocks they recieved, and they had to redeem full value after 24 hour notice, so it was a run on the stock market and a run on the bank when everybody lost trust in the system and tried to take their money out.. And if you look at all the recent recessions, it was caused by oil. Why don’t you look at peak oil, or the 1973 oil crisis, or katrina and find out why the fed raised interest rates 15 times in 2004-2005.

          • Sean – you and I are actually in complete agreement – you just don’t know it. You speak of “margin” where investors only put down 10%. That is EXACTLY what fractional reserve banking does, it creates money out of thin air. If we followed the 100% Reserve system advocated by true free marketers you can not use ANY margin. Either you have the money or you do not. Once again I would like to point you to

            Hard to look at peak oil when oil is at inflation adjusted lows today. That said the 1973 spike was caused by Nixon taking putting the final nail in the gold standard. OPEC didn’t want paper.

            You are correct – there are outside circumstances, other than easy credit, that cause recessions. We should allow the free market to say “Do we trust getting our oil from the Middle East?” Instead we give the markets trust in the Middle East by spending hundreds of billions on our military to keep the oil flowing. The true cost of oil is SO MUCH higher than what we pay at the pump – it is in our taxes.

          • Sean

            “On October 16, 1973, OPEC cut production of oil and placed an embargo on shipments of crude oil to the West, with the United States and the Netherlands specifically targeted.[8] The Netherlands had supplied arms to Israel and allowed the Americans to use Dutch airfields for supply runs to Israel.[citation needed] Also, price increases were imposed. Since oil demand falls little when the price rises, prices had to rise dramatically to reduce demand to the new lower level of supply. Anticipating this, the market price for oil immediately rose substantially, from $3 a barrel to $12.[8] A world financial system already under pressure from the breakdown of the Bretton Woods agreement was set on a path of a series of recessions and high inflation that persisted until the early 1980s, and elevated oil prices persisted until 1986.” -wiki

          • Sean

            What do you think the gold standard is?.. We would have to hold 10% down of gold to just as we would fiat money. There is still a chance of a run on the bank. In fact, the money was backed by gold during the depression and that was the main reason for the run.

          • Sean

            We have such a large trade deficit, that we could not mine the amount of gold to replace money spent over seas.

          • Sean,

            First we would not hold 10% of the gold – the gold would be in the COIN. No paper currency – and yes you can still do Internet banking with such a system.

            There won’t be a run on the bank if you get rid of the Reserve Banking system. 100% reserve system. You can read about it here:

            100% Reserve banking was practiced pre-1800. Yes, you can still borrow money for a house under the 100% Reserve banking system – but growth will come from productivity gains, not inflation & credit. I can’t go into all the details here, because the website is chock full of great information.

          • Sean

            are you kidding me? coins? have you ever heard of shaving coins and the problems it caused in the past?
            you should read this page, and consider the fact that interest rates raised because of oil….


    • Ben

      Shaving coins? That is an earlier form of inflation. Essentially, shaving coins, taking the shaved material, minting more coins, and acting as though the original coins, now shaved, have the same amount of gold or silver in them, and forcing the public to accept this through legal tender laws.

      Inflation is the same thing: Printing more money, out of thin air, and pretending that the money already in circulation still has the same value.

      Your optimist123 is just a blogger Sean. Nothing else. His opinion doesn’t matter, especially since it is totally unvalidated. The minor interest rate “hikes” as a result of oil (supposedly) at a time when oil wasn’t even that expensive, were so minor, that to blame them for the current economic crisis makes you seem like someone who just needs a pat on the head and an ice cream cone, because logic is wasted arguing against your points, since they are so incredibly invalid.

      This “recession” or “depression” was not caused by what you claim, and is actually diagnosed correctly by Ron Paul in the video you are posting responses to but somehow still claim that he never diagnoses the problem.

      Originally, in your first response to this video, you write:

      “The point is, we can take risks that have proven to work, or we can just forfeit with huge reprocutions.. I’m pretty sure they know alot more than everybody here, so bad talking them doesn’t make anyone any smarter.”

      Couple things ridiculous here. Number one: these “risks” are not proven to work, they are proven to not work. Consider the Bush stimulus of the last couple years. Did it work? no. Has printing money ever not led to long-term economic strife? NO! It has never ever ever worked. So, your statement that these risks are proven to work is just bogus and nothing else.

      Also, one of the experts, who you say know more than any of us (kind of ridiculous as far as assertions go, since you know nothing about us, and the only thing you know about experts is that the TV calls them that) says himself that Ron Paul was going way over his head! Do yourself and everyone else a favor, and just completely separate yourself from any kind of economic or intellectual discussion until you educate yourself on the topics being discussed. You are wasting your time and ours. Just think, you could be reading or The Creature from Jekyll Island, A Second Look at the Federal Reserve by G. Edward Griffin, or the Mystery of Banking or Business Cycle Theory by Murray Rothbard, or just even studying the history of money on wikipedia, which is fascinating by the way. Do yourself a favor, become an expert! Then you will know how silly the “experts” really are.

      • Let me add that the “ridges” around coins is not for the BLIND, but to stop shaving.

  • Dan H

    It really is the mindset of trying to fix the problem without it hurting anyone. These “experts”, and I too use quotes around the word, as well as ALL liberals fail to understand that when you fall on your face, it’s going to hurt. We are teetering on the edge and about to fall and they want us to just keep propellering our arms, hoping we won’t fall. Hoping something will swoop in and save us from the pains of our mistakes – Republican and Democratic.

    I will likely be unemployed by following the conservative direction we SHOULD take. It scares me. But I’d rather rebuild our great country to what it used to be than give it away to socialism.

  • Richard Preston

    the problem is that there is no answer to their questions, because their questions are not based in reality. It’s like asking how can I not go to work and still get a paycheck. Or asking how can I cut taxes but keep spending the same or more? It’s ridiculous

    Americans our babies, they have to see instant results and life doesn’t work that way. You have to think long-term, and be willing to sacrifice today.

    Bottomline: They’ve managed to turn America into a land of non-critical thinkers, we have group think.

    Result: 3rd world country where a very small # of people live great and the vast majority live in poverty.

  • Patrick Gann

    I was personally quite fond of “Expert #2.” He really understood Ron Paul’s philosophy. He just can’t see the way out, because it’s so painful. The world we want is one where everything is beautiful and nothing hurts. But the only true solution is going to involve some very real pain. It’s already here. The scary thing that’s happening right now is that we’re all, collectively, denying that the pain exists, damming it up; but when the floodgates break, it’s going to hurt far more than it had to. That’s been RP’s point for years now.

    And I don’t think Expert #2 wants to accept that as “the solution.” When he says “I don’t want to hear ‘wouldn’t,’ I want to know what you WOULD do.” We know what RP would do. Essentially, nothing. As far as the gov’t is concerned, we should do nothing, and let the liquidation of assets occur. It’s tough medicine we need now.

    • SD

      You are exactly right. I think everyone wants a solution that keeps us in this numb, “everything is comfortable and happy” state. Unfortunately, life is full of ups and downs and the longer you put off the downs the bigger (and more painful) that down turn will eventually be. The leaders and policy makes have been putting off those slight downturns for the past few decades and now we’re paying the price.

      The really scary thing is that now that we are at this point people are definitely not willing to endure the pain to get back to a truly healthy economy. This is exactly the time when people start willingly giving away their freedom and liberties in exchange for “security”.

  • Yashar Saberi

    I cannot understand how these “experts” can be so ignorant. Do they just not understand the problem or do they want viewers not to understand the problem?? Everything Ron Paul is saying is being discounted by them, ending with a rather sad “Obama has a way forward”, moving forward giving our future generations wealth away.

    • pianoneil

      Nobody wants to accept the reality of the situation. This would be tantamount to treason in the economic world. Throw everything you’ve got at the problem and it will go away. This is the mind set of the world at the moment. Bail out here, stimulus there and you have the cure. Unfortunately this will prolong the recession and probably cause a depression worldwide. If only Ron Paul were president we might hope for some kind of solution but I believe now it’s too late. Obama will take us down the same road to ruin that was started by Bush and Paulson. All we can do now is watch what happens. The public have been cruelly conned and will have to suffer the consequences as innocent bystanders. I’m sorry I cannot be more optimistic but as long as the bailouts continue I believe there will be no hope.

  • Andrew

    Really though, Ron Paul made that Panel of Experts look like monkeys painting watercolors. It wasn’t even worth Ron Paul’s time because he was repeating himself against ultimately the same retrospective question.

    “What got us into this mess just needs to be stopped, so that the natural order of things can be resumed without a complete destruction of the dollar.”

    “Yeah but, all that stuff that got us into this mess has now made everything a big mess, what are you going to do about this bigger mess?”

    “I just explained the bigger mess, it’s potential, and what caused this bigger mess. I don’t think I can explain any clearer.”

  • A really, really obvious example of “the Death of Common Sense”.
    CAN the people, both on the radio, in TV, in newspapers and magazines EVER understand what Ron Paul is saying?! They just use

    My favorite definition of an Expert: “A squirt under pressure!”

  • Golyadkin

    Did they not listen to anything R. Paul said?

    Last thing said by Expert #1:

    Expert #1 “To Obama’s credit he’s trying to move forward and it’s going to be an interesting conversation.”

    R. Paul at the beginning of the interview:

    “So we’re going to make the problems much worse. We’re doing exactly what we did in the 1930s.”

    How can a President that ran on change do the exact same thing Bush did right before he left office?

    There is nothing “forward” about it.