Right On!

The Fed is what is running up our national debt.  When they say America is rich it's all A lie.  We are the worlds largest debtor nation and the Fed controlls most of our government officials.  The Fed however does not controll Ron Paul and if enough Americans can wake-up to the control masters (monopoly men) that is the Fed we can get rid of them and start gaining control over our government once again.

Great article!

by J. Vorhees (6 articles, 0 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 67 comments) on Thursday, November 22, 2007 at 5:24:16 PM
 

My thanks

Thank you for this well written article.

by Linda Inveninato (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 12 comments) on Friday, November 23, 2007 at 6:44:22 AM
 

Excellent Observation

Paul,

As the character Frank Barone from "Everybody Loves Raymond" fame would say: "Holy crap!" You've made a very profound observation about something that I think all of us are guilty of from time to time. We whine and complain about the need to do something, but then we chicken out when the time comes to actually walk the walk.

I see the opportunity to vote for Ron Paul as one that I may not see again in my lifetime. If we elect yet another slick, shallow president who wallows in the same gray area politics and mud wrestling matches with Congress, we'll certainly deserve the sudden collapse of this house of cards called our economy that is almost certainly will happen before we get to enjoy our hard-earned nesteggs.

by Darryl Schmitz (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 8 comments) on Friday, November 23, 2007 at 9:48:19 AM
 

Ron Paul knows a scam when he sees one

Thanks, Paul, for explaining a complicated subject in simple layman's terms. I'll be referring to this article from time to time - since my way of leaving it to like-minded economists... and whatnot... isn't working so well... these days.

Personally, it's always been a little hard for me to cogently explain what I've always known was so obviously... just a huge scam... in a rigged system... anyway.

And - you know how it is - words can fail us, more often than not.

As a Paul supporter, however, I'm smart enough to tell when somebody's speaking with candor or deliberately glossing over the truth - which is why I've become a volunteer promoting and contributing to the good doctor's election campaign.

So now that we know the money's counterfeit - the Fed and the income tax are both unconstitutional - how about we agree corporatism is yet another form of public welfare... we can well do... without?

After all, the Law of Unintended Consequences, or blowback, is a real phenomenon, wouldn't you say? I also don't like people sucking up to the government for handouts OR fat contracts either - at least without some transparency... in a democratic process... or my personal stamp of approval.

And if this weren't enough, may I recommend you do a search sometime for communitarianism, communitarian law, and anti-communitarian league?

Here's how the elites behind the scenes have been preparing to enslave us - not to mention, trade away American sovereignty - in an all-inclusive, one helluva... grandiose scheme.

Man, it seems like the fun never ends... when exploring all the ways... to game this corruptible system. But then, I'm rather disinclined... to think an elitist's idea of fun... will ever the same as mine!

by bejeezus (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 14 comments) on Friday, November 23, 2007 at 11:51:23 AM
 

Bejeesus

You guys never quit.

If anyone wants a list of the organized horde to attack anyone who says what a "nut" case Ron Paul really is, go to the November 15 article written by Mike Kuykendall. Write down the names of those attacking Mike to notice how many of these same names keep appearing. The article ran with over a hundred articles some very laborious and very long and most making ad hominem attacks on Mike.

Ron Paul is back in the covered wagon days and is just a little to the right of Adolph Hitler, Ghenghis Kahn, Mohammed, and Attila the Hun. If you hate free public education, national health care, medicare, interstate, roads, national museum and parks, national libraries, a navy, an army, an Air Force, national postal sytem, CIA (not turned over to big business), against labor unions, for degregulatoin of banks-- then vote for Ron Paul. He is your man.

Phil.

by pratliff94 (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 969 comments) on Friday, November 23, 2007 at 12:07:36 PM
 

Sticks and Stones

Has it ever occurred to you that any candidate who advocates reigning in the excesses and mistakes of government would attract similar followers and be branded an extremist?

That is not to say all his followers would be of that type, but certainly many would. I would expect Ron Paul to attract many people who are anti-government for whatever reason, who else is actually advocating real reform, however, that does not imply the bulk of his following is not coming from people you would have a more difficult time smearing. Take a look. Ron Paul is big on college campuses. Young people, college students, do not generally support war-mongering fascist murders.

Do you realize that you have not responded at all to the main thrust of the article, what was written about the Federal Reserve Bank? Are you a defender of it? Is it good for America?

Has it occurred to you that you have essentially categorized the people who wrote our Constitution and people who still believe in it, in the same category as Hitler, Ghenghis Kahn, Mohammed, and Attila the Hun?

Yes, it will take more than a little name-calling to make us quit.

by Paul Rye (7 articles, 2 quicklinks, 17 diaries, 352 comments) on Friday, November 23, 2007 at 1:33:35 PM
 

Paul

And you are saying Ron Paul is not an extremist? Do you really think most Americans want to do away with Federal Government programs such as SS, Medicare, the public school sytem and go back to pre-depression banking sytems as he wants to do and those are not extreme positions? I guess they are not if you are a Norquist fan.

Paul, most people think government is a good thing or should be a good think to serve as an instrument for the good. From what I can gather about RP is that he wishes to destroy all the LBJ programs, the FDR programs and especially the anti-trust and anti-monoply laws of Teddy Roosevelt.

My postion is pretty simple:

1. Maintain and reinforce what we have with present social programs.

2. Return to the graduate income tax percentages during Truman and Eisenhower's Administrations.

3. Take profit out of health care much like France has with every citizen fully covered.

4. Make University education as free as Primary and Secondary Schools with good grade standards. A college graduate helps us all. A high school drop out hurts us all.

5. Do away with the parole system, shorten sentences, and get the non-violent criminals out of prisons.

6. Legalize drugs by putting them under the medical care sytem as it is done in most of Europe and England.

7. Have a universal draft where every one must give two years of service to their country right out of high school much as Isreal had in the seventies and eighties.

7. Do all of this fast because I am sixty-seven years old.

Ain't mad, just disagree,

Phil.

by pratliff94 (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 969 comments) on Friday, November 23, 2007 at 10:47:02 PM
 

Thank You for Your Comments

Phil,

Thank you for the distinct change in tone and being willing to discuss issues.

I think the political insult hurled most often in the U.S. is to say that someone is on the fringe in some way, so I do not see the point of debating whether or not Ron Paul is an extremist or not. It’s just a way of trying to marginalize him.

Most young Americans who actually understand how Social Security works want to do away with it. Most older Americans who were taught in public factory-schools to trust the Federal Government and paid into Social Security for 45 years are appalled that anyone would suggest taking it away from them. Ron Paul does not suggest taking it away from older people, but gradually phasing the program out. He recognizes that it would be unfair to penalize people who were taught to trust the system.

Regarding Medicare, the public school system, and pre-depression banking systems, politicians the world over know that making promises of government benefits is the way to get elected and stay in office. I think what you fear is that if Medicare were to be eliminated, then you and people your age would lose your prescription drug benefits, and nothing would take the place of Medicare. Life gets scary as you get older and realize that you will probably have to life on your savings and S.S. However, if you understood my article, inflation is your worst enemy, not Ron Paul.

Not that I would favor the idea, but why couldn’t states create their own version of Medicare, or cities for that matter? Better yet, why couldn’t the states establish voluntary retirement and medical savings programs, which a citizen could choose to pay into their whole working life? That would overcome an objection many have about S.S., that people 18-55 years old are subsidizing people who are on S.S. now, and the fund will be insufficient to cover them when they retire.

Our government factory-schools today still function basically the same way they did over 100 years ago when they were designed to prepare young people for work in American factories such as the Carnegie steel mills, complete with bells to signal when to start work, stop work, recess, and lunch. When I started teaching at my high school over seven years ago, about half the classrooms had an Internet connection. It took until this year to finish the job. I teach one-size-fits-all mathematics at one of those schools after twenty years in engineering. I can tell you it is pretty degrading at times, to the students. No more than 5% will every have the personality suited to a study of mathematics. Yet there is no other viable option for them. The school is intent on working to the state standards that are modeled on federal standards. The goal is college prep, no matter if they are going to college or not, no matter if they are going into work that requires mathematics or not. Critical thinking is a buzz word; it is not effectively taught. I went to a PTA meeting many years ago, with the naïve intent of making suggestions about my son’s elementary school curriculum and was basically told to shut up by the school principal. If I wanted to volunteer to make and serve hot dogs at a school event, fine. Otherwise, stay home. If our intent as a society is to prepare all the young people I see for a productive life in a high tech world, our government factory-schools are not doing that. Just giving people their education dollars back in an education account established for each child and letting parents decide how to spend them would be a vast improvement. Whoever pays makes the rules. If parents do not pay for school, they will never make the rules.

I’m no expert on pre-depression banks but a quick review on Wikipedia indicates that the Fed is the third try at a national bank in the U.S. We had two prior experiments with national banks. All the old banking panics and bank failures appear due to one thing – debasing the currency. Bank notes could not be redeemed. Yet, during the period 1837-1862, when so many banks were failing, the value of money – gold and silver – was very constant. Makes you wonder what games the banks were playing with their notes, don’t you think? Even with the third national bank, the Federal Reserve, debasing its currency, we had a relatively stable currency due to the gold standard. When we went completely off the gold standard in 1971, inflation became severe and entrenched. At least in the old days, when a bank failed, they didn’t all fail. Kind of like every kind of other business, some failed some didn’t. Now, what will happen when the Fed fails? You should fear that.

I’ve never heard of Norquist.

Phil, don’t be lazy. If you think RP wishes to destroy all the LBJ programs, all the FDR programs, and the anti-trust and anti-monopoly laws of Teddy Roosevelt, then say so or read his actual positions and come back and state them. I’m no more an expert on every one of his positions than I was on any other candidate I’ve supported in the past. I trust him. I like his principles, and I know enough about some of his positions to know that he is consistent and thinks things through, but I do not have the time or energy to research every one of his positions today. As I learn more myself, I would be happy to respond. Just do not have time right now.

Regarding your stated positions

1. Our present social programs are not so much excessive as they are flawed. If they are eliminated that does not necessarily imply that nothing will replace them.

2. Returning to the graduated income tax percentages during Truman and Eisenhower's Administrations will not solve the problem of inflation and the national debt.

3. A cursory look at French health care tells me we might learn a thing or two from them, more people covered, good quality of care, less cost overall. But, I don’t think you can take profit out of the health care business. An indication of this is that health care costs in the French system are rising.

4. Education is good, but nothing is free. Someone always pays for it, and the person who pays for it controls it. Make all education free – paid for by the government and you give all control of it to the government and the special interests that control the government. Don’t do it.

5. I’m for institutionalizing fewer people in the prison system, but I’m no expert on the best way to do it.

6. The best argument for legalizing drugs is that it would cost less than the “war on drugs”, and the drop in cost of the drugs would reduce crime by addicts and put drug dealers out of business.

7. If the U.S. military were actually used only for national defense I would wholeheartedly agree with requiring all citizens to give two years of service to their country right out of high school, but if I voted for it and my son were drafted and died to make the world safe for the United Fruit Company or Exxon, I don't think I could go on living.

8. Wish I was retired but I’ll probably have to work until I’m seventy at which time my S.S. benefits might kick in, if the system isn't insolvent then or the eligibility date hasn't been moved back even later.

We need changes Phil, if not for us, then for our children. Don’t trust the nanny-state to look after them.

Paul

by Paul Rye (7 articles, 2 quicklinks, 17 diaries, 352 comments) on Saturday, November 24, 2007 at 3:28:47 AM
 

Ron Paul Right On Target & Fully Understands What We Face.

Obviously Phil [pratliff94], you don’t get it do you? The entire monetary system is built upon a foundation of debt. Everything you hold dear is built upon a system that has a mathematical point of termination.

Every single dollar in circulation, digital or physical, has been BORROWED into existence. The expansion of the economy totally depends on the expansion of the debt. There comes a time however, when the cost of servicing that debt becomes greater than the ability of the economy to maintain its growth and the debt begins to siphon off more and more of economic prosperity. This Fiat System that you obviously tout as wonderful in providing free public education, national health care, medicare, interstate roads, national museums, parks, etc. reached its Practical Possible Lifespan a few years ago, this is evidenced by the growing lack of tolerance of the economy to maintain itself under minor disruptions, such as what was once considered small interest rate hikes. Soon, very soon, the system will enter a stage called the Maximum Possible Lifespan, at that point you will begin to see disruptions and economic dislocations take place that will eventually cause the entire system to suffer failure.

It is a well-known fact that every fiat system always fails because it is mathematically impossible for it to continue past a certain stage between the ratios of debt to growth. This is not a political issue we are facing as you suppose, but one that will so drastically change the face of this country if something is not done then we really will be facing a life where even a covered wagon would be considered a luxury.

It is apparent that you don’t have a clue about what you are talking about, no offense is meant by that, but just read your post again. If you did have a clue then you would know that this Federal Reserve Fiat System is a total sham. Today it takes over $20,0000.00 to purchase what $1,000.00 bought in 1913, before the Federal Reserve Act. Now, it is not that the price of goods and services has risen so high, but your “money” has been systematically devalued through inflation. If you look at inflation charts over the past 200 years you will see a very interesting thing. Inflation was almost nil until 1913, then it began to moderately rise until 1933 and the FDR Fraud. At that point there was a jump and a steady rise until 1971-72 when Nixon completely took this country a total fiat currency. At that point, you will notice a rapid and sharp rise on the inflation chart and with that rise you will note that the buying power of the people was drastically diminished. Today we labor for pennies on the dollar and everyone smiles because they may get a raise, or a cost of living increase, or a minimum raise increase….gosh, aren’t we a happy compliant bunch in this country. All the while the government, with the Banking Cartel called the Central Banking System, walks away with the wealth of this nation while maintaining a country of productive serfs.

Everything we know, from our investments, our pensions, our insurance, our savings, our 401Ks, everything is built on a monetary system that is rapidly reaching that Maximum Possible Lifespan, its inherent terminal point where it is no longer viable. What will you do when the final stage of collapse begins to wreak havoc on everything you are comfortable with in your life? What will you and your family do when it cost $100, $200 or $1000 or more for a loaf of bread? Don’t think it can happen? Keep sticking your head in that cozy bed of sand.

by Republicae (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 35 comments) on Friday, November 23, 2007 at 2:43:34 PM
 

Pigs in Mud

Republicae,

Technically, there is a small amount of legal tender FRN currency in existence called “base money” that would not disappear along with the extinguishment of all debt.

Also, although there are a large number of people who understand quite well the mathematics of a debt-based fiat currency, they still represent only a tiny fraction of the public. So, it is not accurate to say it is a well-known fact – among the public - that every fiat system always fails.

In my mathematics class on Wednesday, I asked who among my students had taken a business or economics class, and two thirds of the hands went up. I pulled a dollar out of my wallet and then asked, “Who can tell me what this is worth?” After ten minutes no one had yet given any sensible answer. Finally, I said “What can you buy for one dollar?” Students replied, “a big mac, a jumbo jack, etc” I said, “You are on the right track. Now, did you know that when I was a kid, you could go to MacDonald’s and get a hamburger, fries, and a Coke for 35 cents?”

The public schools just won’t teach precisely what determines the value of a FRN dollar, or what causes inflation, and that is just one consequence of having a Federal Department of Education.

The role of the Federal Reserve in creating: money, the national debt, and inflation, is not widely known or understood. Therefore, it is incumbent on us to explain it again and again.

Bejeesus did not credit any of the government services you mentioned to the fiat system of the Federal Reserve. The gist of Bejeesus’ comments was he(she) found some the responses to Mike Kuykendall’s article distasteful and characterized Ron Paul’s political views as more extreme than those of a short list of mass-murderers. So, some of the responses to Mike Kuykendall were more hostile than helpful, and Bejeesus was not informed but offended.  Then Bejeesus did the same thing.  I wonder how readers Muslim's took Bejeesus’ inclusion of Mohammed on a list of mass murderers.  Pretty extreme don’t you think?

I’m sure you understood what I was saying about the Fed; I would just caution you about trying to wrestle a pig in mud. That is a pig’s game. Let the pigs offend others, and let us keep our heads.

by Paul Rye (7 articles, 2 quicklinks, 17 diaries, 352 comments) on Friday, November 23, 2007 at 5:27:21 PM
 

Correction

Oops, sorry Bejesus. Got your name mixed up with pratliff94, because pratliff94 had your name at the top of his(her) comment. A thousand pardons.

by Paul Rye (7 articles, 2 quicklinks, 17 diaries, 352 comments) on Friday, November 23, 2007 at 5:35:20 PM
 

Paul

My post was above "Republicae" because it was a direct reply to your comment. I hit the "reply" button under your comment, and that is were it is inserted.

We can use all the argument in the world, but the Progressive will always ask such things as does Ron Paul control the filty rich or does he give them such a "laissez-faire" approach that the corporations and obscenly rich control everything from the media, to health, to energy, to education.

I have a sneaky feeling that Ron Paul is against universal health care with fifty million Americans without any health insurance whatever.

I have a sneaky suspicion that he is against labor unions and every program that demands a fair or livable wage.

Do you refute this?

 Phil

by pratliff94 (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 969 comments) on Friday, November 23, 2007 at 11:11:55 PM
 

Our Children Need be Brave to Win Back Their Government

Phil,

Nobody controls the filthy rich, not now, especially not in the last twenty years. None of the front runners in the Presidential campaign appear willing even to try. I think an area that requires research and great thought is how to take control of government away from corporations and the super rich and back to the people. I think the worry you have expressed about Ron Paul in this regard goes beyond the question of whether a candidate is a strict Constitutionalist or a Progressive.

If I had more time, I would try to explain how monopolies cannot endure without government protection, therefore monopolies that do endure are doing so by buying government protection. In doing so, they corrupt government. A more cogent question then is how to prevent corporations and the super rich from corrupting governments.

As long as we Americans remain focused on the question of who will control the corporations and super rich, we miss the point, I think. We should focus not on how to control them, but how to control our own leaders and how to prevent our leaders from controlling us. The corporations and super rich use government to control us. We need to put a stop to that.

Concerning health care, on his website, Ron Paul says he supports:

• Making all medical expenses tax deductible.
• Eliminating federal regulations that discourage small businesses from providing coverage.
• Giving doctors the freedom to collectively negotiate with insurance companies and drive down the cost of medical care.
• Making every American eligible for a Health Savings Account (HSA), and removing the requirement that individuals must obtain a high-deductible insurance policy before opening an HSA.
• Reform licensure requirements so that pharmacists and nurses can perform some basic functions to increase access to care and lower costs.

So, I would say you are probably right. It looks like he doesn’t support universal health care. You will not catch me lying, because I don’t lie, and if I don’t know or do not understand something, I just say so. You do not need to get all your answers from me, though. Do your homework, heh, heh. (Sorry, that's a teacher joke.) Just go to his website and check out his positions on the issues.

Concerning universal health care, labor unions, and programs that demand a fair or livable wage, here is what I think about all three as a whole. No law or government program can guarranty heath and prosperity for all, no government program is efficient, and we should not be looking to government to solve all our problems for us. We should only look to government to help with problems that cannot be solved any other way.

Government should primarily be involved preventing and resolving things, not in providing services. Government should: fight defensive wars, prevent crime, resolve contract disputes, prosecute violations of civil rights, etc. It should not provide a laundry list of benefits that constitute a cradle-to-grave nanny-state, putting: cash in your pocket, food on your table, and drugs in your medicine cabinet. Someone has to pay for or produce all those things, so you have to pay for them. You cannot get them for free. Government cannot provide them efficiently, so you should not ask it to. We make ourselves all poorer when we ask it to.

Paul

by Paul Rye (7 articles, 2 quicklinks, 17 diaries, 352 comments) on Saturday, November 24, 2007 at 4:34:21 AM
 

Republicae

I get it all right. I am just not willing to go back to pre-depression policies of the banking sytems. Ron Paul is sort of Libertarian and yet goes further than they do in some ways. I think the things done by Theodore Roosevelt with anti-trust and anti-monopoly laws were correct. I think the graduated income tax is wonderful along with social security. I think Medicare and Medicaid, WICK, DHS, Department of Education, absolute universal health care is great.

I think you and the writer try to bring Ron Paul off as a Progressive Democrat in hiding when he is  really farther right wing than GWB, but seems to be an honest man, but honestly in error.

You are going to change very few minds of real Democrats and real Progressives on this blog.

Like I said. I ain't mad, just really disagree with you.

Phil.

by pratliff94 (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 969 comments) on Friday, November 23, 2007 at 11:01:23 PM
 

Engaging the Issues

Phil,

Your comment was to Republicae, but also to me, so I would like to respond.

I would not be willing to go back to pre-depression policies of the banking system either. Certainly, economic theory has progressed greatly since then. For more information about the direction a reform of our banking system might go, take a look at The Future of Money by Bernard Leitaer.

I think the things done by Theodore Roosevelt with anti-trust and anti-monopoly laws were correct also and would not support scrapping those laws. There is nothing wrong with having a government mechanism to break up government-protected monopolies. Although, you might want to ask why there were only two major antitrust breakups in the U.S., Standard Oil and AT&T, why it took so long to get around to doing them, and why our government failed to break up IBM and Microsoft.

The super-rich love graduated income taxes, too, because they know it means people all the way up to the upper middle class and will pay a disproportionate share of all government social services costs, while their income and assets remain sheltered using tax avoidance techniques unavailable to the “little people”. Meanwhile, inflation eats away the savings of anyone living on a fixed income.

Re: social security. Hypothetically, would you pass a law requiring your own children to support you in retirement? If not, why would you pass a law requiring your neighbor’s children to help you? Nothing will solve the problem of the high cost of medicine until the monopoly of the AMA on doctor certification is broken. What about that monopoly?

Long before learning of Ron Paul, I was interested in economics. I’m definitely not thinking of trying to “bring Ron Paul off as a Progressive Democrat” or anything else for that matter, except the guy says many things I agree with, so he's my guy, and he’s being attacked routinely instead of engaged on the issues. I could write out a list of Kucinich’s policy positions and call him a kook wearing a tinfoil hat who sees UFOs, or write a nasty hit-piece about him, cherry picking bits of information about him here and there, but why do it? Anyone can do that to practically any candidate. Writers that avoid that BS, engage and discuss issues, will find the angry horde evaporates. If they do not, then I will be on your side, criticizing the horde.

This belittling of any candidate who is not a front runner makes me sick. It is no different than the students in my classroom who think they are so cool and popular that they can gang up and ridicule the small kid, the goofy kid, or the shy kid.

Lastly, I expect compromise in politics. That does not mean I'm saying, "Hey, do not worry, I don't expect to really get rid of the Fed if my guy is elected." It means that if my guy does get elected, and the Fed does get dissolved, I expect the opposition to get something they can live with to replace it.

Thanks again for your comments.

Paul

by Paul Rye (7 articles, 2 quicklinks, 17 diaries, 352 comments) on Tuesday, November 27, 2007 at 1:34:30 AM