This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
A Guest's Contrarian Take On Dennis Kucinich's Recent Attempt To "End The Fed"
Submitted by Arkady Kamenetsky of Right Condition
Dennis Kucinich finally shows the world why the Left is also against the Federal Reserve, gains support of Tea Party activist?
I have always mused and wondered out loud about the peculiar alliance
between the likes of Ron Paul - a small government sound money advocate
and people like Alan Grayson and Bernie Sanders who are admitted
socialists. What is it about these two completely polarizing political
viewpoints that brought them together to fight the Fed? In fact, I was
utterly shocked that some libertarians mourned the defeat of Alan
Grayson this past November citing his defeat as a loss in the battle
against the Federal Reserve.
At the time my speculation was rather simple. Socialists resent the
Federal Reserve just as much as we do, however for entirely different
reasons. We resent the Fed for several basic reasons. The Federal
Reserve is a monopoly and controls the supply of money. It centrally
plans interest rates and has a flawed mandate to create full employment
which is an illogical desire - because employment should always be
liquid. Finally the Federal Reserve has a mandate of steady inflation
which erodes the value of the money we hold and crushes savings bringing
about a 95% decrease in the value of the dollar since the Federal
Reserve's inception. Leftists like Grayson, Sanders and Kucinich hate
the Fed because it is a private bank and usurps the power of Congress. I
concede that this is indeed a problem as the Federal Reserve actually
controls more of the US budget than Congress and does so through
unelected officials! Yet the solution to our fiscal woes is to return
to sound money and to break down the monopoly, something the Left will
surely balk at. Indeed, here comes a proposal from Rep. Dennis Kucinich
that finally confirms my speculation.
Read full bill at Kucinich's website, which he cleverly and so predictably in true liberal fashion dubs "the National Emergency Employment Defense Act of 2010".
To create a full employment economy as a matter of national economic
defense; to provide for public investment in capital infrastructure; to
provide for reducing the cost of public investment; to retire public
debt; to stabilize the Social Security retirement system; to restore the authority of Congress to create and regulate money,
modernize and provide stability for the monetary system of the United
States, retire public debt and reduce the cost of public investment, and
for other public purposes.
There you have it folks. Dennis wants the power of the Federal Reserve
in Congress. His ambitions are actually quite disturbing because he is
also pursuing the flawed concept of full employment, but now he has
added even grander ambitions - the one thing that the horrible Federal
Reserve prevented Congress from doing - creating money for the purpose
of spending it. Granted with QE2 in full swing it becomes difficult to
make that argument, because buying US debt so that the US Government
can continue functioning is essentially the same thing, but at least our
total debt grows and Americans are still aware of the cost. With
Kucinich's bill this aspect disappears as money will appear whenever
Congress wishes it to be so and the value imbued in this money will come
through Congress alone - a Chartalist dream come true.
The bill also offers an end to fractional reserve lending, a key
inflationary engine where banks lend to other banks at a fraction
thereby creating mountains of credit on top of a very small amount of
money. On page 40 of the bill, money in deposit institutions must : be held for the exclusive use of the account holder; and may not be used by a depository institution to fund loans or investments.
Yeah, that can work when the exclusive lending power now falls to
Congress! Ironically, there are two ways to stop fractional
reserve lending. One is to use sound money and prohibit paper from
being pyramided on top of the sound money much like it was done in the
1800s in America (and for 20 years under the Federal Reserve) and the
other way is for Government to take over lending. Indeed on page 11,
the bill explicitly calls for:
To enable the Federal Government to invest or lend new money into
circulation as authorized by Congress and to provide means for public
investment in capital infrastructure.
So not only will the Government take over lending as a whole, but they
will do so for what they dub to be 'good investment' or infrastructure!
A central planner's dream come true.
This bill also has the support of blogger Karl Denninger a Tea Party
activist from Florida, who in my opinion seriously undermines his
credibility by not only defending the bill out of principle, but also on a Constitutional basis!
But it would be a monstrous improvement over what we have now, and I
will remind Mush that in point of fact we had Colonial Script some
rather long time ago, and further, there is nothing in The Constitution that prohibits the Federal Government from issuing and fixing the value of fiat currency. In fact, such is explicitly contemplated and expected by The Constitution.
Bigger nonsense cannot be found. Now unless Dennis Kucinich proposes a
return to the gold standard, the entire bill fails along Constitutional
grounds and in fact, this is the very reason the Federal Reserve
exists!! The Fed has the power to create fiat money BECAUSE it is a
private institution, Congress could never do it and if they could -
there would have been no Fed in the first place. There are two clauses
in the Constitution that completely disprove Karl's notions. There is
also the history of the Continental which saw America's first paper
currency go up in smoke due to inflation.
Keep in mind, anything not specifically enumerated in the Constitution is not allowed.
Article 1 Section 8 contains the following:
[The Congress shall] To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of
foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;
As you can plainly see, Congress has the power to create coins or
regulate other coins and ensure standards in weight. Nothing about
paper here. In fact, they go on and in Article Section 10 state:
No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant
Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make
any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass
any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the
Obligation of Contracts, or grant any Title of Nobility.
Which explicitly bans paper money on a State level or what they call
Bills of Credit and in fact go on and actually demand that payment of
taxes be performed in coin. In fact one could aptly call today's dollars
Bills of Credit. So by not enumerating the power to create paper money
for the Federal Government, while explicitly banning paper money on a
State level the Constitution packs a 1-2 punch that flat out destroys
paper money and insists on money as something that has tangible value.
Does that make me a gold bug? Not at all, use whatever you want for
money, just make sure it has value because as long as money has value
then no institution (Fed, Congress) can make it out of thin air.
Yet Karl insists that this bill is exactly what the country needs
because it promises to be neither inflationary or deflationary. His
faith comes from page 26 of the Bill:
GOVERNING PRINCIPLE OF MONETARY POLICY. The Monetary Authority shall
pursue a monetary policy based on the governing principle that the
supply of money in circulation should not become inflationary nor
deflationary in and of itself, but will be sufficient to allow goods and
services to move freely in trade in a balanced manner.
The Monetary Authority shall maintain long run growth of the monetary
and credit aggregates commensurate with the economy’s long run potential
to increase production, so as to promote effectively the goals of
maximum employment, stable prices, and moderate longterm interest rates.
Oh ok, so because Congress promises to make sure that the supply of
money and prices remains stable then instability will not happen? If
they promised us unicorns that crapped skittles within a bill does
everyone go out and buy a stable? In fact, Karl dubs this bill 'Delete
the Fed' yet the bill creates a new office called The Monetary Authority
which will have a chairman and appointed members (10 of them) chosen by
the president that will meet on a regular basis and determine the
correct supply of money. Whiskey-tango-foxtrot, we already have that and
it's called the Board of Governors. Instead of getting rid of the Fed
though, Kucinich is going to move the entire reserve system into the
executive branch. What a joke.
Essentially this bill takes the Federal Reserve, renames it, makes it
part of Congress and moves a private monopoly into a public monopoly. So
instead of having the spending habits of Congress show up on the
national debt, everything will now quietly happen through the power of
Congressional members who can order money creation any time they feel
like making an additional investment or building a Bridge to Nowhere.
As one last step before the final takeover, Kucinich plans to eliminate
our debt. Sounds lovely does it not? Page 19 describes the process:
Before the effective date, the Secretary shall commence to retire all
outstanding instruments of indebtedness of the United States by payment
in full of the amount legally due the bearer in United States Money, as
such amounts become due.
Elsewhere in the bill, Kucinich introduces a new money, called the
United States Money although I suggest we just call it a Zimbabwe Dollar
because that is it's destiny and we can save on printing costs. This
United States Money will invariably have a conversion rate to the
current US Dollar. In order for us to retire about 14 Trillion dollars
of private and public debt, imagine for a second just how many new USM
notes must be created? What will be the value of these USM notes? What
happens to the dollar's reserve status that we enjoy now? Let me answer
that for you: a metric ton, value will be non-existent and the one
remaining reason why America is protected from hyper-inflation will be
wiped out.
Mike Shedlock has also written a summary
about this bill and called out Karl Dennginer's support which has now
the potential to escalate into a blog war. This prompted Karl to call
Mish 'mush' and make wild statements about the Constitution. Karl also
believes that if Ron and Rand Paul are for real than they will support
this bill otherwise they are empty suits and fakes. I will tell you
this right now, Ron and Rand will never ever support this bill because
it is a hideous and disgusting piece of legislation.
Yes this will will destroy the top banking elite and their easy money
access through inflation, but this is no different than what North Korea
did to it's currency - a gigantic devaluation of the dollar along with
massive takeover by Congress over the last remainings parts of our
economy.
This is central planning on steroids and yet a Tea Party activist and well known blogger supports it. I am speechless.
»
- 11228 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
ah ha...people are catching on to what those of us mean when we say all debt/money is a claim on the use of energy.
Even if I pick apples off a tree, there is energy involved, the caloric value of my work and/or that contained within the apple for you to eat.
ALL revolves around energy consumption. If you stop breathing, why does this kill you? If you don't eat, why does this kill you? Lack of water kills you how?
You're just renaming labor as energy. While true, it would eliminate capital and rents from the value equation as they are neither. This is just another way to define marxism. I hope people catch on to Marxism for what it has always been- tyranny through ideology.
Work IS energy. That's what it is called in basic physics, fool.
As for "labor," I did no such thing. As far as your conflation of "marxism" and the labor theory of value, that is beyond idiotic.
Well, since you were too stupid to develop an argument in reply, I'll just have to accept you are too ignorant of economics to know better. Not that I would expect a well developed social theory from an engineer. You're just not capable.
Merry Xmas Trav.
that's why I have 1,000 barrels of oil in my backyard.
This article is by another ex-Soviet propagandist. Goldman Sachs is full of ex-Soviet emigres types who escaped what? The fall of Soviet Communisim? You have to ask yourself, why did central banks sell all their gold, and to whom." Why the banksters?
So Kucinich basically wants to create a more central central government. That sounds soooooo awesome .... /sarc
Kucinich wants democracy via Congress as stated in the Constitution. The Fed-apologist that wrote this article wants the Bankster-run Fascist Fed. A sick piece of obfuscation this article
Not agreeing with the article writer either, the Fed should go. However, the Kucinich version of a Fed-less world doesn't sound any better.
Democracy stated in the Constitution? Where?
The more congress challenges the Federal Reserve the higher the stock market will go. When things appear to be getting better, folks tend not to complain. There is no way on earth with these challenges against the Federal reserve are they going to let the stock market and economy appear weak.
Companies are hiring, the stock market is soaring, the Federal Reserve saved the economy. This will be the pro Fed rally cry in 2011 as Ron Paul peaks behind the Federal Reserve curtain.
They can only save $1 of stock market value with about $5 worth of taxpayer money. When the hedge funds pull the plug and take profits, and the taxpayers are stuck with the losses, (if they ever figure it out) it will be game over. The second question is what happens when the Fed is abolished, and the Treasury simply makes clandestine agreements with banks, (all veiled behind the secret veil of government security) Then you end up with a real loss of transparency. In a way having the Fed out there is some comfort, like the cop on the beat, (if you see the guy stealing you TV is wearing a blue unfiform, you just drive down to the precinct and ask for it back) But once the thugs (def:any political official) are in charge, god help us. Unless of course a new amendment which would separate government and business from forming any (can't say it, you know secret) arrangements, and therefore sign into law that government must obey the RICO laws (aptly named, Little Caesar? Is this the end?) Which trust me could be used against former and existing Presidents if anyone would take the time.
Totally delusional.
Never trust a liberal.... Also, never trust a commi, socialist. Anyone that wants to help me by taking my money and "administering a program" is sinister.
Also, never trust a moron named captain sunshine.
it sounds like a nickname for a street drug
Just get rid of legal tender laws.
Exactly. Gold keeps the banksters from printing their own money via lackeys at the FED, and keeps empire building bureaucrats from enacting their absurd ivory tower fantasias.
When there's no gold, bond vigilantes provide the same reality check, though too late.
The central problem here is that the dollar is still the worlds reserve currency.
When Ben decides to buy treasuries and send the interest back to the treasury he inflates the dollar which inflates world commodities of which the most important is oil yet the rest of the world is denied a little interest income as compensation for the inflation.
This is essentially a nationalist policey favouring Americans over the rest of humanity.
I would prefer to see the US congress create its own credit but pay for outside inputs such as oil in Gold - for all its faults congressional money creation could not have been as disastrous as the private money creation over the last 40 years which created virtually zero capital after a epic expansion of consumption.
All credit creation is run by bureaucracies wether they are banks or goverment executives - the problem is that neither Gold or silver is a unit of account creating massive malinvestment.
A suitable compromise between the Green backers and the Gold bugs is to adopt Hugo Salinas Silver coin idea.
This coin would be recognized as legal tender but have no face value - lets say its price would be linked to base money creation which I am sure will almost completly replace credit money built up over the last few decades.
On a yearly basis the central bank would revalue the silver coin upwards to reflect base money creation.
The credit fiat would be wiped out creating deflation in housing while oil and fuel will rise in fiat - however people could save in silver coin preserving some of their purchasing power and decentralising money power amongest the masses.
This would also cool the free gold meme coming out of Europe and would deny Gold holders who obtained gold when cheap first call on all the worlds resourses.
The central bankers and FOFOAs distaste for silver is based on the fact that most of the silver is still underground , unlike Gold - a silver standard in the US would enable people to work in the future for silver yet to be dug up.
A pure Gold standard or freegold will just create another feudal class and therefore will destroy productivity.
Not possible. We would run out of gold in a few months. Also, who's purchase is the federal government responsible to pay in gold for? If Texaco purchases 10K barrels of oil for refining, why would the US government have any responsibility for paying for the oil in gold? Or any interest in the monetary unit of exchange? Texaco would just pay for the oil in whatever currency the seller demands.
No need. Just denominate the currency in its truest form, ounces. Let the market decide what value an ounce has. There is no central banker telling McDonalds what to charge for a happy meal, the market does that. Same with silver and gold. You could easily have products priced in ounces of silver and grams of gold as a simple transactional matter. In Germany, the stores displayed both the DM and the Eu prices during the transition. You can just as easy let the market price goods and services in real units (ounces and grams) vs. imaginary units (dollars, pesos, euros, etc).
1 .Exactly - America is clearly living beyond it means - it imports oil for consumption and gives nothing back , this is the core of the global imbalance.
Example , How much cotton can you export in exchange for oil ?
As for domestic oil it needs to be nationalised - It is worth more in the ground then outside so a corperation who answers to shareholders who want maximum production is counterproductive - however oil traded in Gold may change this dynamic.
I am afraid this will not end well - either dollars will continue to eat up the earths remaining resourses for no capital gain or outsiders will react by rejecting the dollar - both will be nasty events.
2. My silver coin will have its weight displayed.
The politicalized silver coin is nessary as America will need all its Gold to pay for the little oil it can import in exchange for goods of value.
A silver standard in North America will deny outside Gold holders monopoly control of domestic US resourses.
It would be best to have a silver monetory standard encompassing Mexico as it has the Silver and Canada as it has raw materials - some sort of trading relationship can form under these circumstances.
Your faith in markets is naive at best - markets are human constructs and can never achieve perfection.
The role of a responsible Republican Goverment is to check concentrations of power and pass laws accordingly.
Thomas Jefferson said:
"The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it properly belongs."
I stand with Tom on this one.
A point about "central bank independence" that nobody seems to get is that it violates the principles of representative government. The principle is that all new money can only be spent through an appropriation bill voted and approved by the people's representatives.
When Ben prints up money and gives it to whomever he wants, he violates the principles of representative government and my rights as a citizen.
Check out Karl Denniger's post on Kucinich's bill
http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=175557
great piece! also what appears to be a line item veto for Congress, which should solve the problem with earmarks. The end of the omnibus spending bill, and puts the pinch on bank counting depositors reserves. Lots of good stuff
This is kind of what Nathan from economic edge is saying ie non debt backed money
but if the governmnet is in charge then it wilkl also be a disaster
it needs to be backed by gold but he will say its not what backs your money but who controls its quantity. I disagree as you cannot trust anyone with unsound money.
I agree with no fractional reserve banking though
IMO, Steve Keen and all the "New Monetarists" - to whom Kucinich owes his ideas - are really the only people starting to talk intelligently about debt and money. The author reveals the fundamental and (again IMO) insuperable flaw in "sound money proposals" when he suggests we
First, I'm unclear whether the author is acknolwedging the vast frauds and crises that populate financial history of the gold-backed 1800's and is therefore saying we should have "sound money" but that we should do it in a very different way (how, he doesn't say), or whether he's one of those who imagines that things like the Panic of 1907 simply didn't happen or didn't matter. I know there are goldbugs who imagine that new information technology can prevent gold-based banking from returning to the 1800's condition of massive bank runs every decade or so, but they're wrong. It's not as if bankers in the 1800's were idiots or as if they didn't try to keep bank runs and panics from happening. The problem is the permanent and eternal mismatch between balance sheets and human, economic reality.
The answer to that mismatch is to make ALL banking balance sheets public information - at all times. To do that, the government must require it. Once that is done, you've done all you can do. You constantly inform the public how much money they have and if they borrow/lend more than they have, well, that's life. Somebody's not gonna get paid.
Having a legislature create PUBLICALLY the mechanism for the constantly-knowable, underlying balance sheet to the financial system both encourages lending AND limits government liabilty for bad, private financial decisions.
Maybe you trust organizations like ISDA, ICE clearing, the British Bankers' Association, COMEX and the LME to run our financial system in secret more than an elected government to do it publically.
I just don't.
Side note - the author's interpretation of the Constitution is ridiculous. Congress clearly had and has the power to create paper money. Article 1 Section 10 is entitled "Powers Prohibited of States". It does not limit the Congress at all.
what's wrong with bank runs? They are reflective of widespread mistrust of bankers which seems to be a valid position to hold
What's wrong with bank runs?
Well, the depositors (or their guarantors) get screwed, the bankers pay no price and they tend to create other bank runs which tends to make economies collapse.
Other than that......?
that is easy to change.
The bankers should be incarcerated or lynched. As for economies collapsing as a result of runs, that's only the case when bankers control money
And you get your money how?
Bank runs are a phenomenon of fractional reserve banking. period.
"Give me control over a nations currency, and I care not who makes its laws." - Baron M.A. Rothschild
Does anybody here at the ZH 'community' doubt the veracity of that statement?
If Congress does not have the constitutional authority to control money then how were they able to legislate the Federal Reserve act of 1913 which delegated that authority to the the private sector? Why was Andrew Jackson fighting to keep central banking from taking control while he was president? Who was in charge of monetary policy prior to 1913?
We have all now witnessed the horror that has resulted from our 100 year experiment with the Federal Reserve. The question is what to do about it. This N.E.E.D. Act that Congressman Dennis Kucinich introduced and which was originally proposed by Stephen Zarlenga of the American Monetary Institute may not be the precise solution but it seems to me to be a step in the right direction. Tweak the details and let it be done!
www.owngold.biz/2010/12/22/the-n-e-e-d-act-an-act-we-need/
"You do not need to force people to accept good money" , John Adams 2nd President of the US. Eliminate legal tender laws and it won't matter who makes the money.
More simply put. He who makes the gold, makes the rules.
Nature makes the gold. Man digs and up and stores the Gold and spirits in humans marvel at its physical immutability. It is a paradigm for the immotality of souls and on the physical plane a symbol of Character and Confidence. The rules the holders of gold make are a matter of perception of the scales of Justice . Gold on one side, Confidence on the other in our Social Animal court of justice. As Confidence improves with TBTF bad debt claw-back and away from the People, the perception of Gold receeds to its proper place in the halls of weights, measures, and standards.
The market will, brother... Au, Ag....
I just hate to read crap like this. The hard money advocates don't even realize that they are hurting their own cause when they attempt to completely destroy the notion of debt free fiat money. When they insist that money have an intrinsic value, especially a singular backing in gold, they are making a classic mistake that will inevitably lead us right back to debt based credit money in the long term.
First of all, NEVER fail to make the point that ANY money, fiat or otherwise, is preferable to the debt based credit money we have today. As they frequently do, the author of this rant actually indicates that debt based money is better than debt free money because it reminds the people how much congress is borrowing to keep the bills paid. This is a dangerous point and an ignorant assumption. The assumption being that if congress operated the printing press the operation would remain opaque, as it is now. If I recall, in reading the bill, it provides for real time tracking for all monetary aggregates for the precise reason that the people may keep track of how much congress is printing. Over 2,000 years ago Aristotle theorized that money was a creature of LAW, not a thing with intrinsic value. He went further to say that when money gains value, in and of itself, then whomever controls the market of whatever commodity is being used to back money becomes the master of the currency.
I say the best compromise is the provide a US Note that can be used to retire federal debt and accepted in payment of taxes. But at the same time legalize competing currencies and let the market decide in the long run. If the US Notes are deemed insufficient or undependable by the public then they will gradually disappear from circulation.
Whatever you do please stop blathering about the gold standard. Any argument put forth that doesn't stick to the most important point in the debate, namely that debt backed, privately controlled currencies MUST GO, is ultimately damaging to the cause.
++ Indeed... You will know a tree by its fruit...
I like some of Denninger's stuff, but the man does not take opposing viewpoints well. thin skin
This is the populist Greenbackerism of ending "money as debt" thing. The argument is fundamentally flawed. It's that same "web of debt" bullshit that Ellen Brown had been pushing. The Austrians under Gary North went after this pretty hard as being bad economics. Max Keisar and Stacy, much to their discredit, supported Brown. (sorry, max and stacy. Love your site, but you need to unfuck your stance on this. She's a hack and a terrible writer and you know it. Just because North believes in God doesn't make Brown right.)
Anyway, read up on Greenbackerism to get the background on the above. Eliminating the Fed is not enough if the alternative is worse. And that's why Ron Paul is going to subpeona Ben Bernanke. The Fed knows the end is near for them. They need an international reserve mechanism to prevent international bank runs. Kucinich's game is not to destroy the Fed, but to eliminate the "private" part of the quasi-private monster.
Can it really be worse then the Fed? At least of the evils are in public then we can stand aghast at the boldness of their rapacious looting and printing. The greenbackers totally ignore the massive inflation the greenback caused, never talk about it from what I have seen. To the extent they talk about how the people loved the greenback, which flies in the face of everything I've read. So lets bring it back. I'm ready to rock and roll for devaluation no matter how it comes. Putting the sins in public would be a boon to all commodity and metal holders. People will always want something for nothing and always to see to use debasement as a hidden tax to pay for it.
I'm long commodities and metals, but I don't wish the misery that government fiat money causes (whether administered by a fractional reserve central banking mechanism or not). I'd rather that my pieces of metal that I hold were exchangable as just the value as someone would pay for them. It's the misdirection (or malinvestment) that the paper scheme causes that disturbs me.
If the government was the sole issuer of money, those industries and businessmen who are favored by the government would get the preference in capital. It's allocation by favored status, not by what processes and goods are favored by the market. I'm sorry, but I prefer cash flows be determined by people voluntarily exchanging, not sucking the right dicks in government. The Greenbackers not only fail to realize this, but openly look to this later as the model for society
Most people are either ignorant and/or in love with their servitude. It's not uncommon for brutal murderous tyrants to be fondly remembered by the people he tormented so long as he is a national figure, that is no different now. The masses are asleep and will fight with all of their might to remain asleep, even should it render them penniless and starving.
Of course they want to be able to pick winners and losers, because competing is hard! What's harder passing out money to friends or getting said money or starting a new company to exploit a new idea?
Nominally they are our allies, in only that their hamfisted and comical actions would destroy any system they put in, in say a few years. It removes a more cunning and dangerous foe the central banker. It ends much the same way a central bank devaluation does but it is much faster as the greenbackers/politicians lack the skill to pull it off as well, as they will be drunk with their new found ability to print endless money.
So in neither case do the masses and indeed society get made better off. However with the greenbackers, those who know the fallacies in their policies will be able to profit on a much quicker time table. It's like being given the winning power ball numbers.
I admire your committment to ending the current system, even if that means you support a system which will cause a collapse sooner rather than later.
Let me doomer you one up:
The government ends the Fed and throws the banking establishment under the bus. The problem of the governments (state and munis) not being able to afford their police, fire, and national guardsmen remains. For the Feds to agree to this, they demand obdience of local fire and police to federal control. They in effect nationalize local police and national guard. Then they tell these people that the only they can keep this awesome government paycheck is that they begin following federal government directives from say "homeland security". The asleep citizens don't realize that the feds take over everything and the only way the local thugs get paid is that they keep following directives from the federal government.
Local law enforcement is only ever as loyal as the promise to pay them. I'd rather that be through a semi-market process of bond issuance than through direct fiat money creation at the Treasury department. Control over the populace is always the preferred industry of government.
Even Rothbard was willing to make strange political alliances. Rothbard was far wiser then I, but the wisdom of using the momentum of one enemy against another seems good to me. In the end both would be destroyed as the greenbackers would blow themselves up and their public image. After two gov sanctioned fiat systems fail in short order there is a chance the masses would be open to competing currencies or even hard money.
As to your scenario, it's already happening. The locals are being federalized. The oligarchy is not going to let control slip from their hands if they can help it. In the US we will see capital and travel restrictions, probably in that order. Can even be done under the guise of security. Need to trap the productive in and sheer the assets from them as they begin to move to the exits. The best thing we can hope for is a rapid, sudden collapse so some not all of the wealth gets stripped away. Naturally the police and military will be the tools for the oligarchy to make sure that they can keep their positions.
I'm with you, Shameful.
I cheer the self-destruction of my enemies, even if it means my being scorched from the consequent firestorm.
I'm reminded of that train full of looters in Atlas Shrugged. There is no reason to pity them, and much motivation to feel a dark satisfaction from their suicidal behavior.
Your control of local authorities by Federal $'s is already upon us. The shit I've seen municipalities doing in the name of fighting crime, with grants from the Feds (no strings there), is Big Brother's wet dream.
i think what DK wants is to separate government debt from money, which would abolish the treachery which Bernanke is doing at the moment. The government can issue debt instruments and sell them (and the market will determine the rates and the market will buy them, not PDs) The government would no longer be able to print money from nothing, but buying its own debt, or by entering into quasi-legal kickback schemes with the banks. In a free market government would be limited in spending by the markets ability to handle the paper. Imagine what this means for the MIC, because wars are always done on the cuff, and nothing wrong with that, but if government sets the interest rates, then what's to restain them? This tears the foundation out from under the Socialist dogma, if the Pauls don't get it, they should be villified.
This tears the foundation out from under the Socialist dogma, if the Pauls don't get it, they should be villified.
Except for that part about people voting themselves money from the Treasury
true and Ohio is in the competition for poorest state in the Union. They have less to lose. This is where I think Paul may smell the bacon burning, if the GOP gets control again in 2012, the austerity first crowd will rethink their positions. uh huh.
Good discussion. Great points by many here! This is the discussion that we need to have as a nation! Thanks for provoking my own discussion within my own head and with friends and fellow patriots.
Karl to give you a skull-fucking in ....3,2,1...
The notion of discipline is laughable. Look at how many rules and regs are ignored today. Look at how much finance is now moving towards classification as NatSec. Look at how much pandering goes on at election time. A shortage of money will lead to a slate of "loose" candidates, who WILL get the necessary quantity of votes. Promises would be made and broken at an even more alarming clip. I cannot believe that otherwise sane people will let Lucy tee up the football for another run at it.
So, we devalue the dollar, wipe out an ocean of derivitives, resolve the banks and outlaw fractional reserve lending. Guess what - you just start the clock because the fiat will start the march to its intrinsic value. "Hey, Brazil is on its 3rd currency. It's all good there." Really? Really?
http://www.google.com/search?q=brazil+favelas
This is in essence Sovereign Currency. The basic difference between sovereign currency and what we now do is the interest and fees paid to the banks and the ability of the federal reserve to dilute the currency without congressional approval. Congress is clearly not constrained in its spending by the current Federal Reserve system. They just print bonds that allow the banksters a legal means to further defraud the populace. The difference would be printing debt free currency instead of debt instruments. Take away the power from the banksters and eliminate budgetary pressures (interest on the debt, under funded liabilities, etc).
Now, please note I did not call it money. I called it currency. I still would save my wealth in real money (gold and silver) as I do today.
I hate giving credit to the little ET, but Kucinich is right on this one
The mandate cannot be for all three, full employment and stable prices, etc., you can only choose one.
Interesting discussion. I am a bit perplexed by what I detect as some form of hostility towards the gold/silver standard manifested by some of the ZH crowd. If currency is backed by nothing, or otherwise backed by anything revolving around a 'promise' or 'full faith and credit', etc....then what, pray tell, is going to keep whoever controls said currency (whether it is a private bankster cartel or a oligarchical gang of corruptocrats)from inflating the currency?
Am I not correct in assuming the reason the gold/silver standard works is because the physical quantity available cannot be magically poofed into quantity "X" on demand? I'm not seeing how any form of fiat or otherwise un-backed currency...is preferable to the sound money principle.
While there are clearly passionate opinions for/against, I'm with Ron Paul on this, let the market decide which currency will win the day. I have a feeling that under that environment, asset/metal-backed currencies will quickly make competing fiat platforms extinct.
Full disclosure, my savings are in my safe in the form of silver and gold. Having said that there are several reasons why a US gold standard would not work. If a currency is trade able by an amount of gold, the central bank would be constantly battling to support the currency with gold purchases. Let me explain. Lets say that the yuan trades at 10 yuan to the dollar. The Chinese can print (at no cost) a trillion yuan and trade them in the market for dollars, then just demand gold for those dollars. Where is that gold coming from? Obviously form our vaults. But what is there to prevent the Chinese from emptying our vaults. You could say that the US treasury would not print any more notes than the gold remaining in the vaults. Great. What the hell do we use as currency then. If there is no currency, there is no business. So now, whomever controls the gold, controls the economy. This is what happened after the crime of 1873. Congress removed all greenbacks from circulation and returned to a pure gold standard. Problem was that JP Morgan and John Rockefeller had cornered the gold market. So much so that the US had to borrow gold from JP Morgan to pay the Army. The economy crashed and farmers and manufacturers were unable to move their wares. No currency was available for them to do so.
I do agree we should let the market decide. Given level of technology and level of ignorance in the general populace, we would return to digital fractional fiat in a few years.
The NEED act is a large improvement over the current system. It is constitutional relative to the current monetary system, which is not.
The Achilles heel is that the government can nearly always be counted on to be irresponsible.
The previous recommendations for improvement to include the legalization of private money schemes seems like a helpful check on the system.
Mr. T., I addressed this issue a couple of times "The Trials and Tribulations of the Federal Reserve Act of 1913" on 6-15-10 and a couple of times later. In fine, let me answer you in brief.
My argument lies in Article 1, Section 8 (5)-Powers of Congress. The Congress SHALL have power: to coin money, REGULATE THE VALUE THEREOF,--". That power was apparently DELEGATED to the Federal Reserve Bank. That DELEGATION of authority to the Federal Reserve is my question. Did Congress have the authority to delegate that authority to "regulate the value thereof"?
Panama Refining Co. v Ryan 293 U.S. 388 1935
"The Constitution provides 'that all legislative powers herein GRANTED SHALL be vested in the Congress of the United States, which shall consist Senate and House of Representatives.'--The Congress MANIFESTLY IS NOT PERMITTED to abdicate or to TRANSFER TO OTHERS the essential legislative functions with which it is vested.---Cannot be allowed to obscure the limitations of the authority to delegate, if our constitutional system is to be maintained."
Field v Clark 143 U.S. 649 1892
--"The legislative power must REMAIN in the organ where it is lodged by that instrument."
Sovereignty is granted to "We the People" in the first 3 words of the Preamble. As such, under the Constitution, we the people delegate our Sovereign authority to persons to REPRESENT us in day to day dealings. But it is the reserve of the Soverigns to delegate authority not our reperesentatives. John Locke came to the same conclusion.
I would contend that the Federal Reserve Act of 1913 is illegal under the Constitution. Further, if we consider Marbury v Madison of 1803, a decision has has stood for over 200 years, the case can be stated in far starker terms:
Marbury v Madison 17 Wall 205 Cranch 2 1803
"Thus the particular phraseology of the Constitution of the United States confirms and strengthens the principal, supposedly to be essential to all written constitutions, that a law repugnant to the constitution is VOID; and the courts AS WELL AS ALL OTHER DEPARTMENTS ARE BOUND BY THAT INSTRUMENT."
Not only did Congress not have the authority to submit such a document as the Federal Reserve Act of 1913; likewise President Wilson had no authority to sign it. See the last sentence of the above.
Yes, I know, the Constitution has been turned into a roll of toilet paper to the 1%ers but that is still the document I still march to as do most others . If that not be the case then we would be far better served now to be comparing an AR-15 to an AK-47.
If those unhappy with the way things are want a change, we must state our concerns and grievances in a fashion that those who are totally uninformed can have a place, a handle so that a nightmare of a 2nd revolution can be avoided.
There was a ton of groundwork done before Jefferson wrote his magnificent document of 1776. Milestones
I would have to defend Dennis, as he is making the argument that our founding fathers laid out and the Supremes agreed in that they could not delegate that authority. Period. If you have an argument, it is with the founders , not Mr. K.
What the real problem is, is a dumb sovereignity.
We need to keep track of who ridicules this bill, because they are the banker shills who need their comeuppance when TSHTF. This bill takes the constitution back from the banksters. Potentially no more wars against our own people and other nations banks wish to control. It's that important. If you've been complaining about the elites, this bill is nothing less than a dream come true.
Please Dennis don't take airplane to D.C. or drive your own car. We see you at train station.
@shameful
is it bothering you that Bernanke's plan is working? Inflation is low and GDP is growing?
He saved us from a Depression! His thesis was correct
Inflation's low? Not when I went to the grocery store Bub.
I think this would be great. Think about it. We would not owe the FED or China our Soverenty.
This could also be the end of the IRS and the Income Tax. As the Income Tax is to pay interest to the Bankers and the FED.
fuck you contrarian asshole.....the fed is an unelected cabal of bankster financial terrorists who have no right to determine the cost or value of money...it is unconstitutional in every way....
the elected congress can debase the currency and destroy the economy just as well as your lardass imbiciles can...i'll take the former over the latter any day.
The core argument is Congress is unfit to govern. Which, based on their track record, is hard to dispute. However, to be effective for our system of government, fiscal and monetary policy should reside with congress.
Many would say there is no proper way to control an unbacked fractional fiat money system. Regardless if controlled by the FED or congress. Historically it can be said that the FED was created during a gold backed currency, and then, much to their delight, need not protect the currency after becoming fiat. A banker's paradise.
The FED's central banking role (federal reserve system) would be brought into treasury largely unchanged as congress moves to stabilize the currency.
Unfortunately, this discussion is academic based on the US sovereign debt load and demographic liabilities. There is no way to pay our debts without debasing the currency, and for this, the FEDs role as debasser and destruction of wealth is needed outside the normal sphere of politics. The FED will be abolished after destruction of the currency, the ultimate congressional fall guy. Until this point many banks will grow fat with profit and many poor will starve.
----------
The discussion last night centerred on bringing the full US financial implosion to light through state legal action bringing suit against the central government for misuse of tax revenue. The payers of tax not benefitting from its levy. An organized form of debt peonege imposed upon the citizens. An argument for the states to create their own SS and medicare systems for their states residents. A case heard before the supreme court, if not one of state's rights, one certainly to bring to light the perpetual nature of central government taxation without benefit to the citizen.
A way to bring to light the reality of the blatant financial mismanagment of government. A proposal for the states to redirect federal income and FICA taxes to the state. The state's would fend for themselves, while allowing a small percentage to go to the central government to defend our borders.
Any constitutional lawyers out there who could comment?
Mark Beck
Like, only 4 members of SCOTUS, have ever even read the CONstitution....
"Money" is simply a medium of exchange. Simpler to hand over bills than chickens. Letting any group mess with it's "value", is the problem.
Oh, what is "value"? A backing by something? Why?
One World Currency, bitchez!
(That's where the demons want to go.)
I prefer trading chickens; those I can eat. Had silver certificates once, never could get the silver they represented. See, it's all faith-based, so either run around with a semi full of chickens, or STFU!
Just an idea. What if west cost state's "created" there own money i.e by spending money into the local ecomomy it would de centralize the money supply away from Ny and the fed.
Refer: CA IOU's.
The enumerated powers doctrine died after the election of 1800. Thomas Jefferson himself killed it, and it deserves to remain in its grave. Where is it "enumerated" that the Lousiana Purchase is allowed? Do you buy it or suck your thumb when Napoleon offers it? Where is it enumerated that Jefferson has the authority to fight the First Barbary War? Enumerated Powers Doctrine is a fraud and people promoting it want to paralyze the government and strip the people of their rights.
Article 1 Section 8 authorizes the congress to create money.
Article 1 Section 10 says the states cannot create money except silver and gold. Very simple.
Putting America into the hands of the gold cartel would be just as bad as the current situation. The banks control the gold of the world, so they would still be in control. We would just have a deflationary policy like the bankers instituted after 1837 and after 1870 to punish the country and try to break it up. Jackson thought he won when he killed the 2nd bank, but he just handed control over to private bankers and the nation drifted for 25 years into civil war because of his mistake. After the British killed Lincoln they tried as hard as possible to wreck the nation through deflationary policies after about 1870, and this was done by Wall st and the City of London.
We need a national Bank of the United States in the tradition of Hamilton to control currency and credit to replace the private Fed.
Full employment is good. If you dont like full employment you can volunteer to be one of the unemployed 99ers or flip a burger for minimum wage when you used to be wealthy and see how you like it.
You have to look at this as an example of why enumerated powers plus checks and balances are so important. They are to be a check on human nature, and humans with power. They knew this.
Full employment? Employment means nothing when we produce nothing.
Central Bank? This is our 3rd attempt at such a monopolistic endeavor. It too, is failing.
Whoever voted down this article is an idiot.
The guy is dead on with the entire analysis.
Too many fascist Bill Still sycophants in here.
Well, sadly, I see no way HE/Congress could do worse than what we have been witness to.
After all,it WAS their responsibility.
Obviously the world-improvers and socialists HATE the free market so much that they are not prepared to allow even a free market in money.
What if I want to use lollipops as money? What if my business partners and I agree to pay one another in Mexican pesos?
Kucinich et. al. are quite prepared to use the power of the gun. To use government force to impose this asinine idea on the rest of us...they'll say "the government represents the will of all the people" or some such nonsense...
Take your green pieces of government paper and stuff 'em.
rumpel-fargin-stiltskin....say 'what' again mofo!! all this talk like a CONstitushun was anything other THAN a con from 17blah...we need to return to the floundering fathers'..blah....the american dream=cornpoke.... kucinich is much, much less entertaining than Leslie Nielsen, now Barry is good, real good.....however, Mr. Sanders'actions are ? dare i say, a politician with.....maybe we won't have to put 'em all down.
Is Karl CoIntelPro???? ps I'm 23 and I have to inherit this mess...ugh I'm moving to New Zealand
Bye!
Is Karl CoIntelPro???? ps I'm 23 and I have to inherit this mess...ugh I'm moving to New Zealand
Interesting and spirited debate.
However, what is this "con-sti-tu-tion" of which so many speak?
Is it some type of laser device or super-weapon that prevents our current cartel bosses from doing whatever it is they damn well please?
Is it some kind of written contract that all politicians and citizens of this country sign of their own free will after agreement and consideration of the terms set therein?
What exactly is the enforcement/recourse mechanism for breach of this "constitution" contract?
These worries about what congress might do with the power of "money" have basis.
However, our #1 top priority must be to get rid of the FederalReserve and fractional reserve banking. The FederalReserve has absolute power AND absolute secrecy... and are not under even the slightest constraint (fear of losing elections).
In fact, the FederalReserve is the #1 reason that many in congress and senate are not afraid of being thrown out of office! Why? Because the owners of the FederalReserve (JPMorgan, etc) happily and massively fund their campaigns... as long as they do what the FederalReserve and banksters want.
End the FederalReserve.
Yes, we need a pure, simple, honest gold standard with ZERO forms of fractional reserve practices. But first and foremost, we must...
end the federal reserve.
Fuck history and facts, let's go with this editorial instead.
The current central bank is the 6th version the US has had. We got pissed and fired them all. Every time, the usual beneficiaries of this unfettered construct have weaseled it back into existence
Whenever we were without a central bank, who in the fuck do you think printed the money?
The idiot level solution for a whole lot of things is in plain sight.
Since the time of the Romans, governments have printed their own money
When you print your own money,,,,, you don't have to borrow for it. No public debt. Get it?
It is like commercial paper, it's value is derived from the "good name" of the issuer.
This is, without a doubt, the worst torment of logic, facts, and history to feed the lowest common denominator of the self-defeating Black Plague belief system which has brought the US to the ready of an enduring historic disaster of a sovereign.
The pestulance filled shithole of Congress did not happen by accident, nor conspiracy. It has emerged in steady increments by the actions of a People who continue to be the self-edifying mental midgets, who embrace a spoon-fed belief system which has proven itself beyond a shadow of doubt of economic bankruptcy, and collapsed standard of living to be absolutely no fucking good for them and everyone around them, with the exception of its originators. Who have proven themselves to be without the slightest taint of honor, truth, or sense of accountability.
In finest historic example, at the beginning of the Civil War, Lincoln went to European central banks to borrow. As it was Lincoln's clear intention to keep America whole, rather than divide it, the central banks offered him all of the money he would like... at between 28% and 39% interest. A clear picture of their jealously guarded claim to perpetuity and financial domination, and fear of the unbounded potential of an America united.
On the much properly debated advice of a young Colonel in his administration, Lincoln issued the currency nicknamed "greenbacks" for it's distinguishing color of ink. Used specifically to dis-entitle the currencies of the privately held "central banks", like the Second Bank of America piece of shit. Its power of exchange was nothing more than the will of the People to accept it and use it for commerce in their own name.
By doing so, Lincoln monetized the value of arguably the single greatest asset on the face of the earth at that time.. the American People themselves.
The Central Bank of England and the other central Moneychangers and Goldsmiths of Europe shit their pants with fear for the potential widepread discovery of their non-necessary existence. Their worst fears were for a victorious Lincoln, who could someday force them to deal with a monetary system which left them no where to meet and scheme in ways to siphon off pieces of their silver for their pockets and benefactors.
A system where the electorate has the final say in their monetary system.
Even that dog humping bunch of Democrat and Republican bitches and bastards of a profoundly distorted artifice of a political system which ill-serves a democratic Republic, can be dealt with in time.
There is no stopping the Central Bank. If people can't see that in the twisted logic of QEII and it's mirror-image abomination of policy in Europe, they should just go back to their Fox Comedy/News channel, CNBC Never-Neverland of self-serving Peter Pans and Tinkerbells, or limpdicked MoveOn and mercifully live out their lives without need for any effort towards the truth and realities which aren't tube-fed to them.
Lincoln got it. With the everpresent politician in him, unlike the next-disaster-in-waiting people We have put in residence under the Beltway Bubble, Lincoln still held himself accountable AND responsible to serve the best interests of his Country.
He got his funding for war, but then realized he had eliminated an unneccesary and parasitic construct.
"The privilege of creating and issuing money is not only the supreme prerogative of Government, but it is the Government's greatest creative opportunity. By the adoption of these principles, the long-felt want for a uniform medium will be satisfied. The taxpayers will be saved immense sums of interest, discounts and exchanges. The financing of all public enterprises, the maintenance of stable government and ordered progress, and the conduct of the Treasury will become matters of practical administration. The people can and will be furnished with a currency as safe as their own government. Money will cease to be the master and become the servant of humanity. Democracy will rise superior to the money power."
Money will cease to be the master and become the servant of humanity. Democracy will rise superior to the money power.
I think it would be hard to identify a time more closely demonstrating the endemic ills of Adam Smith's "renters of land", than the current monarchy we laughing refer to as our financial system. A system overlorded by a Central Bank chartered and empowered for the sole purpose to forward the opportunities for the benefactors of monetary policy which immolates all but the minority who are served by it.
A democratic Republic government is not inherently socialist, by definition alone. Framing all and every debate accordingly, is an 8th Grade Joe McCarthy misguided effort to devolve any substantive discussion.
If the current government stinks, and it does, it is because we have put those people there.
And it is likely a result of the same bullshit belief system which would rather have our monetary system in the hands of a private monarchy, than a democratic Republic that needs it political system burnt to the ground, to begin anew.
It's not a great choice, but it makes sense to bring it closer to one's influence.
The side of the debate to continue to outsource our monetary system and its powerful impact on our financial system and economy to the private sector is as ill-founded and ideologically bankrupt as the powers-that-be who have been feeding it to a naive public.
With them turning around and further endorse the madness, as they drive themselves, and those around them, into a 21st Century endenturement.
Another fascist Ron Paul person fucking it up as always...except in a monetarist fight with a keynesian. Other than that, they're useless. One trick pony Ron and Rand Paul.
The answer isn't Austrian school of Economics, it's the American traditional economics utlizing a Credit System, in hamiltonian fashion, which isn't monetarist, unlike Ron and Rand Paul and their Austrian/British Fascist use of monetarism.
You see the Ron Paul idiots are just as stupid as keynes, just in their own fucked up way.
They see ANY spending as a problem. They see all this faux spending, on things not needed, causing inflation and such and say, we can't spend. We must go through pain....what are you guys....fucking idiots to the max?
Cancel the debts, let others fail, Glass-Steagall style.
Then use some of this reclaimed money, alot of it, to actually BUILD stuff we NEED. You don't just stop spending, kill people, and hope it resets itself. That's the Ron Paul idiocy, and if you think like him, and just say hell let everybody suffer and die while things 'reset' by the same 'hand' that has never been there, then you're a fascist idiot too.
You see you use gov't in the neverending quest to employ everyone that WANTS to be employed. Not this, we need to have some employment be liquid in a monetarist sort of way. Idiot.
We don't need Hapsburgian monetarist austerity. That's what the Ron and Rand Paul fascists want. They want to end the fed, drown gov't in the bathtub, let things crash, and somehow an invisible hand will make all better eventually, somehow, someway. Nope. Never happen.
Democrats, and socialists want to end the fed, to reclaim gov't purpose of acting on behalf of the general welfare of this nation, to pull gov't up and away from the strangulations of the idiots, and instead of relying on an invisible hand, you rely on great works spewed forth from the human mind that are actually needed, that will actually grow the economy and thus really reset it from this madness.
So either listen to the big time idiots
or
Listen to who really knows what should replace the fed.
Do you want more British Monetarism? Vote for Rand Paul if you're a british patriot.
If you want LESS and an END to British MOnetarism? Well I would say vote for Dems, but with NerO being captured and half the dems being fascist repub lites (like Rand and Ron Paul types) then the only answer that you can really say won't be monetarist is LaRouche people. Maybe Kucinich won't budge. Maybe Bernie Sanders.
But as I've said before, they fight the good fight, until they give up. They should be our WORST senators, not our best. But they are our best. Ron and Rand Paul will be shown as the FASICST ANTI-AMERICAN's they are in REALITY. Wake up idiots. They're fascists. They want you support fascism, to destroy this country, so that it might somehow monetarily, hapsburg way, might be saved for another round of British monetarism.
Sorry Ron, we just aren't that stupid. Unlike you.
Ron Paul is a crazy idiot. He just makes more sense than keynes people at this time. If you don't realize this, you're an idiot, who may wrongly lend his support to crazies, like the Pauls. Who aren't american, they're British. Oh they THiNK they are American, but their ideals are quite clearly...
a) fascist
b) British imperialist
You see only idiots break from keynes to want their own moentary madness. Like Ron and Rand Paul, and all their supporters. Just falling for another failed monetary ideology because their's isn't in power. No shit, because the answer isn't drowning gov't.
Just the Fed.
But as I've said all along, what you replace it with, is JUST as important as getting rid of the fed.
The monetarists assholes like the Paul's are clueless to their non-american ways dominating their ideologies. Not to mention dumbfuck stupid that never has passed the common sense test.
All gold standards are relative. It isn't 1 bill for 1 oz is it? No. So a gold standard can be used, as fixed exchange rate for gold can be fixed at some level. The question isn't to return to sound money. It's how...also are you an idiot...that matters too.
This right wing fascist idiot says spending money on people is wrong. That it was good the federal reserve didn't spend on the general welfare. He says he's a fascist in very clear terms. We want sound money, and you get none. (of course they won't have it either...because their ron paul idiots....and their way doesn't work....and never has)'
"There you have it folks. Dennis wants the power of the Federal Reserve in Congress. His ambitions are actually quite disturbing because he is also pursuing the flawed concept of full employment, but now he has added even grander ambitions - the one thing that the horrible Federal Reserve prevented Congress from doing - creating money for the purpose of spending it. Granted with QE2 in full swing it becomes difficult to make that argument, because buying US debt so that the US Government can continue functioning is essentially the same thing, but at least our total debt grows and Americans are still aware of the cost. With Kucinich's bill this aspect disappears as money will appear whenever Congress wishes it to be so and the value imbued in this money will come through Congress alone - a Chartalist dream come true."
Congress DOES have the authority to regulate money. So nice way of 'there you have it', a congressman wants the power a congress has via the constitution...oh how horrible you fascist right wing Rand Paul idiot.
It DOES have the authority to spend it on needful projects that goes along with the gernal welfare of the American people. Sorry that American idealism is getting in the way of your Hapsburgian Fascism that you and Ron/Rand Paul spew so much. No American Patriot spews such stuff. Only Monetarists with Monarchies backing them do. Or idiots that somehow think the austrian school is american. Fucking idiot.
Here's a nice quote at the end that I'll revisit.
"So not only will the Government take over lending as a whole, but they will do so for what they dub to be 'good investment' or infrastructure! A central planner's dream come true."
Only from the mind of an right-wing fascist toady.
You see Gov't SHOULD take over as the banks have failed. You're right, at one time, people used to think over loans. Not everyone got them. They thought hey should this be funded? Is this loan sound? Is this house really worth 200 percent more than 10 years ago?
You see gov't SHOULD be the lender. If the gov't doesn't agree that your idea is good, called underwriting fucking fascist idiots, then you can go to a PRIVATE LENDER. You see that idiots? If the gov't won't give you money, you can still go to a private lender. It just means private lenders can't lend crap out to everyone, constantly, like they do now, for bullshit. Most of it being ponzi lending, not lending for the betterment of the economy. Where's the real capital investment in todays private lending world? That's right, it's been nowhere as our physcial economy has been negative since 1968. That's right. When we give the lending from gov't to private in pure monopolistic fashion, we have 42 straight years (like stock market outflows) of declining infrastructure, capital investment, etc.
So if that Ron Paul idiot REALLY wants to speak so much of private lending, I'm glad he has such a firm footing to do so.
Listen to these fascist, anti-american at almost every turn, Ron and Rand Paul, at your own peril. They don't spew American ideals. They don't understand the spirit of the constitution. They don't have any plans but let the magical hand do it's work, and people are going to have to suffer.
You see with the federal reserve we get bad loans
With Rand Paul fascist monetarist ideology, you get no loans, as nothing is worthy of printing that money. Protect yourself, the gov't can't do it..all of which is idiotic.
With congress, they can pass bills that say, NAWAPA will be created and funded. Wow. Such a bad thing there you fascist fuck.
Nuclear power? Aww we can't afford the inflation
Fusion? Same thing, or the market will make something affordable
Bridges/Mag lev? Let private industry not do it
Let's just stop the austrian fascist bullshit Ron and Rand Paul spew forth.
Now I DO know what he is talking about. What he is scared of. He's scared that a bunch of captured people
But that's our system.
Our system has always been a system that if misused can create problems. That doesn't mean we stop it, because a few problems were created. It means you rid congress of those problems, like the fascist ideas of Ron and Rand Paul. Just because an idiot Paul can get elected, doesn't mean we should stop having elections.
We just have to stop electing dipshits. But to do so, we actually need to know our history. The one that proves Ron Paul is no patriot. That no monetarist is a patriot. Nobody who says gov't is bad, and thus looks for ways to dismantle it rather than using it to solve our problems, is a patriot. None.
So congress, with its current captured electorate, might not do entirely well at taking over the federal reserve's duties. Well one of the reasons is we have dipshits like Ron Paul who don't know the constitution, or American, or it's spirit. If we did, this wouldn't be much of an issue. But since it is, we do have to deal with it. But let's remember to put it in perspective.
Do we really think that Kucinich would sit there and give tens of trillions to backstop a thousand+ trillion ponzi scheme?
Or would he use congress to authorize HUGE capital spending on infrastructure and other things that actually grow our economy and make life better?
It's not
spending = bad
not spending = good
It's....spending on good stuff = good
wasting money on bullshit = bad
Except no Ron Paul supporter has the capability to nuance such things. They're idiots. Black and white. No color. No shades of grey.
To them bailouts or infrastructure mean no difference. Does it to you? As you drive on gov't infrastructure, turn on your electricity from gov't infrastructure, a thousand examples could be used where the Ron Paul fascist idiots are wrong, once again, yet somehow try to say that preventing such needed things returns us to sound money, and that is the key.
WHat idiots. Do nothing in the hopes that the 'money' short for monetarism, rebounds and goes back to 'normal'. Fucking tards. You'll be waiting until the cows come home.
The answer is to make money sound again, by cancelling the amount that is fucking up the system.
You can link stuff to gold too. But you can spend as well. It just depends on how things are setup. Is debt retired? Or is it forever in the 'monetary system'.
But finally one should realize the extreme idiocy of Ron and Rand Paul when they can say with a straight face that building NAWAPA, other infrastructure, is the same as spending hundreds of billions on bogus wars. Letting people create distortions in markets with low taxes on certain things...think the money on derivatives...should that have been taxed at 99 percent? Well if it was do you think we'd have 1.4 quadrillion of them? Well fascist fucktard Rand Paul doesn't think this way. What an idiot. You use taxes to make sure bullshit like derivatives, isn't profitable, because, aghast, look what happens when you do. Entirely Ron Paul shit there. Fear of taxes, leads idiots, to make idiot decisions, and we end up like this.
So let's see, we could cancel 1.4 quadrillion or thereabouts in derivatives
Cancel all the bogus mortgages
Cancel the bailouts
Cancel certain fascist givaways like our fascist Obamacare (right wingers should love...it's there healthcare plan fwiw), or the prescription drug plan
Again Bogus wars, defense spending, DHS, all terrorism related bullshit
You think our money will be sound then? Trillions less of debt on the gov't's books.
But somehow, we must fear spending any money on something that will grow the economy. Besides the fact that we ACTUALLY GET SOMETHING TANGIBLE FOR THIS MONEY, unlike ANY of the above. Somehow this 1/1000th scope is the same as the banksters. Except of course, this 1/1000 is 1 million more times than what we spend currently on such capital investments that maintain our real physical economy. (something ron paul knows dick about)
Somehow this will fuck us up. Because building platforms which are used cross-training style to power, quench thirst, provide jobs, etc is somehow bad, and that a better way would be to just do nothing, because we're afraid of the possible inflation.
Again, don't these idiots know that if the money is soaked up, through loans, and added value that there then is no or little inflation?
So do you think building such capital investments add enough value? When the gov't can create lending, it doesn't need to constantly rollover the loans paid off. Because there wasn't that constraint on the front end, there's no pressue to rush to lend on the other. No. We won't do that. Ron Paul's world you still will.
Again, there is still private lending, just why use it when you can get a loan from somewhere cheaper, AND know it's not fueling a 1.4 quadrillion derivatives bubble.
It's the gov't job to have the ability to get resources into the hands of the people, under general welfare, so they may create, if the private sector won't or can't do it.
We've seen the won't or can't do it. Thus is must be gov't. The answer isn't to starve everything so that private banksters of what's left can corner the market.
There's much more than this. But would you rather stop progressing and move backwards like Ron and Rand Paul demand of you? Like idiots? Like clueless monetarist anti-american(in reality) ideals?
Or in true American fashion, utilizing American Credit System over British Monetarism. Where private credit isn't the only game in town. Where we actually do what's needed to survive, because *gasp*, the gov't utters the credit, so that the sole proprietor or whatever that wants to better himself and us, can do so, and aren't limited. You'd think the Ron Paul idiots would talk about gov't being in your way by not giving you a loan on a worthy endeavour. But no, that would actually be consistent, and we can't have that with these idiots. No they think that the gov't lending you money, because you know what to do with to add value, can't be done, because the money is created out of thin air.
We do have taxes to soak some of this excess liquidity up. We do have taxes that can be raised if certain sectors are creating instability in the economy. These are tools we can use.
There's so much more to this than meets the eye.
By the end, you'll see these fascist fucktards as anti-american, because they are. You can't claim Monetarism is American, thus you can't claim the Paul's as holding the American ideals. Maybe some. Sure. But not the ones that really count. The ones involving money. Because they want you to fight for what they have, and gov't cannot allow anyone outside this get ahead by doing something needed. Nope, it has to go through already created money that someone else has to hand over.
Just because monetarists lent to each other in great numbers doesn't mean it's bad for the gov't to lend to us in smaller but much more impactful in a postitive way for the economy numbers. But that monetarist Ron and Rand Paul they think otherwise. They think it's bad for gov't to lend to you. They think capital investment is akin to 1.4 quadrillion in worthless monetary casino claims.
They don't know their ass from their elbow.
Wake up idiots. Including every Ron Paul dumbshit anti-american...in reality.
Again, the real solution, that creates a condition for sound money is....
Glass-Steagall
NAWAPA
American (Hamiltonian) Credit System
What's Ron Paul's plan to counter the above? Don't spend.
GREAT PLAN IDIOTS. GREAT REALISTIC FUCKING PLAN. I CAN SEE ALL THE NUANCE IN IT.
'just buy the fucking dip'
'just don't spend'
Sound alike to you? Sound like it springs forth from the same bullshit refusal to think? Yep, and it comes from the right's bed buddy, fascist Ron and Rand Paul. Our saviors. By still spewing 'monetarist' bullshit?
So when Fascist Rand Paul and Fascist NerObama get together, I wonder what sort of fascist things they'll do.
Hmm, I just don't know. That's nuance I can't see. (yeah right)
They'll probably agree on all the fascist style Bolwes-Simpson commission, (which one? or third one worse than either) reductions in pure fascist style.
Spending doesn't create inflation
Wasteful spending, bailouts, and misallocation does
Like for bogus wars, bad debts, retarded tax cuts, faux defense spending/dhs, etc.
Someone wake up the idiots. Ron and Rand Paul and tell them 2-5 trillion for mag-lev, NAWAPA, nuclear power, space, and fusion is not the same as even 500 billion for bullshit monetarist reasons.
How many trillions of bullshit monetarist dollars will we get rid of through Glass-Steagall?
How badly do we need these capital investments?
Well Ron 'idiot' Paul, and his son Rand 'fascist fucktard' Paul don't have a clue what the american people need and want. They're idiots. So are you if you believe their bs.
So if you support the broad base Republican party, congratulations, you support fascism.
So if you support the broad base Democrat party, congratualtions, while being a little less than pubs, it still is supporting fascism.
So if you support NerObama, you will be supporting fascism.
So if you support Ron/Rand Paul and the retarded 'I absolute love Sweatty Balls on my face' Party, controlled by the Queen of England, and are also supporting fascism. In fact the worst kind of all of the others. You're the queen's end game. Because she'll use you to do what you proclaim must be done. Not spend. So your fascism is their endgame. Wake up. Once you agree to destroy everything left, they win.
Going the Ron Paul 'all spending is the same' sophistry direction won't bring us out of this crisis, it will in fact, deepen and perhaps make it permanent for a couple of generations.
Up to us. We either go for fascist fucktards on the right or the left. Or break from them both and get back to our real roots, which doesn't include Ron Paul's austrian monetarism. The constituion forbids monetarism, which Paul practices and would have our whole country turn to. Monetarism is not Americanism, and neither is Ron/Rand Paul or 'his' ideals.
I'm not saying Kucinich's idea is perfect. Any good idea, can become bad if poorly implemented. Plus with so few understanding the crisis, because it hasn't been laid out for them, then any change in law, without a change in the heart and mind, will be wasted. In other words, unless we recognize that monetarism is the problem (and how it's used), then any attempt to change without recognizing that, won't get people to realize the situation on the same terms. Some will understand the change, others won't. So we're not there yet, but eventually, the bill will be written, and it will have in it certain aspects that could derail it, or slow it down if not recognized properly. But at the same time certain things that may seem unfathomable, will be entirely possible.
"Oh ok, so because Congress promises to make sure that the supply of money and prices remains stable then instability will not happen? If they promised us unicorns that crapped skittles within a bill does everyone go out and buy a stable? In fact, Karl dubs this bill 'Delete the Fed' yet the bill creates a new office called The Monetary Authority which will have a chairman and appointed members (10 of them) chosen by the president that will meet on a regular basis and determine the correct supply of money. Whiskey-tango-foxtrot, we already have that and it's called the Board of Governors. Instead of getting rid of the Fed though, Kucinich is going to move the entire reserve system into the executive branch. What a joke.
Essentially this bill takes the Federal Reserve, renames it, makes it part of Congress and moves a private monopoly into a public monopoly. So instead of having the spending habits of Congress show up on the national debt, everything will now quietly happen through the power of Congressional members who can order money creation any time they feel like making an additional investment or building a Bridge to Nowhere."
Again, yes. Someone has to have that power. You deny that. You say no one should have that power. Just let the invisible hand work it's magic. Fucking idiot.
Who says price stability is impossible? Or on a relative basis? Because it hasn't happened recently? Because it hasn't happened with supply side economics throwing trillions and thousands of trillions of dollars at rich fucks who didn't need it, and didn't use it properly? Because they started imperial wars? Because they bailed people out?
You're right, when the federal reserve hyperinflates, so does the rest of the economy, including gov't expenditures.
But to say that somehow because price stability hasn't been achieved lately by our idiots in charge, it cannot be achieved, is idiotic. Of course it can be achieved, and it starts with Glass-Steagall. We don't need to retire 100 percent of it, when this country is lacking 40+ years of capital investment.
Again, should we just cut our national debt in half and do nothing? Well not even Ron or Rand Paul advoacte that. They think we should pay all this stuff off, and feel the pain. What idiots.
Besides, while the goal isn't to destroy people's wealth, if you could build the world and go into space, and become sustainable, and it leads to 1-3 percent inflation, (note not that 12-15 percent inflation our BLS masters tell us is 1 percnet), then oh well.
Kucinich isn't entirely right, but that's because again, like you, the debate isn't over what's real, it's over bullshit.
You see it's hard to craft a good law, when both sides are dumbshit. When Ron Paul is a dumbshit and so is Dennis Kucinich, then you get dumbshit proposals.
But let's look at facts like facts. Even if Kucinich's idea is wrong for putting it in the executive branch, it still is better, but only slightly so than what we have now.
Some of what the fed did, was needed, it's other reasons, it isn't. So lament all you want dumbshits about some things the federal reserve used to do, will be gobbled up by congress. Well let's see, if congress exported it's responibility with the federal reserve, surely you could expect it to re-import it, when the federal reserve has ended.
Nope, not in Rand Paul monetary bizarro world. There you need forget about the whole thing. Because we can't spend money. We've spent too much. (no...we were extorted out of so much...and instead of feeling the pain...we can enact glass-steagall and get it back)
The right wing is so fucking lunatic, they have no answers. You can't do this, you can't do that. You can't have taxes. Oh really. You can't cancel the debt. You can't have the gov't do anything. These guys are fools.
Gov't can do lots of good. It just depends. Did you put idiots in charge? Probably did. But just because idiots are in charge of both parties, doesn't mean gov't itself can't be run by people who aren't idiots.
Notice how he says what he does. Bridge to Nowhere.
Well, if there was a plan behind a bridge to nowhere, wouldn't it then be a bridge to somewhere?
Of course it's not a good idea to build a big bridge with no back plan. But to then take that stupid example and make it appear as if that is what congress will do, instead of that being maybe .0000000001 percent of things, is just asinine. This is why these lunatics are fringe...because they're lunatics.
Somehow the gov't uttering credit is a monopoly. It isn't.
Somehow because the gov't has a chance to build a bridge to nowhere, that's all congress will do.
(again...if you have a plan...a big bridge..isn't necessarily to nowhere)
In fact I'm a proponent to one of the biggest bridge projects ever known. The Bering Strait landbridge or tunnel. I mean, there's a bridge, kind of between two nowhere locations. But would it revolutionize shipping between Asia/Europe and the Americas? Sure would. Not so much a bridge to nowhere.
But you see these idiots got to scare you. Look at that power you might have for the people. It's too much. As a Hapsburg, austrian monetarist in anti-american fashion, these Ron/Rand Paul idiots sure have a problem with reality.
Like democracy delivers everyone golden toilet rolls.
But shhhhh...don't let the Rand Paul psycho fascists hear that....because it means...somehow....not everything....and in fact only a few....wasteful plans will be enacted. Of course as I said before, and even the 'don't spend on anything' idiots don't understand it. As long as the issue is monetarism, and that is not understood, you have much more a chance to spend in a wasteful manner.....but even then 300 million golden toilet roll holders that could be bought monetarily doesn't even equal a small portion of the free money the federal reserve, including lots of supply side republicans to the banksters the past 2 years.
Which means, to anyone with a brain, not a Rand or Ron Paul person, that the irresponsiblity of man that is trumpeted up by the Paul idiots, even if in it's most extreme form possible, buying a golden toilet roll holder for everybody in America, which would never happen, wouldn't mean shit compared to what we already bailed out, and that perhaps the Paul's are being idiotic, and willing to kill their own people because they cannot understand nuance.
Yep. They are idiots that cannot understand nuance. They see things as black and white. They turn off their minds and still believe in the magicness of monetarism. Man cannot be trusted. Man is always stupid and their nature is evil. So on and so forth. Wake up dumbshits.
America needs to utter credit for worthwhile projects
America needs to create the conditions for sound money and can achieve that by stopping the insanity that is (defense spending, wars, bogus debts, bailouts, and interest on all this crap, etc). 95 percent (or alot more) of the soundness of money can be acheived by just doing these things with the proper Glass-Steagall/Fixed exchange rate system put in place. Right there, Glass-Steagall and Fixed exchange rates does everything in reality that the idiot Paul's would have you just abandon to let the invisible hand do it.
The invisible hand won't do it.
Only people, with real plans, with consent of the people, through legitimate gov't can do that.
So follow the intellectual nothing Pauls. Who don't even undestand they hold British Monetarist ideals, and not American patriot ideals; and see where that doesn't take you.
So you can get there by Ron/Rand Paul fascist monetarist magic
or
By American Realism based on Idealism
I know where to stand. Sadly Kucinich gets a few things wrong. Too bad the author, gets it completely wrong. Man at work isn't there to figure out how to buy golden toilet paper rolls, no matter how much the Paul's ideololgical bretheren claim they do.
Ron and Rand Paul, more unrealistic than Keynes-ism, you're just too stupid to realize it....yet. So are they.
So be a human being empowered with the correct plans to get us out of this mess, and push all this Rand Paul 'box yourself into a corner is good' ideology. Because then you can't spend, which is the end all be all in these idiots minds. Well if these monetarists think they know so much about money and the economy, how come they're monetarists? Monetarists don't know jack. So believe their nonsense about how shutting down will be good for you if you believe tragedy is good.
But you fell for Republican bullshit, or Democrat centrism, or supply side, or globalization, or whatever other fascist monetarist bullshit got you hook line or sinker so much that now when real alternatives are there, you can't leave that monetarist bussom in any way, shape, or form. Everything has to be viewed from the monetary angle...because America was founded on monetarism? Oh wait, it FORBID monetarism. Yet monetarists still don't want to accept that fact, including Ron/Rand Paul and there so obvious they're idiots supporters. You were fooled before, you're being fooled now.
Wake up and smell the crap coming from Ron/Rand Paul's mouth. It is that.
So the author is right, but wrong. Anyone that doesn't want to live in fascist fucktard world wants to get rid of the fed. But those that still do, want to replace it with nothing but no spending, and drowning gov't. Sorry. You guys are probably the BIGGEST fascists. Your idea is worse than the federal reserve itself, but not by much. As I've said before it is imperative, that whatever you replace the federal reserve with, it cannot continue to put main street behind like the federal reserve did for 100 years, with a few bones.
Because in Ron Paul's version, there are NO bones. No infrastructure, No healthcare, No welfare, No social security, no nothing. You protect yourself, or like 99.999999 percent of people where this is impossible, you only think you do. So in Ron Paul's world we all 'think' we protect ourselves, someone else screws us, and gov't won't do shit, and surely won't do anything to make up for it.
These guys are fascist anti-american idiots, who think gov't is so bad, that America can't be much better. Everyone knows to protect yourself idiots, but it is good to have gov't there to hear your greviences and do something about it and to be able to hold those accountable for their actions. They just want to be able to tell you, you didn't protect yourself, so tough, deal with the consequences.
Ron 'ass backwards' Paul, and his son Rand coming up right behind him looking like a 90 year old idiot person with dementia with such lunacy as he spouts.
You want hell on earth? Give your power to Ron and Rand Paul, who will make you pine for the crappy and antithetical to the Amreican spirit, Federal Reserve.
Ron 'too bad' Paul. You're dying...too bad it's not the gov't fault.
You got screwed by the corporation...too bad it's not the gov't fault....it's your duty not to shop there anymore...that'll show 'em.
You paid into social security, a righteous, self-sustaining institution, and now he wants it taken away and that you have to find your own way of protecting yourself.
There are so many ways, that these fucktards and their fascist, anti-american ideals will fuck you over. Then say it wasn't their fault, because gov't shouldn't be doing any of this, neener, neener.
Get ready for the idiots, they're coming, because they think a gold standard has to be using gold. They don't see say 32 dollars for a gold as being a system that uses a gold standard, adherent with the constitution.
They say that since it isn't 1:1, it's illegal. Sorry, it isn't. Plus todays realities, don't jive with 1700's money numbers.
So these assholes, claim to know the constitution, but really they're just stupid idiots who see a certain intepretation of the constitution, and not the spirit behind it, and so we must adhere to the letter of the law, not the spirit. Was it that all money have a tangible relation? Or that all money must be gold? They say it must be gold/silver. Anyone with a brain knows it means something a little broader, like a fixed exchange system under a Hamiltonian Credit System, that is on a gold standard of some amount of dollars equals some amount of gold/silver.
In other words, the Paul's are idiots in saying the only way to be constitutional is to let everything crash and burn, protect yourdelf, no money creation, drown gov't, end all successful gov't programs, instead of fixing the broken ones..get rid of them (aside from the some that should be flat out ended).
What is more realistic Ron Paul or Ben Bernanke.
The answer is neither. Because what smells good shit or piss? Neither, and it isn't a trick question.
Austrian in Paul
Keynes in Bernanke
Neither is realistic, Neither bases their theories in American ideals.
FDR was no Keynes, and if you don't realize that, you're a fucking idiot. FDR HATED KEYNES. Beat him at Bretton Woods.
But as long as we say FDR = Keynes, that Paul = Constitution, that gold standard is end all be all, as well as no money creation, and no budget deficits, as long as we just believe these central tenants of stupidness, we can all make things better if we just voted for more of this, and voted for more dumbasses like Ron Paul and Barack Obama. Two sides, to the same British Monetary Coin.
Is that the gold coin you want in your pocket?
"As one last step before the final takeover, Kucinich plans to eliminate our debt. Sounds lovely does it not? Page 19 describes the process:
Elsewhere in the bill, Kucinich introduces a new money, called the United States Money although I suggest we just call it a Zimbabwe Dollar because that is it's destiny and we can save on printing costs. This United States Money will invariably have a conversion rate to the current US Dollar. In order for us to retire about 14 Trillion dollars of private and public debt, imagine for a second just how many new USM notes must be created? What will be the value of these USM notes? What happens to the dollar's reserve status that we enjoy now? Let me answer that for you: a metric ton, value will be non-existent and the one remaining reason why America is protected from hyper-inflation will be wiped out."
Well that makes sense actually. You take all the debt out of monetary dollars, and reissue it as something else, changing who controls the value thereof. Meaning they can't co-mingle certain things, and end up with a hyperinflation episode. But of course dumbasses don't understand that.
Authority of gov't. Consent of gov't. Yes the gov't can do this. That's what it is there for idiot.
Yes we call it something else. Or should we continue using Federal Reserve Notes? Again this dumbshit equated 1.4 quadrillion in derivatives and all the monetary bailouts and other mechanisms as equal to building a bridge, to perhaps nowhere, until something else is built. That in the end because we switch, which would include a different utter-er of credit, using a different dollar, somehow these two things inherent no matter what we do different than the federal reserve is proof positive we end up like Zimbabwe. Which of course happened in monetary world, but let's just forget that okay? Especially since it doesn't help Ron Paul's case that monetary events are more likely to occurr when they are in being and are the world's system. Meaning in monetary bizarro world Zimbabwe is entirely possible, in fact, it's almost a destiny for monetarists to become Zimbabwe.
Conversion rate? Yeah, it should, those that hold their assets in toxic shit, shouldn't be able to convert it to the new currency, or else are we just changing names, but the game remains the same?
No, you have a conversion rate, but not for the average joe. For the big derivatives. For the big bullshit ponzi money not to filter in.
Or are we supposed to create a system, and forget about all that funny money out there? Or we're supposed to pay for it through pain. Another Ron Paul idiocy right out there in plain view.
What good is a new system, if it allows the funny money to ruin it? So again, you see something that MUST happen, and use it as a sign of Zimbabwe. What a fucking fool the author is.
Let's see it's not really 14 trillion, and definitely not the 14 trill+bailouts the market has supposedly baked into it. In the end you have <14 trillion, which mean your money will be worth MORE.
Reserve currency status gone? Why? It'll show the world we're serious about not letting monetarism run amok. It will be a sign to the world that we in our American system are above the banksters. That we use a fixed exchange rate on a gold standard. That would be reality. You think people would view those ways as a reason to dump the reserve currency?
What fools.
Because 'we're going to create value by building stuff the world needs' our and doing so by kicking out the parasites, the Ron Paul ideology is that will kill our 'reserve currency' status. Hell, it wouldn't be so laughable if it wasn't so stupid. It might be the only thing that SAVES us as a reserve currency, not that we need it to survive.
So in bizarro world, the only reason all this printing hasn't come to hyperinflation is because we're the world's reserve currency? No, it's just delayed. The money is still out there, still causing hundreds of millions to go hungry solely because of it, but hey why does that matter? It's not technically hyperinflation.
You will not get hyperinflation from building a bridge to nowhere, not now, and definitely not after voiding TONS of debt, both public and private, based on real facts. The loans are bad, the derivatives are worthless, and the bailouts were extortion. Quit giving tax cuts to people that ship jobs overseas, and increase tariffs so maybe these dumbasses will want to keep their business and hire american employees.
This dumbasses viewpoint of how and why we get here, where we go, is completely wrong, just like a Keynesian says you just have to spend more. The austrian says to spend less or none at all.
Rational people understand that you have to spend on needed things, capital investments with real tangible value. The general welfare must be supported, and none of that will cause hyperinflation. But not providing it, will definitely send this world into a new dark age.
The question should be asked not whether or not either of these guys (Ron Paul/Paul Krugman) are idiots, it's whether or not you see that BOTH are completely idiotic monetarist fools who get the American system and American economy wrong because they base all their beliefs on bullshit.
Fixing this country will not cause hyperinflation.
Paying for bad debts will.
A simple observation, an austrian fool name Ron Paul, and all his supporters, can't see if it was 2+2 written in big bold letters right in front of them.
Meanwhile their way of cutting everything, will have the same result as the Keynesian bullshitters, the destruction of the world economy. All for monetarist bullshit they mistakenly believe. Ron Paul does. Paul Krugman does. They both wholeheartedly deserve to be in the same sentence, because they are in fact, just as stupid.
I give the fascist tea party six months before everyone figures out they weren't the change they voted for either. Just like NerObama, they just put fascists in charge, with no solutions, just more problems. Enjoy the reality, because it is.
Relate it to N. Korea? Wow. So because everyone is a monetary system, just because one country does it a better way, they're wrong?
North Korea is ass backwards. But they do have things which are better than us. Doesn't mean the whole sum total is better, but certain parts of things are better.
Plus if 95 percent of the world is monetary, and they control the power, what does that do to a single nation outside of it?
It doesn't matter how real N.Korea is or isn't, it never has/had a shot with being outside the monetarism (nice oversight dumbass)
So yes, we could do a thing or two like Rome/Venice/London/N.Korea/Germany etc and it be a good thing. We got our stadiums and republic from Rome in a sense. We got roads from Germany. Did we get state credit from N.Korea? No. They didn't invent it. They just happen to be using it. They just happen to be using it, in a world of monetarism. So we wouldn't be copying a North Korean original. That's just your SOPHISTRY making you sound like a dumb fuck. Like Ron and Rand Paul constantly. Do we want to be like N.Korea? Man are you twisting the truth to make a dumbass point that you're wrong about or what?
That's why LaRouche said the U.S. can't change to the American Credit System by itself and pull the world out of this crisis by itself, it needs a big enough percentage of economy and people to make it work. Thus his 4 powers plan. If U.S., Russia, India, China; and odds are Germany would join too, to make the world a place of soverign nation/states interacting economically within a credit system with fixed exchange rates, high tarriffs, and consentual treaties, this monetarist problem would work and it'd be history.
But instead this dumbass monetarist wants to focus how N.Korea acting like America in a small way is really America acting like N. Korea, and thus we can't do it, and must stay with a bullshit ideology, because the alternative is to do something that makes us a little bit more like N.Korea.
Is the author, and ron Paul, and all of his supporters really just really stupid sorority sluts gabbing about bullshit and overreacting about everything meanwhile getting it all wrong about just about everything?
Must be. Because they tell us that all these things we need to do cause something that don't. They say that gov't fixing the problem will result in hyperinflation, and we just have to suffer. That we can't act like N. Korea, and sure shouldn't act like mankind has the ability to change his destiny (What do these retards think America is then??????), and all believe pure BS sohpistry about how to 'not' fix this.
You want to fix this problem, start by not listening to Ron Paul, Rand Paul, Barack Obama, or any other monetarist or fool relying on sohpistry to make their arguments and provide their solutions (or non-solutions).
Hmmm.
Your ideas are intriguing to me, and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.
You had me at:
They see ANY spending as a problem. They see all this faux spending, on things not needed, causing inflation and such and say, we can't spend. We must go through pain....what are you guys....fucking idiots to the max?
I agree and disagree with parts of the rest of your narrative. But I think that's the way it is supposed to work out naturally.
Historically, shitty economies and extremists have a kind of a chicken and egg relationship. It is easiest cited as a shitty economy brings all of the extremist fucknuts out of the swamps and tall grass. But there is usually some other type of extremism which floods the swamps and grass fields to bring them out in the first place.
When Tom Friedman tells me the world is flat and I don't only have to compete with cheap labor, but the cheapest labor in the world. and I just have to accept that..
Or Bill Gross at PIMCO tells me this is the "New Normal", just accept that...
My reflex reaction is to say I don't have to accept dick, on their say so.
As compelling as their opinion may be, it is just that. And represents one possible outcome, from an infinite number of possibilities in a world steeped in complexities and collateral forces, both unforeseen and unanticipated.
With Friedman a now member of the 6th richest family in the US, and Gross as hesd of the arguably largest bond trading outfit in the world... I'll take a chance and say they are talking their own buy-side game and don't necessarily represent my best interests. Nor have any knowledge of them.
8888 I take it, this is the second book of your version of a excellent novel, "The Alexandria Quartet" done in the late 50's, early 60's by Durrell. Wow--you can really string together quite a tale! Milestones
Denninger does also say, however,
"If Congress is going to debase the currency I want them to be the only one who does it, I want it done in the open, and I want it instantly visible to everyone."
So I'm not so convinced he is supporting it unreservedly.
DavidC
Okay, so you have your HFC's, your high-frequency currencies and your LFC's, be your low-freq.
You have your money/commodity/physical representations of the reason for all the currency schemes.
Deadth money has got to go.
Life currrency, as only life is current. Who should create currency? The People, of course.
With technology far surpassing even our founders' imaginations, time to teleinformationalize some of the democratic aspects possible with our little contract with the powers that we've supposedly delegated.
We're finding it difficult to belong to any fuckup of an idea about how to get things done and on time.
The wheel of fortune is some spinning of tables. tilting of pyramids.
The credit upon which we draw is the lives we live.
If who controls money controls it all, then only in the people should this power be held.