|
Wolfgang

Registered: 11/25/07
Posts: 8,370
|
Re: Ron Paul's Economics [Re: afoaf]
#7736640 - 12/09/07 01:22 PM (16 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
afoaf said: I think of Paul's stance on the fed as being less about pure economics and more about politics.
The fact of the matter is that the fed operates as a fourth branch of the US government, but it does so without any oversight or checks and balances.
It wields a tremendous amount of power at the hands of unelected officials that are appointed and largely operate well below the public radar.
This is contrarian to a constitutionally-minded world view.
There are tangential arguments here regarding the means by which the Fed largely benefits the giant banking intrests at the expense of the smaller institutions, but ulitmately, a vibrant money market is what allows economic prosperity.
You can extend that power through fiat money. Since it lacks the true backing of some precious commmodity (gold/silver) you can arbitrarily grow and contract the money supply to control inflation and, in turn, unemployment and general economic prosperity.
Many people will shout "fiat money ALWAYS fails, eventually", while that may be true historically, we are operating in a manner unlike any other in history and, as pointed out previously, doing quite well at it at that.
"the temptation for government to run the printing presses just a little bit longer to cover some of those over-budget items is almost overwhelming."
this is the recurring theme in Paul's politics...
"Fiat money systems always fail" is just not really true. I suppose every country eventually fails, so it might be true in that case, but gold standard systems have been abandoned left and right, and the major economies of the world have successfully been running fiat systems for years. If you read up on your economics, I think that everybody has to agree that fiat systems are not more likely to fail than standard systems if run responsibly.
The Fed being a fourth branch of government is an absurd claim. Its main task is to set the federal interest rates. That may be important, but it is hardly at the same level as any of the branches of the Government.
While the last quotation may be true, its something that SUPPORTS the Fed. The Fed is typically MUCH more conservative with the amount of money they let into the economy than Congress would like them to be. Remember that dumping tons of money into the economy is pretty much guaranteed to help things in the short term, which is what Congress is all about since everybody needs to get elected within a few years. If you are worried about somebody putting too much money in the economy, I dont see how ANY rational person can want Congress to run that given their long history of a complete lack of fiscal conservatism.
|
rickpsfuckyou
listening to Mozzy



Registered: 11/26/05
Posts: 1,860
Last seen: 2 years, 4 months
|
Re: Ron Paul's Economics [Re: Wolfgang]
#7739518 - 12/10/07 07:36 AM (16 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
the fed is a private banking cartel run for profit, at the expense of the american people. their number one job is to, along with the irs, basically redistribute the wealth of the american middle class and widen the gap between rich and poor. the fed is owned by european banking dynasties and aristocracy. the reason they want to empoverish americas middle class is to weaken our resistance to one world government and the new world order. they plan to undermine our national sovereignty by incrementalism and trade alliances like the proposed north american union, and usher in the amero currency. what is happening in our economy is a designed collapse meant to leave us no other alternative but depression or acceptance of the new trade union and loss of sovereignty and freedom. ron paul knows this, and so he wants to avoid it if possible.
--------------------
|
fireworks_god
Sexy.Butt.McDanger



Registered: 03/12/02
Posts: 24,855
Loc: Pandurn
Last seen: 1 year, 12 days
|
|
The idea that I have heard expressed by Ron Paul is to introduce a competing currency, that is backed by a good standard. Why let us speculate in such a theoretical way about which approach works, when we can let the free market decide, and directly observe what happens.
I'll tell you what, it couldn't hurt to introduce another currency backed by some standard. Alan Greenspan might be a formidable wealth of understanding of an economy, but he is only a formidable wealth of understanding of that economy. Others, like Ron Paul, who has directly challenged Alan Greenspan and his successor in Congress (yeah, I caught your "appeal to the authority of Alan Greenspan ), have a different vision of a different economy.
There are a lot of advantages and disadvantages to both currencies and the manner in which they are regulated. I see no reason why there couldn't be two currencies that work together to produce every advantage, and so that each can compensate for the disadvantage of the other. Two concurrent currencies.
If you are skeptical of Ron Paul because of his economic viewpoints, you only have to realize that the biggest change that could result from Ron Paul having influence as the President of the United States is that he would introduce a new currency that was not regulated by the Federal Reserve, that would be backed with value, in addition to the dollar that is regulated by the Federal Reserve. The free market would decide which currency, representing two distinct economic theories, would be most effective. My guess is both.
I'd see the new currency as being the implementation of a system of economic checks and balances. Stability and speculation. Why not? Makes sense to me.
--------------------
If I should die this very moment I wouldn't fear For I've never known completeness Like being here Wrapped in the warmth of you Loving every breath of you
|
afoaf
CEO DBK?



Registered: 11/08/02
Posts: 32,665
Loc: Ripple's Heart
|
|
The Fed is not a for-profit group.
They actually refund a considerable amount of money to the Treasury yearly.
-------------------- All I know is The Growery is a place where losers who get banned here go.
|
rickpsfuckyou
listening to Mozzy



Registered: 11/26/05
Posts: 1,860
Last seen: 2 years, 4 months
|
Re: Ron Paul's Economics [Re: afoaf]
#7741501 - 12/10/07 04:31 PM (16 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
afoaf said: The Fed is not a for-profit group.
They actually refund a considerable amount of money to the Treasury yearly.
yes they are. they are not a part of our government. they are about as federal as federal express is. they are run for profit, all the money printed is sold to america, thats part of why our defecit is so large. thats why america is so in debt we are about to go bankrupt. the debt is backed by the future production of the people collected as the income tax, via the irs. so in essence our government is borrowing a worthless fiat currency and going into debt with foreign banking interests and putting us the american people up as collateral. debt is the new equal oppurtunity slavery.
--------------------
|
afoaf
CEO DBK?



Registered: 11/08/02
Posts: 32,665
Loc: Ripple's Heart
|
|
The vast majority of the interest gained on their reserves (their income) is refunded to the Treasury annually.
The Fed had net income totaling $23.9 billion in 1995, 23.4 billion of which was payed back to the Treasury.
that .5% of the income is spread between dividends for stock holders and the Fed itself for operating budget (nice lunches and big oak desks).
It has stock holders and costs, but when 99.5% of the profits are returned to the Treasury department, I'd say it's about as close to a not-for-profit as you can get and still maintain some ambiguity.
-------------------- All I know is The Growery is a place where losers who get banned here go.
|
art
Stranger
Registered: 06/15/05
Posts: 331
Last seen: 14 years, 4 months
|
Re: Ron Paul's Economics [Re: afoaf]
#7747313 - 12/11/07 10:01 PM (16 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
I am real confused as to what is so bad about the federal reserve? What exactly is it that makes them so evil? They are keeping the economy steady.
And can someone explain why we should be off the gold standard? I have never heard of someone today wanting to go back on the gold standard, it sounds so pointless! Gold has no more value than the dollar does. How many countries actually operate on the gold standard?
Why do you guys actually want deregulation of business!? Do you really want to go back to the guilded age?
|
Seuss
Error: divide byzero



Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 23,480
Loc: Caribbean
Last seen: 2 months, 20 days
|
Re: Ron Paul's Economics [Re: art]
#7748007 - 12/12/07 04:12 AM (16 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
> Gold has no more value than the dollar does
???
-------------------- Just another spore in the wind.
|
SlashOZ
:D



Registered: 10/20/06
Posts: 3,557
Loc: Following the water cycle
|
Re: Ron Paul's Economics [Re: Seuss]
#7749375 - 12/12/07 01:27 PM (16 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
-------------------- "Life sucks but in this really beautiful way" - Axl Rose "Life's a bitch and then you die that's why we get high cuz you never know when you're gonna go." - NAS "When people don't know what you're about they put you down and shut you out" - Black Sabbath "An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind" - Gandhi "Look up at me I am God, look down on me and I am evil, look at me I am you." - Charles Manson. "Don't question my reality." - Me (as far as I know)
|
bugabuga420
bUgAbUgaBOO


Registered: 07/18/02
Posts: 488
Last seen: 6 years, 2 months
|
Re: Ron Paul's Economics [Re: SlashOZ]
#7751231 - 12/12/07 08:32 PM (16 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
"The central bank is an institution of the most deadly hostility existing against the Principles and form of our Constitution. I am an Enemy to all banks discounting bills or notes for anything but Coin. If the American People allow private banks to control the issuance of their currency, first by inflation and then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the People of all their Property until their Children will wake up homeless on the continent their Fathers conquered." -Thomas Jefferson
FED = Central Bank
People should stop referring to the Federal Reserve as part of the Federal Government. The FED is a PRIVATE COMPANY w/ PRIVATE SHAREHOLDERS. The main reason that Ron Paul is against the FED is because it is illegal under his interpretation of the Constitution. Before you can make any arguments about the FED you first must know the history of its creation. The FED was the brainchild of Paul Warburg and Jacob Schiff (whoses great grandson is married to Al Gores Daughter), members of powerful banking families. Families who have tried to establish a central bank in America since immediately after the American Revolution. Early in 1907, New York Times Annual Financial Review published Paul Warburg's (a partner of Kuhn, Loeb and Co.) first official reform plan, entitled "A Plan for a Modified Central Bank," in which he outlined remedies that he thought might avert panics. Then also early in 1907, Jacob Schiff, the chief executive of Kuhn, Loeb and Co., in a speech to the New York Chamber of Commerce, warned that "unless we have a central bank with adequate control of credit resources, this country is going to undergo the most severe and far reaching money panic in its history." Later in that year Warburg, Schiff along with JP Morgan orchestrated through rumors and manipulation the recall of the majority of all margin loans , which led to the panic of 1907. After which they picked up near whole corporations for pennies on the dollar.
And during the aftermath of the panic of 1907 the European Banking families fanned the flames of public outrage through the newspapers they owned and lobby groups they funded which called for Full Banking Reform. Both of the banking reform bills that where being pushed by the Presidential candidates from both parties in 1912 , where nearly identical as they where both authored by Paul Warburg. Also all 3 of the major presidential campaigns of 1912 were mostly financed by Kuhn, Leob and co, one of the richest and most powerful European banking firms, headed by Schiff and Warburg.
They had orchestrated not only the panic of 1907, but the resulting banking reform bill, authored by Senator Nelson Aldrich, and the presidency of 1912. In 1912 Woodrow Wilson was elected, not surprisingly he came from a banking family. He signed into legislation the initially mis titled "Federal Reserve Act". This legislation officially transferred Congress’s Constitutional duty to issue America’s currency into the hands of a private corporation, The Federal Reserve Bank of New York. Stock in this private corporation was not made available to the public, and was purchased by only the powerful banking families.
Here is a excerpt from the Federal Reserve page on wikipedia about Senator Aldrich:
"Centralized banking was met with much opposition from politicians, who were suspicious of a central bank and who charged that Aldrich was biased due to his close ties to wealthy bankers such as J.P. Morgan and his daughter's marriage to John D. Rockefeller, Jr. In 1910, Aldrich and executives representing the banks of J.P. Morgan, Rockefeller, and Kuhn, Loeb, & Co., secluded themselves for 10 days at Jekyll Island, Georgia.[4] The executives included Frank Vanderlip, president of the National City Bank of New York, associated with the Rockefellers; Henry Davison, senior partner of J.P. Morgan Company; Charles D. Norton, president of the First National Bank of New York; and Col. Edward House, who would later become President Woodrow Wilson's closest adviser and founder of the Council on Foreign Relations.[5] There, Paul Warburg of Kuhn, Loeb, & Co. directed the proceedings and wrote the primary features of what would be called the Aldrich Plan. Warburg would later write that "The matter of a uniform discount rate (interest rate) was discussed and settled at Jekyll Island." Vanderlip wrote in his 1935 autobiography From Farmboy to Financier :
I was as secretive, indeed I was as furtive as any conspirator. Discovery, we knew, simply must not happen, or else all our time and effort would have been wasted. If it were to be exposed that our particular group had got together and written a banking bill, that bill would have no chance whatever of passage by Congress…I do not feel it is any exaggeration to speak of our secret expedition to Jekyll Island as the occasion of the actual conception of what eventually became the Federal Reserve System.”
Despite the importance of the Jekyll Island meeting, it remained a secret to both the public and the government until journalist Bertie Charles Forbes wrote an article about it in 1916, three years after the Federal Reserve Act was passed."
Another note same person met in secrecy also created the council on foreign relations, which is david rockefeller directors, past director includes dick cheney. The CFR are the people who are pushing for a North American Union.
you tube video of lou dobbs reporting on north american union
www.cfr.org/content/publications/attachments/NorthAmerica_TF_eng.pdf Their plan entitled Creating a North American Community
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Council_on_Foreign_Relations check out their membership list!!
Cheney at the CFR
Now if your still reading:
Now you are probably asking yourself well who actually owns the Federal Reserve Central Banks? That the actually owners are :
Rothschild Bank of London Warburg Bank of Hamburg Rothschild Bank of Berlin Lehman Brothers of New York Lazard Brothers of Paris Kuhn Loeb Bank of New York Israel Moses Seif Banks of Italy Goldman, Sachs of New York Warburg Bank of Amsterdam
And that these individuals owned banks or majority shares in banks which owned shares in the FED : First National Bank of New York James Stillman National City Bank, New York Mary W. Harnman National Bank of Commerce, New York A.D. Jiullard Hanover National Bank, New York Jacob Schiff Chase National Bank, New York Thomas F. Ryan Paul Warburg William Rockefeller Levi P. Morton M.T. Pyne George F. Baker Percy Pyne Mrs. G.F. St. George J.W. Sterling Katherine St. George H.P. Davidson J.P. Morgan (Equitable Life/Mutual Life) Edith Brevour T. Baker Chase Manhattan Bank of New York
At its inception the FED was to be monitored by Congress and the President,but over the years through subtle legislation all operations of the FED are independent of Congressional control. And that the FED even refuses to be audited by the United States Government. Under the pretenses of helping the Depression the FED with Roosevelt's help enacted a Gold Seizure of all gold coins, gold bullion, and United States gold certificates from common Americans; terminated the domestic redemption of all currency in gold; and outlawed and repudiated all private and public contracts and other debts requiring payment in gold. EVERY DOLLAR THE FED MAKES PUTS THE UNITED STATES MORE IN DEBT. With the FED, AMERICA WILL ALWAYS BE IN DEBT TO THIS PRIVATE BANK and the debt will never go away or get smaller. That the FED only loans the principle to the government and then charges them interest on that principle, so the government is forced to borrow again to pay off the principle and interest on the first loan. But then the second loan is being charged interest, therefore causing never ending debt? All the money we have in our pockets is not constitutional money, just pieces of paper which represent our debt to the stockholder's of the FED? The Federal Income Tax is what the government actually uses to pay off interest owed to the FED? There inst one law on record which says you have to pay federal income taxes. That it is actually arbitrary enforced by the federal courts. Thats the reason Ron Paul wants to get rid of the IRS. Its unconstitutional to tax our labor, after all we went to war with England over a tax on tea and stamps.
The remainder of this post is a collection of quotes spoken on the Floor of the House of Representatives by the Honorable Louis T. McFadden of Pennsylvania. McFadden served as Chairman of the Banking and Currency Committee for more than 10 years.
"Mr. Chairman, we have in this Country one of the most corrupt institutions the world has ever known. I refer to the Federal Reserve Board and the Federal Reserve Banks, hereinafter called the Fed. The Fed has cheated the Government of these United States and the people of the United States out of enough money to pay the Nation's debt. The depredations and iniquities of the Fed has cost enough money to pay the National debt several times over.
"This evil institution has impoverished and ruined the people of these United States, has bankrupted itself, and has practically bankrupted our Government. It has done this through the defects of the law under which it operates, through the maladministration of that law by the Fed and through the corrupt practices of the moneyed vultures who control it.
"Some people who think that the Federal Reserve Banks are United States Government institutions. They are private monopolies which prey upon the people of these United States for the benefit of themselves and their foreign customers; foreign and domestic speculators and swindlers; and rich and predatory money lender. In that dark crew of financial pirates there are those who would cut a man's throat to get a dollar out of his pocket; there are those who send money into states to buy votes to control our legislatures; there are those who maintain International propaganda for the purpose of deceiving us into granting of new concessions which will permit them to cover up their past misdeeds and set again in motion their gigantic train of crime.
"These twelve private credit monopolies were deceitfully and disloyally foisted upon this Country by the bankers who came here from Europe and repaid us our hospitality by undermining our American institutions. Those bankers took money out of this Country to finance Japan in a war against Russia. They created a reign of terror in Russia with our money in order to help that war along. They instigated the separate peace between Germany and Russia, and thus drove a wedge between the allies in World War. They financed Trotsky's passage from New York to Russia so that he might assist in the destruction of the Russian Empire. They fomented and instigated the Russian Revolution, and placed a large fund of American dollars at Trotsky's disposal in one of their branch banks in Sweden so that through him Russian homes might be thoroughly broken up and Russian children flung far and wide from their natural protectors. They have since begun breaking up of American homes and the dispersal of American children. "Mr. Chairman, there should be no partisanship in matters concerning banking and currency affairs in this Country, and I do not speak with any.
"In 1912 the National Monetary Association, under the chairmanship of the late Senator Nelson W. Aldrich, made a report and presented a vicious bill called the National Reserve Association bill. This bill is usually spoken of as the Aldrich bill. Senator Aldrich did not write the Aldrich bill. He was the tool, if not the accomplice, of the European bankers who for nearly twenty years had been scheming to set up a central bank in this Country and who in 1912 has spent and were continuing to spend vast sums of money to accomplish their purpose."
"We were opposed to the Aldrich plan for a central bank. The men who rule the Democratic Party then promised the people that if they were returned to power there would be no central bank established here while they held the reigns of government. Thirteen months later that promise was broken, and the Wilson administration, under the tutelage of those sinister Wall Street figures who stood behind Colonel House, established here in our free Country the worm-eaten monarchical institution of the "King's Bank" to control us from the top downward, and from the cradle to the grave."
"The Federal Reserve Bank destroyed our old and characteristic way of doing business. It discriminated against our 1-name commercial paper, the finest in the world, and it set up the antiquated 2-name paper, which is the present curse of this Country and which wrecked every country which has ever given it scope; it fastened down upon the Country the very tyranny from which the framers of the Constitution sough to save us."
Thank you and Good Night
|
zorbman
blarrr



Registered: 06/04/04
Posts: 5,952
|
Re: Ron Paul's Economics [Re: bugabuga420]
#7751394 - 12/12/07 09:14 PM (16 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
I don't trust anyone who cooks up their schemes at a place called "Jekyll Island". Something just ain't right there.
-------------------- “The crisis takes a much longer time coming than you think, and then it happens much faster than you would have thought.” -- Rudiger Dornbusch
|
bugabuga420
bUgAbUgaBOO

Registered: 07/18/02
Posts: 488
Last seen: 6 years, 2 months
|
Re: Ron Paul's Economics [Re: zorbman]
#7751429 - 12/12/07 09:24 PM (16 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
ive actually been there before its by st simon island and sea island( where they had the g8 summit) , also its where jfk jr got married
|
moho456
The Past Inside The Present



Registered: 06/10/06
Posts: 223
Loc: Translinguistic Matter
Last seen: 9 years, 3 months
|
Re: Ron Paul's Economics [Re: bugabuga420]
#7752031 - 12/12/07 11:43 PM (16 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
The point is, this whole system of debt, of debasing the currency and producing it in such a manner as the federal reserve, is bad. <notice the period. It is a giant corruption scheme, and if you think for a second that money they "give back" to the treasury is anything more than number fudging by the worlds best accountants then you don't know much about how things really work.
The study of macro/national-economics should not be applied here. This is not a government institution.
Ron Paul would do well to wean us off of this. And to those of you who advocate debt systems: Yeah it got us and a lot of others this far, but what now? A reactive and fluid approach with no preconceptions is one of my ideas about government and any kind of problem.
Not to mention the problems with welfare, taxation, education, foreign policy, etc...
--------------------
|
art
Stranger
Registered: 06/15/05
Posts: 331
Last seen: 14 years, 4 months
|
Re: Ron Paul's Economics [Re: moho456]
#7765844 - 12/16/07 02:39 PM (16 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
First of all, Wikipedia, and Youtube are not really the most credible sources, I know they save time, and are great for some things, but I do not think this is one of them. I do not know much about economics but this is what I do know.
Something only has as much value as people give it, therefore gold is only valuable if we make it valuable. The dollar is not going anywhere, it does not need to go anywhere.
Here is a quote on the gold standard, and the federal reserve by Robert Mundell, winner of the 1999 Nobel Prize in Economics, "Had the price of gold been raised in the late 1920's, or alternatively, had the major central banks pursued policies of price stability instead of adhering to the gold standard, there would have been no Great Depression, no Nazi revolution, and no World War 2."
debt is NOT necessarily a bad thing! it can be extremely useful.
Thomas Jefferson was not an economist, his beliefs against a central bank caused many problems for America. You also have to remember that the economy was completely different when Thomas Jefferson was alive.
Stop using the constitution during the founding of America to dictate how we should act NOW. "I do not think we are more inspired, have more wisdom, or possess more virtue, than those who will come after us." George Washington.
I am real confused on how you think the federal reserve works, the point of the interest rate is to reduce/increase inflation.
You bring up the point of corruption, perhaps there is a reason why the "honorable" Louis T. McFadden is so negative towards the federal reserve. Now I do not know anything about him, but I do know that there are always two sides to the story.
Now what about the deregulation of business? doesn't that usually lead to CORRUPTION!? It seems Ron Paul wants to go back to the gilded age. I think Ron Paul and his fiscal libertarian views are a huge scam. And that is not to mention the negative effects that his other policies would have (NAFTA, WTO for example)
And the biggest thing you left out is the...ALTERNATIVE! please explain to me why the economy has been very steady compared to pre-new deal times, and how you would continue to keep the economy steady without the federal reserve, ect.
|
zorbman
blarrr



Registered: 06/04/04
Posts: 5,952
|
Re: Ron Paul's Economics [Re: art]
#7766251 - 12/16/07 04:21 PM (16 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Something only has as much value as people give it, therefore gold is only valuable if we make it valuable. The dollar is not going anywhere, it does not need to go anywhere.
Not sure exactly what you meant by the last statement but I disagree with the first one. Currency is created out of thin air by the banking system whenever a loan is made and is backed by nothing. Gold is brought out of the ground by the hard work of blood, sweat and tears.
Gold, at a minimum, represents the labor which went into producing it.
Unlike currency, gold holds intrinsic value. Although there are fluctuations it always maintains some value over time.
-------------------- “The crisis takes a much longer time coming than you think, and then it happens much faster than you would have thought.” -- Rudiger Dornbusch
|
art
Stranger
Registered: 06/15/05
Posts: 331
Last seen: 14 years, 4 months
|
Re: Ron Paul's Economics [Re: zorbman]
#7767633 - 12/16/07 10:00 PM (16 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
that is not true. There are places in the world that you can go, and gold will have NO value. We gave gold its value, just like we gave the dollar its value. Now I do not know much about the gold standard, but I have never read any logical explanation for getting ride of it. I have read MANY instances where the gold standard has caused huge problems for our economy. I think Ron Paul is using that as an excuse to get ride of some legitimate institutions.
By cutting back on federal spending who is going to get hurt? Ron Paul? other business men? fuck no. Right now America has the largest unequal distribution of wealth since 1929. Ron Paul will only increase that gap.
|
Seuss
Error: divide byzero



Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 23,480
Loc: Caribbean
Last seen: 2 months, 20 days
|
Re: Ron Paul's Economics [Re: art]
#7768210 - 12/17/07 02:03 AM (16 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
> There are places in the world that you can go, and gold will have NO value.
History is against you on this one. Since the dawn of mankind, gold has been valued. Every single civilization that has had access to gold, from ancient Egyptians to modern nomads, have given it a high value. Of course you can get philosophical and claim that gold has no value beyond what mankind gives it, but in reality, every single culture that has access to gold gives it value. Reality, not philosophy, is what is important here. Take a pound of paper money and a pound of gold into the jungle with you and see which one the natives, which have never seen either, will be interested in trading. I'll give you a hint... the nice shiny one.
-------------------- Just another spore in the wind.
|
fireworks_god
Sexy.Butt.McDanger



Registered: 03/12/02
Posts: 24,855
Loc: Pandurn
Last seen: 1 year, 12 days
|
Re: Ron Paul's Economics [Re: art]
#7768222 - 12/17/07 02:12 AM (16 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
art said: By cutting back on federal spending who is going to get hurt? Ron Paul? other business men? fuck no. Right now America has the largest unequal distribution of wealth since 1929. Ron Paul will only increase that gap.
So how would not taking hundreds of dollars from Americans who work for a living each paycheck be detrimental?
--------------------
If I should die this very moment I wouldn't fear For I've never known completeness Like being here Wrapped in the warmth of you Loving every breath of you
|
zorbman
blarrr



Registered: 06/04/04
Posts: 5,952
|
Re: Ron Paul's Economics [Re: art]
#7768703 - 12/17/07 09:48 AM (16 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
There are places in the world that you can go, and gold will have NO value.
Name one country participating in the global monetary system which places no value on gold.
-------------------- “The crisis takes a much longer time coming than you think, and then it happens much faster than you would have thought.” -- Rudiger Dornbusch
|
art
Stranger
Registered: 06/15/05
Posts: 331
Last seen: 14 years, 4 months
|
Re: Ron Paul's Economics [Re: zorbman]
#7769998 - 12/17/07 02:58 PM (16 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
well first of all I was making a point on the value of something, it is philosophy that is important here. As far as I know the point of getting ride of the gold standard was because it allowed more control of our economy. Now you all have yet to answer any of my other questions, specifically the comparison of the gold standard to the post-gold standard economy. Although I am not an economist, and pretty ignorant on the subject I do know that the economy was very tumultuous up until the new deal, suffering a depression about once a decade. It was these recent implications such as the gold standard that has helped keep our economy steady. So why now, would you would to get ride of these things. I am not opposed to the gold standard as much as I am to some of Ron Paul's other ideas. Do you guys know of some moderate economists who support the gold standard? I would be interested in learning more, just not from the libertarian viewpoint, not that they aren't valid, but because I would like to see the viewpoint from someone in the middle. I can not think of a single person who supports the gold standard besides the libertarians.
You don't need to tax "Americans" you can tax specific Americans. I don't know if you heard about Warren Buffets deal with the other billionaires, but his secretary gets taxed more than he does. Now I know that there are other ways of giving money back to the government without taxes, and I am sure Warren was not completely exempt from taxes, but it still leaves a huge question. As far as I know Ron Paul is against deficit spending as well. So if he were against taxes but for deficit spending I could see that. But you still did not answer my question of who will get hurt/helped with tax cuts, cuts in deficit spending, and a smaller federal government.
I believe that it is Ron Paul and the business that will see the vast majority of help. Regulation is a good thing, again, just look at the gilded age for an example of what life was like without a strong government, and then look at where it lead our economy.
|
|