Ron Paul Reacts to Ben Bernanke as TIME Person of the Year

Show: Morning Joe
Channel: MSNBC
Date: 12/16/2009


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. […]

  • Ted O’Connor

    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.

  • Tom Stephan

    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.

  • steve
  • Shane

    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

  • Robert

    obama the liar change you cant believe in

    how about the NEW WORLD DISORDER
    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

  • 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?

  • SS

    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.”



    • Jay Giallombardo

      This reply was to Mario about National Banks.

  • Jay Giallombardo

    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.

  • Jay Giallombardo

    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!

    • SS

      Boom and Bust

      Boom and Bust

      Boom and Bust

      Boom and Bust

    • “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.”

  • shazmiforce

    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?

    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.

  • Jay Giallombardo


    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).

  • SS

    Dr. Paul still kicking that Banksta ass !!

  • Thor H. Asgardson

    Ron Paul is the Man of the Century.

  • F. A. Krieger

    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.

    • F. A. Krieger

      Of course, I meant AUSTRIAN….NOT AUSTIAL…. It was a TYPO.

    • Jay Giallombardo

      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

      • F.A. Grieger

        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.

        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).

        • Jay Giallombardo

          Sorry, a previous message was a reply to Grieger, not Krieger.

          Joseph Giallombardo

          • Jay Giallombardo

            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.


            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

          • Nate Y

            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…

  • Ron Emrick

    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.

    • Ken

      He can be cloned by giving to the Rand Paul and Peter Schiff for senate campaigns.

  • anonymous

    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.

  • 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.

  • 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!

  • Jay Giallombardo


    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!

    • longshotlouie

      Are you trading one command and control economy for another?

      Austrian economists are not monetarists.

    • F. A. Krieger

      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… 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.

      • Jay Giallombardo

        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

  • Thomas Jefferson

    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!