Ron Paul: Don’t allow the Fed to destroy our money!

399 Responses



A Spooked Economy in October

by Ron Paul

Last week we received worse than expected unemployment numbers, challenging recent claims that the recession has come and gone. Also, as the economy continues to suffer the after effects of the Federal Reserve-created bubbles of the last decade, there is renewed interest in gold. Fears that the Federal Reserve will pump even more money into the system had caused the price of gold to reach new highs. Also contributing to enthusiasm for gold is continued instability in the banking industry, symbolized this week by fraud allegations that have caused many banks to halt foreclosure proceedings, thus further destabilizing the housing market. Yes, October has a reputation for being a scary month economically and this month is shaping up to be frightening, as well.

The Fed has been wreaking havoc and devaluing our monetary unit steadily since 1913, and greatly accelerating it since the collapse of the Bretton Woods agreement in the 1970s. This severing of the dollar’s last tenuous link with gold allowed the Fed to create as much new money as it pleased, and it has taken full advantage of this opportunity.

In 1971, Gross Domestic Product (GDP) was $1.29 trillion. Today it is $14.6 trillion, nominally. But adjusted for all the inflating the Fed has been doing, it is only $2.73 trillion, which constitutes only a 1% real increase per year! So with all this extra money going around, we may appear nominally wealthier, but the reality is, we have barely moved at all. This is unfortunate especially for the prudent, conscientious savers, whose nest eggs are constantly being devalued. Unless of course, they have saved in something out of the Fed’s reach, like gold. While the economy has basically been in a holding pattern against the leeching of wealth by the Fed for 39 years, gold has seen an inflation adjusted increase in value of over 5% per year, if measured in 1971 dollars. This is due to the Fed’s ability to make dollars plentiful. And yet, this is the only tactic the Fed can come up with to rescue an economy already devastated by “quantitative easing”, as they call it.

The turmoil in the housing market demonstrates how disastrous it is to flood the economy with fiat money. Latest events with foreclosures are good examples of mistakes made in the market, in this case, by the banks, in the rush to soak up manipulated currency. This is why the truly free market depends on sound, honest money, free from false signals of artificially low interest rates.

The government finds ways to spend money even faster than the Fed can create it, bringing our national debt well past the point of the taxpayers ever being able to pay it off. Other nations who, in the past, have eagerly bought up any amount of debt we produced are now starting to resist. We are reaching a crucial point at which the dollar will no longer function, and in the absence of a functioning dollar, restoring sound money will be the only alternative.

The truly scary notion is that those in power might allow our system to collapse so chaotically to the detriment of so many people rather than simply obey the Constitution.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)
Processing your request, Please wait....

399 responses to “Ron Paul: Don’t allow the Fed to destroy our money!”

  1. Douglas

    David, you have such a great perspective. The one thing that concerns me the most is that we are dealing with a MASSIVE population that has never been properly instructed on the Constitutional Principles of the Issuance of NEW Currency.

    This is easy to understand when I realized that the Private Families who own and control the Federal Reserve went to a great extent to manipulate and mold the Public Educational System. Without doing so Citizens would Naturally never have tolerated such a Ludicrous Central Banking System that owns and controls the US Government and serves only on the Private Banks they own, control or want to take the assets from.

    I feel we as a Global Economy fashioned by stupid greedy ignorant Private Central Banking Families have arrived at the Climax, the Threshold or the ‘Political Correct’ way of stating this, The 50 year Cycle. The resent IRS bail out was a sign that they are stupid and out of control. This TAX bailout has only bought US more time.

    Now it is time for ‘The Private Central Banking Families’ to figure out how to cull ‘Their Heard of Mindless Consuming Spending Slaves’ before Civilization complete self-destructs.

    What I want to say now is that ‘The Private Central Banking Families are stupid fools and are the true destroyers of Planet Earth and All Humanity. Until everyday Citizen Wakes up to this we will all be subjected to the repercussions of their foolish actions.

    We must do more than installing a NEW Presidency and NEW Political Party that will courageously stand up to such Lunacy. We will need to start an ‘International Campaign against the Private International Banking Families’ in order to properly ‘curb’ them.

    By doing so we will at leased properly expose the true culprit of economy chaos and this will ensure that we as a People will never let this happen again. The expansion of the Universe can only occur through those who are effectively able to manage a Civilization through ‘Natural Laws’. The curse of the current ‘Unconstitutional Monetary System’ has now reached the limit of stability and the IRS bailouts only bought US more time.

    Urgent, I see clearly the ‘Political Cards’ played at strategic ‘Geological Points’.

    Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 1

    1. David

      Hi Douglas;

      Wonderful post, again, and you say it like it is. Just as you say and as i've said in many previous posts, every single ounce of needless suffering and misery which has been inflicted on humanity, which is about 95 % of it in the past several hundred years has been caused by banks, owned and controlled by a few banking families. Were it not for them, the world could indeed be a very wonderful place, and without them it will be too. They need to be destroyed, the entire concept of banking needs to be destroyed, so that people can exist, prosper, and finally have the right to the benefit which they themselves are capable of creating for themselves and each other. If they are not and this is not done, we will lose every single thing which could possibly make our lives a worthwhile thing.

      As an immigrant i have experienced life under those conditions, and this is also why Jack and so many others from other countries have been coming on here and desperately urging and pleading with us to get this right, as if we don't and America falls to the absolute power of these banking families as the rest of the world has by now, then there can be no hope. America was my hope before i came here, and America is the hope of every other country in the world as well. It must be maintained at any cost.

      In terms of a population that has never been "properly instructed on the Constitutional Principles of the Issuance of NEW Currency", by now they have been and they've been figuring it out by the tens of millions. The culprits have been exposed. Its largely because of us as well. Over half a year ago, the people were suffering but they didn't have a clue as to why. When we all started discussing this on here, and formulating ideas of a working economy which could actually function for their benefit, i started emailing our discussions into circulation among the general public, and asked others to do the same and i think that many more have been doing this as well. It's to the point now where the ideas and information have been circulating long enough that they have actually gotten into the hands of a huge percentage of the population, and those that haven't received them personally have had discussions with others who have. Having seen this, and having experienced the hardship which has been inflicted on them despite the fact that our capacity to create prosperity has not changed one bit, and having seen the government bailouts of the culprits which they themselves are expected to pay for, they have put two a two together and gotten it right. As i said in another post, you can long into a sex chat room and you'll find someone on there talking about how we have to kill the banks and restore an American economy for Americans, so the ideas have permeated society by now. Everywhere you go and everyone you talk to, if you ask what they think about this 8 out of 10 times they'll tell you the same thing, they've had enough and the banks have got to go. The single and only trick left now will be trying to organize them to act collectively for their own benefit and make this happen.

      The last ditch effort now for the banks to save themselves is Austrian Economics, and i've heard enough of that by now to know where the theory came from. We have several on here who have been adamantly trying to convince us that simply switching over to hard currencies and getting rid of central banking will solve all our problems, but the arguments don't hold up and anyone with half an ounce of reason who's willing to think instead of just trust and believe is able to figure this out as well. They can argue all they want, but for every argument presented someone presents tangible evidence that it simply cannot work and by now its too late as well as the American People have had enough and have already decided that "THE BANKS HAVE GOT TO GO !"

      Oddly enough i'm still supporting Ron Paul and i want to see him as our president at some point in the next few years. If i actually believed that he supported this theory i wouldn't but as i've said in several posts to Jack, i think that he is lying through his teeth and saying what he needs to say to stay alive until he's in a position to do something about it. He's come out on the side of freedom every time so far and he will on this as well. He just isn't gullible enough to believe in what he says.

      We have an election coming up shortly, so after that we need to start circulating the "Declaration and Demand" we came up with awhile ago, and getting it into our senate and congressional offices once again. I'm expecting we'll see a major upset in the political system and right from the start we need to be letting them know what they are in for if they continue to support banking against the interests of the people. Someone needs to be working on trying to motivate a mass economic revolt as well where all of the people, all at once simply stop paying all banks payments and taxes, without them being dumb enough to continue doing this, the whole system comes crashing down, leaving no other option but to do what Franklin did and start issuing and managing a free public currency as a means of trade for the public benefit.

      The bottom line here is that the American people are the first population in the world to figure this out and understand the means to saving themselves before it was too late for them to do anything about it. Hopefully before too long they will get themselves organized and make it happen, and if they all act together it doesn't have to be a difficult thing either. My big worry is that the banks are living in absolute terror of us, they crashed the economy 10 years sooner than they were ready for it with all their mortgage scams getting out of hand, and if my sources are right, they are going to be flooding the economy with another round of debt currency shorty in order to try to placate people until their puppet corporation, the current United States Government, can put more laws in place abrogating our freedom to do anything about them in 2 or 3 years when the debt becomes due and the same that is obvious now becomes obvious again. Hopefully people will be wise enough not to accept the scraps from the bankers table, kill the banker anyway, and take it all for themselves.

      We are after all Americans, not sheep.

      Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

      Report this comment

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1

      1. Douglas

        OK David, so where should we start?

        Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

        Report this comment

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0

        1. David

          Hi Douglas;

          Well, we've already started simply by making people aware of what is being done to them and giving them workable and functional solutions to the problems. We have already given them one means to act which is the Declaration and Demand which James motivated and i drafted toward our senate and congress, which if circulated in sufficient quantity may create enough fear in our political establishment in order to motivate them to turn on their masters in the banking system and act in our interests instead. It's offering forgiveness if they renounce their treason against is and do so, and they are already well aware of the increasing threat that the populations awareness of the situation poses to their existence. We have an election coming up in a very short time now and i expect we'll see a massive upset in the political establishment at that point. I'll be re-posting the Declaration and Demand either a few days before or after, and if absolutely everyone on here does their job and promotes the crap out of it so that it can get into circulation and in front of the entire population so they can act on it, it will let the new house and senate know in no uncertain terms that they had better act in our interest and do so soon, or else.

          I want you to catch this post from Truth Seeker as well:

          http://www.ronpaul.com/on-the-issues/comment-page-11/#comment-136727

          He's a young man, with a brilliant mind, a mathematician in fact, who started giving thought to what many of us were discussing on here a short time ago, has reasoned out the same things we have for himself and whom i think is even more capable of bringing us toward accomplishing the objective than any of us have been thus far. He will be one of the key players in this, and that is certain, and i am just so happy and relieved that we have his contributions to the effort now as well, as our chances of success just increased dramatically because of this.

          Short of the Declaration and Demand creating enough fear in the existing establishment in order to force them to act in our interests according to our will and benefit, then the next stage will be trying to organize a mass economic revolt by the population where they simply all stop paying and all at the same time. One person can propose the course of action, but its success is contingent on all of the others giving it everything they have in order to promote it and get it in front of the population so they can act together on it as well. I type 80 WPM but even so, i have already put many hundreds of hours into promoting this effort thus far and contributing what thoughts and ideas i had to it, and if everyone else behind them will simply dedicate themselves towards putting a small fraction of that into promoting the solutions and giving this everything they have until they are accomplished then they can and will be successful too.

          Short success on any of this, once conditions get bad enough, then the population will simply have to grab their rifles and do it the hard way, and if it comes to that, i just hope that out of all of the resulting chaos and confusion that they will in the end get the solutions right, and not allow the effort to be derailed by banks as it was the first time around.

          Anyway, these are my perceptions on what it will take in order to accomplish our objectives and if anyone else has any more ideas toward doing this successfully which i haven't thought of yet, we need them as well, so i'll ask everyone to keep this in the back of your minds and see what thoughts result. The simple objective at this point is to destroy Banking and eliminate its power over our political establishment so that we can do something, and once that is accomplished, we already have more than enough ideas which have been developed and contributed in order to get it right as well. As James said in one of his recent posts, "the guns are already coming to bear" on the current establishment from many directions, but we have to start loading and firing at some point in order for them to have an effect.

          Again, absolutely everyone, keep emailing relevant conversations on here which you agree with into circulation among the general public. I cant stress enough the importance of getting these thoughts and ideas in front of the general population so that they can consider and understand them as well, and this is exactly how we have brought things to the point where we have thus far and why they are aware of the problems and solutions and ready to make them happen if they can be organized to do so. Email forwards are a geometric progression and there is absolutely nothing that banks can to do stop them, so here is how it works. Most people know some social butterfly like my ex wife who has 1000 people on their email list. When i send one of our conversations to her, the following day its in the hands of 1000 people. Assuming an only moderate success rate with about 10 % of those reading them and forwarding them on to a 100 more, 10,000 have it the next day, 100,000 the following day, a million the day after, 10 million the next and theoretically 1/3 of the population the following day and they just keep circulating back and forth from there until everyone has seen it. This is one tool which we need to use for now and the one thing we can do which no one can prevent. Each and every one of us can do this as individual citizens, without the need for any organizations to work though which can and generally are corrupted by the power which would prevent this, and which will be capable of motivating the combined action from all of the individual citizens which for the same reason cannot be corrupted as well, in order to bring about an incorruptible solution after they themselves have destroyed the power which always corrupts. In other words, Banks !

          Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

          Report this comment

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

        2. Jake

          Guys, we need a way of channeling interest and support to a central point. What´s better then to lead them to the mastermind himself, Mike Montagne (www.perfecteconomy.com)

          If there is anyone in this world i put my trust in regarding real solution, it´s in Mike. He has the intellectual setup and expereince to lead us in the right directions.

          btw: Had to change my login to Jake as posts from Jack are no longer tolerated?!

          You better keep supporting RP David or the same will happen to you.

          David, i did send you an email so please respond to either Mike or myself.

          Keep it up

          Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

          Report this comment

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1

        3. David

          Hi Jack;

          Okay here's what your probably running into with your posts, your either getting hit by the duplicate comment thing or the system just goes down sometimes and doesn't accept any post, so it could just be that. To my knowledge no one has ever tried to censor anything on here and its always been a free discussion at least as much so as the bots and the electronics allow it to be. If your trying to paste text into a post paste it to a simple txt file first and repaste from there on here, that's another remedy i've found with some of the quotations i've used, sometimes there seems to be some formatting which the system here can't deal with in other things. They system does have a lot of glitches and i've run into them many times as well.

          In terms of Mike, i absolutely agree, of all of the people out there he is the one who has gotten all of the essential elements right. Zarlenga has tried too but just as you said there's only one oar in the water as he understands the concept of a free public currency but is trying to figure out how to make it work with banks and it can't. If anything is going to work then whoever makes it work will simply have to get it into their heads that we don't need banks and figure out how to make it function without them, otherwise it wont. Mike understands this.

          I think we've all done a pretty good job already of getting the simple concepts of a free and working economy in front of people and making them understand that it is banking which is their enemy and the root cause of all of their problems, they've all figured that out by now and are angry enough at the current situation that it should be possible to motivate them to act before too long. We do have allies in congress, and we have several prominent congressmen in office from both parties who are thinking along similar lines as we are as well and are not going to be presidential candidates at any point, so they can get away with saying what they think much more so than Ron Paul can. Dennis Kuchinik is one who has been very vocal on this issue and i have quoted him in one of my posts. He has been talking to Zarlenga, now he needs to be talking to Mike so that both he along with any other congressmen they can drag in on this can actually progress toward getting it right once we as a population can finally collapse the power which would prevent this from happening.

          The people need to understand the concepts, which they already do, and this is what i've been putting my efforts into and every one of us who agrees with them are perfectly capable of presenting these to them as well just as we have been doing all along. Those in office or running for office need to understand the details of making this work, and these are exactly the details which Mike has been working out as well. While we are in the process of getting the people behind something which can actually work for their benefit, Mike if possible needs to be trying to establish contact with those in office which could and would be able to help us do it from their end as well and working with them toward making it happen.

          I believe Mike already has some experience in the political arena, so hopefully this wouldn't be a problem for him to establish such contact and this is the best distribution of effort that i could see, with everyone working toward accomplishing this thing with what they themselves do best and hopefully coordinating everyone's efforts toward the same objective. Would be good if Truthseeker could get in contact with Mike and the two of them start working together on this as well, his intelligence and education would make him imminently qualified to do so too and he's in full agreement with the objective. I'm sure that Mike could use and would very much welcome the extra support.

          Also its been suggested on here before, and for the general population, it would be good if someone could somehow set up a central depository of information where we could save all of the relevant discussions on the subject from here in a single place so that people wishing to study the matter further could go there and do so as well, it could be as simple a thing as a yahoo group, or maybe it could be coordinated somehow with Mike's site as well. I still have copies of all the threads i've emailed into circulation since the beginning, so i could forward them to anyone who wants to work on this as well. There's probably several others who have more from what they have forwarded out as well in their sent email as i know that i haven't caught nearly every relevant discussion. Hehehehe, we could even post some interesting posters and t-shirt art that people could download and distribute in their areas in order to increase the already existing terror of the population in the banking and political establishment even further. Would be an interesting thing for a banker to go shopping at Wal Mart and see half of the people in there wearing something with a graphic description of what needs to be done with him, can you imagine the effect ?.

          Also i checked that email and didn't have any messages from you, just to make sure its wekilledthebank@yahoo.com , so try resending it. I may have mistyped it as well the first time around, i don't use that one often. If anyone wants to work on the information depository contact me there as well and i'll respond from my regular email and send you the relevant posts i have on file here as well, LOL there's lots of them so be prepared to be inundated all in one shot :)

          Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

          Report this comment

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

        4. Douglas

          My posts are under moderation.

          Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

          Report this comment

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  2. Jack

    http://i2.ytimg.com/bg/ACzTBd5WSiV-1mhcRERKiA/112.jpg?app=bg&v=4cbc08db

    Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 2

  3. David

    Good relevant post Douglas;

    According to the Constitution it is the duty of government to "To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof", then to "To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes". (BTW if the supreme court were to rule on the term "coin money" it would be to in any manner create or issue money in any form, and not restrict them to using certain substances as claimed by some. Any state issued money, from the people to the people, is money, anything not issued by the people to the people is debt and not money).

    I see absolutely no reference to any involvement of Banks in this process, yet the entire process has been abrogated by congress to private banks.

    They do have the power "To borrow money on the credit of the United States" but without the restrictions of bank debt or finite currencies there should be no need to do this. They do have the "Power To lay and collect Taxes" but again with our modern technology and production capacity and without the restrictions of bank debt or finite currencies there should be no need to do this either.

    I guess what makes me wonder the most about the sanity of so many of our so called Fiscal Conservatives, is that they simply don't understand that since the only possible way for any form of currency to come into circulation under the current system is in the form of debt created by banks (because congress won't create money for us to trade with instead), if we try to pay all the debt which is owed to the banks (notwithstanding the fact that there isn't anywhere near enough debt currency in existence to do this) and if we don't create more debt to put more debt currency into circulation (and hence make the problem even worse), then what are we to use as a means of trade ? Why are we experiencing the current economic hell we have been subjected to in spite of the fact that our production capacity has not changed one bit and we are right now, this very minute, capable of creating an abundance of useful prosperity for ourselves greater than has ever been experienced in human history ? Because Banks, Debt, and Interest have consumed our means of trade and we can't get more back without creating more debt and making things even worse.

    Kill the banks, seize their assets and return them to the American people from whom they have been stolen, declare all bank debts null and void and force congress to do its job and provide us with our means of trade and manage it for our benefit, according to the United States Constitution instead of abrogating it to banks. How do we force them to do this ? Again, kill the banks which through bribery and corruption, have established government in their service so that control of government must revert back to the people and exist in their service instead.

    It seems a simple thing and i just don't understand why so many people keep beating their heads against the wall trying to figure out how to function in spite of a problem which can't be fixed and will never allow them to do so, when they can simply get rid of the problem and no longer have to deal with it. It makes absolutely no sense to me whatsoever, but i guess that's what happens when people trust and believe instead of think. The only definition i can think of for a normal person is someone who is absolutely terrified of having to think and needs someone to tell them what to do. I'm just glad that so many have been removing themselves from that category over the past half a year of so, and there have been a great many who have done so as well, enough that we have a chance i think.

    Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0

    1. Jack

      Hi David,

      I wouldn´t say that debt is the problem, but rather the irreversable muliplication of debt BY INTEREST.

      With MPE, debt is not multiplied beyond the circulation or remaining value of indebted assets.

      To pay debt obligations exceeding the remaining value of indebted assets (through interest/usury system) sets off a perpetual cycle of re-borrowing and multiplication of debt. Merely to maintain a circulation, we must borrow again so much as we have paid beyond the original circulation which was equal only to the un-multiplied debt.

      With MPE neither production or consumption are impeded by imposition of extrinsic cost. In every transaction, production is traded for equal production.

      So long as we make such a circulation available to production, no impediment, limitation, or inequity whatever are imposed upon production or commerce.

      Production and commerce are fully expedited only by a completely liquid and effectual currency.

      Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

      Report this comment

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 1

      1. David

        Hi Jack;

        Yeah this is simply a matter of terminology, we're saying the same thing in different words, and understand that the single and only problem is Banks and interest, making debt terminal.

        MPE is describing debt as the value of the goods or services which the currency is created to pay for and i'm simply saying that the currency needs to be created to pay for the full value of the goods and services, hence satisfying what MPE terms as debt without interest, in exactly the same manner as MPE proposes.

        Same thing, different terminology and it all comes out to just as you say:

        "neither production or consumption are impeded by imposition of extrinsic cost. In every transaction, production is traded for equal production.
        So long as we make such a circulation available to production, no impediment, limitation, or inequity whatever are imposed upon production or commerce. Production and commerce are fully expedited only by a completely liquid and effectual currency."

        Seems like the the only sensible definition of a working economy to me, and what could work otherwise ?. Nothing else ever has.

        Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

        Report this comment

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1

      2. Libertarian777

        Jack, what production does government produce then?
        Excluding interest, the net deficit for the year was roughtly $1 trillion.

        If we look at purely physical terms, war (and the military), which is entirely funded by the government, is net destructive (consumption of commodities, destruction of vehicles, wear and tear on assets that are economically non-productive). Just given that, government cannot be a positive net producer.

        Currently everything (and more) of government output is produced by (inputs of):
        1. taxes
        2. borrowing
        3. eminent domain confiscation of private property

        If government does not produce anything on net, if it created money (interest free) to fund spending (wars, roads etc), how does that money ever get repaid?

        Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

        Report this comment

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 4

        1. Brian Handey

          Jack doesn't understand the concept of interest. That's his problem. Having gold or money or any form of monetary base doesn't necessarily give you power, since you need to trade it with someone in order to get them to produce something for you. If they're not willing to work for your gold or they demand a higher price for their work, then you're not as powerful as you might think. Which is a check on power in itself since it keeps people humble and fair in a free-market society. You only have so much to trade. He also seems to think that interest creates more debt. Well, if you spend like the government and never pay it back, default, and are bailed out by new money creation from a central bank, then yeah, it does. Same thing with your credit cards, and that's no one's fault but the person not paying the bills. Money deposited in a bank is treated as a good, a service. When you borrow that good, you have to pay for it, which is where interest comes in. That doesn't in itself create more money, like he seems to think, but instead it forces the person who is borrowing to go out and work a little more to accrue more capital to pay the principle and interest back. That little bit extra that he has to work is paying the bank for allowing him to borrow the money to pay for whatever the borrower chose to purchase. So you work for the principle, and the little extra on top you have to work is so you can pay someone for letting you borrow their money. So there is no extra money created, since you provided a service in return for the interest you had to pay back.

          What he means to advocate is abolishing a central bank that has the power to manipulate interest rates, create money out of thin air, and bail people and banks out. When you bail people out, they are more likely to default on their payments, as they can increase risk at the chance of reaping higher benefits, knowing that if they default, the losses will be socialized with society. But if there was no central bank, fractional-reserve banking would be limited to the amount of reasonable risk a bank would be willing to take, because they would have to liquidate instead of being bailed out if they made bad business decsions. Therefore, no extra money would be created.

          Jack, it's simple artithmatic. Borrow 1, pay back 2, go out and get the extra 1 to pay back 2 by working a little more to make up for borrowing 1 so you have 2 at the end of the life of the loan. What you're doing is borrowing an extra 1 against future labor. The 2 was always in the economy. The person borrowing had to provide a service through their labor and talents to go out and earn it away from someone else. And where did the depositer - these so called oligarchs - get the 2 in the first place to give to this borrower? They had to work and produce a good and sell it to someone else to accumulate that wealth.

          It's a simple concept, Jack, you're just thinking too hard. That's your problem. Get away from the conspiracy theories and realize that gold is worthless unless someone is willing to work for it, and when they work for it, the gold changes hands. Consumers and the free-market prevent people from accumulating too much power, because there is a threshold on the amount of work they are willing to trade for currency. This is what drives down prices and allows people to climb up the economic ladder. It allows you to become as prosperous as you want, as long as you're willing to work, make sound decisions, save, and invest. You're not against banking, you're just against central banking and the current system banks and lenders fall under. That's why we should abolish the Fed.

          Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

          Report this comment

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 3

        2. Daniels

          Brian and 777, keep up the good posts. I'm glad at least a few of us here understand money, interest, and economics.

          Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

          Report this comment

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1

  4. Jack

    An Austrian individualistic anarchist-capitalist society without a state and where the money represents gold cannot long continue to function on that basis. There will soon come a concentration of power in which a small group of powerful individuals (oligarchs) take all the power because they have more gold than the rest.

    A private bank or a George Soros will become the actual power of a state and build a private army to protect its interests. This will lead to a power struggle among the oligarchs until a few of them are in control. There is nothing to prevent this because all individuals with less capital and less power will be employed by the oligarchs out of self-interest, or develop criminal activities out of frustration and needs.

    Ultimately, you will have a feudal society. And ultimately this will change into a different form of society. Ideal societies do not exist and people will always try to do things out of self-interest, and there will always be people who fight for power and control.

    But Mathematically Perfected Economy solves an important issue, because capital is accessible to everyone without interest if he / she are creditworthy and with the collateral as backing (our labour and produc(tion). This will push the capital oligarchs out of the game and they cannot impose their will by just having capital, and therefore gain unlawful and undeserved (usury) profits, because that capital (our true medium of exchange) is freely available subject to compliance and the conditions as laid out before.

    This preventive approach will be a major shift in which everyone has equal opportunities with a much broader social base in which crime out of frustration will largely disappear.

    If we accept anything less we will fail (again)!

    Or in Benjamin Franklin´s words: JOIN, OR DIE

    Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 2

  5. Jack

    It´s the Interest, Stupid!

    Interest is being payed by people borrowing money and received by people
    having loads of it. So it is per definition a wealth transfer from poor to rich.

    This is the hidden tax that nobody is talking about.
    This is the yoke that we carry.
    This is the worst kind of slavery, because it is slavery without even realizing it.
    This is interest and let it never be forgotten.

    This is our mortal enemy and let us never take our eyes of it again, until it is
    thrown into the fire of hell, together with the usurers enslaving us with it.

    Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 2

    1. David

      Making your point Jack;

      This is an excerpt from a post i made a long time ago, at that point it seemed everyone had pretty much figured out the idiocy of tolerating these bastards, but it seems there are more now who haven't figured it out yet, so here goes. The cost of Banking.
      ____________

      Everyone knows the current situation through their own experience, and I have a nephew who works as a police officer in a city close to me here, and his situation would be typical of the vast majority of people living and working in most American cities. His gross salary is around $ 40,000 a year which would equate to about $ 3,300.00 a month. Out of that, over $ 2,000 goes to the bank every month in mortgage / interest payments on his house so that he can maintain a place to live and will for the next 30 years. Of the $ 1,300 that’s left, assuming a 20 % income tax level, another $ 600.00 goes to the government so they can pay the banks for creating the currency they need to function which they should have created for us and themselves, leaving him with $ 700.00. Of that $ 700.00 another $ 49.00 goes up in sales taxes to fund the state government who also loan the money for their operations from banks. Of the $ 651.00 that’s left at least $ 100.00 a month goes up in property taxes which he has to pay in order to keep his place to live, which goes to the county and city government which again loan the money for their operations from banks. This finally leaves him with only $ 551.00 to spend and inject back onto circulation in order to generate useful production which can benefit himself and the rest of us.

      Total Monthly earnings:
      $ 3,300.00
      Total consumed by banks and because of banks in order to buy power and ownership over America and its population for themselves:
      $ 2,749.00
      Total being spent into the economy to generate useful production for the benefit of the American population:
      $ 551.00

      This is what we got, and that is what the banks got. Is there one single F’ing idiot anywhere can still believe and can try to explain how such a system can be sustainable, or possibly benefit the people it is intended to serve ?

      What would the standard of living for each and every person in America be today if we didn’t have banks and the governments they establish in their service, who neither build anything, fix anything nor feed anyone, consuming 5/6ths. of our capacity to pay for and generate useful production for our own benefit ?

      6 times what it is today.

      Whom does the current American economy and political establishment exist to serve ?

      I’ll leave that for everyone to answer for themselves.

      Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

      Report this comment

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 1

      1. Jack

        Yep, and hopefully the numbers you presented speak louder than words.

        Thanks for doing that.

        Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

        Report this comment

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 1

      2. Brian Handey

        You say $2000 goes to the banks a month in mortgage. No one made you take on that mortgage. And $600 goes to the government which goes to the banks to the create the currency? The Fed creates the currency on its own. Your $600 goes to social programs, defense spending, and anything else that involves public spending. You all blame banks. That's not the problem. The problem is what the Federal Reserve ALLOWS the banks to do by encouraging a system of fractional-reserve lending, artificial interest rates, bailouts, and out-right money creation without the benefit of production. You all are failing to ask the fundamental questions, and instead are blaming ghosts that don't exist.

        And if you're so worried about where your money is going after being deducted from your paycheck, there's a simple answer to that. Get rid of the income tax.

        And your numbers a little exaggerated. If you make $3300 a month, you should have a mortgage that is no more than $1600/month, and that is borrowing the maximum amount without car payments and credit card debts. So if you borrowed that much on a $3300 a month income, then you're setting yourself up for failure and that's your fault. Not the banks. So if you have a mortgage that is that high a percentage of your monthly income, then you set yourself up for failure. The banks didn't make you sign the paperwork.

        Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

        Report this comment

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 2

        1. David

          Your missing the point though Brian. If those payments, that interest, is public as it was during Franklins time and put right back into circulation i order to fund public services then people would in at least some way or form be getting some benefit from it and it would remain circulating for their benefit as well instead of buying ever more power and ownership over them by banks.

          There just is no defense of Banking, the numbers just don't work and the end result no matter now you calculate it is always the same, they end up with it all and we end up with nothing, while they have contributed absolutely nothing of any tangible value. In other words its theft, plain and simple.

          Suggest you look at the sheer volume of foreclosure notices in your local paper to realize the gravity of the conseqences before speaking in their defense.

          I suggest also that the only motivation i can think of for anyone to defend the concept of banking at all is that they are in some way involved in making money with money, and there are a whole lot more people who are trying to exist by doing something useful instead who's productive effort has been pretty much consumed by the former. There are a whole lot more of them than there are of you and they've all figured it out, Ben Franklin would be proud.

          Ending the fed solves nothing, Andrew Jackson already did that, he killed the central bank but didn't kill the rest, what do we have today ?

          Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

          Report this comment

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

  6. Douglas

    The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

    To borrow money on the credit of the United States;

    To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;

    To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;

    To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;

    Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 2

  7. spiral

    Your comments about inflation and deflation not existing are jokes right? A gold standard will cause inflation. pegging the dollar to hard assets we have less of WILL devalue the currency.

    Bleeding out overproduction of circulation will cause the currency to weaken because too much gain was made out of the currency to support itself. Some production is good but where we are today is bad. non-interest banking's capital isn't self-supporting and will continue to be a false hope for the economy.

    by the way, as long as being paid and spending equal out is a weak justification of inflation and doesn't solve anything. You're just not addressing the problem because it hasn't been problematic. Its like saying it's ok for a murderer to keep killing family members as long as you keep getting more family members.

    Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

    1. spiral

      sorry i misread your comment…yea you’re right a gold standard won’t “solve” inflation. To do this imo would require a weakened dollar to create a manufacturing base back in the US, and more true capital gains. However, no-one will want to be a grunt worker after the economy fully recovers and unemployment by factories reduces total unemployment back to 5%. Thus restarting the cycle of office work.

      I say we grow our economy with weapons contractors and start invading countries. Our gold standard will be to seize gold vaults.

      Interest is ridiculous, inflation or deflation will determine what your money is worth. credit never screwed up any economy.

      If Ron Paul means disbanding national banks to weaken the power banks have then I wouldn't mind that. but he hasn't specified whatsoever.

      Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

      Report this comment

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    2. GB

      U.S. history since 1971 does not support your assertion that the gold standard would cause inflation, just the opposite.

      Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

      Report this comment

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1

    3. David

      Interesting statement Spiral;

      "Its like saying it’s ok for a murderer to keep killing family members as long as you keep getting more family members." You've defined in a single sentence the function of an economy which exists to serve a parasitic infection, in other words Banking, and the only way to sustain any meager form of production in it is to continually add more debt to make up for the interest which consumes the means of trade and hence the tangible wealth to the extent where it is no longer possible for the population to produce enough to service the debt which we have reached today, and "the children wake up homeless on the continent that their fathers conquered" (Thomas Jefferson).

      GB is dead on as well in that if the economy were to be capable of growing under Austrian Economics, it would have to exist in a state of constant deflation and aside from AE tolerating banking which makes it unsustainable to begin with, this is just as bad and probably worse than inflation, as it buys power for banks based on an accumulation of the currency with no useful contribution to our productive effort, again killing off that productive effort even faster than Keynesianism (at least now they can add more debt and inflate the currency in order to try to get some small form of production moving again, and i expect we'll see the bulk of the next round of inflation when the debt becomes due instead of now when they put it in). Again "the children wake up homeless on the continent that their fathers conquered" (Thomas Jefferson), only it happens even faster this way.

      We do need to get things right this time and make it possible for them to work, and in order to do that we need to get rid of all the banks, big banks, little banks, central banks, each and every bank, as they are the single and only factor which guarantees an economy to be unsustainable. Money cannot be business, it needs to exist as a standard and public means of trade for business otherwise it cannot perform its only useful function, we do need to think and figure this out.

      Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

      Report this comment

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0

      1. Jack

        Your a true thinker David.

        The Paulian/Austrian solution is to try and take away the top of the pyramid (the fed), and leave the remainder of the pyramid intact. Will that destroy the pyramid?? NO

        Mathematically Perfected Economy (our mandate) will take away the whole pyramid from top to base.

        The interest on OUR Medium of Exchange being issued (at whatever rate) is the whole damn problem and we need to get rid of it.

        So if it is in their sincere interest to offer solution why is it then that they are not offering any? Even worse, they are just offering more of the same to keep the current terminal usury system running.

        WHY?
        Because any purported economy subject to interest will terminate itself under insoluble debt. As interest multiplies debt in proportion to a circulation, ever more of every existing dollar is dedicated to servicing multiplying debt, and ever less of every existing dollar can be dedicated to sustaining the commerce which is obligated to service the multiplying debt. Everything around you can be understood from the obvious consequences.

        There is only one viable solution:

        As this is the very set of principles — and the only set of principles which ensure the immutable value of money across its lifespan — a perpetual 1:1:1 relationship between remaining value, remaining *obligation*, and currency in circulation —.

        Anyone capable of doing the math can only agree.

        I AGREE COMPLETELY WITH YOU. WE DO NOT NEED BANKS. THEY ARE THE PROBLEM AND ANYONE SUPPORTING THEM, AND WE NEED TO ROUT THEM OUT!

        JOIN, OR DIE...

        Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

        Report this comment

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1

      2. GB

        Thanks, David, but I didn't mean to imply that under gold we would have deflation, either. My understanding is that there would be neither. Weren't deflation and inflation both non-issues from the start of Bretton Woods till 1971?

        Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

        Report this comment

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1

        1. David

          Hi GB;

          No there's on implication necessary, its simple arithmetic. If under a gold standard and economy is to expand then it must exist in a constant state of deflation due to a finite amount of currency to trade with, i expect that instead of that it would most likely just stagnate. The stagnation won't last more than 10 years though, because under the Austrian terms the Rothschilds will simply loan an equal quantity of their gold into circulation and at 10% interest in 10 years we will have no more gold, at which point the economy will no longer exist, much like it is today.

          We need to be thinking in terms of something that we can actually make work instead of believing that some form of currency can magically make that happen. We have to design and build a system on purpose that can work and must work. First and foremost we have to get rid of banks so that the economy can exist to serve and promote useful production and prosperity for the population instead of serve a parasitic infection that consumes the means if trade in interest and uses that to buy progressively more ownership and power over our government, industry and resources to the point where they have it all and there is nothing left for us.

          This is the first country in the world where people are actually figuring this out before its too late to do anything about it, and their figuring it out en masse and all at once it seems.

          Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

          Report this comment

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1

        2. Brian Handey

          Gold would fluctuate due to supply and demand. You wouldn't run out of gold, but consumer prices would change due to the amount of people in the market - as the population increases - in relation to the amount of gold, or dollars backed by gold, in circulation. What would stay a constant is your purchasing power. That's what these "great thinkers" aren't thinking about. You could save your way to retirement if you really wanted. If the price of gold went up, prices would go up. If the price of gold went down, prices would go down. So your purchasing power would always stay constant. This would allow you to stuff your savings away without ever losing your purchasing power.

          It's really that simple. David and Jack are looking too deep to see the answer in front of their face, trying to confuse an argument and probably confusing themselves in the process.

          Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

          Report this comment

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1

        3. GB

          I agree, Brian. Price deflation need not equal monetary deflation.

          Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

          Report this comment

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1

  8. Jack

    The Austrians/Paulians tell you, that they want a return to Constitutional money; and to sound money. No bigger lie can be told!

    Why not? Check out their forums. Gold bugs everywhere; and what they want is NOT for gold to return to its Constitutionally defined value! They want to make out like the Federal Reserve!

    Worse then is the lie that they want to “end the Fed.”

    Why? As I have described, the fatal fault of the imposed monetary system is interest; and all further faults merely result from further failure to solve inflation and deflation. The Austrians, and Mr. Paul in particular, not only advocate interest; they advocate ELEVATED RATES OF INTEREST.

    Effectively, what they want is to remove the embossed letters which now say “Federal Reserve Bank,” and replace them with “Ron Paul’s ‘COMPETING’ Bank(s)” — a principle which he refuses to debate, further define, or justify. Of course, any ostensible “competition” would ostensibly, on the contrary, drive interest rates down. But Mr. Paul tells us that we wouldn’t have borrowed ourselves into this debt mess if higher rates of interest had discouraged excessive/reckless borrowing.

    Mr. Paul has never done the math: he tells you that all of you are going to benefit somehow therefore — oh and we so willingly believe this preposterous notion, don’t we? — he tells us we will benefit paying perhaps 17% interest on our homes than 5%. Sounds really like a good idea, doesn’t it? Especially since the rate of interest is the rate of multiplication of artificial indebtedness — higher rates of which instead necessitate greater rates of borrowing to maintain a vital circulation.

    Unfortunately, most people who exalt Austrian “economics” hardly know the first thing about it. They reject math — most of which is little more than counting — as if you could understand otherwise; and they could have possibly determined solution otherwise. In no legitimate discipline or walk of life does such reckless abandonment of principle hold.

    But Mr. Hayek, God of the Austrians tells us why they advocate interest and the current banking model — which are our very problem. See Hayek’s article at Mises org: “A Free Market Monetary System,” I think it’s called. Anyway, he thus justifies interest, that it makes banking “an extremely profitable business.”

    That’s right. There IS no justification, just an outright confession of the motive.

    Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 3

    1. j-dizzle

      agreed interest from banks needs to be increased and interest to banks needs to be decreased to make up for the bank's own non-interest gains.

      Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

      Report this comment

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1

      1. Jack

        If it is in your sincere interest to support solution why is it then that you are not offering any? Even worse, you are just offering more of the same to keep the terminal system running. It´s the interest, stupid.

        There is no mystery to projecting the pattern of failure engendered by any purported economy subject to interest. As interest multiplies debt in proportion to a circulation, ever more of every existing dollar is dedicated to servicing multiplying debt, and ever less of every existing dollar can be dedicated to sustaining the commerce which is obligated to service the multiplying debt. Everything around you can be understood from the obvious consequences.

        There is only one viable solution:

        As this is the very set of principles — and the only set of principles which ensure the immutable value of money across its lifespan — a perpetual 1:1:1 relationship between remaining value, remaining *obligation*, and currency in circulation —.

        Mathematically perfected economy is a currency not subject to interest, comprising a debt financing all permissible enterprise, paid by each and every debtor exactly as they consume of the associated production.

        Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

        Report this comment

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 2

    2. GB

      You've already been told, Dr. Paul doesn't want elevated interest, only market interest.

      Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

      Report this comment

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 2

      1. Jack

        That´s what i said: Of course, any ostensible “competition” would ostensibly, on the contrary, drive interest rates down.

        And i also told you that any rate of interest will have a terminal outcome on you, me, and everyone else.

        Simple question:

        Where is the interest coming from on your gold backed money brought into circulation by your competing banks???

        Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

        Report this comment

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2

        1. GB

          "Where is the interest coming from on your gold backed money brought into circulation by your competing banks???"

          Simple answer:
          From those who pay it.

          Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

          Report this comment

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1

    3. You must be confused.

      "they advocate ELEVATED RATES OF INTEREST."

      No they don't. They advocate market set interest. Remember supply and demand? lol

      Whether the rate they advocate is higher or lower is RELATIVE to whether the current rate is set below or above the rate that would be chosen by the market.

      If you can't tell the difference between elevated interest and market-set interest then it's easy to see why you are so easily convinced that the MPE is the solution to all problems.

      Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

      Report this comment

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1

  9. Jack

    The Austrians/Paulians tell you, that they want a return to Constitutional money; and to sound money. No bigger lie can be told!

    Why not?

    Check out their forums. Gold bugs everywhere; and what they want is NOT for gold to return to its Constitutionally defined value! They want to make out like the Federal Reserve!

    Worse then is the lie that they want to "end the Fed."

    Why?

    As I have described, the fatal fault of the imposed monetary system is interest; and all further faults merely result from further failure to solve inflation and deflation. The Austrians, and Mr. Paul in particular, not only advocate interest; they advocate ELEVATED RATES OF INTEREST.

    Effectively, what they want is to remove the embossed letters which now say "Federal Reserve Bank," and replace them with "Ron Paul's 'COMPETING' Bank(s)" — a principle which he refuses to debate, further define, or justify. Of course, any ostensible "competition" would ostensibly, on the contrary, drive interest rates down. But Mr. Paul tells us that we wouldn't have borrowed ourselves into this debt mess if higher rates of interest had discouraged excessive/reckless borrowing.

    Mr. Paul has never done the math: he tells you that all of you are going to benefit somehow therefore — oh and we so willingly believe this preposterous notion, don't we? — he tells us we will benefit paying perhaps 17% interest on our homes than 5%. Sounds really like a good idea, doesn't it? Especially since the rate of interest is the rate of multiplication of artificial indebtedness — higher rates of which instead necessitate greater rates of borrowing to maintain a vital circulation.

    Unfortunately, most people who exalt Austrian "economics" hardly know the first thing about it. They reject math — most of which is little more than counting — as if you could understand otherwise; and they could have possibly determined solution otherwise. In no legitimate discipline or walk of life does such reckless abandonment of principle hold.

    But Mr. Hayek, God of the Austrians tells us why they advocate interest and the current banking model — which are our very problem. See Hayek's article at Mises org: "A Free Market Monetary System," I think it's called. Anyway, he thus justifies interest, that it makes banking "an extremely profitable business."

    That's right. There IS no justification, just an outright confession of the motive.

    Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

  10. Jack

    It’s impossible to solve inflation OR deflation with a gold standard. If represented wealth is less than the representative reserves, still, no precept prevents you from suffering a circulation exceeding the reserves, particularly if you further subject debts to interest.

    But this objection is largely only hypothetical, because generally, on the contrary, the real danger is suffering a restricted circulation (deflation). As industry and production tend to grow, you are deprived of the further circulation which you need to sustain that industry, if and when it exceeds the monetary reserves. So the more real (practical) fault is it cannot solve deflation. But even worse, is its further fault, that if it coexists with interest, it can’t solve terminal failure, or perpetual subversion of the *disposition* of the currency, that as interest inherently and irreversibly dedicates ever more of every unit of the circulation to servicing falsified, artificial debts, versus sustaining the desired industry. It means nothing to pretend solution then, unless you have answered for all three faults: inflation, deflation, and disposition.

    Mathematically perfected economy is a currency not subject to interest, comprising a debt financing all permissible enterprise, paid by each and every debtor exactly as they consume of the associated production.
    There is no inflation or deflation, as the currency in circulation is always equal to the current value of existent production across however much of the economy is supported by a circulation.

    Neither the value of money or assets are altered by changing proportions of circulation to indebted assets or services. The value of the money is always consistent in quantity — both in earnability and spendability — with the remaining value of the indebted assets which exist, for which it was issued, and which constitute its immutable value.

    The remaining circulation is always sufficient to pay off debt. Further production therefore is not impeded by a deficient circulation, deplenished by paying more than what circulation was introduced to finance the production.
    Debt is not multiplied beyond the circulation or remaining value of indebted assets.

    To pay debt obligations exceeding the remaining value of indebted assets sets off a perpetual cycle of re-borrowing and multiplication of debt. Merely to maintain a circulation, we must borrow again so much as we have paid beyond the original circulation which was equal only to the unmultiplied debt.
    Neither production or consumption are impeded by imposition of extrinsic cost. In every transaction, production is traded for equal production.

    So long as we make such a circulation available to production, no impediment, limitation, or inequity whatever are imposed upon production or commerce. Production and commerce are fully expedited only by a completely liquid and effectual currency.

    Mathematically perfected economy is no more than a singular prescription, dissolving unjust intervention.

    Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 2

    1. Jackeal o neal

      but production for production isn't relative to what's going on right now. In essence, where there is one bank, no inflation or deflation, then yes this works. over-production off of circulation is inflation. Interest is now almost relative to inflation. Your argument is essentially saying inflation or deflation doesn't exist when you look at 100% of currency after the fact. This is the premise of in or deflation. Everything equals out in the end, however stretching ends to means with debt CREATES inflation and deflation. if the system must restore itself towards the end, the value of quantity changes from start-end.

      Your argument works in limited scenarios. You are not addressing overproduction of non-interest related circulation. When you bleed production out of circulation, the value of whatever is being circulated will decrease to equal out what was gained. Our economy has a large non-interest banking sector which will not produce true capital.

      a gold standard will create inflation. This is a fact. We have less hard assets than paper assets so pinning the dollar to gold will de-value the dollar.

      Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

      Report this comment

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  11. marsellus wallace

    A weak dollar is great for bringing jobs back home. a weak dollar means the US can compete in producing exports, increasing employment on true capital. However, our great leaders will waste this opportunity to try and create growth in problematic areas, such as non-interest banking, instead of coming up with a real solution to the US debt bubble. National banks/world banks are terrible and should never have become legal.(Jackson made this point extremely clear)

    Public works projects need to be funded by money printed out of thin air, weakening the dollar so manufacturers can grow.
    (if inflation does not occur jobs were created, albeit for a short time; if inflation does occur, more jobs are created)

    bailouts and stimulus packages do nothing and are a symptom of nationalized banks. QE2? gimme a break.

    quentin tarantino for president!

    Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    1. quentin tarantino

      gold standard would be ideal, but to drop our currency suddenly is too much for the market to handle. maybe a graduated standard that standardizes 5-10% per year.

      Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

      Report this comment

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 2

      1. *

        "drop" as in weaken, not switch to Deft's plan of action.

        Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

        Report this comment

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1

  12. Deft

    I'm all for the gold standard. This is just a logistics question.

    If we had a gold coin standard, wouldn't even a very tiny gold coin still contain a tremendous amount of purchasing power? How would you make small purchases?

    Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 3

    1. herp derp

      what are you smoking? every dollar would be backed by its value in gold in the treasury. We had this system until witch docter reagan changed it in the 70s. please stop watching television. You should probably learn what conservative used to mean and what it means today. America's great jacksonian democracy and today's puppet show.

      Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

      Report this comment

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 2

      1. k2000k

        The gold standard ended in 1933 under FDR, what existed after the War was the Bretton Woods Agreement, which had gold at a fixed price of $35 an ounce. Nixon, not Reagan, ended that agreement in 1971. Reagan wouldn't be president for almost ten years.

        Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

        Report this comment

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  13. economist

    Dear Senator. I support yours ideas and proposals. But how would the transition of Paper-Money to the Gold?

    Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 4

  14. Dfens

    So when Ron Paul says, "don't let the Fed destroy our money." Who is he speaking for? Clearly it's not the poor ex-factory worker who used to be a middle class American, but now is worried that he and his wife and kids will find themselves out living on the street. No, he's speaking for the rich and for nations like Communist Red China who have trillions of US dollars stockpiled in their accounts that they've "earned" by stealing away our industrial might. Yeah, it would be terrible for them if the dollar were to loose value on the international money market. It would be terrible for them, but might get our poor, out-of-work factory guy his job back. Once again, Ron Paul is the mouth piece of Communist Red China against the interests of the average American. Vote for Ron Paul, if you're out of work and want to stay that way!

    Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 6

    1. k2000k

      Do you not understand that it is the very system that the FED has been propagating along with our Federal government that is causing us to borrow money from the Chinese? There is no way that a depreciated dollar will ever help us get jobs back, it simply doesn't work that way. The US will still be more expensive than countries like the Philipines, Vietnam, or Angola. We saw how currerncy manipulation failed to keep Japan inc chugging along, and we are beginning to see how it is failing the Chinese, or have you not heard about the massive real estate bubble that exists in China? The Chinese keep producing buildings, infrastructure, and a whole mess of things that they cannot actually use in the near future but it still counts as GDP growth. At some point it will have to stop and the Chinese are going to be in a world of hurt. Just like our own problem of massive borrowing and spending for programs we cannot afford. However, unlike Japan, and very possibly China, we actually have the ability to head this off and escape the worst of what could happen to us. It just requires a return to fiscally conservative government and sound fiscal policies.

      Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

      Report this comment

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      1. Dfens

        Irresponsible trade policies like Ron Paul is advocating are causing us to borrow money from his communist buddies in China, not the Fed. The Fed is not manipulating our currency value against their currency. China is the country keeping the value of their currency artificially low against our currency. Ron Paul is doing everything he can to help that to continue.

        Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

        Report this comment

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        1. It's Econ 101!

          "irresponsible trade policies" as opposed to what, protectionism?

          People who advocate for protectionism don't understand competition's role in capitalism.

          It's quite simple. Each party involved in any voluntary trade BENEFITS. If they didn't benefit, they wouldn't make the exchange. As Jim Rogers says, if I can buy 4 pencils from China for the same price as 1 pencil costs me in America, then i just saved 75% off the price of my pencil. THAT means that i now have more money to spend on other things.

          If America produces pencils with 4 times the expenses, then America shouldn't produce pencils. They should buy pencils from China and use the extra 75% that they saved to invest in something that they have a comparative advantage in producing.

          It's econ 101. Look up absolute advantage and comparative advantage PLEASE.

          Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

          Report this comment

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        2. Dfens

          If you work for the pencil company and can buy one for 1/3rd as much, then you have the rest of your severance pay to spend like there's no tomorrow. I guess that's Economics 201 instead of economics for the simple minded Ron Paul worshiper.

          Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

          Report this comment

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1

    2. Scapegoating

      "by stealing away our industrial might"

      Nobody is stealing away our industrial might. We lose jobs to them because they have a comparative advantage in producing certain things. When your trading partner has a comparative advantage in producing something, you shouldn't produce it!

      We are losing jobs because we are trying to protect jobs in industries that we do not have comparative advantage in. If we focused on produing the things we have comparative advantage in, then we wouldn't need to worry about losing those jobs because we always have a willing buyer who has to pay more to produce them on their own.

      By blaming all of our job problems on the chinese you are ignoring the real problem and scapegoating an entire population. Think about what you are saying.

      Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

      Report this comment

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  15. Jack

    Sloganizing the issues — Purported solution on the cheap for the sheep.
    Good for you, you memorized that senseless crap

    Mr. Paul is wrong on every count when it comes to (monetary) solution.

    Effectively, what Mr. Paul want is to remove the embossed letters which now say “Federal Reserve Bank,” and replace them with “Ron Paul’s ‘COMPETING’ Bank(s)” — a principle which he refuses to debate, further define, or justify. Of course, any ostensible “competition” would ostensibly, on the contrary, drive interest rates down. But Mr. Paul tells us that we wouldn’t have borrowed ourselves into this debt mess if higher rates of interest had discouraged excessive/reckless borrowing.

    Mr. Paul has never done the math: he tells you that all of you are going to benefit somehow therefore — oh and we so willingly believe this preposterous notion, don’t we? — he tells us we will benefit paying perhaps 17% interest on our homes than 5%. Sounds really like a good idea, doesn’t it? Especially since the rate of interest is the rate of multiplication of artificial indebtedness — higher rates of which instead necessitate greater rates of borrowing to maintain a vital circulation.

    Unfortunately, most people who exalt Austrian “economics” hardly know the first thing about it. They reject math — most of which is little more than counting — as if you could understand otherwise; and they could have possibly determined solution otherwise. In no legitimate discipline or walk of life does such reckless abandonment of principle hold.

    But Mr. Hayek, God of the Austrians tells us why they advocate interest and the current banking model — which are our very problem. See Hayek’s article at Mises org: “A Free Market Monetary System,” I think it’s called. Anyway, he thus justifies interest, that it makes banking “an extremely profitable business.”

    That’s right. There IS no justification, just an outright confession of the motive.

    Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 6

    1. Brian Handey

      Name one business that doesn't seek a profit. Consumers are the ultimate decider in what that profit margin is, as competition keeps profits fair. And yes, banking is a business. What did you think it was, a non-profit organization? When you deposit your money with a bank, you're allowing it to be loaned out to a third party, so they may take out a car loan, a mortgage, or a cash-advance. Cash is the product, and you must "pay" for the product. The compensation for lending your money out is the interest paid on the principle. I bet you don't complain when you receive interest on your deposit.

      That's some simple math for you.

      Besides, while you're so busy ripping on Austrian economics, why don't you explain to all of us why Keynsian economics is the better choice? Keep in mind that a government can't control the economy without controlling the people. It also does nothing as well or economically as the private sector. The government also has nothing, so how does it get money? It either has to take it from the people or print it, both of which are destructive and bad for the average American. Take GM, for example. They were bailed out. Where did the government get this money? It took it from a productive sector and channeled into this unproductive company called GM, a company that lost its market share because of the poor products and marketing strategies it employed over the years. That's Keynesian. Now please explain how that was good for the economy?

      Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

      Report this comment

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 4

      1. Jack

        We do not promote Keynesian economy.

        I prefer to NOT receive interest on my money. It´s just part fo the scam.

        Before making assumptions first study MPE as i did with AE your so called free market idea´s.

        You have to do beter than that

        Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

        Report this comment

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 3

      2. David

        This is what Jack is proposing Brian, the original American currency and economy, and the one that actually worked, and did not involve banks. If money is to facilitate trade business and production then the money cannot be a business in and of itself. Making money with money is simply theft and fraud as no tangible contribution is made in exchange for payment and all such profit must come at the expense of useful trade, its a simple thing and Jack is bang on about that too, things simply can't work if this is tolerated. Franklin had this figured out before the revolution, unfortunately Hamilton sold out the revolution to the Rothschild family and the Bank of England and we haven't gotten it right since. We need to get it right again if were going to survive.

        ___________________

        During a visit to Britain in 1763, The Bank of England asked Benjamin Franklin how he would account for the newfound prosperity in the colonies. Franklin replied.

        "That is simple. In the colonies we issue our own money. It is called 'Colonial Script'. We issue it in proper proportion to the demands of trade and industry to make the products pass easily from the producers to the consumers...In this manner, creating for ourselves our own paper money, we control its purchasing power, and we have no interest to pay to no one."

        In response, the Bank of England influenced the British Parliament to put a stop to this activity. Under the Currency Act of 1764, King George III decreed that the Colonists cease printing their own money. The colonial script in circulation was to be exchanged at a two-to-one ratio with notes drawn from the Bank of England. This caused widespread unemployment and economic depression in the colonies.

        "In one year, the conditions were so reversed that the era of prosperity ended, and a depression set in, to such an extent that the streets of the Colonies were filled with unemployed." (Benjamin Franklin)

        Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

        Report this comment

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1

  16. Ryan

    Congressman Paul,

    Money is a concept, and is not anything actually tangible. Things "used as money" can be gold or printed paper and they represent the concept of money which is debt. Money is debt. Wealth is actually tangible goods and services. When people confuse wealth with money that is where the problems occur and the wrong solutions designed.

    Gold and printed paper, corn, or sea shells, can be things "used as" money (with the "used as" dropped for simplicity) are only circulating as IOUs if they are "used as" money - called currency. Fiat money is simply the increasing of the number of IOUs in circulation by decree. From this we seek clearly that fiat money is not an evil (since it is a tool to add or even remove grease to move the economy when there is no grease or an over abundance of grease to begin with), but inflation is the evil. Holding a monetary policy where inflation is the norm, is wrong. Yet holding to a monetary policy (of no fiat money) where deflation and inflation can run rampant and not controlled except by market forces in a global economy, is just as evil as the inflationary policies it intends to replace. Only a monetary policy that aims to create tools to end inflation and deflation and maintain the value of currency within a stable index, so that a dollar today is worth a dollar tomorrow and a hundred years from now, is the only true solution. Holding to a non-fiat monetary system would actually choke a growing economy. Yet also not allowing for gold and silver to circulate as competing currencies in a free market, hides any problems with a fiat-only monetary system and causes the mess we are in.

    Yet in addition to monetary policy changes, we also need to make them work hand in hand with fiscal policy changes.

    The best solution to our current economic fiscal problem created by bad fiscal policy is two fold:

    1. eliminate the evil of compound interest on secured loans in favor a simple interest monetization fee, and require that the principal of any such loan be paid first prior to paying the monetization fee (and make this change effective immediately and retroactive on all currently existing qualifying loans)

    2. eliminate the income tax (which currently is a regressive increase to the cost of goods and services by as much as 30%) in favor of only a flat 14% sales and use tax on everything EXCEPT on things deemed necessary for life: groceries, rents or leases of real estate, insurance, and medical items and services.

    Doing these two things will allow homeowners who have paid 17 years on their home on a standard 30yr mortgage, to find their mortgage paid (the details of this are simple but detailed and are explained on the site below), immediately increasing discretionary spending, and would transform banks into service institutions (pay for 1.5 houses to own a house), and not fleecing institutions (paying for 2.5 houses to own a house). These changes would also exempt the poor from paying most of the taxes since their income usually goes mainly to the basic necessities of life such as rents, groceries, medical services, and insurance. Also the true cost of government would be reflected in the sales and use tax, with no regression hidden.

    Concerning monetary policy reforms, the solution is to replace the Fed and its tools with a entirely different and more fine-tuned system of monetary policy under the control of Congress, that would eliminate the man-developed flawed monetary policy of constant inflation (which is nothing more than another tax on the people) and instead have as its primary goal the elimination of inflation and deflation almost entirely through the use of its tools, with the only goal of retaining the value of the dollar at a constant value over time so that $1000 is still worth $1000 a hundred years from now (not counting interest).

    These three reforms alone would double the standard of living within a single generation, and eliminate immediately a small chunk of the national debt (about $2 trillion at this time being a simple accounting ledger fix that would cancel itself out). I encourage anyone interested to look at the very simple but transformative legislative proposal here, and I encourage you Congress Paul to submit it to committee for a vote:

    National Economic Stablization and Recovery Act
    http://nesara.org/bill/index.htm

    Please read the articles about money if you want to understand more about how our monetary system works from a systems philosophy perspective. Once you do, you will begin to see exactly what is wrong with it, and what is wrong with also completely removing a competing fiat currency. Once anyone understands truly what money is, they will begin to see the faults in our current monetary and fiscal policies. We currently are on an unsustainable path to prosperity, and headed for an unthinkable sinking of our economy… and to think that it’s all a man-made fiasco. We designed ourselves into this mess, we can design ourselves out of it. Check out the site (and please don't confuse it with a hoax that uses the same acronym).

    Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  17. turboman

    http://www.youtube.com/user/councilonsper

    after you watch this series of video shorts, made for dummies like me, you will know what we have to do, and ASAP. and for those that come by here to try and disparage Dr. Ron Paul, you might as well take these in too.

    the videos explain in simplest form what the eye and pyramid on our debt-based currency means. and if you don't know what debt-based, bond economy is, you will after watching these shorts.

    Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 3

    1. Jack

      Turbo,

      After you have seen those video´s i really do not understand why you support RP with his competing banks and currencies. He is just offering more of the same.

      Is it just because there is no better alternative?? Better government comes though educated people. Solution can only be complete solution, there is no half solution. It is our responsibility to understand and choose real solution.

      Because those banks (also the RP competing banks) work with interest both outcomes will be terminal for us.

      Your goal seems to be to try and take away the top of the pyramid (the fed), and leave the remainder of the pyramid intact. Will that destroy the pyramid?? NO
      Mathematically Perfected Economy (our mandate) will take away the complete pyramid from top to base and leave them with nothing.

      WE NEED TO GET RID OF ALL THE BANKS.

      WE DO NOT NEED BANKS.

      (see also my reply earlier)

      http://www.ronpaul.com/2010-10-11/ron-paul-dont-allow-the-fed-to-destroy-our-money/comment-page-1/#comment-136071

      Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

      Report this comment

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 6

  18. Chris

    When did the trolls show up (Jack et al.)?

    And, more importantly, can their agenda be any more transparent? Probably paid spammers, in fact.

    Go away spammers and trolls and spew your nonsense somewhere else!

    Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 4

    1. Jack

      That's why you shouldn't have had your plastic surgeon stick one of your balls on the end of your nose. Now, when you pick your nose, you might get a hard on -- all by yourself -- while your conjuring up yet another blasphemous retort that you understand the first thing about monetary theory -- the whole body of which, evidently, fits very far up your ass, by your one testicle, hanging off the end of your nose.

      Like I said... this why Ron Paul HAS supporters. If these people had sex operations, they wouldn't even notice.

      Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

      Report this comment

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 10

      1. Brian Handey

        Typical liberal - resorts to name calling. Pretty soon Jack will be calling everyone racists because they don't agree with him. And we don't understand monetary policy? You, Jack, can't even understand the simple concept of interest. There's another person who doesn't believe in interest, either. Osama bin Laden. But it's cool to beat your wife, in his eyes...just don't charge her interest if she takes out a car loan.

        "It's not that are liberal friends are ignorant. It's just that they know so much that isn't so." - Ronald Reagan.

        Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

        Report this comment

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 3

        1. Jack

          Only a fool makes up his mind before he understands the issue.

          Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

          Report this comment

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 2

        2. Brian Handey

          That is why you are a fool, Jack.

          Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

          Report this comment

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1

      2. jim

        It's hard to take anyone serious whos is a rude, pompous jerk. Have you heard of the philosophical saying, "Like is known by like." Well if the virtue of your arguments equals the virtue of your manners we can hazard a guess how much your arguments are worth.

        Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

        Report this comment

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      3. jim

        Jack, it's hard to give any rude, pompous jerk credence. Have you ever heard of the philosophical saying "Like is know by Like."? If the virtue of your arguments is equal to the virtue of your manners we can all hazard a guess to how credible your arguments are.

        Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

        Report this comment

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 3

  19. sfiorare

    - oprah probably knows what ron's newletters said, so i doubt it

    look at this 1988 video of ron paul talking about the economy: v=Gh5oKTY9PoY

    Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  20. Jet Graphics

    I hope you folks do bother to read the law. At least read the U.S. Constitution before you embrace any of the nonsense spouted by Mr. Ron Paul.

    A. Congress has no power to "create money". If the Constitution delegated said power, why would Congress need the power to borrow that which it could create? (See: Art 1, Sec. 8; Sec. 10, U.S. Constitution)
    B. The Federal Reserve Corporation does not "create money". It extends credit, at usury, with repayment specified in dollars (gold coin) - which have not circulated since 1933. (See: Coinage Act of 1873)
    C. Since 1933, the U.S. government has been bankrupt, having repudiated their obligations defined in Title 12 USC Sec. 411.
    D. Only through the "voluntary" contributions of millions of enumerated Americans (via FICA), does the worthless "dollar bill" have legal tender standing. As you should know, only obligated parties cannot refuse tender of their own notes, in discharge of debt.
    E. The public debt, soon to exceed 14 trillions, is a legal obligation to pay the creditor over 700 billion ounces of gold, stamped into coin. Since the world wide supply (est. 2009) is only 5.3 billion ounces, one must wonder how that debt can ever be repaid.
    F. Pursuant to the 14th amendment, clause 4, the validity of the public debt cannot be questioned - - - even when it is evidently impossible to repay.

    Ignorance of the law is no excuse, but it sure is useful to keep the sheeple milling about, while they are sheared over and over.

    Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 8

    1. Brian Handey

      Borrowing money is the act of creating debt, and how do you pay debt? Most people pay it with dollars or something else of value, like gold, labor, or some other form of collateral. Unless they're like you and pay it by getting on their knees while trying to twist words and regulations so they can sound "brainy." You must be a lawyer. Only a lawyer would make a jackass argument like you have. The Constitution is easy to understand if you read it and stop citing regulations that people like you have created to restrict it (and our freedoms). Monetary policy is even easier to understand. Here you go, let me break it down for you - you don't spend what you don't have. You can't create money that hasn't been earned with labor, because you create more money without creating something else in return. Wow, that was difficult to understand. When you'd like to come to big boy class and speak like an adult instead admiring your own nonsense, then come back to this site and say something meaningful. Otherwise, you can have fun being sheered like a sheep under the guise of social justice.

      Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

      Report this comment

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 2

      1. Jet Graphics

        Calling the law an ass is a popular insult.
        Refusing to comprehend the law, and how a dollar is defined is inexcusable.
        See: Coinage Act of 1792, if you wish to know what a unit dollar is.
        A dollar bill is not a dollar. Since 1933, no dollars have circulated.

        Do not believe me. Ask your nearest sitting court judge to rule that a dollar bill is a dollar. I did - he demurred. (Fancy way of saying that he refused)
        Why would he do that, you may ask. Dollar bills are worthless, repudiated debt instruments that do not alienate title. They are the reason the U.S. has been under a perpetual "temporary" State of Emergency since 1933. They are not, were not, nor will they ever be dollars.

        The Constitution is not a source of "our freedoms". It is a compact, but the private people are not party to it. It's not "yours" unless you swore an oath to it.

        "But, indeed, no private person has a right to complain, by suit in Court, on
        the ground of a breach of the Constitution. The Constitution, it is true, is a
        compact, but he is not a party to it. The States are the parties to it. And they
        may complain...."
        - - -Padelford, Fay & Co. vs. Mayor and Alderman, City of Savannah, 14 Ga. 438, 520 (1854) Supreme Court of Georgia

        Private people are not "People of the United States", who ordained the new contract, known as the Constitution for the United States of America. Not all Americans could vote, thus not ratify the compact. (Go read the first two articles of Confederation, 1777, if you want to know the difference between the "United States" and the "United States of America".)

        What this boils down to - we have been lied to, from cradle to grave, by the world's greatest propaganda ministry.

        Do not believe me - go read the law for yourself. It's available at any county courthouse law library. And don't forget to wear kneepads. For at some point you will fall to your knees, weep uncontrollably, and shake your fist at the heavens, crying "How did we lose our birthright?"

        But if you refuse to read the law for yourself, you're no better than the Congress that enacts legislation it has not read.

        Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

        Report this comment

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 6

      2. Jack

        Brian, do you really understand the constitution because from what i can read in your posts you clearly don´t.

        Go back and try to find the words; (private) banks, loans against interest, competing banks, competing currencies, and such...i can´t find them.

        You clearly don´t stand for solution Big Boy!

        Join, or Die...

        Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

        Report this comment

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2

        1. Brian Handey

          Banks are meant to be a private enterprise. Not to be bailed out by a Federally created central bank. So yes, I do understand the constitution. The constitution advocates free enterprise and protects the liberty and endeavors of each and every one of us. People like you, Jack, are the problem in this country. You don't understand what you are talking about. Do you read at all? Seriously, do you? I'm wondering, because you have no concept about monetary policy, what money is, how banking is supposed to work, the purpose of interest, loans and what they represent, or what sound economic policy would look like. You need to put your ego aside, stop spending your time trying to be smart, go out, read, and become smart.

          P.S. - do you notice how I'm getting more thumbs up compared to the sea of thumbs down related to your comments, you know, when you and David aren't patting each other on the back? That's the best part. You're upset at banks, and you're right, the system is broke. But you're not looking at the fundamental reason why the banking system is broken and you don't understand what its true function and intent is. You're governed more by your feelings than by reason.

          Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

          Report this comment

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    2. Daniel

      yes, you are right ! Brian Handey a non-sense comment about the constitution from Jet Graghics . Will not even comment by your true name , maybe not even a (citizen of the u.s. or u.s. citizen) if the constitution is just a (compact) !!! ?? it protects the citizen both privitely and individually and as a nation equily. (art. 1 sec. 8 of the 1st. ammendent bill of rights) states, "congress and only congress shall, have the right to, coin and create the value of the dollar thereof; " so dont be misleaded by complexities its simple , a law that is , and congress is responsible . but since december 22nd ,1913 when most of congressmen were on vacation a bill , known as the federal reserve act , unpublicly brought foward to the congress and minnoridly pasted, with out the senates, due process to approve it. So, ignorance of the law is no excuse! yes, go ron paul !

      Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

      Report this comment

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 2

    3. k2000k

      "To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures"

      Found that in Article I Section -powers reserved to congress 8 of the constitution. So I am very confused when you claim that congress does not posses the power to create money. Unless you mean fiat money that is not tied to any sort of money that can be 'coined', such as gold.

      Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

      Report this comment

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

  21. Jack

    Reply from an Ex Ron Paul follower after learning about Mathematically Perfected Economy via Youtube:

    #
    Retreao

    Haha, I'm so glad Ron Paul didn't get into office now... I was so naive!!

    Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 8

  22. Sammy

    The US government and the Fed are the cause of the business cycle, the cause of coercively misallocating resources through government spending and the cause of onerous regulations that provide negative incentives for hiring workers.

    Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 2

    1. Jack

      Follow Mr. Paul, and you find that because he offers and has no fully accountable understanding of these matters, he in fact then advocates higher rates of interest, which can only multiply indebtedness all the faster. This brief section of my YouTube video demonstrates my model, in fact proving even faster inevitable failure predicated by the higher interest rates (and/or diminished borrowing) of Mr. Paul and his “Austrian economists”:

      What does Mr. Paul then precipitate by his simplistic proposition of “ending the fed”? Is it a solution; or are we to remain subject to the very process which not only makes the central banking systems of the world unjust, but also terminal? Are we to solve the fatal consequences of banking as we should know it? Or are we to suffer those causes still? And worse, are we to suffer escalation of this cause, under the higher interest rates advocated by Mr. Paul and his pseudo science, “Austrian economics” — a pretended discipline without a single formal proof or theorem?

      The most preposterous thing here then is that we might follow Mr. Paul, as he calls the kettle black, in fact advocating even more soot — and even meeting presentation of this fact with no more than evasion. Where is his prevailing argument? Where even is his proof we actually suffer circulatory inflation? If we do suffer this as he says, where too is the phenomenal price inflation we would already have suffered if circulatory inflation itself caused price inflation?
      Nowhere.

      But let’s just take the most casual look at “Austrian economics” — which contrary to its title, can instead only multiply redundant costliness into failure.
      Why do the Austrians advocate higher interest without even indulging in the math which would be indispensable to proving we benefit from some ostensibly legitimate rate of interest, imposed ostensibly because the only legitimate process is to borrow our own promissory notes into circulation from “banks”?

      Well, the Austrian “economist’s” God, Hayek tells us:
      “I am more convinced than ever that if we ever again are going to have a decent money, it will not come from government: it will be issued by private enterprise, because providing the public with good money which it can trust and use can not only be an extremely profitable business; it imposes on the issuer a discipline to which the government has never been and cannot be subject. It is a business which competing enterprise can maintain only if it gives the public as good a money as anybody else.”

      In other words, Mr. Paul’s “competing banks” are merely a continuation in the same fatal processes, to our purported benefit under even higher costs and rates of escalation of artificial indebtedness, by Mr. Paul’s higher rates of interest.

      Source: Mises, “A Free-Market Monetary System,” by Friedrich A. Hayek

      I hope you will have time then to give these matters your careful consideration; and that this will help you see your way to solution.

      for more info google/youtube: Mike Montagne or Mathematically Perfected Economy

      Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

      Report this comment

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 8

      1. GB

        Jack - Ron Paul doesn't advocate necessarily higher rates of interest, only market rates. I think you've made up your mind, and trying to cherry pick Paul, Hayek and Mises' sayings to fit your framework

        Austrian econonics doesn't need a theorem, when it has history (Germany, early 20th century) and common sense supporting it.

        When one starts using insults like saying "Austrian's 'econonmist's' god", it shows weakness in one's argument.

        Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

        Report this comment

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 3

        1. Jack

          Since when would "common sense" fail to fit a proven theorem?

          Double talk? That's why you don´t understand anything, much less proof something. You don´t understand what words to use YOURSELF to say what you mean.

          This is why Ron Paul *has* supporters -- because an idiot can only be supported by even lower-order idiots.

          Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

          Report this comment

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 7

        2. GB

          Whatever, Jack.

          Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

          Report this comment

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 4

        3. Brian Handey

          Theorem: an idea, belief, method, or statement generally accepted as true or worthwhile without proof.

          There is no such thing as a proven theorem. As soon as it is proved, it becomes a law.

          So yeah, whatever, Jack.

          Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

          Report this comment

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 3

        4. jack

          Anyone who needs to be persuaded to be free, doesn´t deserve to be.

          Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

          Report this comment

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 3

      2. Brian Handey

        Higher interest rates don't encouage more indebtedness. They discourage excess borrowing when the pool of savings to lend out is shallow. So high interest rates are a relflection of real savings. It's simple supply and demand. So when interest rates rise, remember, they actually discourage indebtedness. Why? Because they discourage over-borrowing at a time when there isn't enough to lend.

        Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

        Report this comment

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 4

        1. Jack

          Sure, we all save a whole hell of a lot on our foreclosures when they raise the interest. How do you borrow less to maintain a vital circulation at higher interest rates? Why have they been obligated to lower the interest rates interest rates as much as they have? Because higher rates would bankrupt us immediately.

          All you have to do (unless your IQ is under 35) is... go thru the steps of borrowing the money back into circulation first at one interest rate... and then at a much higher rate. Evidently elementary arithmetic is difficult for you to visualize...

          Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

          Report this comment

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 4

        2. Brian Handey

          When they raise interest rates, they don't raise them on existing mortgages. They raise them on borrowing new money. So those foreclosures are no one's fault but the people who bit off more than they could chew. Therefore, they are penalized accordingly. It's pretty simple - don't pay your mortgage, then you get foreclosed on. So higher interest rates only affects today's borrowing. The rates are adjusted according to how the market is responding to current economic conditions - supply and demand. The only mortgages whose interest rates ever change are APRs. And again, no one forced those people to take out an APR. If you have an APR and you can't sell your house or refinance and your rate goes up, then that's your fault. Don't penalize society for the your failure to plan. And you can't borrow money back into circulation. That's what creates excessive debt and leads to inflation. Too much debt that is leveraged against too small a pool of real savings and leads to bad debt, which eventually needs to be liquated one way or another, no matter how long the government tries to keep it afloat through artificial manipulation of interest rates or money creation. I think what your problem is, is that you have no idea about any of these concepts. It has nothing to do with arithmetic. It's simple economics. You can't borrow your way to prosperity. Sure, if I borrow a million dollars then I look rich...until the bills come due. How does borrowing anything make a person more prosperous? And how does a rise in interest rates lead to foreclosure? Answer that one with your IQ of 35. You can't, because there is no answer. Raising interest rates discourages future borrowing. It has no effect on a 30-year FIXED mortgage. That's simple english...FIXED. The rate is FIXED when you lock it in. Lock the word fixed up in the Webster, then maybe you'll understand. Which is good...people need to quit borrowing more than they can afford.

          You might as well not respond. You're losing your credibility...or what credibility, if any, you have left.

          Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

          Report this comment

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 4

        3. Jack

          Your light years behind. Your goal is to try and take away the top of the pyramid (the fed), and leave the remainder of the pyramid intact. Will that destroy the pyramid?? NO

          Mathematically Perfected Economy (our mandate) will take away the whole pyramid from top to base.

          The interest on OUR Medium of Exchange being issued (at whatever rate higher then 0) is the whole damn problem. No point (and less time) to debate the current interest (strategy) cycle which is the sole problem of our pretended economy and we need to get rid of.

          So if it is in your sincere interest to offer solution why is it then that you are not offering any? Even worse, you are just offering more of the same to keep the current terminal system running.

          WHY?
          Because any purported economy subject to interest will terminate itself under insoluble debt. As interest multiplies debt in proportion to a circulation, ever more of every existing dollar is dedicated to servicing multiplying debt, and ever less of every existing dollar can be dedicated to sustaining the commerce which is obligated to service the multiplying debt. Everything around you can be understood from the obvious consequences.

          There is only one viable solution:

          As this is the very set of principles — and the only set of principles which ensure the immutable value of money across its lifespan — a perpetual 1:1:1 relationship between remaining value, remaining *obligation*, and currency in circulation —.

          Just do the math. Think outside the box you were conditioned in. It will be an eye opener.

          WE DO NOT NEED BANKS

          Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

          Report this comment

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 3

    2. Jack

      Sammy, you clearly do not understand the real issues. So please stop sloganizing the issues with purported solution on the cheap for the sheep.

      Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

      Report this comment

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1

  23. 9claudius

    Will Oprah ever have Ron Paul as a guest or help liberate the American people by doing a show on the illegal Federal Reserve ?

    Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  24. Jack

    Great discussions going on right now!

    Because most debates seem to come down to one an one important question only; What is Money, What should Money be?

    Please find below our explanation/definition of what money should be.

    WHAT IS MONEY, WHAT SHOULD MONEY BE ?

    Most people can’t give you a good definition of money — a definition which holds; and a definition which serves them.

    Yet if we ask the questions which develop a fully accountable answer, we readily arrive at a fact that the only definition of money which can inflict no offense whatever, is a currency which comprises immutable tokens of value.

    In fact likewise, most people do intuit that money IS a relatively immutable token of value — not understanding how the exceptions are engendered, or how the exceptions offend them. In other words, they recognize that immutability is a vital object; they likewise recognize that immutability of a promissory note is even vital to its facts of contractual obligation; but they do not recognize that one and one only monetary prescription makes good on this indispensable object of immutable tokenization of value.

    Both to tokenize value and to immutably tokenize value nonetheless are only TO REPRESENT not only however many different products, but necessarily, to likewise represent the volumes of such products, or we fail to keep the ostensible 1:1 relationship between circulatory volume and remaining value of all products, which is necessary to immutable value.

    The only way to immutably tokenize value therefore is if the units of value of the circulation are immutably linked to the remaining value of ALL represented property (not just to one or several of MANY products); and thus likewise, the remaining volume of units of circulation must at all times equal the volume of remaining value of the ALL the products which the circulation is intended to represent, or we fail to keep these principles. In fact then, the only way to maintain these equal volumes is to pay the value of the represented property out of circulation as the value of the property is perceived to be consumed, or to depreciate. The only way you can do this of course, is if we pay monetary obligations comprised only of principal, at the rate of depreciation or consumption of all represented properties.

    Volume of circulation must likewise equal remaining volume of all represented property. Franklin observed in his “Modest Inquiry into the Nature and Necessity of a Paper Currency,” that the colonists prospered substantially more when they supplemented their circulation of precious metal with paper currency (certain implementations of which were debatably subject to interest). He postulated that some prospective extent of such supplementation might be excessive; and that it might have negative consequences. But nonetheless he noted (evidently then because they never reached such a limit) that the additional circulation of paper currency sustained substantially greater prosperity.

    Why?

    They must therefore have suffered previously from an effectively deflated circulation. But simple questions thus resolve Franklin’s curiosity:

    If the circulation is to represent (tokenize) value, then if the circulation were ever to exceed the volume of the remaining value of all property, then someone would have received circulation for nothing. Such an excessive, “inflated” circulation however would be impossible, if in fact all promissory notes (of principal only) are legitimately collateralized.

    Likewise however, if the effective volume of circulation is ever less than the volume of represented property, then it is impossible to trade all property all at once; and someone will not have received and persisted in just reward for their production.

    So, an “effective,” just circulation must at all times equal the remaining value of ALL production (“products”).

    A further malady exists in the present disposition of currencies subject to interest. That is, ever more of a circulation is perpetually dedicated to sustaining ever greater sums of artificial debt, leaving ever less of the same circulation to represent/tokenize the value of property. Thus interest makes abiding by our necessary principles of immutable tokenization impossible.

    1. The only circulation which sustains all these necessary objects therefore is a volume of circulation which is at all times equal to the remaining value of all property.

    2. The only way to maintain such a circulation is to pay principal out of circulation at the rate of consumption or depreciation of related property.

    3. Thus as a circulation comprised of promissory notes only represents FINANCED property (subject to promissory obligations), the only way to sustain a circulation which necessarily represents the remaining value of all property is to further accommodate immediate conversion of equity into currency.

    These in fact then are the principles of mathematically perfected economy™; and this is a vital path of the logic of overall solution.

    But our question asks if money is a product? Essentially, this is to ask if it MUST be a product in order to serve these vital purposes of a just currency, which of course must eradicate all potential for systemic offense.

    We can see however, even on an abstract level, that the concept of tokenization can only go awry if the need for tokenization must account for all products, and the concept of tokenization requires A product or a few productS to do so. Yet even according to the concept of tokenization itself, the token is distinct from the product itself — unless to be an immutable token of value, “money” must actually exist in the physical form or instances of some such “product.” In other words, if just/”honest” money IS a product; how then and why would argue this restrictive concept of A product or products? How can either case serve the objects of volume equaling the volume of ALL products, if money “must” be A product or products; and if the volume of THE product or products must yet equate to the volume of ALL products?

    In fact, given the aforesaid observations, we readily recognize that nothing but ALL products CAN so represent all products; and the only reason folks like the Austrian “economists” are trying to insist on A product (or products) for their obfuscated claim to tokenization, is they refuse to acknowledge the very principles they pretend their ONE or few products somehow uphold — and yet are proven not to uphold.

    As Franklin likewise observes, never did their precious metal monetary standards result in actual consistent values of money; and the reasons are evident in these principles: There is no perpetual 1:1:1 relationship between remaining circulation: remaining value of represented property: and obligation, because the Austrians refuse to recognize that the only mathematic course to this perpetual relationship is to pay off promissory notes comprising obligations of principal only, at the rate of consumption or depreciation of the related property — with the payments thus retiring the circulation as the value of the property itself is consumed. In fact, only promissory notes of principal, paid at this obligatory schedule of payment CAN accomplish these purposes; and do so even without regulation.

    Thus we readily understand the problems of gold, which itself in fact perpetually violates our necessarily perpetual 1:1:1 relationship; and which further violates these principles when it coexists with interest, which perpetually disposes ever more of the circulation to servicing a perpetually multiplying sum of artificial debt — leaving ever less of the same circulation to sustain commerce.

    Thus the answer to the original question is that money CANNOT BE A product, if it is to be an immutable token of value, because A product, in which the resultant circulation would ostensibly be redeemable, ITSELF cannot represent All products! Thus it cannot provide a perpetual 1:1 relationship between volume of circulation and redeemability which purportedly eliminates subversion of value.

    Effectively, the Austrians (and others) claim virtues of gold which do not exist, while the principles they exalt instead would endorse only mathematically perfected economy™, because the only currency which CAN accomplish this purpose of making the circulation effectively not A product, but in fact at all times ACTUALLY REDEEMABLE in ALL products, is mathematically perfected economy™ — which alone therefore, immutably tokenizes all products represented by the circulation, and in such a way that the circulation is always redeemable in the very scope and volume of products it was from the beginning, intended to represent.

    Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 7

  25. actonbath

    Movie/TV actors Al Franken, Ronald Reagan and now Ron Paul are in politics?

    Ron Paul for President and Borat for Vice !

    Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  26. actonbath

    Movie/TV actors Al Franken, Ronald Reagan and now Ron Paul are in politics?

    Ron Paul for President and Borat for Vice !

    Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  27. Douglas

    The Federal Reserve is currently coming up with a plan to help boost the US economy. The main effort they are proposing is to buy US securities. I am trying to understand why some say this will devalue the Dollar, so, please someone tell me your thoughts.

    The only reason I can think of is that the value of the purchase is based upon the profit from Federal Reserve investments in Foreign National Investments. If the Dollar drops because of this then to me it means they are using the profits they made off foreign loans. Why else would competing National currencies rise above the Dollar?

    This is why Ron Paul seeks to Audit the Federal Reserve System. To find out how much US currency was issued in the form of loans to Foreign Nations through various ‘Private Banks’. The only reason US Private Banks would follow the lead of the Federal Reserve in foreign national investments is to reap greater profits off the over consumption of the US. In other words, they wanted to bypass US Government Policies that require, Humane Rights, Environmental Responsibility, Labor Rights, Benefits, Natural Resources Conservation and good old fashion proper Citizen Representation.

    So why would the Federal Reserve allow the issuance of US currencies into foreign Nation over the pas ONE HUNDRED YEARS? Ask, David Rockefeller and His CFR posse, they have a secret agenda. What is the result of these so called ‘Elite’? A total Global economic self-destructing nightmare!

    The other instigation concerning the Federal Reserves plan to buy US securities is that it will cause the price of oil to rise. This again is something that I am struggling to understand. We the US tax payers and the BLOOD of US Military are fighting to defend our US oil contracts in the Middle East. So, why would the buying of US securities by the Federal Reserve cause the price of oil to rise?

    Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 2

  28. Fem

    One more issue:

    The origin, development and amplification of corruption.

    That should be a subject of REAL research in many fields, including the modern technology, I'm guessing!

    At least the field of genetics/biology is watched, or more known, and because of that is possible to catch the abusers if a normal society exists. Research and science should be mainly public, but it requires civilized people to handle it.

    So, where do people and patriots stand on that?

    Thanks for reading.

    Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    1. Douglas

      I see what you are getting at. The most straight forward answer I can give is that the owners of true corruption have the means to bribe or buyout anyone who is in more need for money than standing by US Constitutional Law.

      When dealing with monetary policy we get into the proper representation of all citizens involved in doing business with that system. So, if the system is privately control then the citizens are subjected to uncertain prospects and betrayal.

      The amount of profit the’ Private Central Bankers’ enjoy affords them the option to buy and develop any advanced scientific research on the market. Thus, they currently enjoy extremely advanced technologies the average common investor could only dream of. They have and utilize advanced technologies that no Government has any knowledge of!

      Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

      Report this comment

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1

  29. Female

    I think the only way to change the situation is doing something real about it.

    If one of the main problems is the economy, then let's fix it, or if the problem is the economic system then let's change it. Or if it is the political system then it has to be fixed to what works or has worked before the corruption took over while every one was busy.

    If the above issues do not get solved fast it means the world is already set and going for the same type of economy AND the million people that it can accomodate, because it probably only works for that number. Somebody ought to calculate if that is the reasonable functional limit.

    Also the health, education, and media systems will only function for continuous wars. And the focus is just that.

    Nothing else will count.

    Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0

  30. bclarke3

    I created a twitter account and blog to bring attention to the philosophy of liberty. Follow me on twitter, Im bclarke3. My blog is thevoluntaryiststudent.blogspot.com

    Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  31. gigiontube

    under 2000 people watched this video. What is the hope of this countries?

    People are watching lady gaga instead of watching Mr. Ron Paul. Guess who is going to win the next election? Oh....soooo sad !

    Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  32. RonPaulWI

    Ron Paul 2012

    Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  33. Bottomline

    Before we have leaders like Dr. Paul in office the new leaders that will be elected wion't be any different and it will be too late!

    Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0

  34. JGreene

    Auditing the Federal Reserve would likely reveal participation of the Fed in benefiting from the 2008 Financial Crisis through ownership of derivatives and other hedges.

    Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0

  35. CarpentersBrother

    Down with Fed reserve!!! Down with the IRS!!!! Shame on them

    Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

Leave a Reply