Ron Paul’s Tea Party Speech




Ron Paul gave a stirring speech at the Tax Day Tea Party in Washington DC, calling for an end to big government and a return to a sensible foreign policy.

Event: Tax Day Tea Party in Washington DC
Date: 04/15/2010

Transcript

Announcer: It gives me great honor to introduce our next guest. I think you’re going other be pretty excited about this. If you want a friend of limited government in Congress, you’ve got one here. If you want a congressional record that shows that somebody has spent decades fighting big government without exception, if you want somebody who’s got the guts to take on the Federal Reserve of the United States, you got him in this guy. Please join me in welcoming presidential candidate Ron Paul.

Ron Paul: Hey, thank you. End the Fed, hey! Along with the IRS. Let’s repeal 1913 and we’d all be better off. Now, it’s great to be here. You know, sometimes I give speeches on the House floor and there’s nobody there. I like to leave the House floor and I like to go to America. I like to go to Texas and other states because people actually cheer what I say, and I like that.

You know, I’m sure everybody here has talked a lot about taxes and this is tax day. But taxes, in many ways, are nothing more than a symptom. The taxes that we pay are a symptom of runaway government. And that is the problem. It is the fact that we have allowed our government to be so big and out of control – the Congress doesn’t control it, the executive branch has more control than they deserve and the courts have more control than they deserve. What wee need is a strong Congress to rein in the executive branch and the courts to get back to a constitutional government.

I have a belief about taxes and I believe that taxes, indeed, are theft; stealing from the people. You may have seen this on the Internet, I have a bumper sticker on my desk that everybody that comes to my offices sees, that says, “Don’t steal, the government hates competition”. But the government taxes us in many ways. I think of spending as the culprit, because think of spending as being the tax. And then it’s paid for in many different ways; they do tax us and it’s way too high. But they never tax enough to pay the bills. So what do they do? They endlessly borrow, and they borrow so much and then interest rates go up and that doesn’t work. So then what do they do? They resort to the printing press, and the Federal Reserve is the culprit that finances big government.

And that’s exactly right. Eventually, if we’re going to have a republic, we’re going to have sound money. The Constitution is very clear: only gold and silver can be legal tender, not paper money.

Now why is it that even the Federal Reserve is involved in taxation? When they print money, they devalue your currency. Anytime you complain about a high price, you’re paying a tax. So it is a tax, and the big sin, of course, is the big spending. Politicians, up until just recently, were always rewarded by spending money and telling their constituents back home, “I’m going to get you whatever you want”. Well, those days are over, and you’ve helped end those days.

Now, the Federal Reserve serves two special interests in Congress. There are two types of spending that we have to be concerned about. One is the liberal spending; we know all about that. They like to take over your lives because they consider you too stupid to take care of your lives yourself. So they have to take care of you from cradle to grave, so they justify that.

But then we do have some conservatives – at least they call themselves conservatives, a lot of times they’re nothing more than neoconservatives. And they believe that we have to endlessly spend overseas, and it’s time we quit this. We quit the foreign aid, we quite being the policeman of the world, we don’t need to occupy over 700 bases overseas in 135 countries because that’s how republics are destroyed. That is how empires end: for economic reasons, by stretching themselves too far overseas. So if we want to get back to a normal budget and balance our budget, I think one of the best ways to start is, why don’t we just quit spending all the money overseas? Why don’t we spend the money here at home?

Now, what could we do to save some money? I think it’s time we should ask the question, “How long do we have to stay in Korea? We’ve been there for 60 years.” I would say it’s time to come home from Korea. And we’ve been in Europe, we’ve been in Japan, and we’re looking for a new fight every single day. So it’s really time that we have a foreign policy that was demonstrated and preached to us by our founders; that is to get along with people, be friends with people, trade with people, but mind our own business, stay out of the internal affairs of other nations and have a strong national defense. That’s what we need.

And we don’t need to endorse this system where the president decides when to go to war. War, under the Constitution, should only be taken upon ourselves when the war is declared by the Congress, not the president.

But good things are happening in this country. The budget is horrible, the Congress is horrible, they’re spending, they don’t hesitate for one minute. But there are good things happening in the country and you’re part of it. People have finally awakened. They have finally found out that if they speak out, maybe they will have some influence. Washington has not responded to the people because the people basically have been quiet. And the ones who made noise were the lobbyist. They came with their hands out, they wanted stuff. Well, it’s all ending, because even those who are supposed to be receive this stuff at your expense, are realizing that it’s not going to last very much longer. We’re bankrupting this country and therefore we do need a sea change.

But what we have to do is ask the proper question. The first question is: what should the role of government be? Everybody would say, “Well, do this and that and that and take care of medical care.” I say it’s a much simpler than that. The role of government is to protect our liberties.

And if we protect our liberties, then the free people can take care of themselves. Get rid of all these taxes and all these regulations and all these government controls and needless wars. The purpose of liberty is to allow a free people to be creative, to release the creative energy that we need, and also to strive for excellence and virtue; that’s what life is all about. But when government takes over this role of saying, “We’re going to make you a better person and tell you have to live and run your personal life, or we’re going to take over your economic powers and we’re going to tell you how you spend your money,” then the government does that at the expense of liberty.

And, of course, what suffers is the prosperity of this country. And this country is indeed bankrupt. The standard of living for middle class America has been going down for 10 years. And it’s not going to go up soon until we realize that we have to get control of our budget, control of our government, and give us sound money. And in the meantime, we will end the Fed. Hey!



style="display:inline-block;width:728px;height:90px"
data-ad-client="ca-pub-3666212842414688"
data-ad-slot="9478233584">

»crosslinked«

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

217 Comments:

  1. Ron Paul’s Tea Party Speech I was suggested this website by my cousin. I'm not sure whether this post is written by him as no one else know such detailed about my problem. You're wonderful! Thanks! your article about Ron Paul’s Tea Party SpeechBest Regards Nick

    Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  2. fred the protectionist

    http://www.walletpop.com/blog/2010/04/15/tea-party-movement-confused-about-taxes-and-the-boston-tea-party/#thankYou

    Here's a good article on the real Boston Tea Party, not the historically re-written version.

    Someone commented: "TEA party takes it's name from the spirit of the event..."

    If a tea party happened today in "the spirit of the event" then people would dress up as muslims, hijack a Chinese container ship, then dump all the containers into the ocean.

    Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 3

    • fred the protectionist

      http://www.thomhartmann.com/blog/2009/04/real-boston-tea-party-was-against-wal-mart-1770s

      Another excellent 'historically accurate' Boston Tea Party.

      Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 3

    • You post the best links for revisionist history.

      Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 2

      • fred the protectionist

        You Libertarian/Neocons are no better then Communists when it comes to rewriting history. The Boston Tea Party was an act of protectionism.

        Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 2

      • fred the protectionist

        Don't let the Neocons, or the Libertarians, or the Liberals, or the Socialists rewrite history.

        http://buchanan.org/blog/the-war-over-americas-past-4084

        The War Over America's Past

        By Patrick J. Buchanan

        “Who controls the past controls the future. Who controls the present controls the past.”

        hat was the slogan of the Ministry of Truth in George Orwell’s “1984,” where Winston Smith worked ceaselessly revising the past to conform to the latest party line of Big Brother.

        And so we come to the battle over history books in the schools of Texas. Liberals are enraged that a Republican-dominated Board of Education is rewriting the texts. But is the rewrite being done to falsify history, or to undo a liberal bias embedded for decades?
        .
        .
        .

        Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 2

  3. Theresa Romano

    I think Sarah Palin is the pied piperess of the one party media run big brother establishment.
    I think big brother was fearful of an internet controlled tea party movement being run by the masses. They couldn't silence Dr. Paul. So they're trying to usurp the movement with this Palin character as the 'leader'.
    I don't like it much.

    Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1

  4. Thank you, Ron. You are truly an American hero. For everyone else who is TEA: Why is Sarah Palin riding the coattails of this movement? She is in no way qualified to be spokeswoman for this campaign. It belongs to us and people like Ron. With her track record, she is just another Bush. Sure she claims her policies are so conservative but it's easy when you're governing the least populated state. Please do not accept Sarah as a face for this movement. Remember, she quit being Governor. She quit and then came out with a book. Enough said.

    Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 4

  5. You guys realize that no matter what your opinions are it is not going to change a thing in this world so get used to it....dorks

    Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

    Hotly debated. What do you think? Thumb up 1 Thumb down 21

    • Fred the Protectionist

      Wow, I think you just made me have an epiphany. I see the whole world in a different way now.

      I never knew that, thanks.

      Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 4

  6. Ron Paul and the Libertarian Moment

    "Freedom in our time" – is it possible?

    http://original.antiwar.com/justin/2010/04/15/ron-paul-and-the-libertarian-moment/

    Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 2

  7. Fred the Protectionist

    On MSNBC tonight they were pushing the same old "separation of church and state" junk; using the same old short list of quotes a couple founding fathers made, out of context of course. The most obvious out of context quote was on the Constitution. This is what MSNBC quoted in the Constitution:

    "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion..." dot, dot, dot.

    They conveniently forgot to add: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..."

    Libertarians are Liberals. They use the same snake in the grass tactics, they are manipulative propagandists, hypocrites and liars. They are also both full to the brim of Atheists and Anarchists. Do you want these devils representing you?

    Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

    Hotly debated. What do you think? Thumb up 0 Thumb down 20

  8. Why Won't Obama Replace Federal Judges Appointed by Bush?

    These judges will be invaluable under a Corporatist (Fascist) Regime!

    Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 4

  9. the gold standard is bad because the supply of gold is fixed and a growing money supply is needed to encourage a growing economy. the supply of mexican babies is growing at an exponential rate. therefore, i think that they would make a good source of money.

    Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 8

    • Why is a growing money supply needed to encourage a growing economy?

      Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 3

      • Gander, the gold standard is GOOD because the supply of gold is fixed. By printing more money, you create INFLATION. By removing paper money from the economy, you create DEFLATION.

        If fixing our economy was as easy as printing more money, we'd already be out of this mess. Think before you speak.

        And what's this about Mexican babies?

        Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

        Highly rated. What do you think? Thumb up 12 Thumb down 2

        • Fred the Protectionist

          Libertarian say: "Gander, the gold standard is GOOD because the supply of gold is fixed. By printing more money, you create INFLATION. By removing paper money from the economy, you create DEFLATION."

          There's allot of simplistic assumptions there bubba-sticks, my favorite is "removing paper money creates deflation."

          And since when have the pro-growth neocons wanted to create deflation? I was a Libertarian in the 1990's and I vividly remember the Neocons and Libertarians holding hands under their arc-angel Greenspan, wielding his glowing sword and declaring that growth and NAFTA/WTO is all that is good and holy. You changed your tune, liars.

          Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 17

          • Fred: "There’s allot of simplistic assumptions there "

            Yep, simplistic assumptions alright. Supply goes up; price goes down. Supply goes down; price goes up.
            Inflation and deflation = supply and demand.

            Simple as that.

            Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

            Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 3

          • Fred the Protectionist

            That's right, so as the supply of dollars goes up outside of the US because of the trade deficit (thanks free traders), the value of dollars goes down.....outside of the US.

            Our market is so big it is practically acting like a dual-currency, pretty wierd huh.

            Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

            Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 10

          • Fred said: "as the supply of dollars goes up outside of the US [...], the value of dollars goes down…..outside of the US."

            You're talking about the exchange rate between currencies, not the purchasing power in terms of goods. 'One dollar' worth of euros will buy the same amount of goods as 'one dollar' worth of dollars. The purchasing power remains unharmed.

            Just as a pound of feathers weighs the same as a pound of bricks.

            There is a distinction between two seperate currencies, there is no distinction between ounces of gold. An ounce of gold purchased in China is the same as an ounce of gold purchased in the US.

            Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

            Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 1

          • Fred the Protectionist

            Libertarian say "There is a distinction between two seperate currencies, there is no distinction between ounces of gold. An ounce of gold purchased in China is the same as an ounce of gold purchased in the US."

            If the US went on the gold standard, then we'd export it all because of the trade deficit then flood the world market with gold and drop it's value.

            Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

            Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 11

          • Okay I'm very obviously having a conversation with a broken record.

            Well Fred, all hope may be lost for you. On the bright side, more intelligent people may actually learn something by reading your arguments and watching them get shut down everytime. Just keep repeating yourself Fred, maybe someday you will find someone as blind as you and you guys can repeat yourselves together.

            Oh, and in the meantime, if you actually decide that you want to know something about the issue you are arguing, try reading Rothbard. A beautiful place for you to start would be the audiobook "what has government done to our money".

            I always like a guy who sticks to his guns, but it's so painful to watch them shoot their own foot when they are blatantly wrong.

            Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

            Like or Dislike: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 2

          • Fred the Protectionist

            The only broken record here are the Ronulans, "Federal Reserve...scratch...Federal Reserve...scratch...Federal Reserve....scratch...Federal Reserve....scratc...."

            Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

            Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 11

          • "Gander, the gold standard is GOOD because the supply of gold is fixed."

            Really? So the supply and demand characteristics of Gold actually supercede the Supply/Demand curve? Where in the hell does that happen? Supply doesn't change at all? WOW!!!! Gold is Magical!!!!!

            In addition, what do you think might happen if the worlds largest, and possibly most reviled country/economy moved to a gold standard?

            You don't think foreign countries (China/Russia/S. Africa by proxy) wouldn't want to swamp the United States with gold and throw the US money supply into chaos?

            Come on. Get real. This is why Ron Paul doesn't even support the Gold Standard anymore, too bad cause he spent about 30 years advocating something that he finally realize was... a complete and utter waste of time.

            Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

            Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 5

        • a little inflation is a good thing like wine in moderation. during the gold standard deflation was necessary to bring balance during a recession but dumb people, like union members would get all hot in the pants and refuse to accept wage cuts, making the recessions worse. with the current system a recession will usually only create 0% inflation and it is much easier to deny those retards a raise than to lower their income.

          Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 6

          • gander, you are a fool, the gold standard is good. Just like asbestos is good.

            Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

            Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1

          • Fred the Protectionist

            The gold standard is suicide when you free traders run up a trade deficit of 700 billion a year.

            Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

            Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 7

          • if we had a gold standard then it would be impossible to run that kind of trade deficit, it seems like something that you would be for fred.

            Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

            Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1

          • Exactly.
            What he is describing is a symptom of central banking and unlimited monetary expansion.

            The very existence of the gold standard was to protect against things like that.

            If countries use central banking and have a inflationary monetary policy, they can't keep a gold standard for long because one country loses gold to other countries unless ALL central banks inflate at relatively the same pace -- which is amost impossible to maintain. Eventually, a country must either deflate and return to the gold standard, or repudiate on it's obligation to return to the holders of dollars their own property. It is INFLATION that causes this, NOT THE GOLD STANDARD. Fred's claim that "we can't return to the gold standard" only highlights the damage done by inflation and demonstrates the destructive nature of central banking. A a gold standard currency cannot be deflated unless it is first inflated, so any negative effects of deflation can be blamed on inflation.

            The arguments Fred presents against a gold standard are actually arguments FOR the gold standard.

            Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

            Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1

          • Fred the Protectionist

            Libertarian say: "if we had a gold standard then it would be impossible to run that kind of trade deficit, it seems like something that you would be for fred."

            Wrong, a gold standard would simply mean we'd export gold instead of dollars. And at 700 billion dollars a year we'd be out of gold in less then 2 years, and be back on paper money in no time. The only thing you'd accomplish is draining US treasury of gold which would weaken the dollar in the eyes of the world.

            In effect, we are sort of on a gold standard right now. I bet some foreign greed-heads think that maybe if they hold out long enough we'd go on a gold standard and they could then exchange their dollars for gold. But you nutballs drain America of gold then that's gone.

            Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

            Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 5

          • Fred, do you think any country could continue to exist with a trade deficit of 700 billion dollars per year? That doesn't even make sense; it's unsustainable. You are blaming gold for the things that inflation causes. 700 billion dollar trade deficits are only feasible because of inflation.

            Economies based on central bank inflation cannot stay on a gold standard unless all of the economies' banks inflate together. If they inflate together, -- OR if they don't inflate --, there is no loss of gold from one country to another. Except in the case of over consumption, which has nothing to do with gold. Actually, it has something to do with artificially low interest rates PEGGED BY THE FED (which discourages savings).

            Your arguments against the gold standard are actually arguments against inflationary central banking.

            Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

            Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1

          • Your arguments always focus on "if we returned to the gold standard from a fiat currency" instead of "gold standard versus fiat currency" which is what we are arguing.

            To return now, it would take some drastic changes and a lot of hurt. The money supply would either have to be contracted to match up with the supply of gold, or more likely, the gold would have to be revalued to correspond with the amount of dollars.

            The hardships of 'returning' to a gold standard from the distortions of a fiat currency have little bearing on the argument of "gold versus fiat" in general.

            Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

            Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1

          • Fred the Protectionist

            Libertarian say: "Fred, do you think any country could continue to exist with a trade deficit of 700 billion dollars per year? That doesn’t even make sense; it’s unsustainable."

            Yes I know, one day China is going to need to invade Taiwan with the military-industrial-complex you Free Traders supplied them.

            Libertarian say: "700 billion dollar trade deficits are only feasible because of inflation."

            700 billion trade deficits are only feasible because of trade deficits. Or Aliens, shadow people, contrails, or jews, who knows.

            Libertarian say: "Economies based on central bank inflation cannot stay on a gold standard unless all of the economies’ banks inflate together. If they inflate together, — OR if they don’t inflate –, there is no loss of gold from one country to another."

            Wrong, if the US went on a gold standard the US would be emptied of gold in no time. Then how could you back your currency with gold if you don' got any? Gee wiz Wally, use yer brain.

            Libertarian say: "Your arguments against the gold standard are actually arguments against inflationary central banking."

            If there were no trade deficit, then there would be no inflation. You Free Traders caused the inflation.

            Libertarian say: "The money supply would either have to be contracted to match up with the supply of gold, or more likely, the gold would have to be revalued to correspond with the amount of dollars."

            Then some foreign central bank would trade all their dollars for all US gold reserves, and we'd be out of gold in no time.

            Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

            Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 3

          • What part of "revalue the gold to correspond with the amount of dollars" don't you understand? Remember purchasing power?

            I've explained this to you 3 or 4 times now, so I'm convinced that you aren't willing to open your mind beyond "free trade is the devil".

            Oh well.

            Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

            Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  10. Fred the Necessary

    I am impressed with how much the arguments for free markets, sound money, and personal liberty have improved. I am definitely using some of these when I talk to family members who still believe Pres. Obama is doing an excellent job, especially my father-in-law. I cannot help but feel that this is in part due to you, Fred. Your opposition to freedom has forced people to be more logical, rational and persuasive in their reasoning. It has help posters crystalized their thoughts and hone them into keen blades of truth and reason. Without any criticism this distillation often does not happen. Without a doubter one cannot truly test what one believes. Thanks. Sometimes debate makes the truth sound stronger.

    Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

    Highly rated. What do you think? Thumb up 12 Thumb down 1

    • Congratulations to Fred for his help in spreading and strengthening the message of liberty. Every group of like-minded people needs a fearless devil's advocate who will pretend to not understand what others might pretend to understand (or not fully understand), thereby encouraging everyone to analyze and clarify their own thoughts and positions. Thank you Fred, whoever you are.

      Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 3

      • Fred the Protectionist

        In 2005 when I made the switch from Libertarian/Neocon to Pat Buchanan supporter, I started out playing Devil's Advocate, then learned that everything Libertarians believed in was a load of crap. All you got are political mantras and cliches which break down under the lightest scrutiny.

        Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 9

        • There are no comments in the moderation queue so if it hasn't shown up yet it was probably lost due to technical problems. We deleted only one comment over the past few days and it wasn't one of yours.

          Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        • Bizarre. I saved a copy of it after the first 2 attempts. I just tried it again, and it's still not going through.

          I'll try again.

          Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        • Fred, open mouth, insert foot.

          Fred says: "All you got are political mantras and cliches which break down under the lightest scrutiny."
          ... A "Pat Buchanan supporter", eh?
          ***
          Pat Buchanan openly endorsed Ron Paul in 2008.
          http://kineticreaction.blogspot.com/2007/10/pat-buchanans-website-openly-endorses.html
          ***
          Pat Buchanan on Ron Paul's, Audit the Fed: ... "Bring on the auditors!"
          http://buchanan.org/blog/ron-pauls-hour-of-power-3232
          ***
          Pat Buchanan says, "Ron Paul’s victory at CPAC may be a sign the prodigal sons of the right are casting off the heresy of neoconservatism and coming home to first principles."
          http://buchanan.org/blog/liquidating-the-empire-3646
          ***
          From the 2008 GOP debates:
          http://buchanan.org/blog/video-buchanan-on-the-debate-ron-paul-is-the-classic-conservative-736
          Oberman: Of the serious contenders this evening Pat, is there one who adheres closest to your conception of classic conservatism?
          PJB: I think the closest is Ron Paul who is a pro-life libertarian, who does not vote for big spending, who opposed the Medicare expansion, who opposed “no child left behind,” who opposed the war in Iraq…
          ***
          PB is endorsing Rand Paul too.
          http://buchanan.org/blog/rand-paul-son-of-ron-could-just-save-the-republican-party-3887

          Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 2

          • Fred the Protectionist

            Libertarian say: "Pat Buchanan openly endorsed Ron Paul in 2008.
            http://kineticreaction.blogspot.com/2007/10/pat-buchanans-website-openly-endorses.html"

            Wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong wrong, the title of that article is "Pat Buchanan's WEBSITE," not Pat Buchanan.

            Pat Buchanan's website is run by For The Cause one-issue wonder Linda Muller, who opposes illegal immigration. One issue wonders like Linda Muller will support anyone who even vaguely seems to be an ally. And whoever owns that kineticreaction blog is a manipulative Ronulan, like all Ronulans he/she is evil, liers, Satanists. All Libertarians are Satanists.

            Libertarian say: "Pat Buchanan on Ron Paul’s, Audit the Fed: … “Bring on the auditors!”"

            So what, that doesn't make Buchanan a foaming at the mouth Libertarian. Buchanan doesn't exercize politics by proxy like you lunatic Libertarians, what he says he means, he has no evil underlying agenda he keeps secret. You fruits don't care about an audit, your real goal is to get rid of the FED. Buchanan just wants an audit.

            Libertarian say: "Pat Buchanan says, “Ron Paul’s victory at CPAC may be a sign the prodigal sons of the right are casting off the heresy of neoconservatism and coming home to first principles.”"

            That's not an endorsement, Satanist-manipulative foaming at the mouth evil Libertarians. Buchanan is happy anyone but an establishment-neocon free-trade/open-borders Republican wins any election.

            Libertarian say: "PB is endorsing Rand Paul too."

            Then perhaps Paul's son isn't a complete foaming at the mouth lunatic like his father. But so what, Buchanan also endorsed George W Bush.

            Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

            Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 7

        • fred the protectionist

          Make no mistake, Buchanan thinks you Libertarians are loons (and a destructive force in politics) just like me.

          Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 3

        • Fred must be a legend in his own mind.

          Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

    • Fred the Protectionist

      Libertarian say: "I am impressed with how much the arguments for free markets, sound money, and personal liberty have improved. I am definitely using some of these when I talk to family members who still believe Pres. Obama is doing an excellent job, especially my father-in-law."

      I never said Obama was doing an excellent job, I told you i'm a Buchanan paleo-Republican. But between Obama/Socialists and the Libertarian/Neocons, Obama is the least evil. It's almost a tie though.

      Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 9

  11. " gold historically keeps a pretty even value,”

    Yes it does.
    Unless you are talking in terms of the US dollar. In which case it has been anywhere between $20 and $1200 -- A perfect argument against the fiat dollar. The fed has stole enough value from your money that it now takes 1200 dollars to buy an ounce of gold that used to cost $20.

    Fred: "I don’t want to return to 6,000 BC where caveman bartered in flint and copper."

    Have you ever used a debit card? That's how easy it would be to use precious metals as currency.

    Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 2

    • Fred the Protectionist

      "he fed has stole enough value from your money that it now takes 1200 dollars to buy an ounce of gold that used to cost $20."

      If the "FED" stole that money then they'd have like 10 trillion dollars stashed away somewhere, that's what happens when you "steal" something, you gain something. Where is all that money the "FED" stole?

      "Have you ever used a debit card? That’s how easy it would be to use precious metals as currency."

      No it wouldn't "be easy". If there were no FED I'd have to spend 20 hours a week studying what my bank is doing with their assets so I could use my debit card.

      Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

      Hotly debated. What do you think? Thumb up 2 Thumb down 19

      • Fred: "Where is all that money the “FED” stole?"

        They spent it. Otherwise, what's the point of inflating the currency? They spent it on propping up businesses that can't survive on their own. When the fed pegs interest rates lower than the market demands, businesses become profittable when they otherwise would have been unprofittable. THEY decide who gets to benefit from the dilution of OUR value. Are you okay with that?

        We won't know exactly what they are doing with our wealth until we get an audit.

        Fred: "If there were no FED I’d have to spend 20 hours a week studying what my bank is doing with their assets so I could use my debit card"

        Why?
        What does the fed do to save you from studying what they are doing with their assets?
        You aren't allowed to know what the fed is doing with it's assets.

        You seem like you are worried about "getting screwed" by "bernie madolfs" but you turn a blind eye to what the fed is doing to your wealth. They loan money that doesn't exist, how can that be better than what Bernie did?

        Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 2

        • actually about $2.5 trillion of that made up money is sitting on the Fed's balance sheet in the form of mortgage backed securities, US treasury bills etc.

          Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 2

          • Yeah, they are probably the same mortgage backed securities that contributed to the financial crisis. The same securities that were backed by mortgages that never got paid, and would never have been possible without the fed-created housing bubble.

            The fed kinda puts a whole new spin on 'monopoly money', doesn't it? Maybe the Parker Bros are in on it. Haha. Maybe someday they will allow us to play with real money like adults. lol

            Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

            Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 1

        • Fred the Protectionist

          "They (FED) loan money that doesn’t exist, how can that be better than what Bernie did?"

          That's how the banking industry has been working for a thousand years, they loan money from nothing. The Federal Reserve mandates that the banks have 10% in assets of what they loan, and when they go under that amount that it is that big bad interest rate in which they charge banks to loan to each other to get back to that very low 10% number. If there were no FED then those banks could loan an infinite amount of money making what you are complaining about *knock on wood* worse; printing money from nothing; which is exactly what all those private banks were doing before 1913 and how those banks went under and screwed people out of their money on a consistent basis.

          It is the FDIC which promotes this behavior, not the regulating body of the FED.

          Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 6

          • So you're saying that the government can't be trusted to stop fraud in the private sector for money, so we should allow them to control the entire money system?

            What makes them any more capable of controlling the entire monetary system if they apparently are not capable of recognizing and punishing the occasional fraud?

            Who is punishing THEM for fraud? Wouldn't you say that the average businessman is quite capable of checking the weight and purity of his gold? Even the guy at the pawn shop tests the purity of gold jewelry and weighs it before he buys it. That's how he knows it's value.

            Fractional reserve banking makes all banks insolvent by policy. Do you call that a stable base to the economy?

            Fractional reserve banking is not what i was referring to when I said that the fed creates money out of thin air. If you were not aware that the fed creates money out of thin air, then that explains why you don't seem to understand inflation and deflation, or the confiscation of wealth the fed enables. Maybe I missed something, but should you be taking sides so quickly in an argument that you don't yet understand?

            Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

            Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1

          • The fed creates money that doesn't exist before fractional reserve banking has anything to do with it. That money that is then handed out into the market becomes exponentially increased as banks lend it according to fractional reserve policy. So when the fed creates a trillion dollars out of thin air, the malinvestment and mis allocation in the market has the potential to become 10 trillion. 10 trillion based on nothing. Talk about a house of cards. Talk about living beyond your means.

            Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

            Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1

          • Fred the Protectionist

            Libertarian say: "So you’re saying that the government can’t be trusted to stop fraud in the private sector for money, so we should allow them to control the entire money system?"

            I didn't say that, Anarchy-boy.

            Libertarian say: "Fractional reserve banking makes all banks insolvent by policy. Do you call that a stable base to the economy?"

            Fractional Reserve is how banks have been operating for almost a thousand years now. Are you a Christian who is against banks in general? Hey i'm all for that, usury is bad.

            Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

            Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 6

          • Fred the Protectionist

            Libertarian say: "The fed creates money that doesn’t exist before fractional reserve banking has anything to do with it. That money that is then handed out into the market becomes exponentially increased as banks lend it according to fractional reserve policy. So when the fed creates a trillion dollars out of thin air, the malinvestment and mis allocation in the market has the potential to become 10 trillion. 10 trillion based on nothing. Talk about a house of cards. Talk about living beyond your means."

            I wouldn't want to be the bearer of bad news, buttah, that's how banks have been operating for almost a thousand years now.

            Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

            Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 5

          • Fred said:
            " that’s how banks have been operating for almost a thousand years now"

            Nice work defending fractional reserve banking as if we weren't clearly discussing the fed. Try an stay on topic, or did you change your argument on purpose?

            By the way, to claim something is "good" on the sole basis that "it's been doing this for X amount of time" is a logical fallacy. Time doesn't mean something is right, or better than something else. You must determine causation.

            Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

            Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1

    • I just heard about this and thought I'd share.
      H.R.4759 - To provide for the withdrawal of the United States from the North American Free Trade Agreement.

      http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h4759/text

      oh and there seems to be something wrong with the sound money page( not sure where to post so I'll include it here)

      Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0

      • Julie,
        Yep this is the Unions wanting to raise protectionist barriers.

        "Fred the Protectionist" is probably giddy with excitement now

        Oh by the way...
        Obama signed Executive Order # 13502 this past Friday night
        (under the transparent cover of darkness)
        mandating that only Union Shop Companies can bid on future Federally funded construction projects.
        There goes another 20% rise of tax payer funded inflation and another "bought and paid for" political campaign

        The deceitful Hope and criminal Change keeps on giving!

        Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1

        • Fred the Protectionist

          At least the Unions aren't promoting their own slavery, that's your job.

          Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 6

          • You promote your own slavery when you support the federal reserve. You are not entitled to keep the value of your rightfully earned money because the fed can take it through inflation. How is that any different in effect than slave labour?

            Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

            Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1

          • Fred the Protectionist

            Libertarian say: "You promote your own slavery when you support the federal reserve."

            Conspiracy theorist. Or may jew hater, I dunno, your all so mentally unstable. I've been reading allot about the "Jewish Question" on the internet. Seems like Jews were pioneers of the banking industry for a thousand years (including fractional reserves + usury), it's what kept them getting kicked out of countries. I guess people don't like usury.

            How does one bitch about fractional reserve banking and not mention usury? Makes no sense.

            Libertarian say: "You are not entitled to keep the value of your rightfully earned money because the fed can take it through inflation."

            When the FED deliberately inflates the money supply nobody profits, thereby nobody loses.

            Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

            Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 7

          • fred said:
            "When the FED deliberately inflates the money supply nobody profits, thereby nobody loses."

            Haha, okay then fred. Looks like you've made up your mind without understanding the issue. Nobody can show you the light unless you want to see it. You're free to think as you wish, just do us a favour and stop spreading your opinion as if it's a fact when you clearly and consistently have no logical argument to back it up, or any convincing sentiments that show how you could have arrived at such an opinion.

            That's called spreading mis-information. If you can't tell libertarians exactly WHY they are wrong, then you have nothing but an opinion, and everyone has one of those.

            Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

            Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 1

          • Fred the Protectionist

            The only thing that suffers from inflation is savings, but the American culture has been warped to a point that nobody saves, therefore nobody is harmed.

            Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

            Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 5

          • Fred said:
            "but the American culture has been warped to a point that nobody saves"

            That couldn't have anything to do with the artificially low interest rates pegged by the fed though, right Fred?

            Lol you're comical. Go waste someone elses time.

            Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

            Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1

          • Fred the Protectionist

            Why don't you just come out and say you don't like the Fed cause it's run by Jews. Why all this foreplay?

            Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

            Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 9

  12. Fred, I sit back and read all the posts, and your the only one trying to impose fault in the man. In the debates fox and even his own party tried to exclude him or make a mockery out of him. And the tea party movement behind him was all a big joke, now both sides of the isle are trying to claim them specifically palin. Dr. Paul has been saying exactly the same thing since 1977 and hasnt deviated from it, and everything he says is for "US, we the people" for us to be free, and yet to disagree with him. I watched the debates, and what little time they gave him, he showed his memory and IQ is way above all the other morons who dont have a clue about history or even basic moral. They all ran on more war and regulation, yet there for change Obama has sure brought change hasn't he. Just the fact they tried excluding him shows how slimey they are, Ron Pauls change would mean the end of the take for most of them and they know it. End the Fed means much more than the words, it means markets and people buying and spending would determan interest rates and costs instead of constant bubbles that make it look like were flurishing and make people spend and invest, then crash when the fed feels like cashing in on it. The gold standard is and ideal, commodity backed dollar that would make it worth more than just the paper it's printed on, using the term gold standards use for the expression because gold historically keeps a pretty even value, however any commodity could be used. If Ron Paul ran in 2012 his only hold back will be the media and his own party to shut him up, but more people are discovering this great man and my money says if he ran in 2012 even with being all the strategy to keep him out, he would win. And all the people will be kicking themselves for not voting for him when they get there live and liberty back. Another man to listen to is peter schiff , he predicted the same thing in 2006 as Dr. Paul did in 2002 about what was to come in 2006-2007.

    Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 1

    • Fred the Protectionist

      "The gold standard is and ideal, commodity backed dollar that would make it worth more than just the paper it’s printed on,"

      If you think dollars are so worthless then why do you have dollars? Just give it away if it's so worthless.

      "using the term gold standards use for the expression because gold historically keeps a pretty even value,"

      No it hasn't.

      "however any commodity could be used."

      No thanks, I don't want to return to 6,000 BC where caveman bartered in flint and copper.

      Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 12

      • Fred: "If you think dollars are so worthless then why do you have dollars?"

        Do we have a choice? With congressman Paul's competing currencies bill, we do.

        Right now, we don't. We have legal tender laws which means you are being forced to hold a store of value which is subject to dilution at any time, for any reason, and you have no say in the matter.

        They are only worth something because people know they can exchange them for real goods. It's a faith based system, like religion. "In god we trust". Except it's not god who we are trusting in, it's the federal reserve; we're trusting them not to debase the currency to the point where people begin to refuse dollars as payment because they know that by the time they spend them, they will have lost a substantial portion of their purchasing power. The fed has dissolved 96% of the value of the dollar since 1913, so I'd say they aren't very trustworthy. Why should we continue to grant them this monopoly on currency?

        Why do we have the freedom to choose our own faith-based religion, but not our own currency? Would you put up with a government that says you MUST be a chrstian?

        The fed is a violation of our economic liberty.

        Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

        Highly rated. What do you think? Thumb up 11 Thumb down 1

        • Fred the Protectionist

          A) No such thing as economic liberty, Constitution gives the power to tax meaning you don't have your Libertarian version of economic freedom.

          B) Nobody likes Atheists.

          C) Long term low inflation rate over 100 years is the same thing as 0% inflation rate. You anarchists want private banks who issuing their own currency, you might as well bring Bernie Madolf out of jail and give him control over a bank so he could screw more people.

          Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 10

          • A) ...As long as you're OKAY with the government having unlimited access to the value of the money you are being forced to hold. Not all of us are down with legal plunder.

            B) Huh?

            C)...As long as you consider 96% of monetary value to be "long term low inflation rate". Keynesians say a low long term inflation rate is good for the economy because it accomodates the increased demand for money resulting from gradual increases in productive capacity. This is not true. As the prodctive capacity of the economy increases the demand for money in a gold-standard economy, the value of a unit of gold increases. It's as simple as that. There is no need for an increasing supply of money. In the gold standard economy, money APPRECIATES in value as productive capacity drives the prices of goods down. What's wrong with that?

            Fred: "You anarchists want private banks who issuing their own currency, you might as well bring Bernie Madolf out of jail and give him control over a bank so he could screw more people."

            A bank note from a private bank is a contract that serves as proof of the existence of REAL money (like the dollar used to). The federal reserve notes are not backed by anything and therefore the real money doesn't need to exist. It's fraud. The fed is your madolf. As peter Schiff said, Bernie Madolf should be the chairman of the federal reserve. He would be great at it.

            Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

            Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 1

          • Fred the Protectionist

            "A) …As long as you’re OKAY with the government having unlimited access to the value of the money you are being forced to hold. Not all of us are down with legal plunder."

            Take that up with the Constitution, it gives Congress unlimited access to the value of money.

            "B) Huh?"

            Huh?

            "C)…As long as you consider 96% of monetary value to be “long term low inflation rate”."

            Yes we all know, Libertarians are bad at math, the simple concept of compound interest is just waaay over your head. Could also explain why Libertarians think population growth is no big deal.

            "A bank note from a private bank is a contract that serves as proof of the existence of REAL money "

            No, a bank note is worth even less then a dollar note. The dollar has the full faith and credit of the government of the United States. A bank note has full faith and credit of some fat greedy bank'ster who you pray won't go Bernie Madolf'in.

            Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

            Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 3

          • Fred: "it gives Congress unlimited access to the value of money."

            Yes, congress, as in "representatives of te people", not the federal reserve. The fed is unconstitutional. Does it say that congress can dole out it's constitutional responsibilities? No.

            Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

            Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1

          • Fred: "A bank note has full faith and credit of some fat greedy bank’ster who you pray won’t go Bernie Madolf’in"

            And what happens if he does go "madolf"? He gets investigated by government agencies and punished for fraud. In other words, a bank note has the full backing of the US government, and the rule of law. It wouldn't be very consistent of us to punish those people and turn a blind eye to the fed, now would it?

            You won't trust the government to punish a small amount of (easily detectable) fraud, but you trust them to have absolute control of money as the solution. That's illogical.

            Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

            Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1

          • Fred: "the simple concept of compound interest is just waaay over your head"

            You're saying that in order to protect from unnecessary monetary dilution we should all invest to earn compound interest and offset the effects. What if you're poor?

            Congratulations Fred, you just had a breakthrough. You just realized why inflation doesn't effect everyone equally, and is a means of wealth distribution from the poor to the rich. Nice work.

            Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

            Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1

          • Fred the Protectionist

            Libertarian say: "The fed is unconstitutional."

            No it's not.

            Libertarian say: "Does it say that congress can dole out it’s constitutional responsibilities?"

            Common sense, which ALL libertarians lack, says congress must dole out it's constitutional responsibilities.

            When the Senate declares war, do you expect only Senators to shoulder muskets and start shooting? Of course not, that's silly.

            When Congress setups the post office, another constitutional duty you Libertarians ignore, do you expect only Congressmen to hop in their little clownmobiles and deliver mail to you? Of course not, that's silly.

            When Congress passes an excise tax, do you expect only Congressmen to go around and become revenuers? Of course not, that's silly.

            Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

            Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 3

          • Fred the Protectionist

            Libertarian say: "And what happens if he does go “madolf”?"

            Well if your a Libertarian, you do nothing and let Madoff screw as many people as possible.

            Libertarian say: "He gets investigated by government agencies and punished for fraud. In other words, a bank note has the full backing of the US government, and the rule of law."

            Wrong, you Libertarians are against regulation. You would do nothing, anarchists.

            Libertarian say: "You won’t trust the government to punish a small amount of (easily detectable) fraud, but you trust them to have absolute control of money as the solution. That’s illogical."

            One guy fell through the cracks, Big Bernie, and according to Libertarian Logic (anarchy) that means all laws are bad. That's like Atheist Logic; if you sin once you cannot be for family values and you have to be a Son of Satan forever.

            Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

            Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 3

          • Fred the Protectionist

            Libertarian say: "You’re saying that in order to protect from unnecessary monetary dilution we should all invest to earn compound interest and offset the effects. What if you’re poor?"

            In 1626 a Dutchman purchased to-be New York City area for 60 guilders. In 1912, before the Jewish Federal Reserve, there must have been inflation cause New York City in 1912 was worth more then 60 guilders.

            OMG! Inflation before the FED! How can this be?

            Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

            Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 3

          • Fred said:
            "Common sense, which ALL libertarians lack, says congress must dole out it’s constitutional responsibilities."

            HAHAHAH

            Looks like you missed the "understanding the point of a constitution" boat.

            Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

            Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1

          • Fred the Protectionist

            You Libertarians know nothing about the Constitution, or common sense.

            Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

            Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 4

          • All you can do is brand all libertarians bad, you have no arguments of substance or else you would address the principles and explain your points instead of making attacks.

            It is pretty obvious that you are not here for constructive discussion. You are here to either A) oppose commentors and kick up some action in the comment area, or B) just here to argue because you are irrational. Either way, I have no more time for goofs. Go about your misinforming ways, but don't expect anyone to ever take you seriously. It never takes long to uncover the truth about trolls.

            Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

            Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1

          • Fred the Protectionist

            I'm curious. How does one complain about fractional reserve banking then not say a single word about usury?

            The purpose of fractional reserve banking is simply to expand usury operations, one cannot exist without another. Is your real beef against usury?

            How does an atheist complain about usury? You know what? You're all stupid.

            Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

            Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 2

    • Tony,

      Again, Fred is entitled to his opinion and may even choose to express it here. I have stated my belief that he is a troll who enjoys starting arguments. I may be wrong. If he does truly believe what he writes then we should instead offer him convincing arguments, using reason, logic and the Constitution to enlighten him to see the truth. If we can convince him then we will better able to convince are neighbors, community leaders and local politicians.

      Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 2

      • Fred the Protectionist

        Fine, give it a shot. How will ending the Federal Reserve automagically get rid of the national debt, trade deficit, bailouts, poor'dom, and cure cancer?

        Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 11

        • Thanks, Fred, we will. Appreciate your support. No one said that ending the Fed won't be difficult. In fact, Dr. Paul explicitly says it will be difficult in the short term. That is why most politicians cannot bring themselves to do it. It is unpopular with their constituents because it asks for discipline. It is the long term benefits that we are trying to secure: sound money, no debt, free commerce, etc. Of course it is easier to spend and put everything on credit. That is what the average American does in his personal life. It is harder to save, to sacrifice, to defer for long term goals. But shouldn't we try to be a better country? Your reference to cancer is particularly good. Just because finding cures for various cancers is difficult (to say the least) should we acquiesce?

          Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 1

        • Fred: " How will ending the Federal Reserve automagically get rid of:"

          "the national debt"

          I've already explained this to you. If politicians couldnt rely on inflating the money supply, they would need access to real resources instead of printing them out of the press. Put a limit on their unlimited inflation and you put a stop to excessive spending. The national debt is due to the keynesian fantasy of unlimited government spending. Removing the fed will force the government to live within it's means.

          "trade deficit"

          If we don't produce goods to exchange for trade goods, then we must pay for our consumption with money. If you don't have unlimited access to money, you must curb some consumption and trade within your means, or else nobody would be paid for their goods and they would cease trading with the US.

          "bailouts"

          As with the last two, if they can't print the money, they can't afford to throw around trillions of dollars in bailout money because they would have to get it from borrowing or taxation. As it stands, they can afford to bailout their friends because they have access to the value of YOUR MONEY and you can no longer protect it's value by holding gold.

          "poor’dom"

          Inflation is a transfer of wealth from OUR pockets into theirs. Stop inflation, and you preserve the value of everyones dollars, including the poor. Actually, since the poor often don't invest large amounts of money into the stock market and hide their profits from the taxman in off-shore tax havens, they have very few ways to counter-act the effects of inflation. In other words, the poor are hit the hardest by inflationary monetary policy.

          "cure cancer"

          I'm sure you added this one in sarcastically, but in reality ending the federal reserve would help combat and maybe even help cure cancer. As with gold, the inflationary policies of the fed result in a lowered purchasing power which drives up the price of real goods in terms of dollars. 'Real goods' includes medical supplies and equipment. Getting rid of inflationary policy will stop the decrease in medical equipment that 1 dollar can afford.

          It all comes down to purchasing power.

          Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 1

          • Fred the Protectionist

            "Put a limit on their unlimited inflation and you put a stop to excessive spending."

            The FED has no authority to print money and give to Congress, and it never has.

            "If we don’t produce goods to exchange for trade goods, then we must pay for our consumption with money. If you don’t have unlimited access to money, you must curb some consumption and trade within your means, or else nobody would be paid for their goods and they would cease trading with the US."

            No such thing as "Curb Consumption" or "Trade within your means". The US economy isn't a person, it is a collection of persons. Unless of course your a fascist or commie and think you can force people to stop buying stuff.

            "As with the last two, if they can’t print the money, they can’t afford to throw around trillions of dollars in bailout money because they would have to get it from borrowing or taxation."

            The FED has no authority to print money and give to Congress, and it never has.

            The poor'dom and cure cancer thing was sarcasm, but it doesn't surprise me you actually responded in all seriousness.

            Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

            Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 8

        • Fred:"The FED has no authority to print money and give to Congress, and it never has"

          We don't no who they give it to because we aren't allowed to audit that part. How convenient.

          Fred: "The US economy isn’t a person, it is a collection of persons"

          Then we can collectively live within our means, which is what inevitably happens when no one will lend you anything because you never paid them back.

          Fred: "The poor’dom and cure cancer thing was sarcasm, but it doesn’t surprise me you actually responded in all seriousness."

          Forty thousand Americans die each year as a result of having no health insurance. This is not because the government failed to mandate it until now. It's because the dollar doesn't buy as much medical equipment as it used to due to unending inflationary monetary policy. As a result, medical care is becoming more and more expensive to hand out.

          Wealth confiscation and distribution is a serious issue. Wake up.

          Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 1

          • Fred the Protectionist

            "We don’t no who they give it to because we aren’t allowed to audit that part. How convenient."

            Conspiracy theorist

            "Then we can collectively live within our means"

            Communist

            "Forty thousand Americans die each year as a result of having no health insurance. This is not because the government failed to mandate it until now."

            I'm pretty sure destroying the middle class with open-borders/free-trade had a big part to play in that, not your Austrian School conspiracy theories.

            Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

            Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 4

          • If this is what you call an argument, then you have basically admitted defeat.

            Thanks for comin' out.

            Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

            Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1

          • Fred the Protectionist

            I like your, "collectively live within our means" to solve the trade deficit thing. That's funny, commie-boy. What do you suggest; put a gun to people's head and force them to stop buying things and stuff?

            Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

            Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 3

          • Fred said:
            "What do you suggest; put a gun to people’s head and force them to stop buying things"

            I've already told you. End the fed. When our creditors don't get paid back, they will cease trading with the US. This will force the people to live within their means.
            I'm sorry if you don't like the economic reality that debts must be eventually paid for, but your proposed solution is an unsustainable disaster.

            Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

            Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1

          • Fred the Protectionist

            Libertarian say: "I’ve already told you. End the fed. When our creditors don’t get paid back, they will cease trading with the US. This will force the people to live within their means."

            Oh the, "Make America poor until people can't afford to purchase consumer items" plan. You're already doing that with your free trade, no need to end the FED to reduce aggregate demand.

            Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

            Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 2

          • fred said:
            "no need to end the FED to reduce aggregate demand"

            In other words, "we need the fed to create unsustainable market bubbles"

            Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

            Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1

          • Fred the Protectionist

            There was no bubble, you free traders just made Americans poorer.

            The bankers who leveraged thought the 2000's was to be a bright decade where the fruits of open-borders and free-trade would multiply infinitely. That's what happens when you leverage, you think the future is bright.

            Guess what? The bankers were thrown 2 curve balls.

            1) In 2005 the Americans rejected Amnesty, which means no population growth, no increased demand for housing.

            2) Free Trade destroyed aggregate demand by making Americans poorer.

            ...and a thousand other minor things like new oil demand from China, socialists rising in power making things less efficient thanks to you lunatic Libertarian/neocons.

            Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

            Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 4

    • God Bless you Tony

      Thanks for telling Fred what real!

      I believe Fred is simply a Left Wing Serial Blogger task with disrupting serious debate... He make NO Sense and has never put forth any tangible arguments.
      We should simply ignore his rants
      Again Thanks

      Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1

      • Fred the Protectionist

        No i'm a full Pat Buchanan paleo-Republican who sees you Libertarians as the primary obstacle to reforming the Republican Party so the real Republicans can kick out the Socialists, militant atheist, white haters from power.

        Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 4

        • Weren't you aware that Pat Buchanan endorsed Ron Paul and called him the closest thing to a real republican?

          Haahah.

          Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1

          • Fred the Protectionist

            Weren't you aware that Buchanan believes, like I do, that Libertarianism leads to Statism:

            http://buchanan.org/blog/pjb-does-libertarianism-lead-to-statism-415

            haha

            http://buchanan.org/blog/pjb-free-trade-and-funny-math-678

            "Free Trade and Funny Math
            by Patrick J. Buchanan – February 27, 2007

            To the devout libertarian, free trade is not a policy option to be debated, but a dogma to be defended. Nowhere is this truer than at that lamasery of libertarianism, the Cato Institute..."

            Satanists.

            Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

            Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 4

          • Quit pretending, we all know now that you and buchanan are closet Paul fans.

            Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

            Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2

          • Fred the Protectionist

            Manipulative snake in the grass Satanist Libertarian.

            Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

            Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 5

        • fred the protectionist

          You lunatic Libertarians are evil propagandists.

          I like how many of my posts have been deleted by your propagandists.

          Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1

    • VERY GOOD!!!! Ron Paul 2012!!!!!!

      Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


9 + six =

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>