252 responses to “Ron Paul Reacts to Ben Bernanke as TIME Person of the Year”

  1. Jay Giallombardo

    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

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  2. Lawrence Rice

    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!

    »crosslinked«

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    1. Lawrence Rice

      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?

      Report this comment

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    2. Jay Giallombardo

      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

      Report this comment

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      1. Lawrence Rice

        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.

        Report this comment

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        1. Jay Giallombardo

          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

          Report this comment

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

          1. Lawrence Rice

            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.

            Report this comment

            Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    3. Jay Giallombardo

      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

      Report this comment

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  3. Jay Giallombardo

    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

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    1. Nate Y

      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?

      Report this comment

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      1. Jay Giallombardo

        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

        Report this comment

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        1. Nate Y

          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.

          Report this comment

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

          1. JayGBardo1

            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

            Report this comment

            Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        2. longshotlouie

          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?

          Report this comment

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

          1. Jay Giallombardo

            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

            Report this comment

            Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

          2. Matt

            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.

            Report this comment

            Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

          3. longshotlouie

            Your reply indicates that you are simply confused, as usual.
            Looking forward to your next display.

            Report this comment

            Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  4. Jay Giallombardo

    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.

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  5. Jay Giallombardo

    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

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  6. ryan

    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

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  7. Jay Giallombardo

    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

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    1. Nate Y

      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.

      Report this comment

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      1. Jay Giallombardo

        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

        Report this comment

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      2. Matt

        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.

        Report this comment

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        1. Nate Y

          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.

          Report this comment

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

          1. Matt

            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.”

            Report this comment

            Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        2. Nate Y

          Umm…what? You’re keeping true to form and making absolutely no sense again.

          Report this comment

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    2. Big Joe

      “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

      Report this comment

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      1. Big Joe

        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

        Report this comment

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  8. Jay Giallombardo

    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

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  9. Jay Giallombardo

    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..

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    1. Nate Y

      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.

      Report this comment

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      1. Jay Giallombardo

        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.

        Report this comment

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  10. Jay Giallombardo

    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

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  11. Brandulph

    - 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.

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    1. Corey

      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

      Report this comment

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  12. Big Joe

    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

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    1. Ted O'Connor

      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

      Report this comment

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    2. Brandulph

      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.

      Report this comment

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    3. Jay Giallombardo

      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

      Report this comment

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      1. Nate Y

        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.

        Report this comment

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        1. Jay Giallombardo

          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

          Report this comment

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

          1. Nate Y

            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.

            Report this comment

            Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  13. Mark

    The world has gone mad.. Ron Paul is the only sane one in the bunch. What has happend to us?

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  14. Patriot @ Arms

    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?

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  15. Ted O'Connor

    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)

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  16. 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. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jeffrey-sachs/the-geithner-summers-plan_b_183499.html

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  17. 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.

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  18. steve

    Go Ron Paul!!!!!

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  19. 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

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  20. Robert

    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

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  21. Bottomline

    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?

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  22. 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.”

    —–

    huh?

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    1. Jay Giallombardo

      This reply was to Mario about National Banks.

      Report this comment

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  23. 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.

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  24. 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!

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    1. SS

      Boom and Bust

      Boom and Bust

      Boom and Bust

      Boom and Bust

      Report this comment

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    2. Brandulph

      “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.”

      Report this comment

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  25. 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?

    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.

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  26. Jay Giallombardo

    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).

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  27. SS

    Dr. Paul still kicking that Banksta ass !!

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  28. Thor H. Asgardson

    Ron Paul is the Man of the Century.

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  29. 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.

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    1. F. A. Krieger

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

      Report this comment

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    2. 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

      Report this comment

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      1. 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.

        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).

        Report this comment

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        1. Jay Giallombardo

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

          Joseph Giallombardo

          Report this comment

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

          1. 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.

            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

            Report this comment

            Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

          2. 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…

            Report this comment

            Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  30. 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.

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    1. Ken

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

      Report this comment

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  31. 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.

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  32. Joshua

    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.

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  33. Mario Pines

    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!

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  34. Jay Giallombardo

    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!

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    1. longshotlouie

      Are you trading one command and control economy for another?

      Austrian economists are not monetarists.

      Report this comment

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    2. 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…..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.

      Report this comment

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      1. 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

        Report this comment

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  35. 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!

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

1 2 3