This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Ron Paul Explains His Plan For "Monetary Freedom" And Returning To The Gold Standard
Ron Paul lays it out: "We know what to do - we did it once after the Civil War period, we went from a paper standard back to the gold standard, and the event wasn't that dramatic. But today the big problem is that both the conservatives and liberals have an big apetite for big government for different reasons, therefore they need the Fed to tie them over and monetize the debt. So if you don't get rid of that appetite it's going to be more difficult, but the transition isn't that difficult. You have to get your house in order; you have to balance the budget, you have to not run up debt, and you have to promise not to print any more money... I would like to have a transition period and just legalize gold money, gold and silver as legal tender, and work our way back... We want to legalize the use of gold and silver as the constitution dictates, rather than punishing the people who try to do that... I am quite convinced that the system we have will not be maintained - that's what these last 4 years was all about, and that's what the turmoil in Europe is all about. The question is are they going to move toward a constitutional form of money. or are we going to go another step further into international money - instead of having an international gold standard based on the market, are we going to go toward a UN, IMF standard where they are going to control with the use of force another fiat standard. I consider that a very, very dangerous move." And precisely due to that piece of phenomenal insight which nobody else in the GOP or Democratic roster is even parsecs away from grasping, is why Paul can never be allowed to be elected, why he must be mocked and ridiculed by a co-opted ADHD media which focuses on how many mistresses some other idiotic presidential candidates has, instead of focusing on the one person who grasps the big picture: the status quo can not be held accountable to a political leader who understand not only how the system is rigged, but why it is broken to begin with and that there actually is a way out. However, to the "status quo's" chagrin, one that involves the wiping out of generations of plundered middle class wealth to keep the richest denizens of 'extremistan' ever richer.
»
- 33727 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
Paul throws the baby out with the bath water!
Additionally,I don't care for his non humanistic attitudes,Figures he's funded by Birchers.I used to see things simplistically as this-wish the reality was so.If it goes his way another 15 years of strife for American people.
Us Ron Paul supporters only want intelligent people to join us. Please don't call. Thank you.
we. not us.
Ron Paul delivered over four thousand babies and in no single case was he ever accused of having thrown one out with the bath water. He does tell of having seen a struggling aborted fetus thrown in a trash can during his medical training. It's a chilling image.
"If it goes his way another 15 years of strife for American people."
Only when you are standing on your head does right-side-up logic look upside-down.
My local TV "news" station just reported the results of a recent poll in New Hampshire of the top Republican presidential candidates. Romney came in first, Cain came in second, and ..... Huntsman came in fourth. That's right, the third-place finisher was HE WHO SHALL NEVER BE NAMED (by the corporate-controlled media)!
The Establishment lackeys and status-quo defenders are really running scared.
this can work to his advantage. it gives him the cachet of the forbidden. and only herman cain and mitt romney stand between him and first place? that's lucky.
All "They" can do is ignore him. No lobbying, no mistress, same wife for 50 years, The wealth he's acquired is from investing only in gold miners. The worst thing they can say about him is that he's never visited Israel before running for President! "They" don't care which candidate gets in as long as it isn't the only one can't buy, Doctor Ron Paul!
That's all Paul needs to do to win....
say some incredibly stupid things, show support for the bombing of brown countries, and get caught photographed grabbing womens asses or some other scandal.
It seems to work for everyone else.
And what did Marlon Brando say on Larry King? Brando was the LAST person who could be accused of being anythingphobe or antagonistic toward minorities or in any way racist.
Jews OWN and RUN hollywood and the media. They WILL NOT PERMIT a message contrary to what those in control deem acceptable. And what they deem acceptable is NOT what Paul has to say, and what's more, the truth is unacceptable to them. Their cousins run the racial attack dog organizations, the NAACP, the SPLC, and the ADL.
Their cousins are also the purveyors of marxism and seem to want to destroy what was the dominant culture in the US. Many people don't know, but the JDL entered a business relationship with Eazy E which created Ruthless Records and the entire gangster rap genre. No business is apparently too sleazy to make a buck, nevermind the purveyors of porn and other degenerate filth. The product of all these groups has been to elevate degeneracy and hold it up as virtue. It has worked. Look around you these days at kids and adults.
The one thing the NWO (your Jews) can't control is talent. Talent slips through the cracks. Is Hollywood controlled by money? Yes. But talent and ideas slip out. There is no iron grip on ideas.
Agreed and there also is no predicting what will be "Cool" to people it's just a random occurrance. Many talents are lost and many non-talents are "found" all the time. Only true talent or real genius has longevity.
This is all just mental masturbation in the end...
Ron Paul will probably end up having to go the Ross Perot route... Therefore, it'll split the constituency and we'll end up with O'Bummer for another 4 years...
The NWO will still have its puppet in place, and the beatings will continue until morale improves...
I must say, slamming the "purveyors of porn and other degenerate filth" is a rarely seen line on ZH, home of bouncing titty avatars (and other less savoury pics). . .
doubt it will stick tho' - but it was noticed, lol.
Trav is the most grounded person on this blog imo.
indeed, he can be a dirty sod at times.
Those damn Jews corrupted the fair and pure white race! LMFAO.
European history is neck-deep in innocent blood. Try reading a history book.
Depending on your viewpoint, and mine is that Europe is living on borrowed time, Paul is potentially electable. It all depends on how fast things happen.
If gold doubles before the '12 election, and it likely will, Paul will be the front runner.
Potentially electable? I am almost certain that phrase would come as a total surprise to the 75% of Dr. Paul's congressional district in Texas that voted for him in the last election.
"The notion of a rigid separation between church and state has no basis in either the text of the Constitution, or the writings of our Founding Fathers."-Ron "Jesus built the USA" Paul
Ron has a pretty weak understanding of the Constitution & anyone in the 21st century that believes the Earth is 6000 years old is not fit for any position of leadership, in fact When Ron retires he will be better suited selling pencils from a cup on a street corner while blabbing about his radical Christian revisionist history.
"I think it's a theory...the theory of evolution and I don't accept it as a theory. But I think the creator that i know, you know created us, every one of us and created the universe and the precise time and manner and all. I just don't think we're at the point where anybody has absolute proof on either side." -Ron "the tooth fairy stole my gold tooth" Paul
Hey CaptFufflePants for whom are you selling out our last hope? You are no friend of the USA. You are a POS.
Right, Captain. I'll just go ahead and vote for the declared atheist candidate then. Who was that again?
Signed,
An under-represented atheistic anarchist who thanks God for Ron Paul.
i'm not an anarchist but i am a long time planned parenthood supporting atheist largely convinced by the theory of evolution who is willing to vote for ron paul despite his views on religion, evolution and abortion (although no links were made for the quotations). there are bigger, more immediate fish to fry.
ron paul is not the final answer. there is no final answer. it is a process of which bush and obama were hideous steps backward. i hope paul will be, on balance, a step or two forward. something good rather than nothing good (what we've got).
One doesn't have to be an anarchist but it does add a delicious dose of irony to voting for the good doctor.
"I heartily accept the motto, "That government is best which governs least"; and I should like to see it acted up to more rapidly and systematically. Carried out, it finally amounts to this, which also I believe - "That government is best which governs not at all"; and when men are prepared for it, that will be the kind of government which they will have." -- Thoreau.
see jeff, I think this compromise is easier to make if you're male:
while I agree the fish needing fried are huge, I strongly disagree that perpetuating more religion into governance is ever going to be a solution - and the "evolution and abortion" arguments flow from the religious beliefs.
IF Mr. Paul removed his own personal religious beliefs from the discourse I'd have a bit more respect for his stance; however, both he and his SON are including their personal religious beliefs into their platforms, which only serve those constituents who believe the same - and they cannot fully represent anyone whose beliefs differ.
the majority of religions are based on a sky-Father who makes the rules, and subordinates HALF THE HUMAN RACE (women) in the minds of the believers. to put these beliefs in control of whole nationstates can describe the state of the world today, endless wars, subjugation of peoples to fairy stories in the name of "_____" blah blah "righteousness". . .
I'd rather not live in a state ruled by FatherGod believer - and yes, I do agree that no one "man" is the final answer, nor is there a final answer - but I've done the incremental baby steps method, and they never seem to lead anywhere peaceful.
Just precisely how does one's belief in the age of the earth affect one's ability to control his or her financial affairs, manage a company, lead a nation, etc?
I'll take a stab at this. While believing fantasy and myth doesn't have to interfere with someone's ability to control his financial affairs, manage a company, lead a nation, etc., it's a good start down a dangerous path. That anyone in this day and age could cuddle such nearly prehistoric notions, in the face of science, suggests a tenuous grasp on reality and makes one suspect. I cannot speak for everyone, but I know when I vote, I vote for a specific man or woman and maybe tolerate the cabinet or advisors he or she subsequently chooses. I do not vote for anybody's god, nor do I believe anybody's god should be put before law and the constitution. I don't want an elected leader wasting his time worrying about WWJD, I want him or her worrying about what is right and legal according to the Constitution. Nip it in the bud so as not to suffer the consequences of another's superstitions. While many might like the Christian view of things, there is no law that says our President must be of that faith. Open the door to one man's religion and one opens the door to all. Yes, we have cultural vestiges that grew from religious beliefs, but most of these have since taken on a life of their own closer to tradition than actual belief, and are only loosely associated with a faith. Even swearing on the Bible is really just a mutual recognition that one is expected to be honest in whatever task or questioning follows the oath.
The other problem I have with the age of the Earth question is that it is a de facto disparagement of science and the scientific method, something that on balance has served us well. Some might disagree, but in spite of a certain degree of unfairness in society and some bad uses of science, life is a heck of a lot easier than it was before the Renaissance. Once a few brave people could tame the power of the Catholic Church---owing in part to the miscreant behavior of the Borgia family---the Western world flourished and the body of human knowledge grew a million percent. Anyone who wants to go back to a life similar to before 1500 AD can go off in the woods somewhere and do so. Most people prefer the comforts intellect, innovation and discovery have wrought.
At a time when much of the rest of the world is embracing science and enlightenment, we do our nation no favor by making it a joke, as the 6000 year old Earth crowd makes it.
That quote about separation of church and state is about people, politicians, usually basing their decisions on moral principle founded in their religious upbringing. So you can be disingenuous and attempt to mislead and misinform all you want but the FACT that Ron Paul refused to participate in "Congressional Prayer" sessions, actions certainly speaking louder than words (words, incidentally being the only thing the other "candidates" have).
"All this talk is just talk!"
http://rpflix.com/3241Wow!!! Three whole paragraphs of ignorant bullshit. As a constitutional scholar, I would be willing to bet that Dr. Paul would make you resemble a retarded preschooler. I do see, though, that you are capable of spouting the typical MSM bullshit.
He would probably make more money selling pencils that you do with your welfare check. Oh yes, while I'm thinking about it, do you have absolute proof on either side of the "Theory of Evolution"?
So tying up the money supply to output of gold mines is freedom? What if there is too little or too much of gold coming for a coutnry, compared to GDP growth? Too much: Spain after discovery of America.
Most likely it would too little for developing countries and too much for countries in the West.
What happens in such cases can only be mild in comparison to what happens when banks hit the print button.
Never going to happen.
Poor Ron Paul
Should have lived his later years having some fun
Instead of running an impossible race
Nobody is going to let the "headmaster" be President
An impossible race isn't fun?
It could even be amazing.
Like many Americans, I think Paul fears for the future of the United States. And he has the balls to stick with his convictions and sacrifice the last years of his life trying to make things right again. It takes a rare amount of patriotism to do that. We need more men and women in our government like him.
It must be hard for you to understand conviction.
.
You mean, like being a mindless, superficial, venal momo-chasing monkey, trading Lululemon and Netflix on an hourly basis? That kind of fun?
I hadn't looked at LULU for awhile.....
It got crushed....
oh no!
I'm sure ROBO was all over the trade... He'd have told you about it the day after... It's tucked in there somewhere about all the mobs of shoppers & 25 cent gas in Los Angeles...
Robo has his Chevy Volt plugged into the La Brea Tar pits...
you forgot fixedly staring at boobies.
Robo titties, do you work by the hour or per load?
Neither
He's been demoted....He's been relegated to running the stock ticker at the bottom of Ron Paul interviews on Fox News.
The JPM, GE, Honeywell, Intl. Paper, Lockheed Martin, MMM, Northrup Grumman, Raytheon was a nice touch Robo
....but next time, could you throw in a few more "War for Profit" Defense Contractor's stock prices....
'cuz it's Ron Paul....and the traitorous below threshold messaging needs to get turned up a touch when the doctor is in 'da studio.
he has a son in politics though, right? brand recognition, legacy, etc. etc.
amrkns are pretty down with the "family"vote, witness Dubya, & Hills.
it's not a dynasty. ron paul is unique.
perhaps not a 'dynasty" but certainly there is some "brand name recognition" legacy going on, whether intentional or not.
it's been evident in threads here even, just sayin'
(and this "ron paul is unique" line is elevating the man towards a dangerous platform he can only fall from - for what it's worth I've heard those same words before, recently. . .)
at this point in time, in this nationstate, it cannot be about an individual, the SYSTEM needs to be acknowledged, fully.
I still thank him for waking so ,any people up. Maybe Rand can carry on the work. A lot better outlook than say, the bastard daughter of Web Hubble and Ms. Clinton.
never...thats like taking the corrupt african leaders and multiplying their assets by 50x...at the end of the day... ron paul wants the government to have more involvement witth the FED...as much as we can bitch about monetary policy and the such...i DO NOT WANT congress to have any impact on what our central bank does...these past two years have been lesson enough that elected officials simply cant get along...why should they be making important decisions. not gonna happen no way not ever no way
The Fed's monopoly on US dollar creation was granted by Congress. I'd say that's about as involved as you can get.
generalizing from only recent experience can lead one to erroneous conclusion. that's what reading history is for.
Was talking with a swing state's republican chairman last week during a social. Reading between the lines I detected a vast disdain for RP.
I read politics in a weird way, though. I see candidates as no more than TV personalities. Legislation and enforcement are all beholden to powers more permanent than the whim of the proletariat, namely, lobby interests and monetary authority.
What is a monetary authority?
Anyone who can threaten to pull out their money and make the house of cards collapse. The most powerful one is the one that can start a new monetary system that everyone will go along with.
I don't know about your state republican chairman, but I think the vast majority of the disdain you're talking about is due to the fact that most politicians are corrupt. Dishonesty and deceit always has a tremendous disdain for the truth. That's the main reason Paul gets so much hate and discontent from both sides of the aisle.
My impression was that the disdain arose from a sense that RP could not fundraise well enough to win a national election. Does this make any sense?
Oh yeah, I gotcha. Sounds like your state republican leader looks down his nose at Paul for not going after big money (like lobbying and special interest funds).
I'd say that Ron Paul is the fund raising king but even he puts the credit where it's due: on his supporters. "Freedom is popular," he'll tell you.
And you might want to look up "moneybomb."
"I read politics in a weird way, though. I see candidates as no more than TV personalities. " When TV was the most powerful media they were TV personalities. Now, TV is losing ground to the revolutionary new social media like Twitter and Facebook, so the personalities are having to morph into a more sophisticated persona trying to be everthing to everyone long enough to win the election. But, the new media is being used as weapon in other countries and there will be blowback soon enough.
TV personalities in a metaphorical sense. Entertainment value only, appealing to transient fleeting notions of personhood and identification. Any issues of substance will be resolved identically regardless of the president's jersey. Just my (too) cynical view.
i will say the yahoo type crowd swamps any ZH post with Ron Paul in it.. much better discource in the longwinded 'boring truth' stories
such is culture..
I sincerely hope Paul reads FOFOA before he pushes the gold standard further. He should start with FOFOA's open letter to him.( I am a Paul supporter and have contributed as much as I have ever given a presidential candidate.) FOFOA makes a great argument against the gold standard and yet gold becomes the supreme wealth factor while alowing fiat to coexist...as long as it behaves..ie freegold...and no it is not a cult...just a good idea....inevitable...eventually...
+ 1
Yes, I was trying above to say what you said, but you wrote in more eloquently. Freegold is HARD to summarize in mere paragraphs.
lasvegas is right. FOFOA's recent article "Honest Money" discusses this at great length.
Freegold is HARD to summarize in mere paragraphs.
Indeed. It is verbose and hard to read, but not because it's rambling or poorly written. Rather it introduces a different way of thinking about (seemingly) familiar things. It takes time and several readings for this to gel and take root.
Any of you who are not hard of reading and have not done so, you owe FOFOA to yourself.
freegold is a fantasy while there is this much debt in the world.. and even with a jubilee you can't leave the reigns of fiat creation to the private few. They will be able to print enough money to buy whatever gold they want before reporting that the money was ever created until they have the gold and then the gold goes up because of the printing..
they can even do that in many smaller steps..
you must leash them with a gold standard or you have no control and all you did was create gold to be a fancy butterfly that is trained by the money changers to fly into their pockets
do you really agree with this statement: "If 60 billion needs to be settled every month and only a few ounces are available, those few ounces may absorb the imbalance."
to think that one item will absorb the debts of the nation while other commodities sit idle is so foolish you have to smack your head and wake up.. you do understand that people can still go find gold in the ground right?? So you are saying that people can all just dig for gold and leave the farms bare since they find a few grams of gold they can buy the whole farm??? When does a pig become more than an oz of gold REGARDLESS of the toilet paper currency?? So what price is the pig then??
Keynes himself suggested burying banknotes at the bottom of old mine shafts and letting people dig them up as a remedy for unemployment. Digging gold is no different. And yes, many will leave their farms to dig; it happened several times in the 19th century (California, Yukon, Australia, ...). The new gold is absorbed and things return to normal. That's the point, a proper gold standard enforces a self-correcting system, which is the opposite of what we have today.
Finally, you don't need any gold reserves at all in order to have a gold standard. Read the brilliant Nathan Lewis:
http://www.newworldeconomics.com/archives/2011/050611.html
http://www.newworldeconomics.com/archives/2011/111011.html
Finally, to address your question: "If 60 billion needs to be settled and only a few ounces are available". If 60 billion currency units will not pry loose more than a few ounces, it's a very weak currency (e.g., 1990s Turkish lira) and can indeed be settled for a few ounces.
As I said, you can't lift a sentence or two from FOFOA and make sense of it in isolation, any more than you can take a sentence of Plato's Republic and do anything meaningful with it.
Help yourself out: Focus on learning, not debunking others.
Ron Paul wants to legalize competing currencies. Commodity and fiat currencies would each be able to compete in the market. How is this incompatible with the freegold concept?
Gold Standard, fiat currency. It's all a game of monopoly, and over time someone will hold almost all the assets and it will be time to tip the board over and start again. It's Tipping time bitchez.
Fiat is a rip off from the start. The Fed prints it out of thin air and you have to work for it. Commodity money can not be conjured by the elite to be dangled before the masses. Anyone who wants gold or silver will have to trade something of value in order to obtain it.
There's no point in some entity hoarding all the gold. It's only value lies in what necessary items can be traded for it at some point in time. No banker will choose to sit on a pile of all the gold in the world because he will still want wine, women, song, mansions, vacations, etc. Gold has no purpose if it doesn't circulate.
Gents, not a mention of the word "confidence" on this page, sheesh.
Priceless
This gold standard is just romantic BS of long gone era of Wild West in which a saloon owner bit a piece of gold to "ensure" it was real and then the gold digger got two bottles of whisky for return.
With modern material technology one could fake gold bars so effectively that most customers would be fooled without access to some pretty heavy and costly measuring tools.
This fiat paper standard is just romantic BS of an increasingly discredited era of Medici, Rothschild and Keynesian-inspired psychopathology in which an elitist central banker prints a piece of paper to "ensure" his politically well-connected cronies siphon undeserved wealth from the real economy and then the taxpayer and saver gets raped in return.
Talk about a long con!
<=== blythe masters has approved this campaign message
<=== no banksters were consulted or harmed in making this campaign video
Great poll slewie!
Thought experiment: Without warning, suddenly the US goes on the gold standard at say $17,000 an ounce.
What would follow?
One way this could happen would be for the Treasury to put out the word that they would buy any and all gold at an arbitrarily high price (like $17,000).
Inflation and related pain for a lot of people would then happen.
That would be a great first step to try though, it would devalue our debt, making MUCH less of a burden.
The BIG beneficiaries would be physical gold owners. And, "Freegold" (fofoa.blogspot.com) would likely soon result.
Agreed about the high price. Agreed about the pain, which has to happen not matter what the resolution of this. Cold turkey wouldn't be so cold if there was an easy way around it.
In fact, that is what has to happen to return to any commodity standard, whether gold, silver, or copper. The reason people didn't melt down their gold/silver coins when they were circulating is that the purchasing power of the coin was greater than its melt value. (In that sense, the prices of precious metals were controlled in the sense of being pegged to the currency.)
However, gold coins do not need to circulate to have a gold standard (take Bretton Woods, for example). Nathan Lewis makes this clear on his blog.
A compliant government. Gee, that would refreshing!
Iran and Venezuela both would be richer than UK. Italy, France ten times richer than Spain or UK, Switzerland would be equal to China and other lovely distortions...
The epic monetary distortions the rest of us are currently witnessing arise from the profligate abuse of unsound fiat currencies. Time for you to take a look at the headlines and focus on reality and not your flawed imagination.
Nixon Shock part Deux. Followed by Die Hard 3 (the movie). One thing the MSM and alternate media outlets like ZeroHedge have in common is the punch line "Well the US is the least ugly girl at the dance because we are the reserve currency"
If we implemented any type of gold standard, even at 100,000 USD/oz, I garentee you that $200,000,000 the bush admin "lost" in Iraq would be found and in the first pick up truck in line at fort knox. You'd have russian tupelo's "re-patriating" 80% of the money ever used in black market activities since 1970. and "ex-patriating" gold. Sure private US stackers (ZH types) would be fine, but then again its hard to a play a fun poker game when nobody local can meet the ante.
Thats why I initally thought Cain was the answer (as the MSM will not allow Paul to get elected). Fair taxation will eventually bring about sound money without the consequences listed above. But now it is down to Paul and Romney. Speaking of taxation, considering of how weak Romney is now, does anyone think he'll be able to win against Obama when his skeleton (30 years worth) comes out of the closet?
4 more years. This is how democracy dies.
Current system is broke. Ron Paul for president! If you want more lies, more poverty, more debt, more banker/corporate bailouts then by all means, vote for someone else. Personally, I like the old silver haired gentleman from Texas. CNN/FOX are completely fucked-up trying to show-case the other idiots.
Nuff said.
HOLY SHIT MAN. FOR FUCKS SAKE. Few if any of you even get Ron Paul's message.
The GOLD STANDARD APPLIES SOLELY TO THE GOVERNMENT, as stated in the constitution. And if you think 'fuck the constitution', then you should have your state secede from the union as that was the founding document of the union. The 13 states gave up some of their power, provided the federal government was restricted by the constitution.
FREE MARKET MONEY, means anyone can trade with anything they want. A 1 oz gold coin issued by the US treasury vs the Perth mint should be equal. If people want to work for Zynga credits and get paid in Zynga credits they have that choice. If Zynga wanted to hyperinflate its virtual currency it could do that, but since there is no monopoly on the money supply no one is REQUIRED to use Zynga credits (or silver or gold or FRNs). The key takeaway is CHOICE of money. You might think you can trade freely with gold / silver, but in reality you can't. Try and get a job and get paid in a couple hundred oz of silver a month. The IRS will be on your ass faster than the CERN neutrino.
He only talks about gold and silver because of their 5,000 year history of use as money as well as the consttutional requirement that only gold and silver may be used by the government, to settle debts. He is all for you using tally sticks or paper or plastic or bitcoins or whatever-the-fuck you want, provided there is no GOVERNMENT COERCION in the USE of such money.
I am getting my popcorn ready for this one. Even the MSM is running pundits advocating (pumping up) PM miners to start using "company money" for umm ... ballast for the ship ... I mean wheel weights for their excavators ... Many states legalizing pot, Utah legalizing PMs as currency. What's a busy executive branch to do?
On your central point. Wouldn't a government applied gold standard enable the chinese to cash in all their USDs/USTs for the shiny? Or am I getting it wrong?
They can do that right now (and are doing it to some degree). They hold dollars because they wish to exchange them for the goods or services of their choice at some point in time just like anyone else.
But isnt that largely because they can use FRNs it for electronic settlement with any trading partner? Wouldnt a USA endorsed gold standard be the the last "competing" currency anyone was interested in, and for that reason, it goes all the way back to physical settlement, and/or physical (violent) settlement like in the olden times?
I am not trying to be snarky. I probably need to read up on the free gold concepts. I just know for a fact that Nixon's Executive order (as referenced by Paul in this video) was frances way of getting gold ... since the US was failing to restore their interest in indo-china ...
A gold standard comes down to this: those who create the most value for others will accrue gold unto themselves. They in turn will trade it for goods and services of their choice. Gold must circulate because its sole purpose is to facilitate the exchange of goods and services at some point in time.
The Chinese might get all our gold if we don't wise up and start producing things of value. And that's the way it should be. The US is decaying from within because it has had the ability to simply print the world's reserve currency and exchange it for real goods from other parts of the world. This is obviously unsustainable and will leave the US a gutted shell. Someday the Chinese will want something for their dollars. If we don't give them gold we'll have to give them other resources or real estate. They'll expect to redeem their dollars for something.
So we're doomed with fiat -- it's just a matter of time before the world no longer recognizes the fiat money of a unproductive nation as a reserve currency. With gold we have a fighting chance. Despite conventional wisdom a strong currency is good for the domestic economy and is not fatal to exports.
Wouldn't a government applied gold standard enable the chinese to cash in all their USDs/USTs for the shiny?
Interesting question. You've had one good reply already, but I'll add my 2 cents.
If the USG revalues to $50K+ per gold ounce, then they can satisfy the debt and have a lot left over (assuming they do have 8000 tons, as claimed). The USG could also default; this happened plenty of times (Greece, for example) during the gold era. If the revaluation caused massive inflation, then debtors of all sorts would rush to pay off their old debts, otherwise look for companies, individuals, local govt (and national govts with low gold holdings) to default. All this debt has to be discharged one way or another.
Thanks. It is my question because as much as I think Ron Paul is the only candidate who can purposefuly fix the mess we are in. I do not understand why he criticizes, as he did in this video "The Nixon Shock".
As I understand your post, and the nixon shock itself, they are the same. Nixon took away the USD to gold convertability (peg). But you could still by gold with USDs. you just could not "convert" them. Nixon did this because france was about to cash in all their dollars. France was going to do this because the support for the vietnam war (a former french colony) was failing. Meaning france was not going to beable to restablish their revenue stream/franchises. They were going to shoot the horse they were riding on (the USA) and collect the insurance money since they were not going to win the race/purse. All the other nations in the horse race would obviously do the same, and the USA nolonger has *any* gold, including forcable confiscating private stocks from US citizens to fill the contracts.
Dropping the gold standard was a soft default, including mitigating the ripple effects for internal and external entities. Sure it put us on a path of profligate spending, but if we had/maintained a solid tax code that too could have been avoided.
I can not see how this aspect of Ron Pauls message would not just set the clock back to that event. Not the nostalgia of the 40 years before the event. but the actual event when the frogs were going swamp the communal lily pad as they jumped off.
The French simply did what any rational person would: they exercised their right (under Bretton Woods) to convert their dollars to gold. Many here at ZH exercise that same right whenever they can, they just have to do it at a market price, not the controlled price of $35. The French, under the brilliant guidance of then-Finance Minister Jacques Rueff, recognized that the gold price was being suppressed at $35/oz, and that the true price was higher, so they bought. They ended the game a year or two early by cashing in their chips, but it would've happened anyway.
I live in the euro zone, and Germany is in the same position now as France was then. They can keep the game rolling a year or two more at a big loss, or they can bail out now. It'll happen either way, but political decisions will affect the precise timing.
I admit that "Nixon Shock" sounds a bit overstated, but keep in mind that Dr. Paul was already a thinking adult in 1971, so leaving the gold standard must've seemed like a pact with doom at the time (like the bail-outs of today). And indeed it was; the doom just had a longer gestation than most contemporary observers guessed.
Not government applied... Applied TO government. Remember this was exactly what forced nixons hand and called his bluff. Foreigners were cashing in their depreciating paper dollars for hard gold (greshams law) so Nixon closed the gold window.
The irony is that that was an act of default yet no one complained or stopped trading with the USA. This is the role of gold with the government. They can't 'borrow' gold in the same way they can print dollars. When the Chinese demand payment and we rapidly see our gold stash decrease. Assuming the government can't debase the money, they'd either have to stop spending or runout of gold, or tax the populace and request them to send in physical gold (or confiscate it like FDR)
Never have I seen a thread hijacked by so much bullshit in all of my life. I swear by almighty gawd that some sort of collective aneurysm took place here tonite. Thank gawd for one rational, lucid, and correct thought.
you are responding to libertarian_7?
is his the one rational thought here, or do you mean r.paul's thought? huh?
why don't we agree to let dr.paul speak for himself; i don't need too much help in this, do you?
one thing about the constitutionality of US Mint-produced gold and silver coins that the libertarian_7 doesn't seem to "get" is that gold and silver coins would not be taxed differently from other forms of currency (frns) as they are now via the sales tax, except in utah, and via federal tax.
dr.paul seems to prescribe a period of both currencies; slewie has already been proposing this since Day 1. but we don't need muddled thought about the consutution: a US $50 gold eagle is NOT the same as a canadian maple leaf, here, any more than a canadian dollar is the same as a US dollar or an aussie dollar. neither is a $1 US silver eagle the same as a 1 ounce silver round
"get" it, yet?
if you care a bit about this nation, this election, and this candidate, read the constitution and think about what it actually says; not what some blogger wants you to think it says, ok?
the constitution is a carefully-wrought legal document; don't assume it is easy to understand and that you know what it says and means if you haven't taken time to check it out for yourself, yet
Maybe you should read up a bit on the history of money. Spanish pieces of eight, and in fact the 'Thaler' is what was the precursor to the dollar. Any silver coin of equal purity was accepted as money equally. There was no legal restriction in paying your taxes with Spanish, mexican or French coins of equal weight and purity.
A gold eagle is 1oz of 999 gold. A gold maple is 1oz of 9999 gold. Ignoring purity for a sec, what exactly is the difference between the two? Just the stamp on them. Isn't the whole issue with fiat currencies the fact that we have to take a stamp on a piece of paper as legal tender. So whether the Canadian mint or the us mint prints the stamp, provided the content of the coin is the same, we should be indifferent to them (Except for numismatic differences and trust in the issuing authority {eg fake Chinese silver pandas}
The constitutional paragraph of 'coining' money means what it means in e simplist sense. As private citizens we were suppose to be able to take our gold and silver to the mint and get gold and silver coin in exchange, with the us mint stamp certifying it's purity and weight.
Never have I seen a thread hijacked by so much bullshit in all of my life.
I take it you are new to ZH. Put on your bullshit-waders.
Jim Rogers says a gold standard won't work and has never worked. Try again.
If by "a gold standard won't work" you mean a disciplined, honest and full backing of government-issued paper currency, then I agree.
If, however, by "won't work" you mean gold used AS money, then you are spectacularly wrong --- and I have several thousand years of monetary history to back up my claim.
You mean that it isn't true that until 1933 folks just traded cows for beans?
Even worse than that --- before we had our wonderful, modern, purely fiat, totally unbacked, government-supplied paper currency, people didn't even have cows, or beans. The world was cold, poor and gray, and its pitiful inhabitants shuffled around in rags while moaning lamentations and cries of agony over their short, miserable, impoverished lives. But then the Messiah Roosevelt took from them their evil gold, and the sun finally rose, birds started singing, flowers started blooming, and happy days were there at last!
Gold is monie
Dr Paul is all ready helping the cause of freedom just by dragging the discussion back to the constitution, and forcing the other gop candidates to try to sound like him. Even if he wins the nomination and the presidency, he won't be a dictator but a traditional president, so nobody should think the system will be turned on its head. Congress would have to do that. He would just make his decisions based on what's right for the country. What's wrong with that? Ron Paul won't dictate, he'll only lead.
Paul is the only candidate offerring meaningful reform, the rest are just more of the status quo. Newt had his chance. The so called "Contract with America" was never fulfilled. It did make for nice campaign rhetoric in 94 though. Neocon Newt will have us ass deep in foreign wars and more debt. Romney is funded by the banksters, and Cain, well just watch that Libya video. That leaves Paul, the only honest decent human being in Washington. The first step to making it happen is believing. Do you want freedom, or fascism?
It's a nice thought. There are glitches that didn't exist, from 1867 to 1933. During that period, gold and silver were both in circulation. We had currency redeemable in gold and silver coin, gold and silver certificates. It is important to note the legal definition of the term, "certificate". That is, a note issued in lieu of the real thing, in this case, money. The certificate itself has no intrinsic value, and is not money. If we are to retrace our steps, issue certificates redeemable in gold and silver, that could be phased in. A parallel real money system would eventually eat the fiat system, alive. The big fly in the ointment is that we must put an end to fractional banking. We would have to put an end to private banks. On those points, private banks have demonsrated that they will start wars and kill people to maintain their power.
http://georgesblogforum.wordpress.com/2011/11/02/the-daily-climb-2/
The private bankers are going to inflate their way right out of power and into oblivion. Their fate lies in the fate of the paper dollar. It's a fate I don't wish to share.
It is time to hit the reset button. . . Fight Club style. The banks' insolvency will be exposed and the boomers' retirements would be wiped out.
Fuck it -- What is the alternative? Slave away to pay off their debt and their retirement and their health bills? The better way would be for the boomers to work it off through retirement.
It's time to help the boomers' to an early retirement, get them out of office and where they belong, cleaning up their own fucking mess.
BTW, "Fight Club style" meant only to wipe away the old debts and start over. I am not encouraging violence.
I just wanted to set the record straight before the government sends drones after me over words.
To answer your question (and I am going to be junked for this) is to implement the Ben Bernake 2002 solution. Actually give every man woman and child $100,000 dollars of non debt based new money. Enforce the laws on the books. If you owe debt on a McMansion, you have to pay it off. If you owe back child support, stident loans or taxes, you gotta pay it off. If you are wealthy, good for you. buy another super car or a couple of seats on Virgin-1 (first planned commercial passenger space flight). If you like gold, then you'll still be able to buy it.
Debt jubilee without moral hazard.
Paul can never be allowed to be elected, why he must be mocked and ridiculed
Paul is the closest thing we have to a prophet and, as J-C himself informed us, a prophet gets no respect in his home country.
Yep. And there is a price to pay for not listening to prophets.
this low volume "rally" has presented us all with a glorious short opportunity...there are gaps to be filled to be sure
this is why C3X analysis is among the best. Balanced and quality analysis.
http://capital3x.com/think-tank/new-trend-updates-from-capital3x-why-early-dec-will-be-last-hurrah/
They have called 4 trends in the last 4 months and each and every trend call has been accurate. Now they call for dec rally which will pale in comparison on past dec rallies. Theire Live trading room is where nearly 200 subsc interact with the team directly challening them but mostly following them
Ron Paul has a lot of good things to say, and I agree with him heavily. And if he wins and starts the Dr. No vetoes, the country plunges into The Permanent Depression.
Why? Because capitalism is failing spectacularly, and is only being kept afloat by the evil measures Paul decries. He isn't wrong to decry them. They're wicked and spectacularly unjust. However, once those measures are stopped, the collapse goes full-force. Better sooner rather than later? Sure. Collapse is unavoidable, and the longer it goes, the worse it will be. But make no mistake, his vetoes would drop us to the next stage of collapse, and he would be blamed for it.
In the best of worlds, free markets and liberty would be done for good, and Paul would be impeached and retired in disgrace. In the worst of worlds, the guns come out and America, to the extent it was ever anything, is over.
Depression would last 2 years tops. Eg 1921 depression.
For a recent example, Iceland said fuck it, bring on the depression, they are one of the fastest growing economies in Europe now.
Paul is still an Austrian monetarist, and ANY type of monetarist, has a foundation based on sophistry...aka Bullshit.
Austrian monetarism can be just as deadly as Keynesian monetarism.
The way forward does touch on some of the true-r aspects of what is morphed into other definitions that are then paraded around in the various 'monetarism' schools, be it Keynesian, Austrian, or other.
We can easily have a problem that risks just as many people via Austrianism as we CURRENTLY have through Keynesianism.
The answer isn't to switch from one monetary dogma bullshit built for the oligarchy to another monetary dogma bullshit standard built FOR THE OLIGARCHY.
It's the forest from the trees. Austrian SEEMS right, because KEYNESIANISM is killing us. But in reality BOTH are wrong, and BOTH are extreme. Both taken to their extremes, and rest assured Ron Paul, if given the chance, would very much bring it to an extreme. But even as president, would he have such a chance? Who knows. I just know that if we're going to actually slay the Keynesian dragon, we must not put the Austrian Gilgamesh in our way.
The American Credit System (Hamiltonian), is the way forward. It has the more accurate aspects needed to form an economy, that isn't dogmatic, and is realistic. It doesn't allow the bullshit of keynesianism and isn't constrained by the bullshit inherent in Austrianism.
Which is why I only call Ron Paul, half a dumbass. As in the land of blindsville, the one eyed man is king. But this isn't blindsville, we just choose between blind and one-eyed, when a better way is there.
Now there are some very good things that Ron Paul COULD do, but he is also a dumbass on some of the most important things.
We don't need simply better, we need the correct way forward. Ron Paul isn't that way. Unless he recants Austrianism, and lets the web his viewpoints are attached to on policy, vibrate.
I refuse to believe we ever have to 'settle' on the lesser of two evils, which is what Ron Paul is against any currently announced candidate for President, because every day the debate and the chance to change is possible.
He is not the savior we're looking for. But if he is Tebow'ed, or controlled from engaging in his extreme fucktard oligarchical Austrian monetarism in the purpose and results of the policies he enacts, then he has a chance to be a bridgeway to the return of sanity. There are generally accepted policies he holds that can legitimately be enacted for the good of America, that all sides of the body politic would cheer for, but I don't believe he knows that line, would cross it, even if it is quite easy to delineate, because just like a Keynesian, he too is suckered by the sophistry of monetarism....just a different form. While different, cow patties and diarrhea are still shit. Thankfully, Ron Paul's flaws don't completely overlap those of the Keynesians, and thus again some way forward can be had with him, although I would rather have a real candidate that could blow him out of the water, and there is in reality, a niche for such a person, even if sadly, one never materializes this political cycle.
A controlled from monetarist idiocy Ron Paul could be a great thing for this county, yet he also risks being the man that pulled America out of the frying pan, and into the fryer by merely be the guy who switched the monetarist diabetic economy from coke to pepsi. We need a different drink altogether.
Ditch monetarism in all forms/schools/etc...it is not needed, and is inherently anti-american. It only holds us back, and denies us the ability to do the things we need to survive as a species. Fusion, space, mag lev, machine tools, all sorts (i.e. etc) of needs [generally science driver programs couple with societal and species need] that must be met for the human race to survive, and neither Keynesian, Austrian, or any sort of monetarism will get us there (because they are oligarchical in nature, not about effectively producing the outcomes the species needs to survive, nor thrive). What a Greek tragedy it would be to beat Keynesianism, only to adopt Austrianism and suffer at the very least long term, from the same fate as a species.
Impeach Obama
Glass-Steagall
American Credit System
Lyndon LaRouche, is that you?
If not, I want some of those mushrooms, dude.
Tell me, when you write "Ron Paul is a monetarist", what color does that sentence taste like?
...and Ron Paul would join that illustrious group of assasinated US presidents if he ever got to be elected.
Comparing the US just after the civil war with the US today is absolutely ludicrous and he must know that. He's just another politician jostling for power, at the end of the day.
Comparing the US just after the civil war with the US today
Haha, good one! And England in 1790 was nothing like the UK of today, so it's no use reading The Wealth of Nations.
Yes, in fact the study of history itself is useless and meaningless, because SO MUCH is different between 10 or 100 or 1000 years ago and today. I mean, they didn't even have i-pads or cell phones!
"I got to admit it's getting better, getting better all the time ..."
Ron Paul has a few good ideas with regard to monetary policy. But when it comes to the leadership needed to implement those ideas, he is abysmally inadequate. With 30+ years of congressional experience, he has done little except vote "no," accept massive amounts of pork on the theory that there would be less money that can be spent by the executive branch, has little or no political respect from his colleagues on both sides of the aisle and worst of all, now record of leadership. He is a whiner not a winner.
Ron Paul has a few good ideas with regard to monetary policy. But when it comes to the leadership needed to implement those ideas, he is abysmally inadequate. With 30+ years of congressional experience, he has done little except vote "no," accept massive amounts of pork on the theory that there would be less money that can be spent by the executive branch, has little or no political respect from his colleagues on both sides of the aisle and worst of all, now record of leadership. He is a whiner not a winner.
paul represents the 'anti establishment' vote on the ticket.
hey, at least you vented, er, voted.
Gold could only solve the problem for those that have enough fiat to buy it. THAT is the one big flaw with a Gold standard. If the whole world (of 7 Billion NOT 1 Billion or less) suddenly had to convert to a Gold standard, how are the 6.65 Billion poor sods ever going to be better off with it, except for in a 'theoretical' sense???
They'd be living in excatly the same penury that they currently live in, chasing the next gram of gold. Emporer's new clothes, so far as I'm concerned.
Actually, the per-capita amount of gold in the world is almost exactly the same as it was in 1900 --- and significantly greater than it was in 1800 or 1700, when gold was the undisputed anchor of the monetary world.
Please be aware that the "not enough gold" argument has long been discredited, from multiple angles, for many years now.
Yes yes yes
http://www.newworldeconomics.com/archives/2011/110311.html
The pillaging of the New World caused a flood of gold and silver into Spain, with inflation as the result. Over time, however, things returned to normal. That's the point: under a commodity-money standard things return to normal on their own. No need for wise men, bankers, PhDs, etc.
Self-correcting systems, bitches!
Don't you know that when gold was King there was no poverty, nor booms or busts, and everyone was an expert assayist, never to be fooled by ba "plug nickel"?
Personally, I prefer discipline to gold, as discipline is its own reward. Discipline can be practiced either under a gold standard or fiat. Gold confers nothing in and of itself on to the holder: not fiscal discipline, not wise investment, not a stable economy, not an equitable society, not even stable prices. To paraphrase from Harry Lime, Italy under the Borgias had fiat in all but name, but produced Leonardo Da Vinci, Michelangelo and the Renaissance. The Aztecs had plenty of gold, but could not advance beyond the ox cart and thought "spirituality" involved offering their pre-pubescent daughter up to the local priest to have her heart ripped out.
Valid points all chin.
But, I believe part of the allure of gold is in fact its discpline. It can't be conjured up from nothing as unbacked debt fiat can.
Or perhaps it is the fact that significant deviation from discipline quickly becomes public knowledge, at which time the public can veto by converting its fiat to metal.
Warren Buffet's father made this point long ago:
http://www.fame.org/pdf/buffet3.pdfInteresting thoughts, Chindit, as always.
But I think you make an error in positing that in monetary matters, one can turn to gold OR discipline; in practice and throughout history, gold has been a signficant part of monetary discipline, or at least the enforcing of it. It need not be an either-or proposition.
I cannot help but reflect on the fact that however "impractical" so many people today may consider the use of physical gold and silver as money, it is all but indisputable that if the abomination of paper currency (fiat or otherwise) had never taken hold, virtually ALL the monetary shenanigans and depredations of sociopathic banksters and power elites throughout the last several centuries would have been flatly impossible. Now, just which monetary system is more "impractical"?
in practice and throughout history, gold has been a signficant part of monetary discipline, or at least the enforcing of it.
This is gold's political problem. In a modern democracy, where both Steve Jobs and a state-fed zombie have one vote each, the inflation rachet turns only one way. Gold is just an obstacle.
Keynes's brillant insight was to see that the key is to inflate very slowly, with discipline. And it worked for a long time. The Fed will be 100 years old soon, and will have enriched several generations of the elites who control it and its sisters around the world.
They'd be living in excatly the same penury that they currently live in, chasing the next gram of gold. Emporer's new clothes, so far as I'm concerned.
However, once they get the gold which they have chased, it'll be hard for someone to steathily debase the fruit of their labor
<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nq6N4kQK-KA"></a> Drugs Terence McKenna </a>
ya ya ...return to the gold standard ....what does RON PAUL think ???who controls the gold mining companies....and he is doing a fantastic job dragging this on ....giving hope to the people that there is someone who is fighting for them
Every legislative session Ron Paul introduces a monetary reform bill. Among other things, part of that bill includes repealing legal tender laws.
The point being that if someone "control's the mining and production of gold, than the people can use Silver as money for their transactions. If they control the silver than the people can use copper and so on.
It you control, monopolize, own, a form of currency to the point where it too expensive the average person wouldn’t use it. People will find cheaper forms of currency that they agree to use for a transaction.
Ultimate form of decentralization.
Peter Tchir interview
http://www.bloomberg.com/video/81746756/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ELEwjVRxxGE
to laugh a bit... video about Zeitgeist vs Ron Paul
I have a BETTER plan : especially as it is ironic ( to use a mild word ) that the richest areas on Earth are said to be BANCRUPT . That is ...SELF MUTILATION ... in MY BOOK !
WHY NOT PUT THE PURSE WHERE THE MOUTH IS ? GOLD is GOOD , SILVER too . BUT there is too little of it . WHY not think RADICAL and use all the REAL wealth of a country to back up its currency ? Such as it in a world where promises can be trusted ..should be ! Create an ETF FUND , its SUBSTANCE composed of ... Gold , yes , but also REAL ESTATE m EQUITIES and INFRASTRUCTURE ...owned by the GOUVERNMENT = OURSELVES .This funds sole purpose : to be the tangible substance of value behind the Currency,,, the Money . The Fund ..politically independant .. run by principles of safe returns with just ONE MANDATE : to be the SUBSTANCE of MONEY ..to keep the value of the currency STABLE and INFLATION SECURED . To be equivalent in VALUE as the CIRCULATING AMOUNT OF CURRENCY . The ETFs at all times redeemable for the Currency in question and freely tradeable in Markets . With the provison BY LAW that this convertibility can NEVER be rewoked without at the same time having to compensate holders of a currency with tangibles ..at market value .
WHO would not want to hold on to and SAVE in such a currency ? FEW ..is my guess ! A currency which has intrinsic SUBSTANCE .. not just based on HUMAN Promises ..to pay ..eventually !
It would be possible .. look at the NORWEGIAN WEALTH FUND .. the norvegians have already ..successfully done something not quit as radical ..but similar !. And Gouvernments hold VAST amounts of Tangibles ! Many times more than the circulating amount of Money ! Professional experience in ETF s are to be found high and low these days .. It shouldnt be a TECHNICAL problem ! The legal side of it may take some brilliant brains !
Politicians would not like it .. because it would remove them from their tool of power: the control of Money and its debasement ofc .. and equally .. one cant have a thing like the FED ( a private banking consortium ) controlling the peoples wealth and money .. so they would have to go too .. ofc . My ideas may sound NAIVE ... I am fully aware of that ... but I do not think the idea IS naive .. except from the standpoint.. that the POWERS WHO are ..would fight such an idea with all the might they have to their disposal ... or .. if the errand with current PAPER or ELECTRONIC MONEY ...in reality is to CHEAT !
BUT I am also sure.. if just ONE BIGGER AREA IN THE WORLD would implement such a bold statement of their confidence in their own Currency ...and STICK TO IT ... all other nations and areas would be forced to follow suit .. quit quickly ... or be wiped out from Markets !
That is one significantly murky stream of consciousness.
"Consciousness"?
You must be feeling charitable today.
I have an idea. Let's all be like Norway: small homogenous population with lots of oil, no self-defense problems, and lots of blond women. We'll be rich while everyone else is poor.
I claim intellectual-property rights on this plan.
And I claim rights to be the first absolute dictator of your blond utopia.
And I get to wear a presidential sash. And lots of colorful medals. And live in a marble palace, with many servants at my beck and call. And sail the adjoining seas in my own presidential yacht --- also with many servants.
OK, I'll compromise on the palace and the yacht, but I really want that sash.
OK OK. I'll even throw in a gold-braided military uniform (you forgot that) that'll make you the envy of every other dictator. The Norwegian bikini team will carry the train of your sash. I'll also throw in a potion that takes 10 lb off your waistline and puts hair back onto your bald pate (not that you'll need that, of course, having the bikini team and all).
Just spare your subjects the horrors of fiat money and central banking, and the sane ZH'ers will all move there.
Between the elimination of fiat currency and central banking, and thoughts of the Norwegian bikini team, you have be pondering the possibility of the world's first economy in which sexual acts are the sole official money. I mean, they are recognizable, portable, and divisible --- everything a perfect money should be. Granted, they would make a poor store of value, and are hardly uniform, but hey, I think the experiment is worth it, don't you?
Well, they say that service economies are the wave of the future. And at least you can't conjure up a trillion such currency units out of thin air (you're not Tiger Woods, are you?).
FOFOA teaches us that store of value and medium of exchange can (and probably should) be separate. So your unit of sexchange will satisfy one half the money function, and may even reverse the West's population decline. But, as you admit, it is a poor store of value, ephemeral, and of declining exchange rate as body parts grow limp and saggy.
That leave us with store of value. I await your proposal with my 'business' firmly in hand.
Sorry Ron Paul, Gold & silver have been "mone-ETF-otized" that means it can be shorted and pumped by the the same fiat currency printing party.........That is unless Ron outlaws PM ETF's then you might stand a chance to get back on the Gold standard.......
MoneETFotized is a copyrite of Itsmedicationtime LLC and cannot be used without expresses permission from itsmedicationtime......................
He will never be elected unless the people say enough is enough.
Details on how it would be implemented.
Ron Paul as one of the few public figures who actually cares about educating the Public, recently has sponsored a three part lecture about money.
Here is part 2 of the series. It's a lecture given by Dr. Edwin Vieira about the history of U.S. Currency and banking. The U.S. had many different standards through its history. Talks why some failed and why some ended for political reasons.
He gives more details about the solutions at the 47 minute mark and how they will be implemented.
It’s pretty exciting he talks about digital and silver currencies. The whole lecture overall is excellent.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k6gMkKmQSW4&feature=youtu.be
Gee, Ron...are we gonna have a second gold rush? The sophistry involved in handwaving away the recessionary effects of a transition to a gold standard by inappropriate comparisons across 162 years of history is great pablum for the chest-thumpers but disingenuous to the core.
Ron Paul... well he's been doing this a long time and is quick on his feet. They try to ignore/bury his responses on FOX, CNN, ABC, CNBC, etc., but the truth of his VERY consistent message keeps bubbling up through the sewage... so the corporate owned media pour more sewage on in order to saturate the senses of the sheeple with their hand-picked candidates and carefully selected agenda. The trouble is people are getting worried and are accessing other news sources now via the internet (electing to bypass the propoganda we call the mainstream press) - alternative news sources (like zerohedge) make people question the mainstream propoganda more and more... resulting in those individuals bringing it to the attention of others - it's a lot of work keeping a lid on the "big lie" but you have to give the corporations, big money, etc., credit... they do a good job of keeping the majority in the dark via the boob toob. As much as I'd like to see Paul elected president, I don't believe it would ever happen because he'd turn the existing system inside-out and those who carefully orchastrate the mind machine's message. Ending wars, going back to the gold standard, end the FED, don't ignore our bill of rights and give up our freedoms, etc., they all sound good... trouble is the world may go insolvent prior to that time anyone like Paul is elected. Paul is all steak and very little sizzle, the others are mostly all sizzle, no steak and the sheeple would rather hear the big lie because it's more comforting than the truth... sort of like "you can eat all the chocolate you want and never gain weight."
although Ron Paul is unfortunately quite unlikely to get his wish for a return to the gold standard, at least ordinary citizens can attempt to preserve some of their wealth by continuing to invest in gold-related asset classes. I recently came across this site that provides rankings and analysis on close to 100 gold and silver stocks:
http://pro.goldalert.com
I appreciate Ron Paul 's ideas but he's very short on details. Exactly HOW would we move from a paper standard back to a gold one? The devil is in the details. The fact is there are hundreds of trillions in fiat currency, both foreign and domestic floating around the globe, and there isn't enough gold and silver above or below ground to cover it. Fiat currency is not a good thing. However, it survives (IMO) primarily because no one can pin a value on it. If there was an agreed upon standand, like gold, all those trillions in fiat currency would suddenly have an absolute value that would reveal what we all know but don't like to hear i.e. our money is quite literally, not worth the paper it's printed on.
If the Federal Reserve Note was seen as worthless, countries would cease using the US dollar as their primary reserve currency. This is important because being the world reserve currency of choice has allowed the US to turn into an economic giant. For better and worse it has allowed us to finance our own debt. If the world started looking for a sounder reserve currency, say for example, China's. we too would have to get that currency to transact business with them. How would we do that? We don't make enough of anything in this country to aquire the money we'd need to function. That means all government services, federal, state and local would be reduced or eliminated. It means that the muillions of private sector jobs that rely on funding from all levels of government would be destroyed or severly compromised. That means less tax revenue and all the problems associated with it. In short we'd be facing an economic depression that would make the 1930's look like a field day by comparison.
As I stated, I don't like the idea of fiat currency, but returning to a gold standard isn't the answer unless we want to plundge the world into a very deep, long term depression.
If you read the language of the bills he introduced into congress it explains how we go from point A to B.
Alternativley in this lecture sponserd by Ron Paul. Dr. Edwin Vieira explains how the state government can implement it if the federal government fails to act.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k6gMkKmQSW4&feature=youtu.be
You are not going hear the details on a CNBC because complex details don’t lend themselves to the 30 second sound byte interviews of the ADD media.