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.

 

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Fanatic's picture

Self-destruction, bitchez!

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.

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...

 

 

 

 

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.

dark pools of soros's picture

and that's why he and Kennedy both got capped

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.

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.

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.

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

Ckierst1's picture

The Real Lincoln bitchez!

DaveyJones's picture

Sanity is a frightening thing

Mitchman's picture

Give 'em hell Ron!

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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...

 

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.

DeltaDawn's picture

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

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?

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.

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.

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!?"

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.

trav7777's picture

from where, hydrogen mines?

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!

 

BigJim's picture

hydrogen is a medium, not a source

fallingman's picture

Zero Point Energy, bitchez!

Now roll that shit out from the shadows ...

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.

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

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.  

Rick64's picture

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

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.

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!

 

 

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!

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.

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.

BrerRabbit's picture

Not battery. Cellulistic ethanol.

 

And its not just for breakfast either.

GhershomsRevenge's picture

look at its' cost per gallon 

LowProfile's picture

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

 

BUTANOL, baby, BUTANOL.

DaveyJones's picture

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

trav7777's picture

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

kaiserhoff's picture

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

Temporalist's picture

And there are methane hydrate deposits yet to be developed.

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."

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.