This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.

Ron Paul Comments On QE2, Says Fed Will Self Destruct, Shocked That Krugman Has "Any Credibility Whatsoever"

Tyler Durden's picture





 

There were few surprises in today's commentary by Ron Paul on QE2: the only man in Congress (with Grayson now gone) who is sufficiently intelligent to realize that the primary culprit behind the US economy's boom-bust cycle is the Federal Reserve, continues to press for the termination of Ben Bernanke's public "service" which has resulted in a collapse in American purchasing power in the 100 years since the first Jekyll Island meeting. Yet Paul takes a 'John Lennon' approach to the problem, believing that active intervention may not even be needed, as the Fed ends up cannibalizing itself: "I think the Fed will self-destruct. People will desert the dollar. I think the Chinese are hinting that already. They are not wanting our dollars as much as raw materials. This is a deeply flawed monetary system. Here we have a small group of people who can create $600 billion with the stroke of a pen... I don't know where people are coming from to think that this can work. What really astounds me me is how tolerant the people are, the people in Congress and the financial market, where did this authority come from? Now somebody outside of the government can spend trillions of dollars and not think anything about it. It doesn't work, it's a failure. And next year it will be more. Bernanke is very clear on what he is going to do - he is going to create money until he gets economic growth and there is no evidence to show that just creating money causes economic growth." All logical and expected. Which is why nobody will endorse the Paul stance, it as it means an end to the trillion dollar wealth transfer system from the middle class to the kleptocracy.

Yet the funniest thing is Ron Paul's commentary on that irrelevant, and now completely discredited Fed puppet, Paul Krugman,

Krugman is the exactly the opposite of a free market economist. I would think by now he would have been totally discredited and it's tragic - i pray every night that his views will just disappear because what he wants to do is more of the bad stuff...He is leading the intellectual charge for the total destruction of the dollar. I don't see how he has any credibility whatsoever.

Nobody but the NYT has an answer to that question.

 

 


- advertisements -

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Mon, 11/08/2010 - 11:11 | Link to Comment Fanatic
Fanatic's picture

Self-destruction, bitchez!

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 11:33 | Link to Comment johngaltfla
johngaltfla's picture

Hell, all you have to do is look at the charts up put up on my blog showing

The Fallacy of Quantitative Easing in Pictures

 The first bout did nothing to improve anything other than stabilize the S&P 500. Every economic indicator except for the S&P 500 and retail sales is still in the toilet. And without improvements in employment I don't care how much money you create, the breaking point in the curve has been surpassed and QE eventually DIMINISHES economic activity.

 

Self-destruction bitchez, indeed.

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 13:07 | Link to Comment Duuude
Duuude's picture

 

 

Johngaltfla

 

Nice work.

 

Any charts to show how QE is funding the war on other economies, now that the US has been sucked dry...

 

 

 

 

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 11:43 | Link to Comment Fish Gone Bad
Fish Gone Bad's picture

Ron Paul hit on the solution, create another money.  History buffs will remember that Abraham Lincoln in his fight with the banks, created the Green Back.

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 12:15 | Link to Comment dark pools of soros
dark pools of soros's picture

and that's why he and Kennedy both got capped

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 14:19 | Link to Comment sbenard
sbenard's picture

Your statement is literally true. I know a man whose grandfather is the global head of the central banking cartel. He told his grandson that they, they central bankers headquartered in Europe, did indeed "cap" both Lincoln and Kennedy.

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 12:17 | Link to Comment Dr. No
Dr. No's picture

Careful.  Dont be a Greenbacker.  Only the markets can determine "money".  I am leary of anyone who thinks they can designate "money" by decree.  The Greenback you refer to died due to huge inflationary printing.

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 12:44 | Link to Comment greyghost
greyghost's picture

no dr. no......the greenbacks were withdrawn from circulation over about a ten year period. withdrawn by paying the holder of the greenback in gold and or silver for their greenback notes. was their inflation during the civil war...you bet. looks like lincoln did it right overall, by getting an interest free loan from the people of the united states and paying it back in gold and silver afterwards. so what is your answer to the problem of inflation and money.

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 13:04 | Link to Comment Dr. No
Dr. No's picture

I am not a Historian, so I beg forgiveness on my lack on knowledge on the subject.  But I found this on lewrockwell by the author Dilorenzo:

"As soon as Lincoln took office the old Whig coalition finally controlled the entire government. It immediately tripled the average tariff rate, began subsidizing the building of a transcontinental railroad in California even though a desperate war was being waged, and on February 25, 1862, the Legal Tender Act empowered the Secretary of the Treasury to issue paper money ("greenbacks") that were not immediately redeemable in gold or silver. The National Currency Acts of 1863 and 1864 created a system of nationally chartered banks that could issue bank notes supplied to them by the new Comptroller of the Currency, and a 10 percent tax was placed on state bank notes to drive them out of business and establish a federal monetary monopoly. The government’s paper money flooded the banks so that by July 1864 greenback dollars were worth a mere 35 cents in gold. "

You indicate the greenbacks where purchased back with gold, it would appear it was done at a reduced rate (inflation).

 

Article: http://www.lewrockwell.com/dilorenzo/dilorenzo30.html

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 14:15 | Link to Comment Ckierst1
Ckierst1's picture

The Real Lincoln bitchez!

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 11:12 | Link to Comment DaveyJones
DaveyJones's picture

Sanity is a frightening thing

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 11:13 | Link to Comment Mitchman
Mitchman's picture

Give 'em hell Ron!

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 11:41 | Link to Comment Lost My Shorts
Lost My Shorts's picture

Hell is right.  Who thinks that if Ron Paul wins, and the printing press is pried out of Bernanke's hands, it will be all fun and good times from then on?

Ron Paul is either a brave guy, or secretly glad he is not really in charge, since whoever is the last on on camera when TSHTF might well be the first in line on the scaffold.

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 12:16 | Link to Comment Cruel Aid
Cruel Aid's picture

We will create another currency officially or local communities will come up with a currency to circumvent the corrupt one. The total collapse scenario won't happen.  There are leaders and followers at all levels of society.

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 12:48 | Link to Comment greyghost
greyghost's picture

correct cruel aid.....already happening in several areas of the country.....take "ithaca hours" just for one example, this is also going on in north carolina, interesting stuff.

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 13:28 | Link to Comment Cruel Aid
Cruel Aid's picture

Thanks Ghost,

That is where the split will come/if it comes, when regular people become the target of the IRS for not wanting to participate in the system of wealth distribution outside of their community or state.

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 11:53 | Link to Comment whatsinaname
whatsinaname's picture

dont know how he can give em hell when the American voters dont know between right and wrong. Fact that Grayson is out and Bwaney is in is proof enough. Nada's gonna happen.

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 14:59 | Link to Comment hbjork1
hbjork1's picture

what...,

Yep, therein lies the fundamental problem.  We have grown up a public that feels "entitled" to what ever it wants-now instead of thinking about the larger picture. 

Unfortunately, IMO, we will have to go through a period of re-education about how to have good governance. 

Ethical standards throughout society have slipped where money issues are involved.

http://www.summitdaily.com/article/20101108/NEWS/101109802/1078&ParentPr...

 

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 11:16 | Link to Comment trav7777
trav7777's picture

Ron Paul is still on the fringe, unfortunately.

If he wants to doubledose truth to the public, starting talking about the Oil Peak.  All this monetary bullshit is just a fucking SIDESHOW.

And we have how many topics whining about BB destroying the fuckin dollar?  Who cares about the gd DOLLAR?  It doesn't move your car down the road or grow food.

Underneath all this bitching about the Fed and QE is the unspoken presumption by nearly all that if BB would just do the "right" thing, be that the gold standard or austerity or deflation or whatever, that shit would get "back on track" and we could go back to the way things were after a brief readjustment, well, because we're Americans and we are #1 at bestness.

Ain't gonna HAPPEN.  The monetary shenanigans are a SYMPTOM, not a cause.

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 11:23 | Link to Comment DeltaDawn
DeltaDawn's picture

Ron Paul is no longer fringe. I am sure he realizes the collapse of the dollar will lead to peak oil.

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 15:00 | Link to Comment Ckierst1
Ckierst1's picture

If we have to migrate from peaking oil (but not peaking hydrocarbons???), I trust free markets to properly price out blends of alternative energy sources (particularly for personal transportation) rather than the government.  They would like to herd us in mass transportation to further our evolution as cattle, but I have no desire to celebrate a colonoscopy every time I want to board a train, bus or subway, and that is where TSA's head is (literally???).  Will some people start requiring DIFFERENT sex "enhanced pat down" technicians on an opt out?

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 11:26 | Link to Comment tmosley
tmosley's picture

They're a symptom, eh?  I guess oil peaked during every other hyperinflation that ever happened too.

Don't think that your pet topic is the only one that matters.  It isn't.

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 11:48 | Link to Comment trav7777
trav7777's picture

we're not having hyperinflation and the root causes of our problems are DIFFERENT than other hyperinflations.

I know this is hard for you to get your head around that multiple causes can produce the same effect, but it's true.

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 11:54 | Link to Comment tmosley
tmosley's picture

Right, "this time it'll be different".  Look, we are printing like mad, which has always caused hyperinflation, period.  You can rave and scream about peak oil all you want, but that won't change the fact that technology progresses.

trav777 in England, circa 1810: "Peak charcoal, OMFG!  Collapse of industrial society as trees are depleted!  How will we smelt steel?"

trav777 in the US Eastern Seaboard circa 1830: "Peak whale oil!  How will will we light our homes!?"

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 12:02 | Link to Comment GhershomsRevenge
GhershomsRevenge's picture

All had external energy sources as responses that those circumstances. It is the appearance that at present we don't that makes this so different. If you reply, as is typical, with the same old argument propounding alternatives, solar, wind, nuclear you better bring the charts comparitive to their net energy conversion with you. Then provide an example of what I asked for below. What will replace oil and gas necessary for our contemporary sources of agricultural production and long hauling.

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 12:33 | Link to Comment CU1981
CU1981's picture

Atomic Element #1 - Hydrogen

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrogen

 

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 13:42 | Link to Comment trav7777
trav7777's picture

from where, hydrogen mines?

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 15:18 | Link to Comment Scout Itout
Scout Itout's picture

How about sea water?

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 18:56 | Link to Comment PuppetRepubl1c
PuppetRepubl1c's picture

really?  please do some research into this topic before voting....

 

"Hydrogen isn’t an energy source – it’s an energy carrier, like a battery. You have to make it and put energy into it, both of which take energy. Hydrogen has been used commercially for decades, so at least we don't have to figure out how to do this, or what the cheapest, most efficient method is.

 

Ninety-six percent of hydrogen is made from fossil fuels, mainly to refine oil and hydrogenate vegetable oil--the kind that gives you heart attacks (1). In the United States, ninety percent of hydrogen is made from natural gas, with an efficiency of 72% (2). Efficiency is how much energy you get back compared with how much energy you started out with. So an efficiency of seventy-two percent means you've lost 28% of the energy contained in the natural gas to make hydrogen. And that doesn’t count the energy it took to extract and deliver the natural gas to the hydrogen plant.

Only four percent of hydrogen is made from water. This is done with electricity, in a process called electrolysis. Hydrogen is only made from water when the hydrogen must be extremely pure. Most electricity is generated from fossil fuel driven plants that are, on average, 30% efficient. Where does the other seventy percent of the energy go? Most is lost as heat, and some as it travels through the power grid.

Electrolysis is 70% efficient. To calculate the overall efficiency of making hydrogen from water, the standard equation is to multiply the efficiency of each step. In this case you would multiply the 30% efficient power plant times the 70% efficient electrolysis to get an overall efficiency of 20%. This means you have used four units of energy to create one unit of hydrogen energy (3)."

 

 

http://www.energybulletin.net/node/4541

 

If you don't trust this source i just posted then do your own research and look for yourself, Hydrogen is not a fuel source, it is just an energy carrier.  And currently it cost an incredible amount of fossil fuel energy to 1 unit of hydrogen energy!

 

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 16:56 | Link to Comment BigJim
BigJim's picture

hydrogen is a medium, not a source

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 12:43 | Link to Comment fallingman
fallingman's picture

Zero Point Energy, bitchez!

Now roll that shit out from the shadows ...

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 13:02 | Link to Comment cocoablini
cocoablini's picture

Hyperinflation is nowhere to be seen. Money supply m3 fell off a cliff- we are nowhere near creating a hyper inflationary ecosystem. Credit and money supply are not growing, no matter what the Fed prints. The printed momey is just going into commodity speculation which creates the worst of 2 worlds. Price inflation during a deflationary cycle.

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 13:40 | Link to Comment trav7777
trav7777's picture

It's idiots like you that make Peaks intractable.  Seriously.

Gold peaked, Helium peaked.

A wood supply peak helped kill the Roman Empire as well...it's been studied and determined from the deforestation patterns.

If there's a more energy-dense supply out there than oil, hey man, I'M ALL FUCKING EARS.

Really, you have nothing...I realized that quite awhile ago.  All you can do is hope for deus ex machina.

Technology doesn't melt steel, dipshit...energy does.

Like I said, if you have something SUBSTANTIVE to lend to this conversation other than "they will come up with something," then do so, otherwise, as previously advised, STFU

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 11:38 | Link to Comment GhershomsRevenge
GhershomsRevenge's picture

Admit Peak Oil. What do you think all the smoke and mirrors is for? I'll eat one of my kids shitty diapers the day a Western Government, Energy company, or MSM outlet consistantly spills the beans on that one. Not gonna happen. People will be approaching death by hypothermia on their doorsteps with their neighbours discussing the "local" maintainance shutdown...then maybe some fellow in white camos will show up and let them know they can find safety at the local hockey arena. This show is so well set up people won't have time to panic and get angry... msm is gonna take them right through....denial, anger, grieving, ...and into acceptance without them even knowing.  

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 12:33 | Link to Comment Rick64
Rick64's picture

What about natural gas? It seems there is still abundant quantities.

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 13:29 | Link to Comment trav7777
trav7777's picture

Downing Effect, honestly.

I know smart people, really smart, who assumed if PO were real, they'd have known about it.

Likewise, I suffer from the flipside of Downing; I assume people around me know far more and are far more capable than they really are.  In many cases, this assumption makes me appear to be intentionally trying to confuse people because i want to avoid treating them as if they are knowledgeless.

PO is moonbat to a lot of people, even those in the know.  There's the whole potent directors "they" that will just figure something out.  Even among really intelligent folks who now understand PO, this is the fallback...denial.

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 19:04 | Link to Comment PuppetRepubl1c
PuppetRepubl1c's picture

Peak oil is not only real, it is obvious!

 

Dr. James Schlesinger: "The Peak Oil Debate is Over"

Dr. James Schlesinger gave one of the keynote talks at the recent ASPO-USA Conference. Dr. Schlesinger comes with a wealth of experience: He was the first Secretary of Energy, from 1977 - 1979. Prior to that, he had been Chairman of the US Atomic Energy Commission, US Secretary of Defense, and Director of Central Intelligence.

http://www.theoildrum.com/node/7083

 

I personally have been pondering peak oil for years, but if a former Secretary of Defense and Director of the CIA will admit it publicly then it means everyone who matters has already accepted it as a foregone conclusion.  Of course you won't hear it on the MSM, they simply want you to buy stocks and shop on margin.  People need to wake the fuck up!

 

 

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 20:25 | Link to Comment StychoKiller
StychoKiller's picture

Just another IQ test that Humanity is FAILING!  Make some more disposable plastic bottles, do some more planned obsolesence, and keep wondering why the World Economy keeps going down!

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 11:41 | Link to Comment fearsomepirate
fearsomepirate's picture

Yes, money does move your car down the road and grow food, since it's the medium through which we obtain resources.  Money matters because the food you eat and the car you drive depend on exchange, unless you are some kind of master craftsman who makes everything for yourself and has a private little iron mine in your back yard.  Without money, exchange is much less efficient.  Economy as we know it doesn't happen, and society is reduced to barter.  Destroying the currency is an unmitigated disaster.  When raw sewage is flowing down the streets (because city repair personnel refuse to work for worthless paper) and dysentery breaks out (because doctors can't afford antibiotics), as has happened in Harare, you'll understand why we should give a damn about the dollar.

Peak oil wouldn't be so bad without the government intervening to direct research resources away from viable alternatives and into boondoggles like ethanol.  Not to mention their outright ban on new nuclear energy development.

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 11:47 | Link to Comment GhershomsRevenge
GhershomsRevenge's picture

Won't even explore that argument until you can show me an example of a combine ...tractor....Dump truck...running on a battery.

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 12:00 | Link to Comment BrerRabbit
BrerRabbit's picture

Not battery. Cellulistic ethanol.

 

And its not just for breakfast either.

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 12:08 | Link to Comment GhershomsRevenge
GhershomsRevenge's picture

look at its' cost per gallon 

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 12:37 | Link to Comment LowProfile
LowProfile's picture

Idiot!  Ethanol is a crappy motor fuel, it's low energy, low return on energy, and CORROSIVE.

 

BUTANOL, baby, BUTANOL.

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 13:15 | Link to Comment DaveyJones
DaveyJones's picture

+ and we kinda need to grow food on all the land it would take

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 13:35 | Link to Comment trav7777
trav7777's picture

Cellulistic???  LOL...u can't even spell it but it's gonna save us?

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 12:46 | Link to Comment kaiserhoff
kaiserhoff's picture

They run just fine on propane, and would do quite well on compressed nat gas.

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 16:36 | Link to Comment Temporalist
Temporalist's picture

And there are methane hydrate deposits yet to be developed.

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 13:37 | Link to Comment trav7777
trav7777's picture

it's possible assuming you have some nearby turbines and you hang an overhead wire over the entire farm, along tracks the combine would drive.  It'd be like a glorified city streetcar or electric bus.

Possible.  Obviously a PITA, but possible.

However, electricity won't replace the fertilizer.

The ONLY way this whole shebang can work is for example if we had a MASSIVE surplus of electricity.  IOW, no issues w/ Peak U238 anytime soon, no peak He, PBMRs everywhere, turbines everywhere, solar panels on every roof, etc.

Very obviously, we did NOT invest in that type of infrastructure in the 1990s when we had the strong dollar and surplus oil to do it.  Real R&D has been shoved aside because financial bullshit and housing and .com generate better real profits for "investors."

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 14:03 | Link to Comment GhershomsRevenge
GhershomsRevenge's picture

pPropane is a by product of Petroleum and NG processing and so price point is closely linked to oil and NG prices. CNG is economical right now no doubt. But after conversion, same problem.

World is now a closed thermodynamic system. Tmosley points were valid 100 years ago when the system was an open one.

 

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 11:40 | Link to Comment Problem Is
Problem Is's picture

Ron Paul must be on the fringe...
If he runs in 2012... He has my vote.

I agree with him on 2 core issues that no other bought and sold political puppet would back...

  1. End the Fed... I am for end fractional reserve banking to boot...
  2. Close all US foreign military bases and bring every US troop on foreign soil home...

Wall Street Enforcer: Amerikan Public Foots the Bill
The US military is Wall Street and treasonous US corporation's enforcer abroad. The US military does not benefit the average Amerikan. It benefits Wall Street that turns around and sodomizes average Amerikans...

Yet average Amerikans pay $1 trillion a year in US war machine expenses to be sodomizes...

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 12:58 | Link to Comment CrashisOptimistic
CrashisOptimistic's picture

trav, sir, we are on the same page.

You seem also to understand that human nature won't allow accepting that 6/7ths of the world population will die of other-than-natural-causes within 20-30 yrs.

As for the stupid dollar and its alleged destruction, it's 2 pennies stronger against the Euro today than Jan 1, 2010.

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 13:44 | Link to Comment trav7777
trav7777's picture

I can't accept that this dieoff is necessary because it simply isn't.

The oil consumption patterns in the West are wasteful and aberrant.  We will have to revert to a less consumptive way of life.

Seems like a billion indians get by on a fraction of what we consume.  Wiki has a percapita oil burn page by country.  It's pretty clear that somehow people manage to live happy lives elsewhere on far less oil.

Our American need to supersize everything is a problem.

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 16:27 | Link to Comment hbjork1
hbjork1's picture

"The monetary shenanigans are a SYMPTOM, not a cause."

Agreed! The Grayson defeat in Florida is an indicator of the underllying problem. 

Where I am working now, in an auto industry testing lab(consulting) I advise the people on tests that difficult to implement economically and properly.  I am trying to train and give away the best methods.  Often someone comes up with a "easier" alternate approach and nothing will dissuade them.  I say something like, "Look at what your doing."  The risk of failure and having to spend more money in a restart is great because ...."  Most of the time they persist,  Weeks and many dollars later, they wind up "inventing" the being "proud of" the success of approach that they rejected in the first place. 

This cycle seems to be characteristic of the group that was born during the 50' and later.  My sense is that earlier in my career people were "hungrier.  Fellow workers were competing.  If fellow workers could get your concept tested before you did, they would have the credit.  

That is a generational shift, more generous but less aware of how to do things physically.

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 11:17 | Link to Comment H. Perowne
H. Perowne's picture

The upcoming Bernake/Paul hearings would be so much more entertaining if the good doctor was allowed to use a cattle prod on Zimbabwe Ben

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 11:31 | Link to Comment Ura Bonehead
Ura Bonehead's picture

The upcoming Bernake/Paul hearings....

~~~~~~reply~~~~~~

They better be in 3D or I wasted a lot of money on a new 3D TV. Get your popcorn ready!

P.S. Would be be funny is if all his fellow Republicans yield back all their time to him !!! :)

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 11:38 | Link to Comment ZakuKommander
ZakuKommander's picture

Won't you be surprised when you discover that Ben is only a 2D character.

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 11:31 | Link to Comment Ura Bonehead
Ura Bonehead's picture

The upcoming Bernake/Paul hearings....

~~~~~~reply~~~~~~

They better be in 3D or I wasted a lot of money on a new 3D TV. Get your popcorn ready!

P.S. Would be be funny is if all his fellow Republicans yield back all their time to him !!! :)

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 11:18 | Link to Comment sezwhom
sezwhom's picture

Here we have a small group of people who can create $600 billion with the stroke of a pen.

Endless supply of ink in that pen too. 

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 11:37 | Link to Comment Rusty Shorts
Rusty Shorts's picture

"Here we have a small group of people who can create $600 billion with the stroke of a pen."

 

...and then buy real assets, and charge interest...if this is not the very definition of THEFT, then I'll be Jon Brown.

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 11:18 | Link to Comment john_connor
john_connor's picture

"I think the Fed will self-destruct."

Ron and I are on the same page.

The Krugman comments are hilarious btw.

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 11:20 | Link to Comment zaknick
zaknick's picture

I'll stick with Ron Paul:

 

On CIA drug trafficking

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SBh_hzU-jdI

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h9EOU5yONeg

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 19:15 | Link to Comment PuppetRepubl1c
PuppetRepubl1c's picture

Ron Paul is the man, I still hate the Republican party for they way they mocked him during the last primary campaign.  It was like Fox News (fuck you Sean Hannity), made it their personal crusade to make sure he had no shot at the white house.  I guess the establishment GOP couldn't handle the truth he was bringing to the party.

 

 

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 19:18 | Link to Comment PuppetRepubl1c
PuppetRepubl1c's picture

damn double post  :(

 

 

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 11:20 | Link to Comment TradingJoe
TradingJoe's picture

Sure the FEDs will implode but before that the $ is GONE! ALL the Wealth is GONE...to the rich corrupt WS DC Crocks! There is a dire need for ACTION NOW or ELSE...!

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 16:43 | Link to Comment Temporalist
Temporalist's picture

I have a feeling the crooks will not get off so easily.

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 11:21 | Link to Comment Fanatic
Fanatic's picture

"12 year olds who know a little bit about arithmetic and the game of Monopoly know that that can't possibly work." :-D

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 11:22 | Link to Comment Cyan Lite
Cyan Lite's picture

It wouldn't surprise me if we woke up one day and Ron Paul announces his retirement to spend more time with family.  Or if he suddenly dies from a short battle with cancer. 

Or if Hillary/Bill has anything to do with it, he'll "commit Suicide" after having to deal with long-term mental issues.

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 11:26 | Link to Comment financeguru500
financeguru500's picture

They call that being "suicided". Like the lady who ran the brothel who came out and was going to announce all the politicians who used the brothel. She was "suicided" as well due to her stress.

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 11:27 | Link to Comment snowball777
snowball777's picture

Mmmmm...dioxin...it's what's for dinner!

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 11:31 | Link to Comment umop episdn
umop episdn's picture

He's been part of the system for many many years. He's most likely an integral part of the system now. IMHO, he's like a cork in the boiler part of an old-fashioned steam engine, which is supposed to pop out and release the pressure before the boiler blew up. I could not help but notice he was willing to let The Fed Res folks do what they want until they destroy themselves...not an action that I think is wise. Parasites are to be removed, not tolerated.

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 11:40 | Link to Comment zaknick
zaknick's picture

Nobody except a mutinous mob of millions can remove this parasite.

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 11:43 | Link to Comment Spalding_Smailes
Spalding_Smailes's picture

He's been part of the system for many many years.

+ 6 suppressed renminbi

Paul = short leash.

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 12:14 | Link to Comment CrockettAlmanac.com
CrockettAlmanac.com's picture

I could not help but notice he was willing to let The Fed Res folks do what they want until they destroy themselves...not an action that I think is wise. Parasites are to be removed, not tolerated.

 

But Ron doesn't have the power to end the Fed. He's done and is doing his best but he believes that the Fed will probably destroy itself in the meantime. No one who is in the know is "tolerating" any of the Feds actions.

Ron is alerting folks that the dam is going to burst and if they can't shore up the structure then they should gather up their loved ones and move to higher ground.

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 17:33 | Link to Comment Temporalist
Temporalist's picture

Yes put it all on one lone congressman who has been trying to warn everyone for decades about the problems in the system and government and has voted no on every measure he deemed unconstitutional.  It is all his fault he didn't do enough to make every thief in the oligarchy do right and not steal the money of hard working Americans.  Shame on him for not putting on his cape and mask and flying backwards to reverse time.

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 19:28 | Link to Comment PuppetRepubl1c
PuppetRepubl1c's picture

Awesome, i love your post!  :)

 

It's funny, people in the GOP establishment call Ron Paul a Nut for believing the Federal Reserve is a parasite (which is obvious to most people).  Yet there are people even on this board who think he is a GOP plant because he hasn't fixed the world while being 1 lone voice in the house of represantatives.  

 

Please, the GOP has tried to take Paul out many times (politically speaking) but it has always backfired, the people in his district love him.  I'm almost tempted to MOVE to his district just to keep him in office!

 

 

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 11:38 | Link to Comment TheSettler
Mon, 11/08/2010 - 13:19 | Link to Comment Husk-Erzulie
Husk-Erzulie's picture

Fantastic link.  Bringing Bush cocaine through Mena Ark.  was the Clintons step up to the criminal big time.  Learning about this will open closed eyes and minds.

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 11:46 | Link to Comment Swampape
Swampape's picture

Reminds me of a Bumper sticker on Vince Fosters suicide on a park bench...If Vince Foster had had a gun he'd be alive today!

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 11:23 | Link to Comment Flounder
Flounder's picture

Meanwhile in Ireland nothing is fucked (I'm sure CDS values don't matter). 

"Ireland faced a painful choice between imposing a resolution on banks that were too big to save or becoming insolvent, and, for whatever reason, chose the latter."

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/opinion/2010/1108/1224282865400.html

 

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 11:31 | Link to Comment snowball777
snowball777's picture

"For whatever reason..." == French and German bank solvency and general survival of the EEU.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xexmIgVUgfw

The deregulation of derivatives has put us in a position where the counterparty risk of insolvency of the financial sector is more dangerous than insolvency of a particular sovereign.

It's not good to be the littlest PIIGlet.

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 11:27 | Link to Comment Rusty Shorts
Rusty Shorts's picture

Dr. Ron Paul cuts right through the shit, fucking aye!

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 11:28 | Link to Comment cxl9
cxl9's picture

The American quality of life is coming down, by fits and starts, as the quality of life in China, India, and other developing countries comes up. It's a natural and irreversible result of many factors, including: the integration of millions of workers into the global economy, made possible by the Internet, cheap communication, and freer trade; the natural decline and fall of the American empire; and a bill that is now coming due for years and years of America living beyond its means. The trend for America is gradually down. The trend for many developing countries is up. Eventually, those gently sloping curves will meet somewhere in the middle and then both will resume their climb. The process is undeniable. Barack Obama can't stop it. Ben Bernanke can't stop it. Rand Paul cannot stop it. The most that can be said is that many people - politicians, bankers, businessmen - will make money or careers riding the process as it plays out.

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 11:32 | Link to Comment financeguru500
financeguru500's picture

If we were smart, we would realize that there isn't anything we can do to reverse the huge deficit, therefore we should build up our military as much as possible and become as self sufficient as possible. Then announce an end of the dollar/bankruptcy and tell china to F off. Otherwise, we should all be planning on working at serfdom wage rates.

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 11:44 | Link to Comment ZakuKommander
ZakuKommander's picture

If we achieve self-sufficiency we won't have to waste money on building up military "as much as possible."

Extraordinary military spending is part of the problem, not part of the solution.   

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 12:38 | Link to Comment financeguru500
financeguru500's picture

We will need military power to prevent other world powers from taking over our country when SHTF so to speak.

I don't believe they will just shrug off the fact that we would screw them over by defaulting on our debt and saying oh well.

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 12:45 | Link to Comment ZakuKommander
ZakuKommander's picture

So are the Yellow Hoardes going to sweep in through Canada, or boat it over the Pacific in containers?  Or do you seen the Franco-German army sitting in cafes in occupied NYC?  

We can nuke the world multiple times, and guys like you want to expand the military "as much as possible" based upon bad movie conceits.

 

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 11:45 | Link to Comment Pants McPants
Pants McPants's picture

Did you forget the "/sarcasm" tag?  That idea has no legs whatsoever.  A huge military is one of the main - if the THE main - reasons we are in such a mess to begin with.  I'll never understand the US' love affair with the military - it is a financial sinkhole for chrissakes.

 

 

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 11:48 | Link to Comment SheepDog-One
SheepDog-One's picture

Military industrial complex and the need to ever expand it IS the main reason we are in all the BS to begin with!
'Grown the military as much as possible'? OK so every american will be in the military...then what. Station guards around the printing press till whenever?
Nah, thats not a way out of anything!

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 12:00 | Link to Comment Walter_Sobchak
Walter_Sobchak's picture

The major difference between our empire and rome's is that the profits from our military adventures are privatized.  Whereas in Rome the profits went to the treasury and helped the people, our military helps the very same private sector which robs the american people at home through taxation, inflation, and bailouts.  It is truly absurd that we support this system.  Even though military conquest is morally abhorrent, at least in the past there was some tangible benefit for empire.

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 14:12 | Link to Comment thefedisscam
thefedisscam's picture

You missed the other part of difference, that is Publicize the loss/cost of the War.

In case of Iraqi War and Afghanistan war, the U.S. is Losing money! period.

I read that now the U.S. spends $200 million in ONE signle day in Afghan.

After all, this is NOT 19 Century, not the first half 20 Century either, when imperialist countries could rob/invade 3rd world colonies Blind and harvest huge profit!

In 21st Century, whoever launch the MAJOR War will also have to suffer the consequencies. Yes, the U.S. can nuke China, but be prepared for China use nuclear weapon to strike back!

 

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 11:55 | Link to Comment Spalding_Smailes
Spalding_Smailes's picture

'll never understand the US' love affair with the military - it is a financial sinkhole for chrissakes.

 

This keeps oil peg in dollars. This kept you from speaking German.

 

Ask remington,boeing,bechtel,kellogg brown & root ...

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 12:02 | Link to Comment ZakuKommander
ZakuKommander's picture

Ah, but without the dependence on oil, your argument comes down to (a) a long-dead dictator (b) the neglect of the fact that Hitler was toast after Operation Citadel.

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 12:13 | Link to Comment Spalding_Smailes
Spalding_Smailes's picture

The dependence on oil is all that matters and that is not changing. Oil is found in most everything.Oil powers the world.

 

 

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 17:17 | Link to Comment Temporalist
Temporalist's picture

The Amish don't think so.

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 12:20 | Link to Comment CrockettAlmanac.com
CrockettAlmanac.com's picture

kept you from speaking German

Even if the US had no military whatsoever I can not envision a successful  German invasion of North America. If political neutrality and citizen militias could keep the Swiss free while the rest of Europe fell then I think that you could give Americans at least as much credit.

 

Ask remington,boeing,bechtel,kellogg brown & root ...

Ask Smedly Butler.

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 13:40 | Link to Comment Ace Ventura
Ace Ventura's picture

If a few gajillion Russian troops and a few gazillion square miles of territory didn't give Adolph pause, I somehow doubt it was a comparative handful of citizen militias that kept old Adolph from invading pea-sized Switzerland. If I had to hazard a logical guess, I would offer that perhaps the real reason for successful Swiss 'neutrality' has more to do with being the center of world bank cartel operations (and war funding), or something along those lines.

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 14:00 | Link to Comment Ace Ventura
Ace Ventura's picture

If a few gajillion Russian troops and a few gazillion square miles of territory didn't give Adolph pause, I somehow doubt it was a comparative handful of citizen militias that kept old Adolph from invading pea-sized Switzerland. If I had to hazard a logical guess, I would offer that perhaps the real reason for successful Swiss 'neutrality' has more to do with being the center of world bank cartel operations (and war funding), or something along those lines.

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 11:32 | Link to Comment Rusty Shorts
Rusty Shorts's picture

 - bingo here, ... BINGO.

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 11:34 | Link to Comment Ragnarok
Ragnarok's picture

They might not be able to stop it, but what can be stopped is the theft that is taking place along the way.

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 11:33 | Link to Comment DaveyJones
DaveyJones's picture

How We Got What We Have (1950)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9yH-BdsZN4E

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 11:33 | Link to Comment Catullus
Catullus's picture

The invitation is open for dr krugman to debate the Austrians. They're even donating to charity for it to take place.

What I love most about krugman (and his west coast fluffer, brad delong) is that they decry the "concentration of wealth" while ignoring the fact that the fed literally prints money and gives it to a select few banks. If the consentration of wealth is the problem, then look no further than the federal reserve.

But it doesn't matter. They're both fluffers for Bernanke. They still have arrows in their quivver. BB wrote about it in 2002. If necessary, they will be purchase every share of every public company. That's still very much on the table.

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 11:33 | Link to Comment Bearster
Bearster's picture

It's fun and easy to blame "the politicians".  It's less fun but more important to look at the electorate.  Yes, that middle class group who is screwed by the Fed *wants* the Fed.  Because the Fed enables the lie they believe in: something for nothing.

You can have a government which is "generous" to everyone, without having to raises taxes.  You can have unlimited entitlements and retirement schemes and healthcare for everyone over 65 or under 18 or just plain everyone.

The people *want* the Fed.  And they elect politicians who will keep the lie going for a little bit longer.

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 12:09 | Link to Comment the grateful un...
the grateful unemployed's picture

one (1) unflag here. you're right, UST and government regulators use their powers to drive down the price of commodities, like oil. We have a weak dollar policy, which punishes the commodity sellers, cheats them out of a fair exchange, but who's complaining? You cheated some stinky Arabs out of their money, good for you! Americans are all for that. The idea that the profit is mine, and the loss is yours have been going on in bailout America for decades. No one wants to admit that Americans want something for nothing, and that we are to blame for the Fed and its behavior. We want the Fed to print money, if it saves our standard of living.

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 11:34 | Link to Comment Fearless Rick
Fearless Rick's picture

Ron Paul-Rand Paul in 2012. That's the ticket to sanity, prosperity and the rule of law.

Paul's comments on gold were especially acute. Allow competition to FRNs and see how quickly Americans and the rest of the world abandon the Fed. I'd like to see a gold/silver standard just because most people can't afford gold, but the jingle of a little silver in their pockets might give them some hope. still plenty of old silver dollars, halves, quarters and dimes out there. All we need is to have the mint get back to real coinage.

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 11:35 | Link to Comment the grateful un...
the grateful unemployed's picture

why is everybody wrong? Bernanke owns the franchise on the dollar, who can argue with that, there is no competition. Other countries may choose not to do business with us. Tourists may get turned back at the frontier. It will be protectionist policy dressed up us a strong dollar policy, which was in fact a weak dollar policy the whole time. And Ron Paul is the perfect guy, if the Speaker of the House started blasting the Fed, that would be another story. But that would never happen, even if Ron Paul were to become Speaker of the House, he would change his rhetoric, these guys are just a bunch of actors, in a less than Shakespearian drama. The system is just a lot bigger than any of the players. 

You want to end the Fed, start floating M1 versus all other designations, M2 and M3. YOu don't need to even trade it that way, just show people what the printing press is doing to their real M1, sweat money, and then it will be time to roll out the guillotine. 

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 11:58 | Link to Comment zaknick
zaknick's picture

Ron Paul is not an actor:

 

 

On CIA drug trafficking

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SBh_hzU-jdI

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h9EOU5yONeg

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 11:38 | Link to Comment TheMonetaryRed
TheMonetaryRed's picture

The "primary culprit behind the US economy's boom-bust cycle" is bank fraud, not the Fed. 

 

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 11:42 | Link to Comment SheepDog-One
SheepDog-One's picture

Oh, well what IS the FED?
Just a cabal of private bankers.

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 11:54 | Link to Comment TheMonetaryRed
TheMonetaryRed's picture

No, I'm talking ACTUAL fraud by banks - like this:

http://www.heraldtribune.com/article/20090723/ARTICLE/907231072

The Fed stuff is fine for symbolic representation - and of course Republicans ALWAYS need a boogeyman to rail against - but the real problem is actual fraud - per Bill Black. 

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 12:25 | Link to Comment CrockettAlmanac.com
CrockettAlmanac.com's picture

Right. Bankers are evil but the banking cartel is of no concern. So sayeth the resident Communist. Take it for what it's worth.

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 12:41 | Link to Comment TheMonetaryRed
TheMonetaryRed's picture

"Washington Mutual loaned a Sarasota resident $2 million three months after it had foreclosed on a previous $2 million loan. The new loan went into default less than a year later, about the same time WaMu's crush of bad loans put it out of business."

So explain to me how the above is the Fed's fault. What did the Fed do to make those crooks at WaMu lend to fraudsters?

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 13:10 | Link to Comment packman
packman's picture

What did the Fed do to make those crooks at WaMu lend to fraudsters?

Where in your quote does it say anything about a fraudster?  It only talks about loans going bad.  Are you attempting to imply that all loans that defaulted were fraudulent?  If so - you are wrong.

What the Fed did was make housing prices go up inordinately via their insane interest rates, such that banks had to make bad loans or else go bankrupt.  Any bank that decided in 2002 that housing was a bubble and they were going to stop making loans would have been bankrupt by 2005, easily.

That's what the Fed did.

 

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 13:32 | Link to Comment TheMonetaryRed
TheMonetaryRed's picture

What the Fed did was make housing prices go up inordinately via their insane interest rates, such that banks had to make bad loans or else go bankrupt.

I see, so in your Universe being able to borrow money really, really cheaply means that banks "had to make bad loans" - billions in fraudulent loans. So these bankers have absolutely no personal responsibility for their actions.

Wow, that is priceless. You people really can't blame anyone but the government. What your bosses tell you, you believe and that's that.

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 13:40 | Link to Comment packman
packman's picture

Please point out the flaw in the logic, i.e. which of the following is false:

1.  Banks make the bulk of their money with loans.

2.  Housing prices rose inordinately in the 1997-2007 period; particularly after 2002.

3.  A significant contributor - probably the single largest contributor - was the ultra-low 1% interest rates in the 2002-2004 timeframe.

4.  Thus we had a housing bubble, and it was primarily caused by the Fed.

5.  Banks can't afford to sit on the sidelines for 5-7 years making no loans, or else they go bankrupt.

6.  Therefore any bank that wants to stay in business had to make loans during the housing bubble; many of which would inevitably go bad.

???

And once again - who said anything about fraudulent?  A very small percentage of the loans were fraudulent.  Even banks that made no fraudulent loans made bad loans made plenty that defaulted.  They had no choice.  It was either make loans that will go bad (whether they knew it at the time or not) or go out of business.

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 13:42 | Link to Comment packman
packman's picture

P.S. Who said anything about blaming the government here?  We're talking about the Federal Reserve - a private entity - are we not?

(Though I do blame the governement for actually creating it, and subsequently maintaining it.).

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 13:57 | Link to Comment TheMonetaryRed
TheMonetaryRed's picture

No, it was not a "very small percentage" of the loans that were fraudulent.

EVERY NINJA loan was fraudulent. 70% of all subprime were fraudulent. 40% or more of Alt-A were fraudulent. That's why they were made the way they were made - to cover up fraudulence.

Nothing about low interest rates forces banks to make and sell bad loans. That is just ridiculous. Ultra-low interest rates were created in order to make ALL lending more profitable. Banks made fraudulent, doomed-to-fail loans because bankers could get away with it and it made them more money.

Not only did these originators not care who they were lending to (because it wasn't their money, after all), they were obviously eager to lend to people engaged in real estate fraud.

What happened in 2003-2008 was a replay of the S&L scandal except many multiples larger.

Oh, BTW, bankers blamed their actions then on interest rates that were too high. One thing you can be sure of - it's *never* the bankers' fault. They ALWAYS blame the government.

And, yes, since the Fed Chair is confirmed by Congress and the Fed was created by an act of Congress, it's the government.

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 14:03 | Link to Comment TheMonetaryRed
TheMonetaryRed's picture

"

IGNORING A WARNING

In November 2005, when the real estate market in Florida had just begun to slow, the state’s top law enforcement agency issued a warning that mortgage fraud was about to wreak financial havoc.

In sober language, a 36-page Florida Department of Law Enforcement report explained that banks would collapse and losses would be counted in “hundreds of billions of dollars.”

The level of fraud would rival the Enron case and the Savings and Loan collapse of the 1980s, the intelligence report warned.

The report, which was not released to the public but was sent to prosecutors and law enforcement officials across the state, laid out a series of responses to help prevent or lessen the disaster."

http://www.heraldtribune.com/article/20090722/ARTICLE/907219906?p=all&tc...

Law enforcement knew the wave of fraud was going to destroy the financial system and, predictably, they did nothing to stop it. After all, they didn't want to be accused of being anti-business "socialists".

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 17:26 | Link to Comment CrockettAlmanac.com
CrockettAlmanac.com's picture

Law enforcement knew the wave of fraud was going to destroy the financial system and, predictably, they did nothing to stop it.

 

So YOU are blaming the government, specifically the government regulators and their enforcement arm. And you still think that more regulations will "fix" things. Oh my.

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 15:25 | Link to Comment packman
packman's picture

And the prime loans - defaulting at a higher rate than subprime - I suppose they were all fraudulent in your world, too?

Even if there were this absurd level of fraud that you claim (obviously there's a nigh level among NINJA - it's pretty much what they were created for), why exactly was there this preponderance of subprime lending?

It wouldn't have anything to do with interest rates and home prices rising at over 15% per year, would it?  Nah, that can't be it.  Who in their right mind would borrow money at 5% and invest it (leveraged) in something that makes only 15% per year, unless they were committing fraud?

 

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 17:24 | Link to Comment Temporalist
Temporalist's picture

The Fed is supposed to regulate the banks.  Not much regulation going on.  Same with the SEC and same with the CFTC. 

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 15:13 | Link to Comment Fraud-Esq
Fraud-Esq's picture

and what creates the strongest incentive to commit bank fraud? The Fed. That proof is long in... 

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 11:47 | Link to Comment fearsomepirate
fearsomepirate's picture

The purpose of the Fed is to enable bank fraud.

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 11:55 | Link to Comment TheMonetaryRed
TheMonetaryRed's picture

No, that's just an excuse for why capitalism fails - and always will fail - to control bank fraud without proper regulation. 

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 12:22 | Link to Comment Bartanist
Bartanist's picture

Greenspan was supposedly always a believer in fraud and that the market will sort it out. And, it may sort itself out in a free market, but not one where you bail out the fraudsters.

The Fed is a bank and has the ability to create money. All of the big Fed owner banks also have the ability to create money. Putting excess money into a system creates a boom. Taking the money away creates the bust.

THOMAS JEFFERSON HAD IT NAILED.

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 12:29 | Link to Comment CrockettAlmanac.com
CrockettAlmanac.com's picture

No, that's just an excuse for why capitalism fails - and always will fail - to control bank fraud without proper regulation.

 

The regulation is the fraud. It's not like powerful bankers are bad but omnipotent regulators are good, ya know?

If you want to enslave yourself to a particular group because you fear another group be my guest. Don't tread on me.

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 12:49 | Link to Comment TheMonetaryRed
TheMonetaryRed's picture

Yeah, when you have anything to say that doesn't amount to "rich people should get what they want because they're rich and that makes them better than us" - let me know.

Why don't you tell your boss not to "tread on you".

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 13:24 | Link to Comment CrockettAlmanac.com
CrockettAlmanac.com's picture

What makes you think I have a boss? Oh, that's right, your forte is making incorrect assumptions and then getting hopping mad about those misconceptions.

I realize that this effort is likely in vain, but can you explain why you believe that freedom only benefits rich people?

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 13:42 | Link to Comment TheMonetaryRed
TheMonetaryRed's picture

Well, then why don't you tell me about your long history of not letting your boss "tread on you".

In terms of why I think "freedom" from rational regulation benefits rich people, well, it's because of the data:

http://www.minneapolisfed.org/publications_papers/pub_display.cfm?id=135

"Both of the dominant types of models—dynastic and life cycle models—reproduce the U.S. wealth distribution poorly."

In other words, a rich man's dollar earns more in this fair and free market than a poorer man's dollar - and the situation is getting (predictably) worse, not better with Republican policies.

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 17:29 | Link to Comment CrockettAlmanac.com
CrockettAlmanac.com's picture

Well, then why don't you tell me about your long history of not letting your boss "tread on you".

I'll say it again. What makes you think I have a boss?

 

In other words, a rich man's dollar earns more in this fair and free market than a poorer man's dollar - and the situation is getting (predictably) worse, not better with Republican policies.

Obama is a corporatist and a warmonger, but if you check the scorecard you'll see that his party affiliation is D not R. The house and the senate are also in the D column. So what was your point?

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 11:39 | Link to Comment putbuyer
putbuyer's picture

The Krugbots and Obamabots are backed my the MSM. There in lies(pun intended) the problem.

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 11:57 | Link to Comment TheMonetaryRed
TheMonetaryRed's picture

And by "MSM" I assume you mean Murdoch's News Corp - Fox, the Wall Street Journal, etc..

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 12:31 | Link to Comment CrockettAlmanac.com
CrockettAlmanac.com's picture

The Krugbots and Obamabots are backed my the MSM

 

Mostly true but I thought that the CNBC folks treated Ron very well in this interview. Also a hat tip to the r3volution when the moderator said that they always get a big response when RP is on the show. Looks like the markets are allowed to work at times. Freedom is popular.

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 12:47 | Link to Comment TheMonetaryRed
TheMonetaryRed's picture

Wait, you don't mean that the mainstream media loves Ron Paul, do ya?

You don't think that the always microphone-hungry and camera-ready Ron Paul could be other than a "contrarian" - that he might actuall represent the powers that be?

Wow, what a concept. Somebody who's been in politics since 1976 might actually be part of the mainstream.

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 13:26 | Link to Comment CrockettAlmanac.com
CrockettAlmanac.com's picture

Please report to remedial reading class immediately.

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 13:34 | Link to Comment Husk-Erzulie
Husk-Erzulie's picture

No one else in the mainstream was standing up to call out Bush I on his drug running.  I think Paul is for real myself.  That said, I reserve judgement on all politicians.  Anyone who makes politics their occupation should be prepared to regain the public trust every single day.

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 13:45 | Link to Comment TheMonetaryRed
TheMonetaryRed's picture

Ron Paul has been auditioning for the world's largest media corporation (Murdoch's News Corp, plus its subsidiary, the Republican Party) for 40 years.

When they decide they can use him, they'll use him.

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 14:04 | Link to Comment Husk-Erzulie
Husk-Erzulie's picture

Even though I like Ron Paul and agree with most of what he has to say,  I completely stand behind your harsh assesment.  It's up to RP to prove he's not a tool, every day.  ( I do hope you're wrong of course, but cold, hard cynicism is the only way to deal with political types IMHO, nobody gets a free pass.)

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 17:31 | Link to Comment CrockettAlmanac.com
CrockettAlmanac.com's picture

It's up to RP to prove he's not a tool, every day.

 

And he's never failed to do so.

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 11:39 | Link to Comment sunny
sunny's picture

Ron Paul is my hero!  However, he isn't the only member of Congress who think the Fed/Bernanke is a horse's ass.  McMorris-Rogers, R WA 5th district also recently came out with a strong condemnation of Benny.  That's 2 that I know of.  Just another data point. 

sunny

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 11:50 | Link to Comment erik
erik's picture

I second the Ron Paul is a hero comment.

He will probably become the next Volker if we restore fiscal sanity and the market corrects tremendously.  He will unfortunately be hated for years and years, and vindicated in the end, just like Volker.

He has my vote in 2012.

 

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 11:41 | Link to Comment SheepDog-One
SheepDog-One's picture

'What policy would you go for then Mr Paul'?
How about those who are most responsible and work the best and produce the best products are the drivers of the economy?
No cant have that...central banksters would not benefit $144 billion in bonuses.
What we really have now is a bank economy.

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 11:43 | Link to Comment Gold Man Sucks
Gold Man Sucks's picture

Bernanke is responsible for PEAK INK.

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 11:44 | Link to Comment SheepDog-One
SheepDog-One's picture

I did love how Paul shot that little cheerleadin Ho Becky Quick down over her gratuitous pump of the MSM's chosen economist Krugman. She had to be seething over that.

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 11:49 | Link to Comment Pants McPants
Pants McPants's picture

I had a crush on Ms. Quick not too long ago.  Then I started listening to what she had to say and, well, as the saying goes, you can't fix stupid.

 

Never trust a big butt and a smile.

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 12:17 | Link to Comment Bartanist
Bartanist's picture

Yes, our society has degraded to the point where everyone want to be given free money and take a pill to feel good instead of pulling together and doing the hard work.

It seems to be part of the dumbing down and de-moralizing of America. If there was someone who hatched this plan to destroy an entire productive country defined by high moral standards, ethics and hard work by creating sloth, corruption and superficial nonsense then they are both brilliant and successful at the implementation.

Reminds me of Pinnochio and turning little boys into asses.

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 11:50 | Link to Comment istt
istt's picture

OK, so what is the most effective way to play the destruction of the dollar?  It seems gold has gone too far, too fast.  Maybe in hindsight, no, but I would love to hear some ideas on how best to play the dollars destruction because I agree it is just a matter of time.

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 11:51 | Link to Comment zwscott33
zwscott33's picture

I've never seen Ron articulate his point so well. Well said Sir. True American hero.

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 12:02 | Link to Comment CitizenPete
CitizenPete's picture

This is why we campaign in the winter going door-to-door, why we hang banners from bridges calling out to the sheople "Google Ron Paul" - in hopes they till can read, why we stand at street corners handing out literature on the FED and the Austrian v. Keynesian economy perspective. 

FUCK the FED

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l8y8syWwyV4&feature=recentf

 

Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!