Show: Morning Joe
Channel: MSNBC
Date: 12/16/2009
Transcript
Joe Scarborough: If I could pick someone to follow up Rick Stingle’s person of the year, Ben Bernanke, seriously, it would be our next guest. Introduce him.
Mika Brzezinsk: Republican representative from Texas and member of the Financial Services Committee, Congressman Paul joining us on the set of Morning Joe, nice to have you on sir.
Ron Paul: Thank you.
Joe Scarborough: You actually just wrote a book about the Fed. I mean, by God, tell us? Off camera you were telling me that you think that Ben Bernanke probably deserves to be person of the year because of the power he has.
Ron Paul: Yes, he’s the most powerful man in the world; I believe a case could be made for that. Because he controls the supply of money, which is the dollar, which is the reserve currency of the world. He can create a trillion dollars in secret without any monitoring of the Congress. So, there is no transparency. And I think he’s more powerful than the president.
Joe Scarborough: The president we are talking of here, again the president has all these checks and balances. Bernanke and every other Fed chief operate in secrecy. Like you said, he can create a trillion dollars out of thin air.
Ron Paul: Right. The big question is: has he used that power for good, or for evil? And, of course, my side of the argument is the system is evil, and the chairman, whether it’s Greenspan or Bernanke, they can do no good. They cause our troubles, they cause the inflation, they cause the bubbles. And, therefore, the bust, the correction, is always their fault. So the problems that we have and because this is such a worldwide phenomenon, you know, since 1971 everything has become worldwide and global economy. There is no backing of any currency. And yet our Federal Reserve controls the gold, so to speak, the paper gold. And therefore this whole mess that we’re in, which has a long way to go, has been caused by the Federal Reserve.
Pat Buchanan: Alright, that’s exactly what I was going to ask you. We just heard Rick Stingle say [Bernanke] saved us from a great depression.
Mika Brzezinsk: From the brink.
Pat Buchanan: He pumped 3 trillion dollars into the economy. Who was responsible, if you name one, two, three people or institutions, to take this country, the greatest country on earth, to the brink of a depression?
Ron Paul: Well, the Federal Reserve.
Joe Scarborough: How?
Ron Paul: By creating money out of thin air, causing interest rates to be low, causing the malinvestment and causing an artificial economic expansion that has to correct. Like if you build too many houses, eventually it crashes.
Joe Scarborough: Bernanke gave us the disease and cured it, both.
Ron Paul: Yeah, but there are other things that contributed to it; like Congress having laws that say you must make bad loans and give money to people who don’t qualify.
Joe Scarborough: I got to interrupt you, Pat. You read my book?
Pat Buchanan: Right.
Joe Scarborough: That quote by Ron Paul, and I remember the date: September 10th, 2003. And buy my book or just google “September 10th 2003, Ron Paul“. In September of 2003 you predicted in the banking committee exactly what was going to happen in 2008.
Mika Brzezinsk: Word for word.
Joe Scarborough: Word for word. And I read that and people always say, “Are you making that up?” You knew in 2003 what was going to happen.
Ron Paul: You’re better than I am, I can’t remember the dates. I knew that was the position I’ve taken for years and years. And, matter of fact, I was motivated to go into Congress and run for political office in the 1970s because I understood the principles of malinvestment. But I didn’t come up with these ideas. It’s the Austrian economists and the sound-money people that said this would happen; and they were correct. Matter of fact, when the Bretton Woods System collapsed in 1971, that was the confirmation that Austrian economists were on the right track.
Joe Scarborough: Buchanan, didn’t you want to [...] some Austrian economist?
Pat Buchanan: I said something about dead Austrian economists during one of my [...]. Murray Rothbard… They were gone.
Ron Paul: He was your friend.
Pat Buchanan: He was always my great friend, but we slam-shut the gold window in 1971. I was with Nixon in August. That’s what you’re talking about.
Ron Paul: That’s your fault.
Pat Buchanan: But look, what were you going to do? They had all that money abroad and if you ask me… the Brits wanted to come in and clean out Fort Knox. What would you have done?
Ron Paul: Well, you should have done a lot more a lot sooner. That is don’t print so much money.
Pat Buchanan: It was LBJ’s guns and butter. But what do you on that day? I mean, my friends tell me you should have let them clean it out. You can’t do that.
Ron Paul: No, I would say that was only half the thing. If you’re going to quit, what you have to quit is printing the money. So we quit handing out the gold, but then we said we’re just going to print money and there is no restraint. So what you ushered in was a system in 1971 which created this huge, huge bubble and that’s where the real problem was.
Mika Brzezinsk: But congressman, given the bubble and given restraint, where would you stand now on regulation? Would somebody like you say less regulation or off to the crisis? Or would you say actually we do need tight regulations?
Ron Paul: Well, I want more regulations of different things. I want more regulations on Treasury, on the Congress, and on the Fed. But I want to have less mischief by bureaucrats because they do a great deal of harm. We introduced a lot of regulations in the 1930s and it just prolonged the depression. When we had Enron fail we had Sarbanes Oxley. That did harm because our businesses left our country. I don’t like those kinds of regulations. But you have to enforce regulations like contracts and bankruptcies. We ignore that. We don’t follow the contract of money, so the government does everything opposite. They violate contracts and they don’t use bankruptcies. They bail out people. So yes, you want the market to regulate, you want to get rid of bad investments and people who are bankrupt.
Joe Scarborough: Ron, really quickly, we’re coming up on a hard break. But I’ve got to ask you about Afghanistan. Pat Bucanan, myself and other conservatives are very concerned about the so-called surge. We’re concerned we’re going to be in Afghanistan for another decade. What do you think?
Ron Paul: Well, we’ll be there for a decade or longer if the money holds out. But because we are doing exactly what Osama Bin Laden wanted us to do, that is get ourselves bogged down, spend a lot of money, and get people discouraged about being bogged down. At the same time have an incentive to build up the Al-Qaida. So we’re doing exactly the same.
Joe Scarborough: The thing is Al-Qaida is not even there.
Ron Paul: Yeah, but there are a lot of people who hate our guts and they do it because we bomb them, invade them and occupy them and steal their oil and all these things. So that’s going to continue.
Joe Scarborough: What would President Ron Paul do?
Ron Paul: The troops would have been home by now. I’d bring them home. You know the famous saying, “Declare victory and come home”. There is not much victory to declare. But just come home. I’d come home from Korea and Germany. Save the money. This country needs the money, we’re all broke. Quit printing the money; save the money.
Joe Scarborough: Alright. [...]
Processing your request, Please wait....
END THE FED
READ THE BOOK
infowars.com
henrymakow.com
goodnewsaboutgod.com against the NEW WORLD DISORDER
why dont you all YOUTUBE THE SPEECH THAT GOT JFK KILLED
and listen to it
END THE FED if you want america to be free
and we NEED OUR CONSTITUTIONAL troops HOME NOW
not when they are all DEAD
obama is a muslim LIAR and you can take that to the BANK
OBAMA
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Welcome to Kleptocracy.
Government of the elite, by the elite, for the elite.
You probably have all seen this? ZEITGEIST: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7065205277695921912#
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Lawrence Rice says:
December 19, 2009 at 12:01 am
Brandulph,
As an American citizen who is sick and tired of seeing and hearing our officials use lofty rhetoric as the pretext for their spending sprees on war and death, I assure you, there are MANY, MANY Americans who do not like what is done in our name and wish we could bring the young men and women who volunteer for our military home to their families and friends. It is long overdue.
Hi there Lawrence,
- Your present President’s lofty rhetoric is not HIS, but that of your shadow government the “Rothschild Clan”. Hence those MANY Americans must wake up and face reality. Explain your sons and daughters what the warmongers call them; “useful idiots”.
- ATTACK the men, the organization behind your politicians, the shadow government. Take away from them their astronomical profit on all the wars. Stop their screwing around with other peoples countries.
- Wishing, hoping and praying will however not bring any end to the “Rothschild Clan’s” perpetual looting of you and the still potential coming generations, nor the countries they terrorize!
(With the horror of Viet Nam and Cambodia just some thirty years behind us, it appears to me as if Americans suffer from a common absolute amnesia.)
- What the “Rothschild Clan” dragged you into in Viet Nam, was also a “war” about oil… I KNOW, I was there. (If you don’t believe me, google “South China Sea+oil”) And! the rhetoric used back then was identical to the one used today… “domino effect”, “prevent communism from spreading” verses teh Bush/Obama “prevent spreading” and “al-Qaida-Taliban-Islamic terrorists”.
- And by the way, when talking about “radical Islamic terrorist groups”, what can be more radical than issuing a fiat money with “In God We Trust” printed on it, and having some 800 military bases spread around the world? That is nothing but pure modern day colonialism… or global terrorism to phrase it differently.
- But again, the global terrorism by the “Rothschild Clan”, in the name of America, cannot be ended with hope nor prayers nor “lofty rhetorics”. Neither is Ron Paul good enough, as he doesn’t offer a detailed viable plan on how to cope with the major “economical amputation” he is fronting. To suggest “gold standard” and “Austrian economy” is fine, but what are the “crutches” offered to the patient when he regains conscience?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
1-Work with salary in industry that produces something needed, and trading where competition is fair (salaries in china yield higher profit that in turn bring down home industries).
2-Regulation and accountability
3-Less innovation for war and war profit, and making unfavorable the monopolies to crush emerging new, small and medium, businesses. But for real.
4-Redesign of benefits: it will improve the whole health care sector, the work environment, and the real family values, and the real personal values.
5-Freedom with responsability
Etc. Little changes that if implemented will go a long way into officially declaring a new economic system that will stand the test of time (actual currency can never be the people or their knowledge, that is a deformed slavery system)
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I understand why those who think Austrian Economics is the “cat’s meow” would necesarily criticize FDR as failure. Re-emergence of Austrian Economics with Mises was a reaction by Rothchild/HaapsBurg tradition against Otto Von Bismarck who had adopted American Style Economics of Abraham Lincoln for Germany in 1879. Through the British conspiracy Bismarck was ousted by 1890 but warned of the impending 7 years war with Britain which ultimately came in the form of WWI.
FDR was not a FREE-TRADER and therefore by the AusEco perspective must therefore be condemned for his socialistic ways. FDR did a lot of good with Hospitals, infrastructure, rural electricy development. If you had let the market decide, Mississippi would probably still be run on kerosene. Market’s don’t have minds; people do.
Austrian Economics main axiom of “non-government intervention” would then necessarily preclude FDR from presidential greatness.
Yet, by the American People FDR is considered the Greatest President perhaps surpassing Washington and Lincoln, certainly the greatest of the 20th century. Elected to office 4 times.
For those of you holding to your anti-FDR beliefs here is a link to a contrary view which will probably not change the view of the rigid…but it’s worth a try.
By Eric Rauchway
http://hnn.us/roundup/entries/61131.html
Thanks for listening
Joseph Giallombardo
PS Don’t get me wrong…I am Ron Paul fan. I hope he is PRESIDENT in 2012. But Austrian Economics plays right into the hands of the British Empire. Mr. Paul needs some continuing education on that matter.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Jay,
Just out of curiosity, how old are you and where do you get your information?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I’m 59 years old…and as you may have deduced this information, the history, is from Lyndon Larouche.
In a way, Mr. Rice, I express these view, which are different than the AusEco crowd is used to hearing 1) to get your reaction and viewpoint and 2) to use your rebuttals to validate my information. AusEco perspective changed with the influence of Milton Friedman and the introduction of the metaphysical aspects (which are platonic in origin vs the typical Aristotlean view that predominated up until 1950. I learned that in one of the lecture video by one of the Austria fellows that gives lectures on the subject.
But it is important that you know the history and not just accept axioms given.
Joseph Giallombardo
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Jay,
Yes and no. To be honest, as I read through your earlier statements I found myself wanting to attribute some of them to youthfulness due to their incoherence and lack of clarity and cogency, but, I see I cannot do that; You are 59 yrs. old.
I don’t want to use this space to shame you or anything else since Nate is doing quite well at pointing some of this out. However, I would recommend putting down much of the Larouche stuff and getting your mind around something much more intellectually rigorous and, in the end, satisfying and productive. This is just my opinion though.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Your arrogance is wearing thin. You say “markets don’t have minds. People do”. Such childish platitudes might work on others but they will convince no one here. If you can reject the market with such flimsy logic, you must necessarily reject any form of social organization (including government) on the same grounds. But you’re obviously a big fan of big government. So cut the bs.
I once held FDR in high regard. It’s tough not to when you are constantly told by your US history teachers that he saved the US with the New Deal. However, like many others, I have come to hold him in a negative light as a result of learning real (Austrian) economics. Almost everything he did served to benefit wall street and Washington at the expense of the common man. He even went so far as to steal the people’s gold with Executive Order 6102. This disgrace wasn’t even mentioned during my schooling. And I imagine for good reason. After all, who can support a person who steals from the common person on the street in order to enrich a select few in Washington and New York?
Seriously dude, stop with this “British Empire” nonsense. You must clearly see how confusing that phrase is. It is constantly misunderstood. Just use the more accurate “Rothschild baking cartel” if you want to describe the conspiracy you believe has taken/is taking place.
Actually, I think I’m just wasting my time. Your posts are so off the wall, littered with complete fabrications and wild speculations that I don’t think any response is appropriate.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Nate,
Well said. I’ve been following this discussion the last couple of days to see how it would evolve. I guess you beat me to calling him out on his assertions. He does have a fertile imagination. Hopefully he will put it to truly good use.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Arrogance..no, passion. Why express something apologetically?
Your false characterizations fly in the face of your own argument. When I say, “markets don’t have minds, people do”, it is a methaphor. This relates to the biosphere of nature which follows natural, even geological, processes for creation. The act of the mind is “willful”…and it is the human creative mind that can change the natural world by force of will through scientific discovery and the application of technology to increase the productive labor of mankind. It is in this labor and production that realth wealth resides, not in monetarism (the assumption that money has value).
I also send the message that “laissez-faire” markets play into the hands of the Empire. That’s what they want you to believe.
The British Empire (Rothchild Banking Cartel based in London) would have you believe that markets DO have minds and if you just leave them alone they will create wealth. In the meantime as the Empire controls the money, they control the market, and you (we) control nothing. And, if you buy into their notion of FREE-TRADE, they will then come to your shores and take all you have.
The force of the empire can only be broken with an alliance of nations that use a different system of money, their own currency to control the physical development of their nation.
These nations need to have power and population. Larouche suggests Russia, China, India, and the US.
Larouche argues in defense of the Nation State, and I believe Ron Paul does also, in the constitution of American. But where they differ is in a Hamiltonian National Bank that is controlled by the government of the Nation, not an external International Banking Cartel (like Rothchilds/London).
You can have a gold standard, but the point is moot. When the enemy comes on your shores with gunboats and soldiers, you will print money and build your army to fend them off, and not say for minute, “Ok, no money for the army because we don’t have the gold”.
How else will you defeat them? Hayek suggestion in his book “Road to Serfdom” that we need an international police force to protect the freedom to choose currency. Do you really want that? Isn’t the Nation State the better source of protection? That is actually the founding principle of America, with sovereign national borders.
Joseph Giallombardo
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
You have proven yourself unworthy of dialogue with your blatant lies and misrepresentations. You have demonstrated an willingness to acknowledge and respond to the thoughts of others. I (and others) have presented arguments against your positions but your counters amount to little more than “you guys are merely drunk off the Austrian Kool-Aid. We just need the right philosopher kings like Lyndon LaRouche in the places of power and everything will be just fine and dandy”. Theory suggests such a philosophy is absurd and history bears it out time and time again.
You have also completely changed your statement regarding Hayek and the Road to Serfdom. First you said he suggests “a world police force used to PREVENT Sovereign Nations from determining how people wish to use their money.” now you claim he said “we need an international police force to protect the freedom to choose currency”. First you say the “police force” is to impose a form of tyranny on sovereign states. Now you have done a complete 180 and say the international police force serves to keep people free. He never uses the term “police force” in the final chapter of The Road to Serfdom.
Also, you use a completely alien definition of the term “Monetarism”. You seem to think that Austrian Economics is synonymous with monetarism or that Austrian Economics is merely a form of monetarism. You couldn’t be farther off the mark if you tried. In fact, the ideas held by LaRouche and the so-called American School of Economics include the key aspect of monetarism. That aspect is a national bank headed by the proper philosopher kings with the intent of using monetary policy to promote productive industries. The Austrian School is dead set against such an institution because it cannot achieve its desired ends. Over time, such an institution only serves to distort the economy, promote malinvestment, expand the power of government at the expense of the people, make people poorer than they otherwise would have been, and a develop a host of other negative consequences. Such is the price of incredible hubris.
You also don’t appear to understand what the word “axiom” means.
I mean, seriously, how are we to have a constructive dialogue with you when you state “I express these views…to use your rebuttals to validate my information.”? By taking such a ridiculous position, you have demonstrated yourself to be impervious to reason and evidence.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Nate Y…
I see that I am antagonizing you more than I meant.
I am working on presenting my knowledge and this is good forum to do that.
But to clarify, I suggest your watch one more video and others that may catch your interest at the Larouche website.
By the way I watch the Ron Paul Video on the FED (40 minutes) and I am in complete support of its abolition.
A FED is not a national bank in the sense of Hamilton. It was indeed a corruption of the concept (by the British, who else?). FDR used it correctly, but it has grown out of control and is serving the interest of the Empire, not America.
So here’s the link:
http://www.larouchepac.com/lpactv?nid=9166
Thanks for the scintillating conversation.
Joseph Giallombardo
PS I’ll be back…
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
good movie!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Nate Y:
Another article for your education.
http://www.larouchepac.com/node/12359
Joseph Giallombardo
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
And for those still with an open mind,
here is marvelous serious of presentations on the concepts
of Hamiltonian Credit vs British Monetarism.
http://www.larouchepac.com/credit
JG
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
As the saying goes, “One must remain open minded, but not so open minded that one’s brains fall out”. Unfortunately, it seems you have reached that point.
That aside, you do not abide by the rules of civil discourse. I and others here have shown you the respect of considering your views. We have then proceeded to tear your positions to shreds. We have pointed out your logical inconsistencies, your outright lies, your misunderstandings, and your misconceptions. And what have you done in return? Have you reciprocated with your own counters to our arguments? Have you shown the respect which was shown to you? Not at all. Instead you have engaged in a number of annoying and, frankly, childish tactics. I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt and conclude that you simply don’t realize you’re doing what you’re doing but I still feel compelled to point it out. You have mainly just ignored the counter arguments given. It’s true that you have thanked me and others for our replies but you haven’t attempted to refute our positions nor have you put forth new arguments in an attempt to strengthen yours. You may as well have said “Thank you for wasting your time responding to my post”. You have also have changed your position (as you did with Hayek and his supposed “international police force”) and, true to form, refused to acknowledge it. And you have merely heaped more lies upon lies and made nonsensical assertions such as “Hayek was supported by John M. Keynes and Winston Churchill. The Austrian School of Economics was the British response through Mises and others against Otto Von Bismarck who had adopted the American principles of Economy of Abraham Lincoln. AusEco is the British answer to the American system of Economy. It was attempt to crush Bismarck and unfortunately, it did”. I mean, seriously, is this some type of freaking joke?
Anyway, I have made my way to the LaRouche site (I had already visited it after my encounter with a couple of his supporters) and the ideas presented are truly insane. As I have already said, he honestly believes that a select group of people (himself being chief among them) are capable of, have have the right to, control everyone else on the planet. The arrogance is unbelievable. He never seems to consider that people just might be better at deciding what they want for themselves and that he may be acting like a jackass for thinking he knows better. It appears the world can be divided into two camps. Those content to live and let live and those who seek to impose their will on others. LaRouche most definitely belongs to the latter.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
lol whatever nate.. 98% of the people on this website believe that a small group of men can and does control the world. Anyways, that’s not it, LaRouche isn’t saying that at all.. Plus, most of the stuff he talks about is well known and not a secret. Everyone knows that the British empire has always meddled in everyones affairs.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
We live in a world of polar opposites. Hot n’Cold, Good n’Bad, Bitter n’Sweet, Freedom n’Control. The right choice is neither both, but in moderation.
You can’t have “total freedom”, it allows the advancement of those seeking power and control do to so “freely”.
You can’t have “total enslavement”, it never allows advancement except by those who are in “control”.
It takes a bit of both, “the middle ground”, to find the answer of a perfect system. You need a authority that wants freedom – sadly it is a rare occurrence expressed by the human heart and more imporantly beyond “most” common knowledge of our simple polar thinking. The US Constitution being an example of one of the only document-states in human history with this mentality.
I would have to say Ron Paul is a US politican closest (if not only) to that middle ground.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Old Dominion,
Very wise. I would agree. It’s not one system that fits all, it actually as you say a combination of principles. Free-markets work well across state lines. Free-markets are more complicated across National borders.
So unbridled capitalism has the danger of monopoly. Unprotected nations run the risk of production dumping and wrecking their local industry.
An authority that loves freedom. What you are talking about was discussed by Plato as the Philosopher-King of Plato’s Republic.
And that, sir, is very much in the right direction of principled thought.
By the way, Austrian Economics is an Aristotlean view of the world, So the philospher king does not exist in that world, only the KING.
Joseph Giallombardo
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Nate:
I did find that interesting article by Mr. Champion on the Popperian support of Austrian Economics. So, I am starting to get a pretty good understanding.
Larouche is BIG…HUGE…on Plato. The empiricists discount the metaphysical. All of the philosophy from Adam Smith, Lock, Hobbs, Malthus are all degenerate apologists for the British Empire (which is what you may refer to as the Rothchild banking cartel based in London). Sorry to say, the British rely much on the fixed world notions of Aristotle…and that might be a fatal flaw.
The antithesis of this world view is found in “Nicholas De Cusa”, whose writing on “inalienable rights” endowed by the Creator was borrowed by Thomas Jefferson in the Dec. of Indep. You can follow this strain from Kepler, Leibnitz, Gauss, Riemann (the Mathematician) to Eistein.
This forms the basis of the Larouche’s Science of Economy which places the “creative human mind” at the forefront of economic development combined with “scientific discovery” that provides technological development for the purpose of increasing the product labor of human endeavor.
The purpose of the National Government of the USA was founded on these principles to protect it’s citizens from the ravages of the British empire which by 1762 was totally corrupt. It was not a graceful start with Slavery in the South as part of the colonial empire. And the USA principles of economy have been at war with Britain ever since.
If we can but return to the constitutional principles, it will be a major step in the right direction. Follow the constitution!
By the way, John Marshall (Supreme court Justice) wrote the ruling in 1819 supporting the National Bank…NOT a FED (that is a corruption)…but a true National Bank to support the endeavors of the national interest based on a credit system.
Under the a National bank of this kind, America became the economic leader of the world by 1876…We were corrupted thereafter, but under FDR (whether you like him or not) we restored the National economy. That lasted until 1971…and it has been downhill every since.
This back and forth flow of economic progress followed by destruction comes at the hands of the British Empire.
To stay on a lasting path of economic development requires
the destruction of the British Empire.
The 4-Powers Initiative has a chance to do just that.
Here is the link to the paper:
http://www.the-rathouse.com/RC_PopperPaper.html
Joseph Giallombardo
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Somehow it sounds to me Joseph, that you are one of those guys who agrees on, that money rules the world, but still talk about politicians and presidents being the rulers.:-)
- “We were corrupted thereafter,…” Politicians Joseph, are politicians for personal reasons; for the power and the money which power brings THEM (and their party). Max Weber also stated that fact clearly on several occasions.
- “… but under FDR (whether you like him or not) we restored the National economy. ” What you state there sounds as if FDR’s New Deal was a success, while the fact is that his politics did nothing but prolong the depression which was created by the FED.
What brought around prosperity to the US was getting into WWII and the unlimited financing of the war supply machinery by the FED against future US taxpayer money. And, you do know of course who the owners of that industry was and is.
- “That lasted until 1971…and it has been downhill every since.”
Hmmm?… yes, the big accelerators in the US economy got badly hit when the Viet Nam war drew to an end, and the Appolo program lost funding. US economy was also gradually badly hit by the advance of nations like Japan and Germany, who after 1945 had to consentration on developments outside the military field. On most civil industrial sectors the US had lost much ground by the late sixties.
In anyway, an economy based primarily on rockets big and small to be blasted off into space or up the ass on people in foreign countries, has no lasting future.
BUT!.. there is no bigger earner around for Rothschild&Co, than all the wars they create and initiate with the taxpayers money. Cold war -real war -war on drugs -war on terror (ridiculous) -war for peace(at present a total insanity) -war on starvation – war on poverty -war to end war…
-”To stay on a lasting path of economic development requires
the destruction of the British Empire.” The British Empire was brought under absolute Rothschild control at the fall of Napoleon by Waterloo, when the British Pound came under their absolute control, which it has been and still is today… like the dollar and the euro.
Finally, the US of A has been under absolute Rothschild control ever since they were allowed to found the FED in 1913. And! there are no others to blame , than the American people and their own politicians themselves for being robbed and screwed for the better part of a hundred years.
To blame “the British” for the US downhill slide from previous glory is utterly pathetic Joseph. Instead you should start dragging your politicians out into the town square and give them a solid bare ass spanking for taking bribes from Zionists inside and outside of the US.
However, I think it is too late to break loose of the grip that the Rothschild clan have on the US and indeed the whole world… far too late.
And beside Joseph… the way an old atheist like me looks at it all… it would definitely be a better planet for mother nature if the super rich get their way and rid her of some 90% of us.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Brandolph,
The problem sounds to me like you have given up. You complain
about FDR and that our economy only heats up when there is war.
When I talk about the British, I don’t mean England and the british people. I mean what I think you call the Rothchild/Haapsburg banking cartel, which is essentially based in London and is what Larouche calls the British Empire, or what could be called the Global World Monetary system.
Rather than pouting about it and getting ready to die just to spite them, I think the American People can control their destiny and elect knowledgable folks that can learn to practice the economic principles of a Lincoln or a Hamilton. We have had smatterings of these good economic times, but never consistent.
Why? because we don’t understand the British Empire and we keep falling into the traps they lay…cheap goods, easy money.
It’s our fault…but the Empire is on the brink of collapse now.
And the 4-Powers agreement is 3/4s of the way forward with China, Russian and India already rethinking their economies along the lines Mr. Larouche has proposed.
McCain has introduced a bill to return to “Glass Steagall”.
Health care will be stopped and defeated, if not now, in 2010, and 2012.
I think there is hope…and that means “stay the course” and keep to the principles of the Constitution.
Mr. Paul would agree…fight ‘em with American “Mass Strike”
and keep working to all the bums are out.
Lincoln didn’t give up…he died for his belief in a strong union to thwart the evils of the British Empire. He said, “I have an army in front of me (South) and banking cartel behind (Britain)…but he persevered and won. Should we do any less?
Joseph Giallombardo
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
- Nope Jesuph, but what I did say was that it was not FDR’s New Deal which got the US out of the recession created by the FED, but the war which the FED managed to drag the US into.
- On the other hand, yes, war has been an important part of the US economy ever since the US of A, with the Spanish-American war, ventured onto the path of building a US empire.
- A long and comprehensive listing of all US wars and military conflicts is found here: http://www.history.navy.mil/wars/index.html . A long and sad history, culminating with the present ongoing rape and occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan… under the pretext of creating peace and democracy… and of course also to “protect American interests”, to repeat the words said in Oslo by yes-we-can-change-Obama. It is Viet Nam all over again.
- And yes, war IS the biggest racket there is. War was always the bankers favorite racket, and wars are of course also huge accelerators in the economy, just like the space program is. Wars are killing a lot more people than a space program of course, but as Kissinger once said, “Soldiers are useful idiots.” so who the heck cares.
- But like the history of all empires tells us, war as an economical accelerator is not sustainable. In the long run the only winners are the guys who have been given the right to print the fiat dollar and to operate their fractional banking system.
- Well, I think the only way to end the power of your shadow government, is to make an end to the wars that they have dragged you into. Do as Ron Paul says. Bring all your troops home. Let the Senate take over the coining of money. Create accelerators in the economy at home to replace the warmongering abroad… and above all, flog and fire all your politicians who have been preselected by the International Banking Cartel… The Rothschild Clan.
- By the way, do the following lines sound familiar to you?:
Quote
“We shall surround our government with a whole world of economists. That is the reason why economic sciences form the principal subject of the teaching given to the Jews. Around us again will be a whole constellation of bankers, industrialists, capitalists and – the main thing – millionaires, because in substance everything will be settled by the question of figures.
For a time, until there will no longer be any risk in entrusting responsible posts in our State to our brother-Jews, we shall put them in the hands of persons whose past and reputation are such that between them and the people lies an abyss, persons who, in case of disobedience to our instructions, must face criminal charges or disappear – this in order to make them defend our interests to their last gasp.
It is from us that the all-engulfing terror proceeds. We have in our service persons of all opinions, of all doctrines, restoring monarchists, demagogues, socialists, communists, and utopian dreamers of every kind. We have harnessed them all to the task: Each one of them on his own account is boring away at the last remnants of authority, is striving to overthrow all established form of order. By these acts all States are in torture; they exhort to tranquility, are ready to sacrifice everything for peace: But we will not give them peace until they openly acknowledge our international super-government, and with submissiveness.
Unquote
- And then finally Josuph… me “given up”?… heck, I’m just an old retired Norwegian watching you from the other side of the water.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Brandulph,
As an American citizen who is sick and tired of seeing and hearing our officials use lofty rhetoric as the pretext for their spending sprees on war and death, I assure you, there are MANY, MANY Americans who do not like what is done in our name and wish we could bring the young men and women who volunteer for our military home to their families and friends. It is long overdue.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Brandulph,
I like your icon because it reminds me of Rudolph the raindeer, and I can agree with several things you said.
But, this
“However, I think it is too late to break loose of the grip that the Rothschild clan have on the US and indeed the whole world… far too late.
And beside Joseph… the way an old atheist like me looks at it all… it would definitely be a better planet for mother nature if the super rich get their way and rid her of some 90% of us.”
is contradictory to everything else.
Now, how can that be explained? in a single comment, by the same person, we find obvious contradiction: you point in the direction of the root cause of the problem and then say something to discourage the reader/person from doing something constructive, even maybe to the same rothschild.
I just don’t get it.
anyway, merry christmas.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Here is the interesting conclusion of a paper by Rafe Champion in Popperian support for Austrian Economics
He says:
“The revival of the Austrian program also requires that the Austrians [advocates] themselves have another look at Popper instead of following the example of Mises and dismissing his [Popper's] ideas as irrelevant to their concerns. ”
The entire article is worth reading, not that MISES is not a God to some, but the “metaphysical” aspect of scientific discovery is articulated well in this paper…which has its roots traceable back to Plato who argues against the Aristotlean world view of “empiricism”.
Joseph Giallombardo
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
The Southern Avenger’s ‘Man Of The Year’
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q9GMe5RkRNk&feature=player_embedded
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Some new questions for my Austrian Eco friends:
1. Given the “laissez-faire” approach to markets and economy, what is the place of national will to take advantage of a say a “moon mission” and the predictable scientific discovery that would ensue, and the technological development that would take place.
a. Do we wait for the market to impliment such an action?
b. Is there a role for government to stimulate economic develop by supporting such a mission?
c. What drives the “market” to wish to create a Water Reclamation project which might irrigate a desert for agricultural benefit?
d. Isn’t it a role of a goverment to initiate such projects, or support them, for the obvious benefit to the welfare of it’s citizens?
Would Ron Paul support these endeavors?
I would welcome some comments from the Autrian Eco perspective.
Joseph Giallombardo
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Oh Dear, Joseph,
There are tons of info, right here in earth and for earth, for our fellow humans to improve living conditions, life span, suffering, etc etc etc etc etc…. I get just tired of knowing that of having had a glimpse at that hope, a true hope, gasp…. and nothing was, had, or ever will be done with it, it has been put some how in a place that we the real people can not even access, though we may even have produce it ourselves, somehow it is what is happening. By who?, by the cruelest rulers of planet earth? so then we must now go to the moon to be able to get it done… is that it? that would be worst, hard to spot like here in earth.
if, science fiction is what this is all about allow me to let my imagination role…..
THEY must sit there, somewhere, dictate, run things, plan and plot, say or somehow decide whose baby will survive something on the move, a lesson, and the innocent little one will be coming to this world for a short while, with half a brain (like many children on a hot spot of genetic problems near a river, down south), with just enough time to be a ‘testimony’ for a few months to the cruelty of science or scientists, was it really? who is doing that? where? but, but, but if that is the problem why then we the real people can not do what we must do, in peace, in true fellowship, and in true scientific true.
In the space project few will go, few will benefit, but there is a lot do in earth, and what is needed is to take the few exisiting terrorists and pull them out by the ears, into the light of the day, for real, but they should not be the reason to run to the moon now.
ejem!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Nate:
If you are around, I am reading the Higgs article on FDR and also Thomas Woods. I’ll have a response for you soon.
I hope you will watch the film on Africa.
http://www.larouchepac.com/lpactv
Joseph Giallombardo
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I watched the video on Africa. What has happened to the people of that continent as a result of colonialism/imperialism is a complete and utter travesty. But it has done nothing to change my opinions of LaRouche and his ideas. The ideas espoused are a bizarre mishmash of disciplines that have no business being mixed together. Human consciousness is a cosmic force? The universe had humans in mind?
In a way it’s very interesting. LaRouche and his supporters make a few suggestions that may be helpful and some statements that are true. But they quickly make their way past reason, truth, and wisdom and run full sprint toward delusion, half-truths, and folly.
Yes, Africa is in a sad state of affairs. But do they really need a new 4 pronged imperial monster comprised of the US, China, India, and Russia to save them from imperialism? Would they not be better off if left to themselves? The experience of Vietnam is instructive in this case. Vietnam was fragmented and bogged down in civil war brought about in no small degree by French Colonialism/Imperialism. The US finds itself drawn into the conflict. After much bloodshed and wasted money/resources, we leave. What happened to Vietnam? Did it fall into barbarism. Nope. It’s now a united country and we have peaceful trade relations with them. No outside entity was needed. And no such entity is needed to help Africa.
Also, the video provides a perfect illustration of LaRouche’s drive toward unbelievably large capital projects. Nothing wrong with that…if they can be afforded and the losses aren’t passed off on the people. So Africa needs a MagLev train system running throughout the country with nuclear power plants sprinkled throughout the land? If these gifts could be conjured out of the ether it would be a boon no doubt. Unfortunately that option is not available to us. How are these (maybe) advancements to be funded? How is a continent mired in debt supposed to suddenly have the savings (credit) to pay for these projects? Essentially no consideration is given to these questions. Also, what if the people of Africa don’t want a MagLev running through their backyard? Do they have no say in the matter? Do they really need the “Super 4″ to descend upon them and tell them what to do?
You know what I think would help Africa? They should be left to determine how they want to use their natural resources. I see every reason to believe that they would very much benefit from commodity money.
Btw, you will find no fans of the IMF or the World Bank here or among Austrian free-marketeers in general…just sayin’.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Nate Y:
Thanks for your thoughtful discourse. I respect your perspective.
I am still studying the articles you lead me to. It’s tough to just read this stuff and get a full understanding…so I’m not ready yet to respond back.
And, I am very much a Ron Paul supporter…but I do believe he is talking to Mr. Larouche and thus his “gold standard” perspective is changing.
Larouche has pointed out that gold or “free choice in currency” is a secondary issue…more important is breaking the back of the world banking cartel.
And the only way to do that is with a NEW economy not based on monetarism.
FIAT currency ala the FED is a distortion of the concept of CREDIT…it currently is feeding the monetary engine of the British empire. Hamilton wanted a National bank that issued credit based on the “National GOOD”, that which is needed for the people and the nation to provide for their welfare and prosperity. I don’t believe Hamilton conceived of an institution like the FED (which is of British design) that is above the National Sovereignty of the USA…that is why we all agree that it’s time to “END the FED”.
Austria Eco says let there be “choice in currency”…but the only choice that will break the British Banking Cartel is the Larouche’s approach of the 4 Power Initiative to establish a new system of Credit, not monetarism.
The price of criticism is a better idea!
4-Powers initiative has a chance, and other nations can join in if that is their “choice”, even Britain. And for the US to do so, we must “contain” or vote out Obama. I think he’s gone for 2012 anyway.
Joseph Giallombardo
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
There are very few good people left in government.There is no money,only debt.Every dollar you spend is more debt,we’ve been slaves since FDR.Our only solution is to stick tightly together and show the elite we won’t take it anymore.Madoff is nothing compared to the fraud of this banking system and your strawman name(all capitol letters)which is the only way they can do business with you.Take control now.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Socialism…
This is bad word to some…it is bad when we think of it in terms of control: a government controlling our “carbon dioxide” output for example. A government attempting to control an economy when a fair market place would do better. (i.e. USSR vs America)
But what about the Welfare of the Citzenry. When the goverment says, “Gee these people should have electricty from a dam in their area, that will support business and enterprise and improve the standard of living of the people, even it if kills a few fowl and fauna. Is that socialism? The government saw the wisdom of such an action and said “Hey, you creative people and engineers, build yourself a dam here and then use the electricity to helo build your local economy and industry; increase your productive labor with this new source of energy.”
Is that evil social engineering…Or as the “laissez-faire” economists would say, “Wait for the people to determine the want a dam.” Would the people of Tennessee initated such a project (TVA) on their own or was it suggested by “somebody”…
Usually, the creative idea does come from ONE person, or group, but was the goverment right to support the project….?
Is that socialism at work..?
Joseph Giallombardo
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Don’t defend these bailouts. The cash for clunkers program cost taxpayers $23,000 for every $4,500. That $8,000 first time home buyer incentive? Runs the taxpayer $43,000 for every $8,000. Those 630,000 new jobs created? Cost taxpayers $1.2 million each. Waste. Unused Tarp funds should be used to pay down the debt, not wasted on job’s that cost 10-100 times more than they pay. BTW, A rumor was going around that the reason China bought our debt like it has it that they wanted all the cash for clunkers cars for scrap metal. A guy in NJ working at a scrap yard said copper was being seperated from the cars and thrown into box cars and when he asked where they were going he was told China. How long will they or other countries buy our debt? No one knows for sure, but when they stop things will get real ugly.
Do you guys know that the banks have taken over the mortgage industry? They’ve gotten rid of brokers (competition) and for the most part appraisers. The appraisers that do work for the 4 too big to fail banks are paid around 1/3 what the usual fee was. Only the most inexperienced, cheapest and fastest appraisers are hired as the bottom line for these bank owned “appraisal management companies” is $. How did this happen? The AG of NY, Cuomo, blackmailed FAnnie and Freddie into adopting his “home valuation code of conduct”. The HVCC is a huge scam being run on the American public, and , it’s illegal. It did not go through the Administrative Procedures Act (APA) or the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) as required of rules issued by administrative agencies of the federal government. And yet it’s allowed to dictate the public policy of 2 public trust giants – the GSE’s. 85% of all mortgage loans have to go through these bankster owned AMC’s. The consumer is being hurt and the economy is being put at risk by the banks greed again. Get rid of the Fed. They’re no more related to the Fedreal Government than Federal Express. The banks are dictating and employing illegal policies and as long as Bubble Ben and crew are in, they will push us off the cliff in the name of greed. Kind of like the snake and the rabbit story. Snake asks for a ride across a small stream from the rabbit. Rabbit agrees and then the snake bites the rabbit. The rabbit asks Why did you do that? Now we’ll both drown! The snake replies, I’m a snake – that’s what I do. Substitute bank for snake, people for rabbits and stream for cliff and you’ll get the 21st century version.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Your are the man Ron Paul. Abolish the federal reserve.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Gold Standard,
If Ron Paul is changing his view on the gold standard (someone commented that he was), why brought about this change.
Why did he think it was a good idea and what has cause this change of mind. Education…awareness…new information on the subject?
Where did Ron Paul get this information…obviously he’s be getting some advice from someone, and it’s not from the Austrian Economists.
I think I know, but it’s not necessary to say, other than it’s good that he “may” be changing his position.
Comment?
Joseph G.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Well there’s still a spirited debate WITHIN the Austrian School as to what the best course of action is. I know back in the 80′s Ron Paul was quite adamant about a return to the gold standard and a 100% gold dollar. Much similar to the arguments put forth by Murray Rothbard (and others within the Austrian School). Perhaps he changed his mind because he feels we are now just too far down the road of debt and inflation. There’s just too many government interventions, and economic dislocations to make the same move back to gold that he advocated in the past. Time has a way of changing things. He still very much advocates a return to gold/silver. After all, that is what the Constitution states is the only legal tender. But he now seems to thing that THE WAY back to gold as money/a gold standard is through Choice in Money. Let the people determine what they want to use as money. Historically, gold/silver win out as the chosen monies for very good reasons. This idea of choice in money is aligned with F.A. Hayek (and other members of the Austrian School).
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Nate pegged it. Start with choice. Gold and silver will win in the end. A straight up move to a true gold standard would be overly abrupt in our current situation.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Nate:
I have read about the Hayek book, the Road to Serfdom, if that is what you are talking about. Hayek was supported by John M. Keynes and Winston Churchill. The Austrian School of Economics was the British response through Mises and others against Otto Von Bismarck who had adopted the American principles of Economy of Abraham Lincoln. AusEco is the British answer to the American system of Economy. It was attempt to crush Bismarck and unfortunately, it did.
Hayek in his last chapter said that there should be a world police force used to prevent Sovereign Nations from determining how people wish to use their money.
A world policeforce? This is where you are being duped by thinking that “FREE-TRADE” is good economy. FREE_TRADE is ADAM SMITH…it is the laissez-faire notion that markets work all by themselves. They don’t. They do work on behalf of creative minds for good or evil.
And the clearest example of the “deceptive” use of the world FREE in trading is to dupe Americans into thinking they are fighting for Liberty when all you are doing is playing right into the hands of the British Empire. Fair-Trade, Fair Markets would be the better term, but that not nearly effective for British control and suppression. Why do you think the British use the word FREE. It is a ploy.
And there is no better example of the corruption that befalls nations to “FREE- (British Imperialism) TRADE than our current economic situation in nations of the world including America who has lost ALL of its industrial wealth because of the notions of FREE-TRADE. Now, the Collapse of their entire system is happening. And the attempts to save it with the FED printing Trillions of dollars chasing worthless financial derivatives is a desperate and to salvage the unsalvagable.
You folks are looking for answers, I know. But Austrian Economics is NOT the American way. Bismarck followed Lincoln, not the Austrians. Lincoln’s legacy with the banking act of 1867 and the implementation of reconstruction efforts by Henry Carey (lincoln’s treasury secretary) provided a boon of expansion westward until McKinley was assassinated.
You can hold on to your beliefs, but you are reading a very selective view of history and thinking it the truth. Austrian Economics reimergence was a Haapburg/Rothchild initiave to crush Bismarck. And advocating that for America is like allowing a Wolf (Britain) to guard the “chicken coop” (sovereign nations).
Joseph Giallombardo
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Well it appears we are at an impasse. I wasn’t talking about the Road to Serfdom but I have read the book. I can remember nothing in it supporting a world police force…I’ll read the last chapter again.
I very much doubt such a champion of liberty and of Choice in Money would advocate a “world police force used to prevent Sovereign Nations from determining how people wish to use their money”. It would be a blatant contradiction. But even if true, Hayek’s (supposed) unfortunate misstep wouldn’t negate the wisdom of the Austrian School.
Also, Keynes was no fan of Hayek and Hayek was no fan of Keynes. They were intellectual rivals. Of course, Keynes’ ideology was and is intellectually (and morally) bankrupt. I wish Hayek wasn’t so modest. The power of his ideas weren’t enough to destroy the personality of Keynes.
Hayek on Keynes as an economist:
* “His ideas were rooted entirely in Marshallian economics, which was in fact the only economics he knew.” (Collected Works, Vol. 9. p. 241)
* “[H]is aim was always to influence current policy, and economic theory was for him simply a tool for this purpose.” (Collected Works, Vol. 9. p. 248)
* “Keynes was not a highly trained or a very sophisticated economic theorist.” (Collected Works, Vol. 9. p. 242)
Hayek on the Keynesians:
* “It was [Keynes'] revival of this underconsumptionist approach [long preached by cranks and radicals] which made his theories so attractive to the Left.” (Collected Works, Vol. 9. p. 249)
* “some of the most orthodox disciples of Keynes appear consistently to have thrown overboard all the traditional theory of price determination and of distribution, all that used to be the backbone of economic theory, and in consequence, in my opinion, to have ceased to understand any economics.” (Collected Works, Vol. 9. p. 243)
He was much too kind to Keynes.
http://hayekcenter.org/?p=38
All of this nonsense you spout about the Austrian School reeks of a terrible conspiracy theory. Indeed, the Austrian School is rejected by the establishment and mainstream. They follow the exact opposite of Austrian Free-Market Economics. They are all followers of Keynesian economics.
I know we don’t have free trade at the moment and have made it explicitly clear. I have no idea why you continue to bark up all the wrong trees.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
So I read the last chapter of The Road to Serfdom again. There is no mention of “a world police force used to prevent Sovereign Nations from determining how people wish to use their money”. He does speak of an international authority but to pervert his words into such an outrageous misrepresentation is downright shameful.
“…a community of nations of free men must be our goal”
-F.A. Hayek “The Prospects of International Order” last chapter of “The Road to Serfdom”
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Question: Why was or is Gold worth anything? Truth is, its not worth more than any other metal. Sure, it has its own applications, but what would you rather have, steel that you can build your home with, or gold that looks pretty? (I know gold is used in (some?) pc’s, and is a good conductor, but does that make it worth more than something you can build with? If so, how? There are plenty of good conductors other than Gold..
Why have we not asked why Gold is worth more, or why it serves as a currency?
Perhaps we should put down the political debate and opinions of this and that, and ask questions that are relevant in explaining how the system came to be.. How can you fix something if you don’t know how it was built? Its like working on a ufo, except the answers are in our history to find..
The Elite want you to be overly involved in the meaningless details of This Politician says this and That Politician says that, when in fact its all a game, and they are on one team, and we are on the other. Dont believe me, than walk into the white house and demand to speak to them and see what happens, and then tell me whose team they are on and which team you belong to.
The sad reality is we are their slaves, bc we choose to be. We choose to use their currency, and they choose how much we get. A currency that isnt worth anything until we determine the value for them. If all were to stop using money, how much would it be worth? As much as any other piece of paper with useless numbers and letters on it-not a damn thing.
Realize our own stupidity in all of this, and then do something to change it. Or be a coward and a slave. Those are the options, no inbetweens..
contact me @ coreyjbooth@gmail.com to discuss REAL solutions.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
It’s true that there’s nothing fundamentally special about gold/silver. But there’s nothing fundamentally special about anything. Check out The Origin of Money by Carl Menger and you will understand why gold/silver tend to win out as the monies of choice. If it was only the usefulness of the commodity that was important, we would be using air as money. Would you rather have “something pretty” or would you rather breathe?
Money emerges naturally on the market. It emerges spontaneously out of barter.
Here’s a couple articles summarizing the point…
http://mises.org/daily/1333
http://mises.org/daily/3739
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
gold doesn’t corrode or oxidize.. neither does silver or platinum really. That’s why they are called precious metals.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
In the depression prices fell 30-40% for everything. They haven’t done that and they won’t unless there’s a serious dip. The propping up of the banking system and prices overall devalues the dollar and gold is the standard that all monetary systems are based on. Did you know that the UN is issuing a gold coin with intent of it being an international currency? The dollar, unless it gets stronger, will not be the fiat of choice in the carry trade. It ain’t going to get stronger as long as Bubble Ben has his way. Granted, countries all around the world are printing money and America’s biggest export is inflation, but where does all this fiat find a balance? Without backing it’s a confidence game – as in scheme. GS and JPM are shorting precious metals, I’ve heard, at the urging of the Fed, to keep it in check. It’s all corrupt and all fiat currency around the world is being exposed as worthless paper with no monetary backing. Gold is the standard. Why? It doesn’t rust or erode – that’s about as stable as anything you’ll find in this world.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
You have to realize that for the most part, all money is earned. People aren’t just going to dispose of their dollars. They are going to be used until they completely lose their value.. All the trillions of dollars that will be payed back from debt will be paid back in dollars and will completely flood the world market. Either people can exchange dollars with one another or purchase goods from the united states. So basically, the dollar will continue to dominate any other currency unless it totally loses its purchasing power.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
By the way, we are on the Ron Paul site because he is in a position to abolish the FED which is what we want.
But the question about “looking ahead” is the point I’ve been making. Some here think that there is only one choice, either the FED or “Laissez-Faire don’t interfere with Markets” of Austrian Economics.
Austrian economics which Mr. Paul thinks is the answer…is not. It may be better than the FED, but it is not the solution when compared to of the Science of Economy.
In this regard, a government can nurture “Scientific Discover” and think in terms of increasing the Productive Labor of a person. When doing this under the protection of a Sovereign Nation, real wealth can be created, protected and built to the point where we create more than we consume. Then the bounty can be shared (traded) with other nations with similar outlooks.
FDRs “Reconstruction Corporation” was good for America, as was Lincoln’s vision, as was Kennedy who was a student of Economics, his “mission to the moon” being the best example of stimulating the creative mind for discovering scientific principles that provide for technological advancement.
So, we hope Ron Paul can lead us forward, but we should also look carefully ahead as to the direction we choose, lest we fall back on the same misfortune that plagues us today: A FED the has unpacked the printing presses of Weimar Germany, 1923.
Joseph Giallombardo
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
The abolition of the Federal Reserve would be the single-most crushing blow to Statism and its adherents that this country has seen in 130 years. I would even be willing to go so far as to say that no other issue should demand our attention like this one. Governments control of the money is the ONLY thing that enables them to do all the immoral, evil things that they do. Take it away and their ability to kill, steal and destroy is minimized.
I never cease to be amazed by how few Americans really understand or care about this institution and what its role is in our society.
Ron Paul is a giant among men for going against the status quo on this issue for as long as he has.
Audit and abolish the Fed or continue to be enslaved!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Gee, I forgot about Bernanke’s “Person of the Year” status. I think pathetic and misguided sums it up for me. Who cares? It’s only Time magazine. Does ANYBODY take them serious anymore?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Mr. Rice,
Just to clarify, the FED is not a Government institution. The word “Federal” is confusing to some…because it implies that it is a US government institution. It is NOT!
The FED is private Banking concern that is above the control of the US Federal Government…and THEREIN lies the problem.
You are right to support Ron Paul, as I do, to abolish the FED; but, not all governments are immoral. There have been a few in American history that did well. Washington – JQ Adams…Lincoln-McKinley… FDR, and JFK, and Reagan, somewhat.
The rest of our presidents been either stupid or corrupt.
Joseph Giallombardo
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Jay,
While you are correct re: the Fed being a private institution, my point was that WITHOUT the collusion and cooperation of politicians, this institution would not have the devastating effects on government policies that it currently does. I apologize for any confusion this may have created and I should have phrased my point more accurately.
I am unconvinced by your assertion that not all governments are immoral though: Since man runs them, they are immoral by definition; It’s just a question of varying degrees.
Personally, I believe FDR and JFK’s policies rank pretty high on the immoral list and Reagan just a little lower. He was a brilliant rhetorician more than anything because his policies on many issues certainly don’t reflect the “freedom” mantra so many are fond of ascribing to him, even to this day.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Lawrence,
I appreciate your thoughtful response.
Why is it that you have such a low opinion of FDR and JFK?
They epitomize the concept of wealth as the product of labor.
And their record and history validates that.
Perhaps you could elaborate…? I’d be interested in your viewpoint.
I believe government can play a principled role…you have to understand who the enemy is and where the corruption comes from and be ever vigilant. Since 1762 you need look no further than the British Empire for the all the world’s evil.
The USA was formed as a bullwark against tyranny and oppression through economic control. If practiced as intended, like FDR, JFK, and a few others did, American Economics can beat the British oligarchy every time.
Joseph Giallombardo
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Jay,
Re: My low opinion of FDR and JFK.
Their ACTUAL POLICIES belie their RHETORIC.
Rather than present an itemized list of my opinions and/or disagreements, I will refer the interested reader to access the Ludwig Von Mises Institutes archives, The Freeman’s archives, the Cato Institutes archives and perhaps Jim Powell’s book on FDR in particular for a more full-orbed perspective. The book itself has a bibliography for cross-referencing sources.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Mr. Rice,
One more word on FDR…if you read the history from Lincoln to the assassination of McKinley, and then the actions of the President’s that followed…you will see clearly that from Teddie Roosevelt through Hoover…we were under the direct corruption of the British Empire.
After the defeat of the south in the Civil war (that was initiated by the British as a last ditch attempt to destroy the US), the British gave up direct overthrow of our country and went into subterfuge-mode to destroy America through war-monger and corruptions of economic principles.
When Henry Carey continued with Lincoln’s plans for the Inter-continental Railroad, the British were soundly defeated because our Economy shifted from Maritime trade to intercontinental development which they could not undermine so readily undermine.
Although they did so with the Robber-Barrons, JP Morgan and others (that’s another story). And they West remains relatively undeveloped until this day. Lincoln envision a US population of 500,000,000 by 1950 had the West been fully developed.
The America system flourished in the latter part of the 19th century not only in America but in the world, Germany, Russia, China. The British were losing control most everywhere.
They shot Garfield and McKinley. McKinley was a staunch “Lincoln” supporter and kept high tariffs on British goods. With these two great President’s out of the way, in came British stooge, Teddie Roosevelt, followed by a line of Presidents which included Woodrow Wilson, former KKK leader. British destroyed Germany in WWI getting France and Russia to ally against them.
The devastated the Germany economy (Weimar 1923) and gave rise to Hitler.
We got the FED. We got Income tax and under HOOVER we got the CRASH and the depression. Tent City in NY Central park was called “Hooverville”. From 1890 to 1929 it was the worst decline in American Sovereignty in our history.
FDR came in and by 1944 and the Bretton – Woods conference had defeated the British Empire, once again. Compared to what went before FDR and his contribution to bringing the US back to the original principles of economy were astounding and remarkable.
Why you would think him a immoral or a bad president is not borne out by the facts of his accomplishments. Not only did turn on the American economic engine to defeat Hitler Germany and Japan (who were created by the British Empire), he turned the swords back into plowshares and the American economic engine continued to roar until the assassination of JFK…
It’s been a “dark age” ever since.
Perhaps Ron Paul can lead us to some new light.
Joseph Giallombardo
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I recently reviewed Mr. Larouche’s comments on a return to the gold-standard.
He’s statement was [paraphrased]….”There should be no gold standard”. He did not elaborate, but went on to imply that is not the most important issue. We should not be distracted by it.
What is more important is the 4-Power Alliance. It is the only way to break the Banking Cartel (British Empire) which is under threat NOW as it fails under its’ only massive weight of derivative debt.
Dubai, Greece…soon others will follow. Bernanke can print as much money as he likes….it won’t help…The system is going down.
But the 4-Powers of Russia, China, India, and America must establish the new economical model for the world which relies on the cooperation of sovereign nations under the AMERICA SYSTEM OF ECONOMY, a credit system, not a monetary one.
If the 4 hold together, others will join, and the world can heal.
Joseph Giallombardo
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
One must admire LaRouche’s passion but the man is borderline insane. He’s much like Hamilton and FDR. They are corrupt with ambition and hubris. He honestly thinks that a cadre of bureaucrats can properly control everyone else on the planet. The main questions are do you want freedom or force? Do you think men and women are intelligent and responsible enough to establish their own relations and tend to their own affairs or do they need to be overseen, manipulated, and controlled by other (maybe more intelligent but just as fallible) men and women?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Nate,
How was FDR corrupt…?you are very confused on the issue of control…You are parroting what others have said. Do you understand what FDR did at the Bretton-Woods conference.
Do realize the economic wealth brought to many nations that adopted the American system of economy from 1879-1895 or so.
FDR said to Churchill, “Winston, when this war is through (WWII) there will be no more British empire…We will free all the colonies.” And, then Truman betrayed America and Bretton-Woods because he was puppet of the British Empire. That’s how he got elected. Truman, the Traitor. Read the history of what he did, and you will think differently of FDR.
Eisenhower would not even speak to Truman when he took office in 1952. Truman was hated by those who knew what he did.
The battle is not about government control…it is British Empire. Larouche is far from insane… you are reading the hype and the distortions.
Read what he writes and you will think differently. Read the history. Larouche is pretty bright fellow, at 87. And China, Russia, Italy, India, and Brazil, and parts of Africa are listening.
There is a real Science of Economy…and when practiced, it produces wealth and cultivates a high standard of living FOR ALL PEOPLES, under the structure of sovereign nations, not just the few.
That is the American Principles of Economy and Freedom.
Joseph Giallombardo
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
We all parrot what others say or have said. I will again suggest you read “America’s Great Depression” by Murray Rothbard.
Here’s a link to help you on your way…it has links to the PDF version of “America’s Great Depression”.
http://mises.org/literature.aspx?action=search&q=america's%20great%20depression
FDR did the exact opposite of what he should have done. He ramped up government spending, he gave us the monster that was the Bretton Woods accord (which eventually collapsed as the Austrians predicted), he confiscated the people’s gold and then reset the price (which is no different from plain stealing), etc. He is not to be admired.
I stand by my statement of LaRouche. I have read some of his papers and have listened to some of his speeches. I also had a not so pleasant discussion with a couple of his supporters outside of Whole Foods (Whole Foods’ founder/president is a big fan of Mises and Hayek btw). Actually, I’ll make a change to what I said. It’s the ideas he holds that are insane. They will not accomplish what they set out to accomplish.
What person of good will doesn’t want a high standard of living for all peoples? But the best way to work toward such a happy outcome is through freedom.
Also, you want to live “under the structure of sovereign nations” but at the same time you promote this idea of “the 4-Powers Alliance of Russia, China, India and the US.” Such an alliance would be a direct assult upon national sovereignty. You are contradicting yourself.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Nate:
Government spending on infrastruture is how this nation was built, bonds primarily. That’s how Eisenhower fostered the US Interstate Highway system (like a good general would do, building roads). FDR took people out of the bread lines and put people to work on in the CCC. The TVA brought electricity to Appalachia and host of other project included water reclamation. This jump-started the America economy that devasted by Hoover and past associates. Remember Roosevelt was not elected until 32. It was Hoover that screwed the economy with tight money policies.
However, the point is that spending on productive labor has always been a good thing for an economy. Bailouts from Bush-Bernanke-Obama, chases worthless derivatives and adds no value to the economy, in just prolongs the collapse.
As for notions of Bretton-Woods, that system stayed in place until 1971 after the assassignation of JFK and the disatrous actions of Nixon with his wage and price controls.
Bretton-Woods was undermined from the start not by your prediction of collapse by Austria Economics, but simply because Harry S Truman betrayed the American people by letting the British back into their colonial ways in indo-china…and also letting the devalue their current by 30%, destroying their own British economy (for a while) in order to destablish Bretton-woods further.
Kennedy as was rightly pointed out was about to abolish or curtail the FED…Kennedy was a “Hamiltonian”…like FDR…
And of course he was killed. That’s how the british work to destroy nations and take-over the pieces that are left.
Prince Phillip would happily reduce the population by 4 Billion people and return us to medieval times, with him as King, of course.
Joseph Giallombardo
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Jay,
Do you honestly believe that Americans would sit on their hands when something needed to be built that would bring more prosperity. I’m confused by an adult that believes that government could do anything more efficiently than the market.
Are pols keepers of the American brain trust?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
LongshotLou:
I think you misunderstood my point about building a dam.
Of course private enterprise could take up the project. But you also have a government that can pave the way or BLOCK the enterprise with notions of “environmentalism” (which is a fraud, anti-science, anti-human.)
But private enterprise is NOT going to the moon.. Why Not?
Because they don’t see the profit…But why did Isabella finance Columbus. Its a similar analogy; she took a risk because of the potential of financial gain.
A government can initiate a moon project and reap the benefits for the Nation in technological advancements that will necessarily come in order to solve the technical issues of getting there.
It was estimated that for every penny spent on the JFK “moon mission”, America (and the world) reaped 15 times in economic benefit.
Thus, there is a role for Government to play in nurturing science and research, even though there is no immediately apparent gain. Not fraudulent science, like global warming, but real scientific discovery and breath-through with correct methods (ala Kepler, Leibnitz, Gauss, Riemann, Einstein)
I contend a FREE Market will not do this by itself: Only creative minds initiate the enterprise. The government role, as per the US constitution is to nurture and foster economy. The most important asset is the creative human mind that works to discover natural secrets which create technology that increases the productive labor of the human.
So the question is what is the role of government? If you don’t have one, the vikings or the British, or somebody, will come ashore and loot your businesses.
Joseph Giallombardo
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Yes, private industry does sit on its hands at times where there was something that could bring more prosperity. Three easy examples off the top of my head:
Where was private industry when we were in a race with Germany to build a nuclear bomb?
Where was private industry when the internet was ‘invented’?
Where was private industry when we started utilizing satellites?
I am confused by an adult that believes free markets always serve as the inception point for everything we use.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Your reply indicates that you are simply confused, as usual.
Looking forward to your next display.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I would like to add that I enjoy this site. It seems to be full of intelligent people and I like the fact that I have 5 minutes to edit my comments and correct all (most of) my spelling errors.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
There is a way to break the Rothchilds banking cartel.
It is the 4-Powers Alliance of Russia, China, India and the US.
3 of those countries are already developing trade treaties, using Chinese credit for mutual beneficial cooperation for infrastructure development.
Russian President Medvedev met with leading Russian scientists who had led a battle against British climate change ideologue Sir David King in 2004, then science advisor to Tony Blair. The Russian scientists included Russian Academy of Sciences President Yuri Osipov and Academician Yuri Israel.
In recent statements, Medvedev said Russia will change their economic approach away from a exporting nation, back to science and technology development and a revitalization of their infrastructure. China is using America debt (owed to them) as credit for Russian Siberian development which include MAG rail and eventually Bering Strait Tunnel to the Americas. China is building nuclear power plants at the rate of 1 a week.
The stumbling block to the 4-Powers Alliance is Obama and the congress which are rudderless in this endeavor.
McCain and other have introduced legislation to reinstate “glass-steagall” banking standard which would then eliminate the derivative debt and chart a new course.
Ron Paul leading the attack on the FED may be the tidal wave that begins to sweep this corrupt system away.
If we can get US into the 4-Power Alliance, it will break the Rothchilds and the British Empire. Obama will have to be impeached or not re-elected which for the moment looks likely, given the American people’s reaction with MASS STRIKE against ‘health care fraud” and the lack of job creation.
There is hope.
Joseph Giallombardo
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Who owns time magazine? Whoever he is you can bet Bernanke’s lining his pockets. What a surprise. Go study the old world. NOTHING HAS CHANGED EXCEPT ‘US’ SERFS believe we are free and that we have evolved. LOLOLOLOL. What a joke there’s more control now than ever
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Mr. Paul advocates a return to the Gold standard.
The question is: Why is a Gold Standard unnecessary?
The main reason is that the creative human mind is not limited by “money”…Real value is in human labor that is ever-increase in productivity. This is achieve through scientific breath-through which does not arise from a priori axioms, but is derived from what might be described as “discovering truths” outside the box.
If you look only in the box, you will never find new truths about nature. The creative human, unlike animals, can look outside the box. This is along the scientific lines of thinking of Kepler, Leibnitz, Gauss, and Einstein.
In short, the gold standard is an “inside the box” notion…i.e. there is ONLY so much money, and it has to be backed by gold.
We know that isn’t true. A national government can create credit based on an asset or even a liability as Hamilton did in his Assumption of the States debt in the First National Bank of America.
So, Mr. Paul, it appears that gold standard would curtail the excesses of the FED, out of control, printing money like it was 1923 in Weimar Germany. But, ultimately, you can do the same with a International Fixed rate of credit between nations. You don’t need a gold standard to control a FED. You control a FED by abolishing it, and then creating the international standards as was accomplished at Bretton-Woods in 1944.
Joseph Giallombardo
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Ron Paul does not advocate a return to the gold standard as you describe. He suggests having the market (the people) freely determine what they want to use as money. His recent bill advocating Competition in Money can be seen on this site.
You can read “Choice in Currency” by F.A. Hayek and other books for a more thorough argument in favor of freedom and choice in money matters.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I heard Mr. Paul talk about “…we used to have a gold standard…” and that seem to imply that he was advocating that return. If that is not the case, then I stand corrected.
Joseph Giallombardo
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
You could also say “Ron Paul USED to advocate a return to the gold standard for about 40 years and just recently changed his mind and is espousing a more purposefully vague market-driven approach – for reasons he has not clarified.”
This could also explain the confusion regarding ascertaining what Ron Paul believes in – he changed his mind.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Beat that dead horse some more. So Ron Paul has allowed his mind to be changed as a result of changing circumstances. That is a good thing. Perhaps you can write to Ron Paul and ask him what caused his ideas to change. You will get no answers otherwise.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Nate Y says: “You will get no answers otherwise.”
Hey Nate, much like RP looks like you also like to change your ‘hard stance’ approach – and only four hours later!
Thank you for your speculative answer above, good to see you thinking again.
Nate Y says:
December 17, 2009 at 10:36 pm
“I know back in the 80’s Ron Paul was quite adamant about a return to the gold standard and a 100% gold dollar. … Perhaps he changed his mind because he feels we are now just too far down the road of debt and inflation.”
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Umm…what? You’re keeping true to form and making absolutely no sense again.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
“The Decline and Fall of the English System of Finance” – Thomas Paine 1793
“But besides these things, there is something visibly farcical in the whole operation of loaning. It is scarcely more than four years ago that such a rot of bankruptcy spread itself over London, that the whole commercial fabric tottered; trade and credit were at a stand; and such was the state of things, that to prevent or suspend a general bankruptcy, the government lent the merchants six millions in government paper, and now the merchants lend the government twenty-two millions in their paper; and two parties, Boyd and Morgan, men but little known, contend who shall be the lenders.
What a farce is this !
It reduces the operation of loaning to accommodation paper, in which the competitors contend, not who shall lend, but who shall sign, because there is something to be got for signing.
Every English stock-jobber and minister boasts of the credit of England. Its credit, say they, is greater than that of any country in Europe. There is a good reason for this: for there is not another country in Europe that could be made the dupe of such a delusion.
The English funding system will remain a monument of wonder, not so much on account of the extent to which it has been carried, as of the folly of believing in it.
Those who had formerly predicted that the funding system would break up when the debt should amount to one hundred or one hundred and fifty millions, erred only in not distinguishing between insolvency and actual bankruptcy: for the insolvency commenced as soon as the government became unable to pay the interest in cash, or to give cash for the bank notes in which the interest was paid, whether that inability was known or not, or whether it was suspected or not.
Insolvency always takes place before bankruptcy: for bankruptcy is nothing more than the publication of that insolvency.
In the affairs of an individual, it often happens that insolvency exists several years before bankruptcy, and that the insolvency is concealed and carried on till the individual is not able to pay one shilling in the pound.
A government can ward off bankruptcy longer than an individual: but insolvency will inevitably produce bankruptcy, whether in an individual or in a government.
If then the quantity of bank notes payable on demand, which the bank has issued, are greater than the bank can pay off, the bank is insolvent: and when that insolvency is declared, it is bankruptcy….”
More Excerpts:
“The tumults are great in all parts of England on account of the excessive price of corn and bread, which has risen since the harvest.
I attribute it more to the abundant increase of paper, and the non-circulation of cash, than to any other cause.
People in trade can push the paper off as fast as they receive it, as they did by continental money in America; but as farmers have not this opportunity they endeavor to secure themselves by going considerably in advance.”
“The credit of Paper is suspicion asleep.
When suspicion wakes the credit vanishes as the dream would.
England has a large Navy, and the expense of it leads to her ruin.
The English nation is tired of war, longs for peace, and calculates upon defeat as it would upon victory.”
http://books.google.com/books?id=MwArAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA380&dq=%22Thomas+Paine%22+%22Insolvent%22+%22Bankruptcy%22&as_brr=1
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
The U.S. Panic of 1792:
Financial Crisis Management and the Lender of Last Resort
Abstract:
During the US financial panic of 1792, Wall Street’s first crash, securities prices lost nearly a quarter of their value in two weeks. Nonetheless, the crisis, which came when the modern U.S. markets were less than two years old, is off the screens of most scholars, including even financial historians. In part that is because the crisis was managed incredibly well, mostly by Treasury Secretary Alexander Hamilton. Hence, there was almost no economic fallout for the US economy from the financial crisis. This makes the event worth studying. It is also worth studying because of the crisis management techniques Hamilton invented at the time, many of which later became theoretical and practical standards of central bank behavior in crises. Among other things, Hamilton invented and implemented “Bagehot’s rules” for central-bank crisis management nine decades before Walter Bagehot wrote about them in Lombard Street.
Introduction.
The U.S. financial crisis of 1792, which can be regarded as Wall Street’s first crash, was a more important historical episode than one might gather from the inattention it has received from historians and economists. Although specialists in financial history have known of the 1792 panic for decades, at least since Davis (1917) explored it in some detail, it did not make a strong impression on others. The crisis did not make it into the long listing of major financial crises throughout the world dating back to Thirty Years War in an appendix to Kindleberger’s Manias, Panics and Crashes until its fourth edition in 2000, and even then it was not discussed at any point in the text. This essay attempts to rescue the 1792 panic from oblivion and to establish it as an important historical event.
http://www.helsinki.fi/iehc2006/papers1/ Cowen.pdf
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
So…My statement to Mr. Paul would be:
The FED should be abolished, but an implementation of Austrian Economics will not achieve what you want…You NEED strong leaders to buffer
the attacks that will come from the banking cartel.
Only a strong National government, and sovereign nation, along the lines of the US constitution and a NATIONAL banking system CONTROLLED, not by an international cartel (i.e. the FED) by the Nation itself for the “welfare of its citizens”…i.e the constitutional principles.
That is the true and only American system of economics as proposed by Hamilton in his Federalist papers and treatise on Manufactures.
I hope Mr. Paul will listen.
Joseph Giallombardo
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
This problem in this thinking of “FREE-Markets” plays into the hands of Rothchild banking Cartel. It is “Adam Smith” all over again.
Only a strong National government can protect its industries from
FREE-TRADING looters. A Tariff protects the National industry from seemingly cheap labor goods. If fact, they are not “cheap” at all. They become very “dear” in price, when you lose your national industry. That is the illusion of FREE-TRADER…they suck you in, and then take over.
You don’t want “cheaper labor goods”…because it ultimately destroys your national economy…that is what has happened with Globalism today..
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
The term “Free-Trading looters” is an oxymoron. Make your way to mises.org or fee.org if you wish to learn the proper arguments in favor of free trade and Austrian Economics. I think you’ll find that they share most of your concerns but the solutions put forth are actually workable in the long run. Freedom is the end of but also the means to a more equitable and prosperous world.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Nate:
FREE-TRADE is different than “Free-Markets”…
FREE-TRADERS loot nation-states and keep them from economic development. An example is British colonialism.
A strong National government is the only
defense against the TRADERS that take and leave nothing in return.
This is a semantic difference in terms…I used the terms with specific connotations. FREE-TRADE is a term “coined” by ADAM SMITH which is anything but FREE and nothing more than a justification of British Colonialism. More important is Smith’s early treatise on the Theory of Morality…which shows his true colors of British view of the “under-class”.
The myth is: If Markets are left alone, everyone propers. The truth is the sovereign nations will fall under the boot of the Empire that controls the money if they do not act to manage their nation. If they are not crushed by an invading army, they are corrupted (like America is now) from within.
Today we see China, India, Russia, Brazil, Sudan and others that are applying American Economic Principles using “credit” and trade treaties to plan for infrastructure development. Russia and China have a MAG Rail development plan for Sibera and Northern China. And Russia has recently stated its intention to build the Bering Strait Tunnel to Alaska. This is government supported enterprise that will prove a boon to both these economies over the next 50 years.
The answer to FREE-TRADE is “Free-Markets” (in the spirit of competition, capitalist supply and demand) yet a sense of “Mind” that points to vision and uses credit with fixed international rates of exchange between strong nation-states to build toward the future. That is the answer to failed British global economy which is in shambles today.
Joseph G.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Question:
What is the virtue of Austrian Economics?
Otto Bismarck in 1879 followed the American System of Credit
and built Germany from City States into a Nation.
Russia did the same?
This was not a “free-market” system that accomplished this, it was the American System of credit in action.
So, I ask: What is the virtue of Austrian Economics?
Joseph Giallombardo
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
- What amazes me in all this, is that most people agree with the truth in the statement: “Money rules the world”. However, the same people still believe that the world is ruled by presidents and such.
- And then, another thing that puzzles me is the statement: “Ben Bernanke is the most powerful man in the world because he controls the supply of money… and I think he is more powerful than the President.”
- Ben Bernanke doesn’t control anything. He is nothing but a puppet doing what “The Rothschilds” are telling him to do, and that goes for the US puppet President as well.
- Orwell’s world is virtually upon us… war is peace… and most people have become walking zombies.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Brandulph: You could not have said it any better than this.
War has become Peace, and most are walking zombies.
But..
What is the solution to all of this is the next question..
Email me to discuss it if you like. coreyjbooth@gmail.com
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
On Ben Bernanke
History has a habit of repeating itself:
“I care not what puppet is placed upon the throne ….
1743: Mayer Amschel Bauer is born in Germany, the son of a gold smith and money lender.
1760: He changes his last name to Rothschild.
1773-1792: Rothschild sets up a central bank in the USA called the Bank of the United States with a 20 year charter, and had 5 sons: Amschel Mayer, Salomon Mayer, Nathan Mayer , Kalmann Mayer and Jaccob Mayer.
1811: Congress votes against the Bank of the United States renewal. Nathan Mayer Rothschild stated,
“Either the application for renewal of the charter is granted, or the United States will find itself involved in a most disastrous war.”
1812: Backed by Rothschild money, the British declare war on the United States.
1815: Nathan Mayer Rothschild with advance knowledge of Napoleons defeat places strategic trades on the London Stock Exchange giving the Rothschild family an enormous profit and forces England to set up a new Bank of England, which he controlled.
“I care not what puppet is placed upon the throne of England to rule the Empire on which the sun never sets. The man who controls Britain’s money supply controls the British Empire, and I control the British money supply.”- Nathan Mayer Rothschild
1816: The British war against America ends and the charter for the Bank of the United States is renewed for another twenty years with the Rothschilds in Control of the American money supply again.
1837: President Andrew Jackson succeeds in throwing the Rothschilds central bank out of America for the next 76 years. It would not be until 1913 that the Rothschilds would be able to set up their third central bank in America, the Federal Reserve.
1849: Gutele Schnaper, Mayer Amschel Rothschild’s wife dies. Before her death she would state,
“If my sons did not want wars, there would be none.”
1862: By April $449,338,902 worth of President Lincoln’s debt free money had been printed and distributed. He went on to state,
“We gave the people of this republic the greatest blessing they ever had, their own paper money to pay their own debts.” The Times of London publishes the following statement,
“That government will furnish its own money without cost. It will pay off debts and be without a debt. It will have all the money necessary to carry on its commerce. It will become prosperous beyond precedent in the history of civilized governments of the world. The brains and the wealth of all countries will go to North America. That government must be destroyed or it will destroy every monarchy on the globe.”
1865: In a statement to Congress, President Abraham Lincoln states,
“I have two great enemies, the Southern Army in front of me, and the financial institution in the rear. Of the two, the one in my rear is my greatest foe.” Later that year President Lincoln is assassinated.
1881: President James A. Garfield states :
“Whoever controls the volume of money in our country is absolute master of all industry and commerce…and when you realize that the entire system is very easily controlled, one way or another, by a few powerful men at the top, you will not have to be told how periods of inflation and depression originate.” two weeks later he was assassinated.
1963: On June 4th President John F. Kennedy signs Executive Order 11110 which returned to the U.S. government the power to issue currency, without going through the Federal Reserve. Less than 6 months later on November 22nd, President Kennedy is assassinated.
That very same day, Executive Order 11110 is rescinded by President Lyndon Johnson on the Air Force One flight from Dallas back to Washington.
“It is well enough that people of the nation do not understand our banking and monetary system, for if they did, I believe there would be a revolution before tomorrow morning.”
- Henry Ford
“Once a nation parts with the control of its currency and credit,
it matters not who makes the nations laws. Usury, once in control,
will wreck any nation. Until the control of the issue of currency
and credit is restored to government and recognized as its most sacred
responsibility, all talk of the sovereignty of parliament and
of democracy is idle and futile.”
-William Lyon Mackenzie King
http://forums.wallstreetexaminer.com/index.php?showtopic=849996
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Rothschild, omg. That’s amazing. Thanks for posting that Big Joe. Let me add:
“A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship. The average age of the world’s greatest civilizations has been 200 years.
Great nations rise and fall. The people go from bondage to spiritual truth, to great courage, from courage to liberty, from liberty to abundance, from abundance to selfishness, from selfishness to complacency, from complacency to apathy, from apathy to dependence, from dependence back again to bondage
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Yes Big Joe, you are indeed pointing your finger at the real power. And, they are of course in absolute control of Europe as well… the whole fiat money system… which controls us all.
In an earlier comment I also pointed at JFK and his “11110″, saying that Ron Paul indeed is a man of tremendous courage.However, the fact that he is still alive indicates to me that “The Rothschilds” see him as no danger to them.
And it also seems quite clear that they are in the process of scrapping the USD… with the aid of their latest fiat currency creation, the Euro. This process will bring the whole world in chaos, which inevitably will allow them to initiate a new world war, which again will pave the ground for their final global takeover.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
This is history is good….the question remains…If the banking cartel can be overcome, what is to replace it.
Ron Paul indicates “Austrian” Economics. But this is absolutely the opposite of what Lincoln did with the National Currency and opposite to his supporters, Garfield, and more importantly McKinley, was also assassinated.
Austrian economics says, “Let the markets alone…and they will work as intended…i.e. ABSOLUTELY NO GOVERNMENT INTERFERENCE.
But that is not what Lincoln said or did with National Banking Act of 1867 implementing Lincoln reconstruction plan, by Treas. Sec, Henry Carey.
And this approach is not what Benjamin Franklin recommended with his treatise on a “National Currency”.
There is place for Government involvement and it is at the level achieved by FDR, one of America’s Greatest presidents. FDR was effective because although he had the FED to deal with, FDR had “His man” in control of the FED.
I believe Lyndon Larouche’s plan of the 4-Powers agreement between Russia, China, US, and India is the better solution..
Yes, Abolish the FED, but Austrian economics is NOT the answer. Not a monetary system and certainly not a “laissez-faire FREE-Market” approach, but a currency controlle d by the National government, a credit system is the best, and frankly ONLY approach that will work.
Joseph Giallombardo
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
So you want to abolish the Fed and replace it with another system of control? I’ll pass. Freedom is always better than force.
We have a credit (debt) based system right now. Such a system works well for the banks, the government, and the big businesses capable of influencing the government but it enriches those entities at the expense of the normal guy and gal on the street. If the people have the money power (as they would under sound money) it makes for a more fair and harmonious world.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Nate:
Because the Control of the FED is bad, you think that all control is bad, and that is the fallacy of your argument.
The creative mind exhibits control over what is which is to accomplish. It is question of whether the control views the world as fixed, locked in stasis, and that there is only so much of “this or that”…
Mankind changes natures and creates more where no existed.
FDR exhibited control over the economy, in the right way in in 15 years America was the industrial might of the world once again from the brink of disaster.
Was that improper control or well-exercised control?
The FED is tantamount to Weimar Germany relying on Keynesian manipulation. We all agree that has produced massive debt and disaster to nations and economies.
The culprits use “FREE-TRADE” because it manipulates the American adherence for liberty, “ie. FREEDOM”…but it is not free.
Therefore, I like to use the term “Free-markets” free of monopolistic corruption…vs FREE-TRADE which is the British mindset of Imperialism.
We want Free-Markets in AMERICA (between states and across state lines) and between countries with treaty agreements between nations with a Fixed international rate of exchange.
This is what FDR put into place at Bretton-Woods and it is a kind Government “control” that I think you would welcome!
Joseph Giallombardo
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I would not welcome any government control. And I hold FDR to be one of the worst Presidents in US history. His actions prolonged the correction that came to be known as the Great Depression. Check out “America’s Great Depression” by Murray Rothbard for a proper treatment of FDR.
Again, I urge you to check out mises.org and fee.org. I doubt anyone would be able to convince you of the virtue of Austrian economics through this message board. It’s just not the best way to obtain the information.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
The world has gone mad.. Ron Paul is the only sane one in the bunch. What has happend to us?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Hmmm…Let us see,
If I go to war with nearly 3 nations of which I aspire to be diplomatic with, I can win a Nobel Peace Prize.
If my policies cause an economic crisis and then I do more of the same, I can become Time’s man of the year.
I think I’ll start small. How about I go for the Time’s Nobel Charity Prize by robbing a homeless man’s change bin?
By these standards, why is Madoff in jail?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
This illusion they’re creating (Nobel Peace Prize, Afgan needs thousands of Americans troops for 100 rabble rousers, we must pay to keep the banks propped up, the housing market is being fully funded by the Government – read taxpayers, the banks caused the problem so they’re the ones to fix it, and on and on every bleeping day) is heaven to them and their cronys but hell to us common folk – and they absolutely refuse to see it or even listen to us. Greed is blinding isn’t it, or at least tunnel vision. Hahaha – tunnel visionaries lol. I love the overabundant gratitude the banksters are showing us for saving their arses and bailing them out. Gives me a nice warm “snuggie” feeling. (puke)
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Lets see, Obama’s “change we can believe in” was how he won his office – got my vote anyway. He got the Nobel Peace Prize for doing nothing and all that time had plans for a “needed” surge in Afganistan – more war. For about 100 terrorists? Does that make sense? He gladly accepted the peace prize. Does he deserve it? Does he really think he deserves it? He should have refused it and said give it to someone actually deserving of it. He didn’t. That says a lot about the character of the man. Since he’s been elected how many promises has he gone back on? 2 big ones and counting. Where is that change? He puts Geithner and Summers in as Treasury Secretary and Chief economic counsel and they’re the ones that were behind the meltdown!! What change? A bank oligarchy where the banksters cartel runs the show and the government and American citizens be damned? Now Bubble Ben gets named Time magazine Person of the Year??!! Who is in control here? Who owns Time? Who nominates people for the Nobel Peace Prize? The rape of the American public is the only change I’m seeing. Every day there’s more bad news from these crooks paid off by the banksters. Read this – the Geithner-Summers plan is even worse than we thought. Mr Paul, you are giving hope to the down-trodden masses. Compared to current policies – you sir are a genius. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jeffrey-sachs/the-geithner-summers-plan_b_183499.html
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Congressman Paul,
One world govt. “Mega Bankers” ( Ashkenazi, aka Aluminati, aka Berger Belsons etc.) obviously own Time Magazine as well as other magazines, newspapers and most other TV and radio stations. No wonder ‘Reporters without Borders” rated the U.S. number forty something in freedom of speech.
What can be done to rids ourselves of their yoke? If they run our Govt. as indeed we think they do, then they have the launch codes.
They will never give up power of taxing us without “leveling the field”. The Nazis’ in WW2 had an expression for this. They would, if the battle was in doubt, shell their own position. A draw was better than a loss.
Orwells’ 1984 is finally here. How sad.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Go Ron Paul!!!!!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Here is the letter I just sent Senator Reid in regards to an up or down Vote of the Senate Auidt the FED bill.
Dear Senator Reid,
As a resident of your state, I urge you to support your fellow senators and FULLY support an Audit of the Federal Reserve. You and the President campaigned on total transparency, unfortunately on numerous issues such as TARP, healthcare, and now the Federal Reserve the absence has been seen by the American public. As a public official all you have is your word to your voters. If it is found out that you didnt support an up or down vote on an Audit of the Federal Reserve, I will do everything in my power to make sure you are not in the next Senate come 2010. Mr Bernake was recently made the Time “person of the year”. This is probably true since he and he alone can print trillions of Dollars in total secrecy. He is also allowed to make deals with both foreign countries as well as Wall Street with taxpayer funds, this was certainly not the original idea for the Federal Reserve. Their purpose is to moderate interest rates, have full employment, and keep stable prices. They have failed on each of these for the past 20 or 30 years, creating bubbles and busts that have wiped out trillions of dollars of wealth of American citizens, and in turn forced the government in to areas such as private company ownership and bailouts for some of the most wealthy of the country at the expense of the middle class.
In closing once again, if it’s noted that you decided to protect the Banks, foreign countries, and incompetence of the Federal Reserve over the taxpayers of the USA, I will vote for a member of any party to make sure you wont work for the taxpayers of Nevada in the next 2010 Senate.
Thanks for your attention,
Shane Crosley
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
obama the liar change you cant believe in
how about the NEW WORLD DISORDER
infowars.com henrymakow.com goodnewsaboutgod.com
against the new world disorder
RON PAUL should be president RON paul should bring all the troops home Ron paul would end the IRS
Ron Paul would get the HELL OUT OF THE UNITED NATIONS
cause they are sick sons of bs with itches
united nations rights of the child my ass what about parents rights to make sure the dam communist united nations
doesnt steal peoples children in the name of SO CALLED CHILDRENS rights
give me a break
end the fed get rid of the united nations
and start being free americans and stand the f k up
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
So this money and power hungry [man] is Time magazine’s Person of the Year? HUH? “What a shame”! He has done nothing right to get our economy moving again! He is making his allies in Wall Street, the Big Shot Banks, & the Fed’s even richer with our money!
“This is Change we can believe in”? & HOPE? What HOPE?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Jay Giallombardo says:
- “NO National bank is the argument of the enemy, The British Empire.”
- “I agree the FED’s way serves the British Oligarical monetarist system.”
—–
huh?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
This reply was to Mario about National Banks.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Lastly, if you understand Hamilton then you understand the concept of the American Financial engine which is based on Credit.
And frankly, if the return to gold standard is all we are arguing about, then I say, let’s band together to get rid of the FED…and then I will attempt to convince that the science of economy does not need a gold standard…THAT is what got into this mess in the first place. And, there is an example in history when silver was used to undermine the gold standard in the 12-14th century…I’ll look it up and report back.
The Austrian economics is better than what we have now with the FED, but it is not the real answer to economy…Our constitution advocates a “credit system”, not an Austrian Economic system.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I am not arguing for the FED…I agree that it is unconstitutional.
I am saying that AMERICAN HISTORY points to 4 periods, of 20, 20, 30, 15 years…where we had either actual National banks chartered by congress, or banking acts that served as such…and during those times the American economy flourished. We were always under threat of the British empire to dislodge this system. In the Civil war the South was financed mostly by Britain, to break up the USA.
Anyway, as the economy flourishes you have more wealth and that backs your “Credit”…in the physical asset of productive labor.
The Chinese have USA treasuries worth a trillion. They use that to finance a new deal with Russia to build infrastructure and develop Siberian natural resources, nuclear plants, and Mag rails. The USA debt is worth nothing, but the chinese have turned it into credit.
From you view point, you cannot go to the MOON or develop fusion power, because you don’t have GOLD backed money to do so. I say that is a monetarist notion. You go to the moon, BECAUSE YOU CAN!
I agree the FED’s way serves the British Oligarical monetarist system. I am against the FED…by you don’t understand the science of economy by saying that you have to rely on GOLD…you don’t!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Boom and Bust
Boom and Bust
Boom and Bust
Boom and Bust
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
“We were always under threat of the British empire…”… Hmmm?
No, you were under threat from The Rothschilds back then, by the very same family who control you today. Nathan Mayer Rothschild (1777-1836)once said: “I care not what puppet is placed upon the throne of England to rule the Empire on which the sun never sets. The man who controls Britain’s money supply controls the British Empire, and I control the British money supply.”
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Only in America, a swindling entity like the chairman of the Federal Reserve could be nominated as a man of the year by Time magazine…Unbelievable and shameful …I tell you why Time magazine did this to reduce the impact of the discontentment of the American people against the corrupt Federal Reserve,as well as the congress and Mr Ron Paul bill to Audit the Federal Reserve…Don’t let this fool you …Audit the Fed.
Here read these lines from a PBS Documentary “The Warning” Interview of former chair woman of the “CFTC” Miss Brooksely born…
Question:So we’re the losers. Who were the winners?
Answer:
I think the profits made by the over-the-counter derivatives dealers, by our largest banks and investment banks, were the upside of this. And that was shortsighted. It was short-term benefit for a few major institutions at the expense of all the people who have lost their jobs, who have lost their retirement savings, who have lost their homes.
Please Mr Ron paul don’t let these swindling thugs get of the hook,so to speak…I realize that they are not going to go down quietly ,but I have been relentless on the blogs to get support for your bill to Audit these thugs…Strength and Honor to you.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Mario,
Your argument is not supported by History. We did have 2 20 year periods of central banking that was a boon for America. Madison
let the 1st charter expire. After the war of 1812, he and congress issued a 2nd charter…That was undermined by Jackson who vetoed congress bill for a 3rd charter as he was under British influence of BURR and Van Buren. Lincoln and successive president support this approach until McKinley was assassinated, Leading to Tedde Roosevelt who acted Primarily as Obama today, as British Agent.
FDR saved us for a while with “Glass-Steagall” of 1933, the American Economic engine ROARED back to life.
So, NO National bank is the argument of the enemy, The British Empire. A real Hamiltonian bank worked for America…(not a FED).
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Dr. Paul still kicking that Banksta ass !!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Ron Paul is the Man of the Century.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
TO: Jay Giallombardo: Sir… You have NO CLUE, what the real difference is between an ASSET-Backed currency, and a FIAT currency. Credit, issued at random is istelf…..a FIAT medium of transaction as well. Your assertions on Hamilton and others, are perverting history and logic. The ONLY FAIR system, is an ASSEET-Backed currency supporting a Free market Capitalist socio-economic system per the Austrial School. There is NO OTHER fair option, and Austrial Economics is NOT MONITARISM. Furthermore, the ELITE Bankers who run our Federal Reserve, are NOT CAPITALISTS…..They are MONOPOLISTS (quite another thing). They DO NOT believe in a fair and level economic playing field for all. They want ABSOLUTE POWER achieved through POLITICAL PULL, which is CORPORATISM, NOT CAPITALISM.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Of course, I meant AUSTRIAN….NOT AUSTIAL…. It was a TYPO.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I agree with you about the FED. The question is whether or not a gold standard is required to “legitimize” the value of money. According to Hamilton, a sovereign National Government can issue its own currency, going in debt to itself based on congressional bills that would make the currency available from a National bank lending to private business for the development of “needed” infrastructure and goals. Hamilton made good “American Credit” based on his assumption polices of the State’s debt.
There were two national banks in American History from 1791-1811 and from 1816-1836. With banking act of 1867 Carey was able to carry the development of intercontinental railroad and brought the US to the leading Economic power of the world at the time.
And Germany, Japan, and Russia and China followed this American model. Yes we did have a gold standard at the time. My point is that a gold standard is not a pre-requisite, if you have sovereign nations employ a fixed rate of exchange between nations. This is what the constitution alludes to and was supported by Supreme Court Ruling that a National Bank, under congressional control (not a FED) is constitutional as a means and a method for “securing the welfare” of the population. (Marshall ruling 1819).
Joseph Giallombardo
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Excuse Me? “….Going in debt to itself”? OK…so let me get this straight…… I’ll LOAN money to myself….and then issue that money to some other National Bank, who will then lend to Commmercial Banks…. So….if I’m “Loaning the money to myself”….where did I get that money in the first place ? What is the BASIS of VALUE, for that money….which I loaned to myself ? How do I “pay myself back” ? If I “issued” this money to other banks….do they have to pay me back ? If not…it’s then a GIFT. If I “Loaned Money to myself that I didn’t have…them I”M in debt…….to myself”……… This is the same convoluted nonsense that is used today, to convince people, that CREATING MONEY OUT OF THIN AIR, WHICH DOES NOT EXIST, IS A VIABLE AND SUSTAINABLE ECONOMIC MODEL. IT IS NOT…..
You are TALKING ABOUT THE SAME THING…..PRINTING FIAT MONEY OUT OF THIN AIR. And By the Way, Hamilton himself espoused a “Heavy Handed powerful Government”, and was regarded by Jefferson as little more than an arrogant stooge of the British whose intent was to economically subvert the American Revolution by indebting the Newly Independent United States to a bunch of European Bankers…..just as we are today.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pzH7mGt0VDE&NR=1
In direct conflict with Jefferson, Hamilton favored a strong central authority. He believed a strong government was necessary to provide order so that business and industry could grow, and he continually berated “the peasantry” as he so eloquently referred to American citizens. He envisioned America becoming an industrial power (A corporatocracy) and to this end he sought to establish a national bank and fund the national debt in order to establish a firm base for national credit. Hamilton believed that the government should be run by those who were educated and wealthy rather than by “a government of the people” whom he often referred to as “the mob.”
The Jefferson/Hamilton conflict helped give rise to political parties by polarizing factions on opposite political sides. Those who backed Jefferson’s Democratic-Republicans supported states rights and a strict interpretation of the Constitution.
Those who backed Hamilton’s Federalists preferred a much stronger central government and an “elastic” interpretation of the Constitution. It is this continual mis-reading of the US Constitution for the convenience of whoever happens to be in power….. that has morphed our once free-market system based on individualism, into the current “mixed economy” based on Socialism DISGUISED as Capitalism which we have today. The point is this… YOU CANNOT HAVE YOUR CAKE…AND EAT IT TOO. YOU CANNOT CREATE MONEY OUT OF THIN AIR (which is the same as creating DEBT, without the assets with which to ever pay back that debt).
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Sorry, a previous message was a reply to Grieger, not Krieger.
Joseph Giallombardo
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Mr. Grieger,
You stated:
YOU CANNOT CREATE MONEY OUT OF THIN AIR (which is the same as creating DEBT, without the assets with which to ever pay back that debt).
——
In answer, Hamilton in the “assumption” act, assumed all the debts of the states, creating DEBT of the United States of America. He did this to prove that by honoring the debt owed to many interests, that America was worthy of credit…
Therefore he used a debt to be able to prove the “Credit worthiness” of the USA. And the money continued to flow into the Country (Yes to be paid back)… But this is Hamilton’s genius, in using a DEBT to make money available for continued US economic development.
Yes, I agree that creating money by turning on the printing presses only serves to inflate the currency…that is irresponsible in the long term. There is no integrity in selling treasuries whose interest will never be paid back.
In the derivative world, the idea is to keep selling and inflating the security, and the last one holding, before the bubble bursts, is a “sucker”.
Currently, China has money owed to it by the USA in the form of Treasury securities. Rather than wait for that interest to be paid, which it never will be because AMERICA, in monetary terms, is bankrupt (not in creative potential), China is turning the money owed to itself into “Credit” for Russian-Chinese infrastructure development in Siberia which contains a wealth of natural resources, NOT just for export but for the development of the Russian Siberian infrastructure…leading eventually to the Bering Strait Tunnel which then makes a land bridge to the Americas.
That is a credit use of worthless American paper for the advancement of economy in ASIA…USA should take notice.
Other nations are, once again, using the system our fore-fathers invented.
If a sovereign nation, carefully, wishes to provide money to itself, responsibly, to build infrastructure, a dam, a bridge, a nuclear plant, and be paid back on a long-term, low-interest rate transaction…Why would it need to borrow from an International Cartel. All that is needed is integrity and more importantly an understanding of economy…that the loan must be paid back in order to secure the value that was intended of the original project.
If handled responsibly, a Sovereign Nation, can borrow on its own “credit” Tho’ this seems no different than what the FED is doing, the FED is propping up financial instruments that are worthless; no investment is made in physical production. Big Difference!
The thing is not to get discouraged:
I’d like you all to watch this…and comment later if you can.
AFRICA: THE MORAL TEST
http://www.larouchepac.com/lpactv?nid=12782
This shows the potential of humanity. Watch what we can do with the 4-Powers Initiative that will break the back of the British Empire.
Joseph Giallombardo
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Hamilton may very well have had such a noble intention (although I doubt it) when he established the national debt. But what the national debt actually accomplished was to expand the power of the central government at the expense of the states. The states were more than capable of paying off their individual debts. In fact, some (including Virginia) were well on their way to full repayment. But when the debts of the states were adopted by Congress, it made the states beholden to the central government. And so the gradual corruption of the Republic began…
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Amen! Mr. Paul you are exactly right. End the FED!
You are almost the last defender of freedom in Washington. How do we clone you?
Keep up the good fight.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
He can be cloned by giving to the Rand Paul and Peter Schiff for senate campaigns.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I strongly agree with Ron Paul.
The Fed system has become way too corrupted and secretive. The Fed is robbing the hard work and ingenuity of Americans.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I actually think this is going to have very negative effects on people’s perception of the Feds and Bernanke. Many people are going to look at his as a hero instead of someone responsible for the worst recession since the depression.. It’s a shame.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Ron,
Central bankers will never be independent from their political supporters! A central bank must be audited and restrained from any issuing not justified by balancing real value equivalent assets!
Hang on!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Ron,
You are partially right but Austrian economics is still monetarism.
We don’t actually need money…we need production and science.
Hamilton demonstrated that a Sovereign National government can issue credit at long-term, low interest rates to build the economy. The nation lends to national business and and invests in research and science for break-throughs need to continue to increase the productive labor of the population.
We need infrastructure, technology, agriculture and industry within our own borders and for the benefit of our citizens.
While you have the right intentions, your reliance on Austrian economics is flawed and will not produce the kind of education and science discovery that we need. We will fall back to old habits.
We don’t need a gold standard to remedy the current situation. That just exchanges dollar value for gold value.
America’s best productive times were under Hamilton (as 1st Treas. sec) JQ Adams, Lincoln (and other supportive presidents, Grant, Garfield, McKinley), FDR and JFK…forget party…these men understood ECONOMY and the American Economic system of credit. Under this approach AMERICA flourished. We should do the same. The british financial empire is the enemy…this is the only way to defeat them!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Are you trading one command and control economy for another?
Austrian economists are not monetarists.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
TO: Jay Giallombardo: Sir…You have NO CLUE, what the real difference is between an ASSET-Backed currency (Gold/Silver), and a FIAT currency. Credit, issued at random is istelf, simply a FIAT medium of transaction as well. Your assertions on Hamilton and others, are perverting history and logic. The ONLY FAIR system, is an ASSEET-Backed currency supporting a Free market Capitalist socio-economic system per the Austrian School. There is NO OTHER fair option, and Austrian Economics is NOT MONITARISM (NO ASSET-BACKED Currency can be….for by nature, assets are LIMITED in their quantity, and the money supply can therefore NOT be CREATED to an over-supply simply OUT OF THIN-AIR in an asset-based currency system). Issuing CREDIT OUT OF THIN AIR, IS EXACTLY THE SAME AS Creating money out of thin air, and what you describe, is precisely what our Fed Does. 90% of the US Dollars that are in circulation, are NOT EVEN PRINTED….THEY ARE ISSUED ELECTRONICALLY…..WHICH IS CREDIT. In case you still don’t get it, I’ll state it another way:….. A FIAT MONEY SYSTEM….IS A CREDIT SYSTEM. ALL FIAT MONEY…IS DEBT.
Furthermore, the ELITE Bankers who run our Federal Reserve, are NOT CAPITALISTS…..They are MONOPOLISTS (quite another thing). They DO NOT believe in a fair and level economic playing field for all. They want ABSOLUTE POWER achieved through POLITICAL PULL, or by any other means possible, and at any cost…..at the expense of the populace (which they view as nothing more than subserviant peasants). This is CORPORATE SOCIALISM, NOT Free Market CAPITALISM. The United States has NOT PRACTICED FREE MARKET CAPITALISM since the Fed was FOUNDED in 1913.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Mr. Krieger,
You are quoting the lies about Hamilton, the revisionist history of the British Empire to discredit Hamilton. Jefferson in his later years acquised in part to Hamilton’s view of credit and economy.
Your problem is you don’t understand money, except how the British have defined it for you. Money itself is valueless…it is a means of exchange. A beaver doesn’t need money to make a dam, yet his action benefits the entire environment with the pond and eventually meadow that is created. And, yes he cuts down trees to do it. Nature destroys things all the time to create something new. Nature created Iron Ore deposits, and mankind turns the ore into rails for commerce and transporation. Men used to use wood for fire, then coal, oil, and now nuclear power.
The world is a creative place and mankind does not exist outside of nature; he is an integral part of nature that changes the world in a dynamic process of continuous creativity.
The difference is that man creates wealth through his will, his vision, and his action on discovered scientific principles which are unseen by can be discovered by the creative mind. The application of scientific principles lead to increase productity of human labor, wherein lies real wealth, not in money.
So, we don’t ask so much where the money comes from, that you have to pay for it first, before you can attempt to achieve some goal. Instead the creative mind envisions what can be done, and discovers or figures out a way to do it.
The Erie Canal was built from a variety of “creative” sources, as was the inter-continental rail development from 1860-1880s…and JFKs “Mission to the Moon”.
So don’t think of it terms of money…think about creativity and you will be closer to the mark. That’s what FDR and Lincoln and Hamilton did. And sing; or like Jefferson and Einstein, play the violin.
Joseph Giallombardo
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Right on, Dr. Paul!!! The founders would be proud of your efforts against these Banksters. You are one of the last rays of hope left for the Republic!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0