The Mainstreaming of Ron Paul

For the past couple of months I’ve been writing about the “mainstreaming” of paleo-libertarian Ron Paul; he’s been a regular guest on Fox News and other networks, and his drones have been heavily involved in organizing “tea party” demonstrations. Lots of LGF readers didn’t want to believe this was happening.

Well, it really is happening.

The weird economic theories of Ron Paul are Winning GOP Converts.

A funny thing has started happening to Paul since his long-shot presidential campaign ended quietly in the summer of 2008. More Republicans have started listening to him. There are the media requests from Fox Business Channel and talk radio, where he’s given airtime to inveigh on sound money and macroeconomics. There is HR 1207 , the Federal Reserve Transparency Act of 2009, a bill that would launch an audit of the Federal Reserve System, and which has attracted 112 co-sponsors. When Paul introduced the Federal Reserve Board Abolition Act just two years ago, no other members of Congress signed on.

And then there are the luncheons. The off-the-record talks have brought in speakers such as ex-CIA counterterrorism expert Michael Scheuer, libertarian investigative reporter James Bovard, iconoclastic terrorism scholar Robert Pape, and George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley. Perhaps the most influential guest has been Thomas Woods, a conservative scholar whose previous books include “The Politically Incorrect Guide to American History” and “Who Killed the Constitution?: The Fate of American Liberty from World War I to George W. Bush,” and whose current book “Meltdown” has inspired Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) to question Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke and Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner about economic fundamentals.

Paul’s unexpected and sudden clout with his fellow Republicans — even some of Paul’s staff have been surprised with the momentum of his “Audit the Fed” bill — come as the GOP engages in a tortured internal dialogue about its future. Since January, no small number of new coalitions have formed between current members of Congress, former advisors to President George W. Bush, and perennial party leaders such as former Gov. Mitt Romney (R-Mass.) and former Gov. Jeb Bush (R-Fla.). Few of those conservatives, however, have spent much time criticizing the very foundations of America’s modern economic system and worrying about a 1929-style crash. Few of them had a drawer stuffed with off-brand economic ideas and forgotten libertarian texts, ready to explain what needed to be done. Ron Paul did, and as a result the ideas that made the Republican establishment irate enough to bounce him from a few primary debates are more popular than ever.

And chief among these new converts — one of the very kookiest Representatives in Congress, Michele Bachmann, the one-woman GOP anti-science crusader.

But the most prominent new face is Bachmann, the rising conservative star who left C-SPAN and YouTube watchers scratching their heads with a constitutional grilling that seemed to puzzle Geithner. “What provision in the Constitution could you point to to give authority for the actions that have been taken by the Treasury since March of ‘08?” asked Bachmann during a hearing on March 24. “What in the Constitution could you point to to give authority to the Treasury’s extraordinary actions that have been taken?”

Bachmann “goes to these luncheons on a weekly basis,” said Debbee Keller, Bachmann’s press secretary. Keller noted that Bachmann was reading “Meltdown,” which argues that the New Deal failed and that the Federal Reserve is responsible for the current economic crisis. “Just as Austrian theory suggests,” wrote Woods, “the Fed’s mischief was responsible for the Great Depression.”

“I had a feeling she’d have some interest in the book,” said Woods, “because she asked some good questions. She was taking notes. She was asking if this or that point could be found in the book. I thought I recognized a sincere person who wanted knowledge, not the usual politician who couldn’t care less about what the truth is and just wanted to propagandize.”

Paul didn’t take credit for turning Bachmann on to Austrian theory (”He’ll give credit to everyone on the planet except himself,” laughed Woods) but said he was pleased to see more members of Congress delving into economics. “She’s very open to studying,” said Paul. “In fact, she’s been working really hard to get me back to Minneapolis. She says, ‘You’ll get such a great reception there!’”

And Ron Paul’s oldest racist friends, the John Birch Society, couldn’t be happier about his new legitimacy.

It’s been a rapid rise for an idea that, only months ago, was located firmly in the political fringe. The John Birch Society, the far-right group that Paul has often defended from media criticism, was one of the first groups to encourage members to contact their members of Congress to support an audit of the Fed.

This is a deeply disturbing development; for more reasons why Ron Paul should not be brought into the mainstream of the GOP, see: Angry White Man - The bigoted past of Ron Paul.

I’m under no illusions that the GOP will pay attention to me, but isn’t there anyone in the party who sees how disastrous this is becoming?

Jump to bottom

536 comments

1 jcm  Thu, May 7, 2009 4:35:03pm

Laup Nor!

2 Sheila Broflovski  Thu, May 7, 2009 4:36:16pm

That sucks.

3 pingjockey  Thu, May 7, 2009 4:36:49pm

Madness!

4 erraticsphinx  Thu, May 7, 2009 4:37:47pm

Ron Paul doesn't belong in the Republican Party.

5 CyanSnowHawk  Thu, May 7, 2009 4:37:59pm

No one in the GOP can do anything about it. The GOP leadership is absent.

6 Sharmuta  Thu, May 7, 2009 4:38:09pm

Fox news doesn't care it they're promoting kooks- it makes them money. Until this starts costing them money- they won't have incentive to stop.

7 Devil's Advocate  Thu, May 7, 2009 4:39:05pm

Charles,

I think you need to elaborate better on this. I didn't vote for Ron Paul; I didn't agree with his foreign policy. I didn't approve of Lew Rockwell's racism. But, one thing that Ron Paul has been right about is economics.

In essence, Ron Paul stands for Capitalism, No Bailouts, Free Trade. I stand for all those things.

This issue with the Fed, is based on the Austrian theory of the Business cycle, understood by F.A. Hayek and Ludvig Von Mises. Essentially, it is the idea that price controls always create misallocation of resources, so why do we accept the Federal Reserve setting "price controls" on our money via interest rates.

I think you need to explain why you're against Ron Paul's economic policies on paper, because he happens to be right on those narrow issues.

8 nevergiveup  Thu, May 7, 2009 4:39:28pm

re: #6 Sharmuta

Fox news doesn't care it they're promoting kooks- it makes them money. Until this starts costing them money- they won't have incentive to stop.

And since they are getting some of their highest ratings ever, I guess that is not going to end anytime soon. Unfortunately.

9 Syrah  Thu, May 7, 2009 4:40:47pm

re: #5 CyanSnowHawk

No one in the GOP can do anything about it. The GOP leadership is absent.

There really is no leadership. We are watching what happens in a vacuum.

10 brookly red  Thu, May 7, 2009 4:43:08pm

If Obama is the anti-Bush, then the anti-Obama may just be... oh crap.

11 nevergiveup  Thu, May 7, 2009 4:43:11pm

Senior officials in Jerusalem expressed concern recently over the sharp decline in the coordination between Israel and the United States on security and state affairs since President Barack Obama's entered the White House and especially since the formation of Israel's new government.

[Link: www.haaretz.com...]

And it's only going to get worse.

12 hopperandadropper  Thu, May 7, 2009 4:43:13pm

I don't like Ron Paul even a little bit. The problem he presents is that even a crackpot can be right about certain things (possibly by accident). The Republican leadership really doesn't need to be doing anything else right now except beating the drum about the level of debt Obama is trying to create and the unprecedented level of government control over every aspect of our lives the Dems are seeking. Forget about the Fed, this is truly fundamental and not that hard to explain.

13 Killian Bundy  Thu, May 7, 2009 4:43:27pm

re: #7 Devil's Advocate

In essence, Ron Paul stands for Capitalism, No Bailouts, Free Trade. I stand for all those things.

A return to the gold standard?

/that's really dumb

14 pingjockey  Thu, May 7, 2009 4:43:27pm

re: #9 Syrah

Mass frakkin' idiocy!

15 windhorse  Thu, May 7, 2009 4:44:15pm

where's Mike Gravel when we need him?

/

16 wrenchwench  Thu, May 7, 2009 4:44:40pm
I’m under no illusions that the GOP will pay attention to me, but isn’t there anyone in the party who sees how disastrous this is becoming?

Maybe they don't "pay attention" in the sense that they take you at your word and consider it at face value, but I do think they go into defensive mode when they feel you breathing down their necks.

Yesterday Rush was saying that the new leftie template was to paint Republicans as "anti-science." The "background material" linked at the end of the transcript was to Hot Air. Rush does not get (or does not yet admit) that some of the criticism is coming from the right.

17 Sharmuta  Thu, May 7, 2009 4:45:01pm

re: #8 nevergiveup

Well- I'm not watching them already.

18 HelloDare  Thu, May 7, 2009 4:45:12pm

Ron Paul wants to trash the Federal Reserve and go back to the original currency. Yap stone money.

19 Taqyia2Me  Thu, May 7, 2009 4:45:12pm

These are signs of how nature abhores a vacuum; as in this case, Republican leadership.
Therefore, let us hope for the emergence of a TRUE conservative leader, for our country's sake.

20 pingjockey  Thu, May 7, 2009 4:45:17pm

re: #15 windhorse

Throwing rocks in a lake.

21 Koyaanistaaqa  Thu, May 7, 2009 4:45:33pm

"Mainstreaming"? More like "mainlining'...

22 Wasta  Thu, May 7, 2009 4:45:33pm

re: #9 Syrah

There really is no leadership. We are watching what happens in a vacuum.

It appears that

vacuum

is indeed expanding and the political future is up for grabs...at least to those willing to show up...

23 Gus  Thu, May 7, 2009 4:46:26pm

The List:

Ron Paul
Mike Gravel
Dennis Kucinich

Brought to you by Loonie Tunes.

24 pingjockey  Thu, May 7, 2009 4:46:34pm

Dinner. BBIAB.

25 erraticsphinx  Thu, May 7, 2009 4:46:37pm

re: #16 wrenchwench

Rush is wrong on this.
This isn't a leftie template, it's what's really happening.
The anti-science wing of the GOP is ascendant, and you can't blame the left for that.

26 Devil's Advocate  Thu, May 7, 2009 4:46:56pm

re: #13 Killian Bundy

A return to the gold standard?

/that's really dumb

I'm read Milton Friedman's Money Mischief, Thomas E. Wood's Meltdown, "The Case against the Fed", as well as Mises arguments for the Gold Standard.

The reasons for the gold standard are actually quite strong and outweigh the tradeoffs in my opinion. Fiat currency outside a war has never been tried in world history, and usually leads to disaster. Our experimentation strangely is something that people take too lightly.

27 Sharmuta  Thu, May 7, 2009 4:47:01pm

I mean- fox now have guest on prime time that think Malcolm X was 0bama's father. They obviously don't care about their credibility. There's no professionalism in the msm.

28 HelloDare  Thu, May 7, 2009 4:47:17pm

re: #19 Taqyia2Me

These are signs of how nature abhores a vacuum; as in this case, Republican leadership.
Therefore, let us hope for the emergence of a TRUE conservative leader, for our country's sake.

It's more a case of the media loving a vacuum in Republican leadership.

(And why the hell does vacuum have two u's.)

29 Racer X  Thu, May 7, 2009 4:47:40pm

The GOP is anti-science.

The Obama administration is getting ready to shut down NASA.

What next?

30 brookly red  Thu, May 7, 2009 4:48:44pm

re: #29 Racer X

The GOP is anti-science.

The Obama administration is getting ready to shut down NASA.

What next?

/do we really need an air force?

31 rumcrook  Thu, May 7, 2009 4:48:52pm
isn’t there anyone in the party who sees how disastrous this is becoming?

I do.

32 wrenchwench  Thu, May 7, 2009 4:48:58pm

re: #25 erraticsphinx

Rush is wrong on this.
This isn't a leftie template, it's what's really happening.
The anti-science wing of the GOP is ascendant, and you can't blame the left for that.

Yep. Rush loved the Ben Stein movie, Expelled, and can't see how that makes him anti-science.

33 pink freud  Thu, May 7, 2009 4:49:22pm

re: #29 Racer X

The GOP is anti-science.

The Obama administration is getting ready to shut down NASA.

What next?

Eminent domain to seize the land upon which the Flight 93 memorial is to built. Four owners.

34 freetoken  Thu, May 7, 2009 4:49:28pm

re: #7 Devil's Advocate


I think you need to explain why you're against Ron Paul's economic policies on paper, because he happens to be right on those narrow issues.


Dude.... that is soooo.... 20th century of you.

35 Killian Bundy  Thu, May 7, 2009 4:50:36pm

Watching Bachmann and Paul harangue re: #26 Devil's Advocate

I'm read Milton Friedman's Money Mischief, Thomas E. Wood's Meltdown, "The Case against the Fed", as well as Mises arguments for the Gold Standard.

The reasons for the gold standard are actually quite strong and outweigh the tradeoffs in my opinion. Fiat currency outside a war has never been tried in world history, and usually leads to disaster. Our experimentation strangely is something that people take too lightly.

Um, there's no country left on the face of the earth that's ties it's currency to a precious metal.

/ever tried comparing the total amount of mined gold with the money supply?

36 freetoken  Thu, May 7, 2009 4:51:01pm

re: #16 wrenchwench

Rush does not get (or does not yet admit) that some of the criticism is coming from the right.

Limbaugh also cares less for science than even Melanie Phillips... at least in his role as a radio talk show personality.

37 LGoPs  Thu, May 7, 2009 4:51:04pm

re: #28 HelloDare

It's more a case of the media loving a vacuum in Republican leadership.

(And why the hell does vacuum have two u's.)

I always pronounce it vack-uh-yume........

38 nevergiveup  Thu, May 7, 2009 4:51:20pm

Obama Puts Entire NASA Space Program in Limbo

[Link: www.foxnews.com...]

If I worked at NASA, I'd be looking for another job?

39 Walter L. Newton  Thu, May 7, 2009 4:52:13pm
I’m under no illusions that the GOP will pay attention to me, but isn’t there anyone in the party who sees how disastrous this is becoming?

Probably not. Just like there are very few people who see how disastrous it is to that the anti-jihad movement in Europe is being headed by a bunch of recycled fascists, and conservative in our own country are riding on those fascists coat tails.

Probably not. Just like there are very few people who see how disastrous it is that many conservatives in this country accept that science is the enemy and and believe that there is some sort of all out war to steal their religious faith.

Probably not. Just like there are very few conservatives who see how disastrous it is to have pundits as the keynotes of their politics and an entertainer that calls himself the head of the Republican party.

The biggest disaster is that critical thinking skills have gone the way of the dodo, which enables and allows conservatives to fall into this kind of trap, ruled and ruined by a bunch of right wing lunatics.

40 erraticsphinx  Thu, May 7, 2009 4:52:37pm

Unless Obama reveals he is the Chupacabra, there is no way the GOP is going anywhere in 2010.

At least not in the Northeast, where I live.

41 freetoken  Thu, May 7, 2009 4:52:42pm

re: #35 Killian Bundy

/ever tried comparing the total amount of mined gold with the money supply?

Furthermore, gold production has at times run into real problems (mining, etc.)

Additionally, it is now a key mineral for our modern electronic society. Gold is far too important to our electronics to allow the gold-bugs to lock it up in vaults as a type of "money".

42 brookly red  Thu, May 7, 2009 4:52:44pm

re: #38 nevergiveup

Obama Puts Entire NASA Space Program in Limbo

[Link: www.foxnews.com...]

If I worked at NASA, I'd be looking for another job?

Iran is hiring...

43 Racer X  Thu, May 7, 2009 4:52:50pm

What the hell happened to America?

Our politicians continue to fuck us over time and time again, and we continue to fall for it, hoping the next batch will be better.

They just get worse.

44 Querent  Thu, May 7, 2009 4:53:02pm

re: #39 Walter L. Newton

i regret that i have but one upding to give for that comment!

45 wrenchwench  Thu, May 7, 2009 4:53:06pm

re: #36 freetoken

Limbaugh also cares less for science than even Melanie Phillips... at least in his role as a radio talk show personality.

Yep. Loves his cochlear implant, but thinks creationism should be in science class.

46 Killian Bundy  Thu, May 7, 2009 4:53:37pm

Watching Bachmann and Paul harangue Gethner and Bernacke with incredibly stupid questions during House hearings is actually kind of humorous.

/they have to be polite in answering and you can just tell it's killing them

47 jcm  Thu, May 7, 2009 4:53:38pm

re: #7 Devil's Advocate

The gold standard won't work either.

RP has all those problems you mentioned. Between the racism and isolationism it makes him untenable as representative of the conservative movement.

48 HelloDare  Thu, May 7, 2009 4:54:15pm

re: #37 LGoPs

I always pronounce it vack-uh-yume........

Does anybody hear remember how Corporal Agarn on F-Troop pronounced, "The bandit from Banff."

49 iLikeCandy  Thu, May 7, 2009 4:54:31pm

That Michelle Bachman "smackdown" had me scratching my head, too.

"What Constitutional provision allows you to take these actions?"

"Uh, Congress authorized it . . . Congresswoman."

50 jvic  Thu, May 7, 2009 4:55:09pm

I'm guessing the Democrats/MSM are happy to see Paul being built up--so they can be shocked shocked to 'discover' his background once he's established as a major Republican.

Nightmare 2012: Huckabee/Paul or Paul/Huckabee. shudder

I don't put it past them. The "thinking": Obama = Carter; Paul = Reagan; Huckabee = GHW Bush.

shudder

51 iLikeCandy  Thu, May 7, 2009 4:55:44pm

I also wondered why Bachmann was haranguing a Treasury guy about the Constitution. If Tim Geithner had had his head about him, he would have referred her to Eric Holder.

52 erraticsphinx  Thu, May 7, 2009 4:56:32pm

re: #50 jvic

You can't blame EVERYTHING on a conspiracy.

53 Racer X  Thu, May 7, 2009 4:56:58pm

The way the MFMSM absolutely crucified Sarah Palin, it is no wonder sane people stay away from politics.

54 Macker  Thu, May 7, 2009 4:57:03pm

re: #38 nevergiveup

Obama Puts Entire NASA Space Program in Limbo

[Link: www.foxnews.com...]

If I worked at NASA, I'd be looking for another job?

Perhaps Private Industry can step up...that is, if БХО doesn't regulate and tax outer space to death.

55 Devil's Advocate  Thu, May 7, 2009 4:57:06pm

re: #35 Killian Bundy

Watching Bachmann and Paul harangue

Um, there's no country left on the face of the earth that's ties it's currency to a precious metal.

/ever tried comparing the total amount of mined gold with the money supply?

Of course not. When we switched everyone else had to switch as well because of the size of our economy.

Moreover, you don't need a 1 to 1 ratio.... I'm not sure if you understand how a gold supply works. People would simply issue dollars based on percentages of an ounce.

I suggest you read some of the books I outlined.

56 Killgore Trout  Thu, May 7, 2009 4:57:41pm

This calls for a poll:
Ron Paul is.....
A) Mainstream
B) Awesome
C) Ron Paul!

57 Querent  Thu, May 7, 2009 4:58:00pm

re: #56 Killgore Trout

D: Nucking Futs!

58 jcm  Thu, May 7, 2009 4:58:24pm

re: #56 Killgore Trout

This calls for a poll:
Ron Paul is.....
A) Mainstream
B) Awesome
C) Ron Paul!

Laup Nor!

59 brookly red  Thu, May 7, 2009 4:58:25pm

re: #52 erraticsphinx

You can't blame EVERYTHING on a conspiracy.

/true, it might just be a useful crisis...

60 Devil's Advocate  Thu, May 7, 2009 4:58:31pm

re: #47 jcm

The gold standard won't work either.

RP has all those problems you mentioned. Between the racism and isolationism it makes him untenable as representative of the conservative movement.

I don't want Ron Paul leading the Conservative movement. But, he happens to be right on economic issues, including the gold standard.

61 Gus  Thu, May 7, 2009 4:58:44pm

re: #56 Killgore Trout

This calls for a poll:
Ron Paul is.....
A) Mainstream
B) Awesome
C) Ron Paul!

D) An Alien

62 debutaunt  Thu, May 7, 2009 4:58:45pm

re: #48 HelloDare

Does anybody hear remember how Corporal Agarn on F-Troop pronounced, "The bandit from Banff."

Banff-ff-ff?

63 dmens  Thu, May 7, 2009 4:58:49pm

On the contrary, Ron Paul's economic views are the only thing good about him. His naive isolationism and crypto-racism are far more objectionable.

His economic views are radical for today's standards, however, the current state of affairs (end of Bretton Woods) is relatively new in the history of the nation. Also new is its status as the largest debtor nation thanks to the government's extreme fiscal irresponsibility, as well as the fed's vast monetary expansion.

If out-of-control spending, bottomless debt to Asian nations and going crazy on the money press is the new norm, call me a fiscal radical.

64 Querent  Thu, May 7, 2009 4:59:04pm

re: #60 Devil's Advocate
now we just need a major breakthrough in Alchemy, to make enough gold!

65 jcm  Thu, May 7, 2009 4:59:53pm

re: #57 Querent

D: Nucking Futs!

Stuf Gnikcun!

66 SixDegrees  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:00:22pm

Charles,

Thanks for all your good work and diligence dragging this news into the light of day, where it belongs. Please keep it up.

If it makes you feel any better, this sort of madness is common when the economy tanks. With high unemployment and financial uncertainty comes desperation and a willingness to grasp at straw. The same thing happened during the last deep recession following the Oil Embargo in the 1970s - the usual loons were yammering, just as they always had, about the gold standard, the Trilateral Commission, government control of banks and on and on, but a lot more people were willing to listen to them.

The moment the economy started to improve, these loons were just as quickly forgotten. Fortunately, it looks as though our current recession has stabilized and will start to reverse course shortly, if it hasn't already, in plenty of time to clear the decks of these boneheads before the 2010 election cycle. Although a bad economy might be worse, in the short term, for the Democrats at this point, in the long term it could hurt the Republicans even more if it allows a raft of kooks to drift in on the tide of disenchantment. With a bit of luck, we may avoid that.

But it's certainly good to stay on guard and not leave such things to chance. Thanks again.

67 capitalist piglet  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:01:22pm

What is this man's history, anyway? My understanding was always that he was a libertarian, who was simply using the GOP for better electibility. In fact, I thought it was a matter of record...but I can take correction. Just swat me on the snout.

68 Walter L. Newton  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:01:23pm

re: #38 nevergiveup

Obama Puts Entire NASA Space Program in Limbo

[Link: www.foxnews.com...]

If I worked at NASA, I'd be looking for another job?

I wonder if the folks up on the space station got the memo?

69 Killgore Trout  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:01:40pm
The off-the-record talks have brought in speakers such as ex-CIA counterterrorism expert Michael Scheuer, libertarian investigative reporter James Bovard, iconoclastic terrorism scholar Robert Pape, and George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley.


Robert Pape is the guy who wrote a very popular book about how suicide terrorism is a secular phenomena with a concrete strategic goal.

70 LGoPs  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:03:03pm

re: #68 Walter L. Newton

I wonder if the folks up on the space station got the memo?

Hope they plan to bring them back before the budget gets cut off.....
/

71 jcm  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:03:04pm

re: #60 Devil's Advocate

I don't want Ron Paul leading the Conservative movement. But, he happens to be right on economic issues, including the gold standard.

Gold standard won't work.

Gold is finite.

Wealth creation is infinite.

If we base the economy on a fixed amount of gold, and through capitalism double the value of the economy, you just deflated the value of the currency by 50%.

72 brookly red  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:03:14pm

re: #68 Walter L. Newton

I wonder if the folks up on the space station got the memo?

he sent it via blackberry...

73 yochanan  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:03:27pm

nor laup & rat pukeanan DOUBLE FEH

74 SixDegrees  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:03:28pm

re: #42 brookly red

Iran is hiring...

So is China.

75 Killgore Trout  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:03:38pm

I'm not expecting apologies from everybody here who told me to shut about Ron Paul and the Tea Parties.

76 jcm  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:03:46pm

re: #68 Walter L. Newton

I wonder if the folks up on the space station got the memo?

They'll have to make other arrangements for a ride home.

77 Killian Bundy  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:03:58pm

re: #51 iLikeCandy

I also wondered why Bachmann was haranguing a Treasury guy about the Constitution. If Tim Geithner had had his head about him, he would have referred her to Eric Holder.

That one was especially funny. "Where in the Constitution do you get that authority?"

Geithner calmly explains the line of laws passed by Congress going back to the 1930s.

"No, where in the Constitution do you get that authority?"

/Bachmann is a moron, not to mention a loose cannon

78 Ojoe  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:04:00pm

The GOP is going down, IMHO.

This may be better. It appears so to me.


Modern Whig Party platform.

79 Archimedes  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:04:19pm

re: #7 Devil's Advocate

Charles,

I think you need to elaborate better on this. I didn't vote for Ron Paul; I didn't agree with his foreign policy. I didn't approve of Lew Rockwell's racism. But, one thing that Ron Paul has been right about is economics.

In essence, Ron Paul stands for Capitalism, No Bailouts, Free Trade. I stand for all those things.

This issue with the Fed, is based on the Austrian theory of the Business cycle, understood by F.A. Hayek and Ludvig Von Mises. Essentially, it is the idea that price controls always create misallocation of resources, so why do we accept the Federal Reserve setting "price controls" on our money via interest rates.

I think you need to explain why you're against Ron Paul's economic policies on paper, because he happens to be right on those narrow issues.

Economics is the one thing Ron Paul was good on.

The thing I would question is this, if people are against other ideas that Ron Paul has espoused, then I don't think he will do well. What I mean is, he can't change the way people think. Otoh, if people want Ron Paul because of some of the bad ideas he has espoused, then that would be a problem.

80 yochanan  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:04:30pm

re: #71 jcm

GOLD is not wealth it is just pretty metal. does not produce anything.

81 pingjockey  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:04:30pm

re: #75 Killgore Trout

Just shut up and drink yer tea! :)

82 Render  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:04:32pm

re: #69 Killgore Trout

Scheuer's career doesn't exactly speak of any great "expertise" either.

[Link: en.wikipedia.org...]

RIGHT
IN
TWO,
R

83 Walter L. Newton  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:04:54pm

re: #75 Killgore Trout

I'm not expecting apologies from everybody here who told me to shut about Ron Paul and the Tea Parties.

And you are probably not going to get them, so I would move on.

84 brookly red  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:04:56pm

re: #74 SixDegrees

So is China.

Oooooh, they have plenty of dollars too.

85 jcm  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:05:13pm

re: #78 Ojoe

The GOP is going down, IMHO.

This may be better. It appears so to me.

Modern Whig Party platform.

There has to be a better way!

// ;-P

86 EndlessBob  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:05:42pm

"Paul’s unexpected and sudden clout with his fellow Republicans — even some of Paul’s staff have been surprised with the momentum of his “Audit the Fed” bill — come as the GOP engages in a tortured internal dialogue about its future."

This made me think for a moment, and I came to the realization that when the Dems/Libs fail at the ballot box, they presume the electorate is just too stupid to know what's good for them, and they tell them so loudly until they believe it and vote "correctly."

The Republicans/Conservatives lose and they "engage in a tortured internal dialogue." Maybe they should just start telling the electorate how stupid they are -- it just might be crazy enough to work.

87 Ojoe  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:05:43pm

re: #80 yochanan

Actually gold has many industiral/technological uses.

88 Cato the Elder  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:06:35pm

re: #4 erraticsphinx

Ron Paul doesn't belong in the Republican Party.

The way things are going, real old-fashioned Republicans don't belong in the Republican party.

89 cowbellallen  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:06:38pm

What economic theories of Ron Paul's are weird? I haven't heard anything that I particularly disagreed with (can't say the same about foreign policy).

90 jcm  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:06:50pm

re: #80 yochanan

GOLD is not wealth it is just pretty metal. does not produce anything.

DING, that too!

Come the apocalypse (okay a little extreme) a rifle, a mule, a plow, and some seed will be far more valuable.

91 nines09  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:06:59pm

It's obvious that the GOP has no leaders. That's what happens when "Using Capital" turns into a turn at the trough. It's obvious that it's all up for grabs, no one cares a hoot besides ratings points (check Fox News stats) and that screaming at each other is now the norm. After the left smeared everything NOT left and remained standing, they now munch at the trough. It's like you went to the library and all the book titles weren't even close to the pages within. Check please.

92 Ojoe  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:07:05pm

re: #85 jcm

Where do I get one?
Or one of these chain mail things?

93 Querent  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:07:15pm

re: #89 cowbellallen

i'm giving you an upding just for your nic.

we can always use more cowbell!

94 Killgore Trout  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:07:28pm

It's also worth noting that Ron Paul's proposal to audit the Federal reserve is a ruse. One of his main goals to the abolish the Federal Reserve so this is the approach he's taking. He's going to use the audit system to hassle and sabotage the institution.

95 yochanan  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:07:40pm

re: #87 Ojoe

so does human shit

96 brookly red  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:07:59pm

re: #80 yochanan

GOLD is not wealth it is just pretty metal. does not produce anything.

I would gladly give you paper dollars for yours...

97 Querent  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:08:12pm

re: #92 Ojoe

Where do I get one?
Or one of these chain mail things?

for a modest fee i'll make you one -- i can make chainmail.
(just need a good source of rings, and lots of free time...)

98 Cato the Elder  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:08:19pm

re: #89 cowbellallen

What economic theories of Ron Paul's are weird? I haven't heard anything that I particularly disagreed with (can't say the same about foreign policy).

You must be the new Court Jester. We've been expecting you.

Your cap and bells are over there.

99 Ojoe  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:08:47pm

re: #95 yochanan

There is an element, Lutecium, which pretty much has no known practical application.

100 Koyaanistaaqa  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:09:07pm

re: #96 brookly red

I would gladly give you paper dollars for yours...

I'll gladly pay you Tuesday for a hamburger today.

101 nyc redneck  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:09:54pm

re: #86 EndlessBob

"Paul’s unexpected and sudden clout with his fellow Republicans — even some of Paul’s staff have been surprised with the momentum of his “Audit the Fed” bill — come as the GOP engages in a tortured internal dialogue about its future."

This made me think for a moment, and I came to the realization that when the Dems/Libs fail at the ballot box, they presume the electorate is just too stupid to know what's good for them, and they tell them so loudly until they believe it and vote "correctly."

The Republicans/Conservatives lose and they "engage in a tortured internal dialogue." Maybe they should just start telling the electorate how stupid they are -- it just might be crazy enough to work.

maybe we should just educate them. focus on the basics and forget the libs.

102 brookly red  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:10:01pm

re: #100 Koyaanistaaqa

I'll gladly pay you Tuesday for a hamburger today.

sure... pay me in gold.

103 Killgore Trout  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:10:08pm
Paul has remained surprised and bemused at his new influence. “I was talking with one of the other Republicans on the floor,” he remembered, “one of the types that had been voting with Bush, for big spending and all of that. I asked him: ‘Are you voting with me now or am I voting with you?’ They just laugh. They know what the situation is.”

Yikes.

104 SixDegrees  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:10:09pm

re: #63 dmens

On the contrary, Ron Paul's economic views are the only thing good about him. His naive isolationism and crypto-racism are far more objectionable.

His economic views are radical for today's standards, however, the current state of affairs (end of Bretton Woods) is relatively new in the history of the nation. Also new is its status as the largest debtor nation thanks to the government's extreme fiscal irresponsibility, as well as the fed's vast monetary expansion.

If out-of-control spending, bottomless debt to Asian nations and going crazy on the money press is the new norm, call me a fiscal radical.

The problem with this outlook is that kooks tend to obsessively cobble together bits and pieces of a whole passle of lame-brained ideas scraped from all sorts of sources. Like a monkey pounding on a typewriter, some small portion of these ravings will occasionally seem to make sense.

But that's no guarantee that the monkey understands them. Or, in the case of economic ideas, can successfully implement them. He's still a monkey, banging away at random.

It takes only a few minutes wading through Paul's rambling incoherence to realize that this is a man with deep mental problems. He is not someone I want in office, ever, in any capacity. His presence in Congress is embarrassing and disturbing, and is only tempered by the equally odious presence of filth like Ted Kennedy and Robert Byrd.

105 Ojoe  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:10:22pm

re: #97 Querent

Chain mail would be SO cool to make at scout camp as part of the metalworking merit badge.

106 Devil's Advocate  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:10:53pm

re: #64 Querent

now we just need a major breakthrough in Alchemy, to make enough gold!

This is an eye opener. People really don't understand what a gold standard is. I didn't realize that that was the problem.

107 ArchangelMichael  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:10:55pm

re: #26 Devil's Advocate

I'm read Milton Friedman's Money Mischief, Thomas E. Wood's Meltdown, "The Case against the Fed", as well as Mises arguments for the Gold Standard.

The reasons for the gold standard are actually quite strong and outweigh the tradeoffs in my opinion. Fiat currency outside a war has never been tried in world history, and usually leads to disaster. Our experimentation strangely is something that people take too lightly.

You missed the part where there's not enough gold in the world to support this... And the part where economic growth isn't possible without finding more gold lest you have deflationary spirals.... and the part where trade imbalances cause post-industrial nations (like the US) to collapse... and the part where recessions last decades instead of a few years.

You probably also missed the part when all the paleo-libs get together to bitch about the fed, they are usually mumbling about "Jewish money changers hatching a sekrit conspiracy on Jekyl Island to enslave the world."

So no... Luap Nor isn't "right on" on economics. Yes there are problems with Fiat Currency, and there are definitely problems with the Federal Reserve system, but paleolibs offer a solution that replaces those problems with a set of different, and possibly worse ones.

108 Querent  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:11:55pm

re: #105 Ojoe

and then earn your Sewing badge to make the padded clothes you'll want to be wearing under them. Else someone else will get his Chiropractic Badge straightening your back out after you wear that armor all day

(i know; i've worn said armor all day)

109 Devil's Advocate  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:12:29pm

re: #71 jcm

Gold standard won't work.

Gold is finite.

Wealth creation is infinite.

If we base the economy on a fixed amount of gold, and through capitalism double the value of the economy, you just deflated the value of the currency by 50%.

This is astonishing. You don't even understand what a gold standard is. As I told another person, I didn't realize that was the objection.

What you think people need to create tons of gold and then carry it around with them?!

110 Guanxi88  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:12:34pm

re: #1 jcm

Laup Nor!

Twin Peaks: The Black Lodge:

111 Ojoe  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:12:51pm

re: #107 ArchangelMichael

You missed the part where there's not enough gold in the world to support this...

Why not use other elements as well?

Lutecium, for instance?

112 Guanxi88  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:13:01pm

re: #110 Guanxi88

Twin Peaks: The Black Lodge:


[Video]

The next time you see me, it won't be me.

113 jcm  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:13:12pm

re: #96 brookly red

I would gladly give you paper dollars for yours...

Gold has value for a variety of reasons, it's rarity, it's purity, that it is hard to counterfeit, but mainly that people decided it was useful as currency.

It was easier to as trade developed to use gold as currency than the actual materials. Previously in a barter economy I trade my wheat, with you for a mutually agreed to amount of olive oil.

Gold let me travel farther and not haul a ton of wheat, but a pocket of of nuggets, coins etc... and get things I needed.

Gold's value is what we put on it.

114 june_july  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:13:15pm

Ron Paul is simply filling the vacuum of ideas and leadership created by the disintegration of the Republican party. Nature and politics abhor a vacuum.

If the Republicans get off their ass and come up with a coherent principled conservative message they can bounce back and Ron Paul will be an unpleasant memory. Until then, Ron Paul will be there to remind republicans of how badly they are failing.

115 brookly red  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:13:22pm

I am going over to the lager standard... bbiab

116 Ojoe  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:13:31pm

re: #108 Querent

I put on a whole cloak of the stuff once, yeah it was HEAVY.

117 Killian Bundy  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:14:20pm

re: #55 Devil's Advocate

Moreover, you don't need a 1 to 1 ratio.... I'm not sure if you understand how a gold supply works. People would simply issue dollars based on percentages of an ounce.

Really, and how much is an ounce of gold worth? Would my dollar be worth 1/9ooth of an ounce, 1/1000th of an ounce, 1/10,000th of an ounce?

It's a moot point anyway, because it's never going to happen.

/you're the one not thinking it through, what do you think would happen to the U.S. and world economy if Obama announced tomorrow that we were going back to the gold standard?

118 Querent  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:14:33pm

re: #116 Ojoe

i refer to mine as my Full Metal Jacket.

119 Guanxi88  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:14:35pm

re: #112 Guanxi88

The next time you see me, it won't be me.

That didn't work: Try this one!

120 Walter L. Newton  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:14:35pm

re: #114 june_july

Ron Paul is simply filling the vacuum of ideas and leadership created by the disintegration of the Republican party. Nature and politics abhor a vacuum.

If the Republicans get off their ass and come up with a coherent principled conservative message they can bounce back and Ron Paul will be an unpleasant memory. Until then, Ron Paul will be there to remind republicans of how badly they are failing.

He's not reminding the Republicans of anything, he's teaching them, which is the problem, they are listening to him.

121 Devil's Advocate  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:15:09pm

re: #107 ArchangelMichael

You missed the part where there's not enough gold in the world to support this... And the part where economic growth isn't possible without finding more gold lest you have deflationary spirals.... and the part where trade imbalances cause post-industrial nations (like the US) to collapse... and the part where recessions last decades instead of a few years.

You probably also missed the part when all the paleo-libs get together to bitch about the fed, they are usually mumbling about "Jewish money changers hatching a sekrit conspiracy on Jekyl Island to enslave the world."

So no... Luap Nor isn't "right on" on economics. Yes there are problems with Fiat Currency, and there are definitely problems with the Federal Reserve system, but paleolibs offer a solution that replaces those problems with a set of different, and possibly worse ones.

Please don't pull your ridiculous paragraph about Anti-semitism. There are lunatics who believe in everything.

But, the crux of your "deflationary spirals" is incoherent nonsense and not based on historical or economic fact.

122 ArchangelMichael  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:15:56pm

re: #111 Ojoe

Why not use other elements as well?

Lutecium, for instance?

It wouldn't be the Gold Standard then. I'm not against a material-based currency, but Gold is inadequate for this anymore.

123 Sharmuta  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:16:19pm

re: #94 Killgore Trout

It's also worth noting that Ron Paul's proposal to audit the Federal reserve is a ruse. One of his main goals to the abolish the Federal Reserve so this is the approach he's taking. He's going to use the audit system to hassle and sabotage the institution.

I haven't really followed the argument, but what's the reason for this audit? I guess- what's the point of it?

124 Guanxi88  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:16:47pm

re: #122 ArchangelMichael

It wouldn't be the Gold Standard then. I'm not against a material-based currency, but Gold is inadequate for this anymore.

I seem to recall rumors to the effect that China was considering a new international currency backed by copper.

Seems sensible.

125 jcm  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:16:53pm

re: #109 Devil's Advocate

This is astonishing. You don't even understand what a gold standard is. As I told another person, I didn't realize that was the objection.

What you think people need to create tons of gold and then carry it around with them?!

You misunderstand the objection. See also, re: #107 ArchangelMichael

How do you tie a expanding economy's currency to a fix amount of anything without a proportional deflationary effect on the currency?

126 erraticsphinx  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:16:57pm

re: #121 Devil's Advocate

I don't know what "facts" you've been reading, but the Gold Standard is NOT compatible with the current world economy, in any way.

Maybe in la-la-land and twinkly-town, but not in the real world.

127 Ojoe  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:17:08pm

re: #122 ArchangelMichael

There is plenty of titanium in the earth's crust; it resists corrosion well, and it takes some energy to reduce it, so it has a bit of intrinsic value ...

128 Walter L. Newton  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:17:20pm

re: #124 Guanxi88

I seem to recall rumors to the effect that China was considering a new international currency backed by copper.

Seems sensible.

Wrong, Raman noodles.

129 Querent  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:17:58pm

re: #127 Ojoe

There is plenty of titanium in the earth's crust; it resists corrosion well, and it takes some energy to reduce it, so it has a bit of intrinsic value ...

How about a carbon standard?

then our "carbon credits" will actually be worth something!

130 Guanxi88  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:17:58pm

re: #128 Walter L. Newton

Wrong, Raman noodles.

Well, that and cigarettes and booze were all used as currency in my College dorm days. There's precedent.

131 Devil's Advocate  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:18:00pm

re: #117 Killian Bundy

Really, and how much is an ounce of gold worth? Would my dollar be worth 1/9ooth of an ounce, 1/1000th of an ounce, 1/10,000th of an ounce?

It's a moot point anyway, because it's never going to happen.

/you're the one not thinking it through, what do you think would happen to the U.S. and world economy if Obama announced tomorrow that we were going back to the gold standard?

With your question about the ounces yes, that is exactly how it could be done. And if Obama said tomorrow we're on a gold standard, it would take less than one week for the market to correct itself.

132 Cato the Elder  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:18:12pm

re: #128 Walter L. Newton

Wrong, Raman noodles.

Wrong again. Plastic Jesuses.

133 itellu3times  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:18:24pm

Ron Paul has no economic theories, and perhaps the only thing WORSE than what we have now, would be the vacuum between his ears. The world financial system would today be in collapse, and I personally would be out two-thirds or more of my net worth, with no hope of recompense. I presume that is worse than what we have seen now, and are likely to see.

ON THE OTHER HAND, an "audit" of the fed might well be in order, because NOBODY in the fed or in Treasury, has even a wiff of constitutional authority to do the stuff they've been doing for the past few months in order to save our bacon. And it is only a matter of time (if it has not already happened) that these billions and trillions of magic dollars flow to people's pockets, instead of to abstruse accounting nooks and crannies, which is so far where 99.9999% of the stuff has gone.

134 Guanxi88  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:18:45pm

re: #132 Cato the Elder

Wrong again. Plastic Jesuses.

I don't care if it rains or freezes

135 HelloDare  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:19:18pm

re: #122 ArchangelMichael

It wouldn't be the Gold Standard then. I'm not against a material-based currency, but Gold is inadequate for this anymore.

Obama is backing The Unicorn Standard. Ground Unicorn horn.

136 Walter L. Newton  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:19:27pm

re: #132 Cato the Elder

Wrong again. Plastic Jesuses.

Stop making fun of plastic!

137 erraticsphinx  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:19:34pm

re: #131 Devil's Advocate

With your question about the ounces yes, that is exactly how it could be done. And if Obama said tomorrow we're on a gold standard, it would take less than one week for the market to correct itself.

LESS than ONE week to correct switching to a gold standard?

WTF

138 Cato the Elder  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:19:41pm

re: #134 Guanxi88

I don't care if it rains or freezes

...long as I got my plastic Jeezuss...

139 Devil's Advocate  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:19:41pm

re: #125 jcm

You misunderstand the objection. See also, re: #107 ArchangelMichael

How do you tie a expanding economy's currency to a fix amount of anything without a proportional deflationary effect on the currency?

Gee, I dunno, maybe because we had the greatest economic expansion and growth in world history from 1776-the early 1900s on a bi-metal"fixed" standard.

140 Querent  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:19:43pm

re: #135 HelloDare
at least that's good against poison...

141 Guanxi88  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:20:34pm

re: #138 Cato the Elder

...long as I got my plastic Jeezuss...

riding there on the dashboard of my car...

142 Cato the Elder  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:20:57pm

re: #141 Guanxi88

riding there on the dashboard of my car...

Love that song!

143 HelloDare  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:21:12pm

The new currency: Obama Bucks.

144 Killian Bundy  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:21:23pm

re: #131 Devil's Advocate

And if Obama said tomorrow we're on a gold standard, it would take less than one week for the market to correct itself totally collapse.

/FTFY

145 Guanxi88  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:21:34pm

re: #142 Cato the Elder

Love that song!

You can buy Him phosphorescent
Glows in the dark, He's Pink and Pleasant,
Take Him with you when you're travelling far

146 Devil's Advocate  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:21:53pm

re: #137 erraticsphinx

LESS than ONE week to correct switching to a gold standard?

WTF

Yes, the federal reserve expands the money supply all the time. The only difference is that the price of gold would end up setting the price of money instead of a Fed. Chairman. Yes, it would take less than one week.

147 HelloDare  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:22:17pm

re: #143 HelloDare

The new currency: Obama Bucks.

Image: Obama_Bucks_by_eckert82.jpg

148 jvic  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:22:19pm

re: #52 erraticsphinx

re: #50 jvic

You can't blame EVERYTHING on a conspiracy.

Well, in your position I might say something like

jvic, I doubt the Democrats are as machiavellian as you think

instead of shouting and down dinging.

But that's me.

149 Fenway_Nation  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:22:55pm

re: #143 HelloDare

The new currency: Obama Bucks.

Sure hope that they're two-ply.

150 Guanxi88  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:23:10pm

re: #143 HelloDare

The new currency: Obama Bucks.

Yeah, I used those when I was in College; ended up paying big-time fines for passing bad paper.

I do it, and I pay a fine; he does it, and he's a feakin' economic genius.

151 pingjockey  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:23:28pm

Luap Nor Quatloos.

152 Cato the Elder  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:23:39pm

re: #141 Guanxi88

Seriously, though, all of the really cheap Catholic tchotchkes are made in China now.

And on that note, I'm off to the hospital. Nothing serious, just an overnight study.

See you all tomorrow!

153 Racer X  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:23:54pm

re: #146 Devil's Advocate

Yes, the federal reserve expands the money supply all the time. The only difference is that the price of gold would end up setting the price of money instead of a Fed. Chairman. Yes, it would take less than one week.

And the price of gold would go up to - what - fifty thousand an ounce?

154 pingjockey  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:24:13pm

re: #152 Cato the Elder

Take care!

155 Archimedes  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:24:36pm

re: #139 Devil's Advocate

Gee, I dunno, maybe because we had the greatest economic expansion and growth in world history from 1776-the early 1900s on a bi-metal"fixed" standard.

I have a great book by Richard Salsman on gold and liberty, where he defends the gold standard. He also wrote a book on the history of banking, which backs you up. I need to locate those.

156 Killian Bundy  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:24:41pm

/unbelievable

157 Guanxi88  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:24:51pm

re: #152 Cato the Elder

Seriously, though, all of the really cheap Catholic tchotchkes are made in China now.

And on that note, I'm off to the hospital. Nothing serious, just an overnight study.

See you all tomorrow!

Well, they've turned them into gold, in a sort of plasticized and holy version of Rumpelstiltskin, so why not? Good luck to the lot of 'em/

158 Randall Gross  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:25:07pm

The nativist wing is taking over and that really needs to stop.

159 Guanxi88  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:25:32pm

re: #158 Thanos

The natNUTivist wing is taking over and that really needs to stop.

160 Charles Johnson  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:25:50pm

re: #146 Devil's Advocate

Now I get it.

'Devil's Advocate' is the fifth sock puppet you've registered at LGF. Get off my website.

161 jcm  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:26:14pm

re: #139 Devil's Advocate

Gee, I dunno, maybe because we had the greatest economic expansion and growth in world history from 1776-the early 1900s on a bi-metal"fixed" standard.

During that time the amount of available monetary metal increased approximately proportional to the economic expansion. That is no longer possible.

162 ArchangelMichael  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:26:20pm

re: #139 Devil's Advocate

Gee, I dunno, maybe because we had the greatest economic expansion and growth in world history from 1776-the early 1900s on a bi-metal"fixed" standard.

And during that time we were constantly mining more, and we had not yet switched from a primarily industrial economy to a primarily service-oriented economy. Switch to the gold standard and every dollar we send to China and India for manufactured goods will eventually result in us sending them Gold... that we wont have anymore, and wont get back.

There simply isn't enough gold on the planet for this. Human capital will increase, but it will exceed the material available to cover the currency. The money supply naturally deflates.

163 erraticsphinx  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:26:52pm

I'm speechless, honestly, here in 2009, somebody is arguing we should switch back to the gold standard.

Because it will take less than a week (!) to recover. No matter that we'd be the only non-fiat currency around. No matter the effect on international trade. No matter the effect on domestic trade.

But yeah, Go Gold!
/

164 doubter4444  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:27:39pm
Obama Puts Entire NASA Space Program in Limbo

[Link: [Link: www.foxnews.com...]...]

If I worked at NASA, I'd be looking for another job?

Sorry, that's just horse shit, and Fox News spin.
I have friends at JPL and NOAA and they say it's just a new regime kicking the tires.
The new administration is reviewing all the science agencies to see what works and what does not. Priorities may change but shutting it down? No.
It's not going anywhere, in fact, it'll probably be better run and managed than it was. The last guy there (I forget his name) was apparently quite a tool, and demoralized the agency pretty dramatically.

165 Dr. Shalit  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:27:41pm

ALL LIZARDIM -

Fugheddabout the Mainstreaming of Ron Paul, a/k/a "Luap Nor." Tonight begins the Application of "Chicago Rules" to Madame Speaker of the House.
Minutes of the "shortly after 9/11/2001" Intelligence Meetings have been released. Madame Nancy comes out looking like DARTH VADER/a/k/a Former Vice President Richard Cheney Pictured Her.
Madame Speaker forgot one thing - CHICAGO - has owned everything WEST since "The Commission" was established.
BAD MOVE - Madame Speaker. That is enough. Digest it.

-S-

166 HelloDare  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:27:46pm

re: #160 Charles

Now I get it.

'Devil's Advocate' is the fifth sock puppet you've registered at LGF. Get off my website.

Ron Paul, is that you?

167 Guanxi88  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:27:55pm

re: #162 ArchangelMichael

And during that time we were constantly mining more, and we had not yet switched from a primarily industrial economy to a primarily service-oriented economy. Switch to the gold standard and every dollar we send to China and India for manufactured goods will eventually result in us sending them Gold... that we wont have anymore, and wont get back.

There simply isn't enough gold on the planet for this. Human capital will increase, but it will exceed the material available to cover the currency. The money supply naturally deflates.

You forgot about asteroid mining. I mean, if we're seriously proposing a metallic standard for currency, why not just go all the way down Fantasy Lane on our way to Dreamland?

168 jcm  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:27:57pm

re: #160 Charles

Now I get it.

'Devil's Advocate' is the fifth sock puppet you've registered at LGF. Get off my website.

I thought we'd had this argument before.........

169 Sheila Broflovski  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:28:11pm

re: #160 Charles

Now I get it.

'Devil's Advocate' is the fifth sock puppet you've registered at LGF. Get off my website.

His blog sucks, and he sent me hate mail for down-dinging him.

170 Charles Johnson  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:28:14pm

re: #163 erraticsphinx

I'm speechless, honestly, here in 2009, somebody is arguing we should switch back to the gold standard.

Because it will take less than a week (!) to recover. No matter that we'd be the only non-fiat currency around. No matter the effect on international trade. No matter the effect on domestic trade.

But yeah, Go Gold!
/

It was a sock puppet -- banned now for the fifth time.

171 jcm  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:28:47pm

re: #167 Guanxi88

You forgot about asteroid mining. I mean, if we're seriously proposing a metallic standard for currency, why not just go all the way down Fantasy Lane on our way to Dreamland?

There must be a solid gold asteroid out there someplace. Let's go get it!

172 redc1c4  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:28:49pm

re: #56 Killgore Trout

This calls for a poll:
Ron Paul is.....
A) Mainstream
B) Awesome
C) Ron Paul!

i vote for "crack smoking idiot"

173 BignJames  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:28:53pm

And CJ hits it deep....it's...it's....it's outta here!

174 Guanxi88  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:28:55pm

re: #169 Alouette

he sent me hate mail for down-dinging him.

Guy needs a better hobby. Cranky economic and monetary theories are pretty dull.

175 Guanxi88  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:29:45pm

re: #171 jcm

There must be a solid gold asteroid out there someplace. Let's go get it!

I saw a BBC documentary some years ago (Dr. Who), where I learned of the existence of a planet made up largely of nothing but gold. So we know it's there.

176 Macker  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:30:43pm

re: #173 BignJames

And CJ hits it deep....it's...it's....it's outta here!

Fortunately not like Manny Ramirez!

177 Caboose  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:30:57pm

WOn Pawww, duh on-wee manne dat kan safe Ah-merr-u-kuh! WOn Pawww, wif hizz byrane uv steel, izz a wery emm-pote-tint thinkker uv WERY BIGG thots. WOn Pawww, zuper-de-DOOPER-manne! Awl hale WOn Pawww, Ah-merr-u-kuhn safe-yur!

(say this out loud with your lips doing the fish-lipped, sucked-in cheeks thing to get the moronic tone right. Thank you in advance for your co-operation.)

178 LGoPs  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:31:17pm

re: #165 Dr. Shalit

ALL LIZARDIM -

Fugheddabout the Mainstreaming of Ron Paul, a/k/a "Luap Nor." Tonight begins the Application of "Chicago Rules" to Madame Speaker of the House.
Minutes of the "shortly after 9/11/2001" Intelligence Meetings have been released. Madame Nancy comes out looking like DARTH VADER/a/k/a Former Vice President Richard Cheney Pictured Her.
Madame Speaker forgot one thing - CHICAGO - has owned everything WEST since "The Commission" was established.
BAD MOVE - Madame Speaker. That is enough. Digest it.

-S-

I would give a lot to see that {deleted} bitch taken down. Great big bunches of lot.

179 Walter L. Newton  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:31:23pm

re: #175 Guanxi88

I saw a BBC documentary some years ago (Dr. Who), where I learned of the existence of a planet made up largely of nothing but gold. So we know it's there.

Doc Who is a science fiction show and I... oh, never mind!

180 jcm  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:32:15pm

re: #175 Guanxi88

I saw a BBC documentary some years ago (Dr. Who), where I learned of the existence of a planet made up largely of nothing but gold. So we know it's there.

Or the diamond core of Jupiter! Arthur Clarke said it was there!

181 jcm  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:32:39pm

re: #179 Walter L. Newton

Doc Who is a science fiction show and I... oh, never mind!

ROFL!

182 Gus  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:33:04pm

I have to plead ignorance on a gold standard. I think a unilateral conversion to it would be foolish however. Gold prices are affected by production and is not immune to market manipulation by gold producers. I would also guess that since it is a finite resource that it would eventually peak in value.

There would have to be an increase in mining of gold which is not immune to environmental, safety, health and other issues. Gold itself would not be immune to management manipulation. It would also require security and transport which would cost billions in the long run.

Also keep in mind that there already some rather suspicious operators in the gold market already not the least of which being George Soros and his brother. Then we would have to deal with tenuous nations such as South Africa for gold. I wonder how environmentalists would feel about expanding gold recovery in Nevada and South Dakota?

Perhaps I'm wrong but there seems to be a lot of baggage to something we don't really need in the end.

183 LGoPs  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:33:23pm

re: #180 jcm

Or the diamond core of Jupiter! Arthur Clarke said it was there!

Uranus is full of.........oh, never mind.
;

184 Sheila Broflovski  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:33:32pm

We should go on the onion standard. There are plenty of onions to go around, and you can grow your own. Unlike gold, you can eat them.

185 Guanxi88  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:33:38pm

re: #180 jcm

Or the diamond core of Jupiter! Arthur Clarke said it was there!

See. but if you go and get that big hunka rock, you'd have DeBeers on your back, and trust me, you do not wanna mess with their racket. Plus, the sudden availability of diamonds would almost certainly lead to every guy out there having to double-down on the carats just to avoid that "you cheap bastard" look from their fiance.

186 Killian Bundy  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:33:51pm

There's a good reason no currency on Earth still backed by metal.

/and no, going back to the gold standard, even if it was possible, would do nothing to stop a government, like ours, from borrowing money and going into debt, so I'm not sure what the point would even be

187 wrenchwench  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:34:23pm

re: #184 Alouette

We should go on the onion standard. There are plenty of onions to go around, and you can grow your own. Unlike gold, you can eat them.

And the comedy is great.

188 Ojoe  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:34:26pm

There's a huge amount of dissolved gold in the ocean, and if someone could genetically engineer a shellfish to grab gold along with the calcium they put in their shells, why, they'd have it made.

189 albusteve  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:34:59pm

re: #188 Ojoe

There's a huge amount of dissolved gold in the ocean, and if someone could genetically engineer a shellfish to grab gold along with the calcium they put in their shells, why, they'd have it made.

goldfish?

190 Walter L. Newton  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:35:10pm

re: #188 Ojoe

There's a huge amount of dissolved gold in the ocean, and if someone could genetically engineer a shellfish to grab gold along with the calcium they put in their shells, why, they'd have it made.

But then we would have to kill the shellfish. Shellfish are sea kitten too!

191 Racer X  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:35:42pm

It would be amusing to see a "Banned Graveyard". With sock puppet names, how many times they've tried to register, and a notable / ban worthy comment attached to each gravestone.

Just for kicks.

192 Render  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:35:47pm

Something rattling around in the back of my head about a vicious cycle.

Making my brain itch - and I can't scratch it.

WTH happened to the moderate, Left and Right?

Help me, I'm channeling TFK and the Two-Party Money Cult here...

GOING
COMMANDO,
R

193 Koyaanistaaqa  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:35:50pm

re: #175 Guanxi88

I saw a BBC documentary some years ago (Dr. Who), where I learned of the existence of a planet made up largely of nothing but gold. So we know it's there.

/So that's why Obama is poised to scuttle NASA - his grand scheme to foil Lop Nor's plot to go get it and put us back on the gold standard!

194 Ojoe  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:35:58pm

re: #184 Alouette

Or, a bimetal stndard so to speak: Onions and Garlic. (silver & gold, respectively).

If you lived in Gilroy Ca. you'd do well.

195 Guanxi88  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:36:07pm

re: #184 Alouette

We should go on the onion standard. There are plenty of onions to go around, and you can grow your own. Unlike gold, you can eat them.

The ferry to Shelbyville cost 5 cents. Back then, nickels had bees on them. "Give me five bees for a quarter," you'd say. Now, I had tied an onion on my belt, as was the fashion at the time."

196 jcm  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:36:08pm

re: #185 Guanxi88

See. but if you go and get that big hunka rock, you'd have DeBeers on your back, and trust me, you do not wanna mess with their racket. Plus, the sudden availability of diamonds would almost certainly lead to every guy out there having to double-down on the carats just to avoid that "you cheap bastard" look from their fiance.

Damn, I was counting my nearly infinite wealth too soon.... I guess I have to go back to work tomorrow.

197 Archimedes  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:36:20pm

re: #179 Walter L. Newton

Doc Who is a science fiction show and I... oh, never mind!

I loved Doctor Who ... Tom Bake rulez :~D

198 Guanxi88  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:36:29pm

re: #188 Ojoe

There's a huge amount of dissolved gold in the ocean, and if someone could genetically engineer a shellfish to grab gold along with the calcium they put in their shells, why, they'd have it made.

And mikimoto would have a whole new market.

199 Guanxi88  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:36:50pm

re: #197 Archimedes

I loved Doctor Who ... Tom Bake rulez :~D

There was only one Doctor, and that was Tom Baker.

200 Archimedes  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:37:27pm

re: #197 Archimedes

I loved Doctor Who ... Tom Bake rulez :~D

Bake = Baker.

Sorry, Tom. :-(

201 Ojoe  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:37:55pm

re: #192 Render

The moderates are forming the new Whig party. ModernWhigDotOrg

202 spudly  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:38:00pm

Regardless of any specific points that Paul may have right, having a messenger that writes for, or allows his writing to be published by extremist kooks hurts conservatism.

It's the same argument that is made against the fascist anti-jihad groups. Including them hurts the cause. Giving the opponent a pre-made straw man to knock down is just dumb... "don't make the Zulus a gift of fire!"

203 Killian Bundy  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:38:05pm

re: #153 Racer X

And the price of gold would go up to - what - fifty thousand an ounce?

/damn, on second thought, my gold mining stocks would probably also astronomically increase in value overnight

204 Ojoe  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:38:13pm

BBL

205 Killgore Trout  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:38:19pm

re: #123 Sharmuta

I haven't really followed the argument, but what's the reason for this audit? I guess- what's the point of it?


It's really complicated. The Fed is sort of its own entity. They aren't technically under the control of any of the branches of government. Ron Paul wants to move them into a position where they have to answer to congress. I don't see anything wrong with some sort of oversight but Ron Paul is going to use it to try to destroy the Fed so he can go back to the gold standard for currency.

206 yochanan  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:39:27pm

[Link: www.nytimes.com...]

they admit the anti semitism in this murder

207 Guanxi88  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:41:48pm

re: #206 yochanan

[Link: www.nytimes.com...]

they admit the anti semitism in this murder

Was reading about that one earlier today - weird as all hell. Boston? Why is he going to Boston?

208 ArmyWife  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:42:33pm

Well look, we ARE turning into the democrats. They let the fringe kooks run their party, too.

Disgusting.

209 lawhawk  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:43:40pm

re: #206 yochanan

Police actually spoke with the guy after the murder
. He was wearing a disguise when he committed the act, and milled around outside the bookstore. Only later did cops realize they had talked with the guy they now believe murdered the co-ed.

210 Killgore Trout  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:43:46pm

re: #206 yochanan

She was also a volunteer for Planned Parenthood.

211 anchors_aweigh  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:43:54pm

For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction.

Obama is the action.....

212 brookly red  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:44:22pm

re: #210 Killgore Trout

She was also a volunteer for Planned Parenthood.

and...

213 ArchangelMichael  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:45:08pm

re: #205 Killgore Trout

It's really complicated. The Fed is sort of its own entity. They aren't technically under the control of any of the branches of government. Ron Paul wants to move them into a position where they have to answer to congress. I don't see anything wrong with some sort of oversight but Ron Paul is going to use it to try to destroy the Fed so he can go back to the gold standard for currency.

I always hear stuff from paleo-libs about how the Fed is a "private corporation" (false) of insert code word for Jew Banker here with no accountability and how we need to put the "power to control the money supply back in the hands of Congress." I generally just sorta nod and grin and decide not to start an argument while thinking "does this kook actually think that The US Congress can be trusted with that?"

214 Sharmuta  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:45:48pm

re: #205 Killgore Trout

Thanks

215 JacksonTn  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:46:16pm

Change ...

216 Killgore Trout  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:46:47pm

re: #212 brookly red

It could be part of the reason he was harassing her. She was obviously beautiful so it might have been a sexual obsession but the police also feel he is going to target Jews. Smells like a possible right wing extremist to me.

217 Guanxi88  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:47:33pm

re: #216 Killgore Trout

It could be part of the reason he was harassing her. She was obviously beautiful so it might have been a sexual obsession but the police also feel he is going to target Jews. Smells like a possible right wing extremist to me.

Could be, or a psycho-sexual pathology case. Or both.

218 Charles Johnson  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:47:42pm

Anyone who wants to defend Ron Paul's insanity needs to explain why he is a frequent guest on the Alex Jones conspiracy show, gave the keynote speech for the John Birch Society's 50th anniversary meeting last year, and took money from the neo-Nazis at Stormfront and refused to return it when it was revealed.

And that's just scratching the surface of the problems with this guy. He's a creationist, he's connected with the hardcore extreme right paleocons at the Robert Taft Club, and much, much more.

219 Dr. Shalit  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:48:20pm

re: #178 LGoPs

LGoPs -

It IS THERE - IF - You can see it. Pres. Obama just - in the words of the Beach Boys - SHUT HER DOWN!

-S-

220 brookly red  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:49:17pm

re: #216 Killgore Trout

It could be part of the reason he was harassing her. She was obviously beautiful so it might have been a sexual obsession but the police also feel he is going to target Jews. Smells like a possible right wing extremist to me.

I think rejection seems more likley, but who knows.

221 ArmyWife  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:50:33pm

For those who think we need to "moderate" our position and be all big tent, this is the result. People don't want big tent, they don't want Dem lite. They want conservatives, heavy on the fiscal conservatism, but social issues as well. Sadly, we don't have a candidate who is stating things people are craving - except the kooks. So guess what? The kooks are gaining support. If we found/ran a candidate who was for smaller government, held strong support for the Constitution, believed in being fiscally conservative and espoused reasonable socially conservative views, Ron Paul would cease to exist.

Pull your head out of your arse, Michael Steele.

222 Killian Bundy  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:50:59pm

re: #203 Killian Bundy

/damn, on second thought, my gold mining stocks would probably also astronomically increase in value overnight

/of course, they wouldn't be able to open the markets anyway so it doesn't really matter

223 Slumbering Behemoth Stinks  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:54:12pm

re: #208 ArmyWife

Well look, we ARE turning into the democrats. They let the fringe kooks run their party, too.

Disgusting.

Yeah, but they won the election with that, so....

/moron mode off

224 medaura18586  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:56:39pm

re: #160 Charles

Now I get it.

'Devil's Advocate' is the fifth sock puppet you've registered at LGF. Get off my website.

Sockpuppet? Ouch...

I don't know what kind of craziness that person is involved in to be sock-puppeteering it up, but before I go to bed I want to add my 2 cents on the economic arguments s/he espoused:

Ron Paul's economic ideas, at least the ones he publicly champions, are not the original inventions of his paranoid racist anarcho-paleocon brain; rather, he is parroting economic conclusions developed by Ludvig Von Mises and Friedrich von Hayek, who, while not being "mainstream economists," were respectable intellectuals untainted by any associations with racist lunatics, Neo-Confederate secessionists, or Christian Dominionists (which is more than I can say for Lew Rockwell, Ron Paul, and their disgusting Rockford buddies). Hayek's contributions to the field of economic theory were so well-respected that, in fact, he won the Nobel Prize in Economics (which in and of itself, doesn't say much about the merits of his ideas, only that they were not considered kooky at all by the intellectual establishment).

225 Slumbering Behemoth Stinks  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:57:32pm

re: #221 ArmyWife


For those who think we need to "moderate" our position and be all big tent, this is the result.

These kooks, Ron Paul, Alex Jones, Birchers, fascist sympathizers, Beck, etc., are anything but "moderate". Just sayin'.

226 funky chicken  Thu, May 7, 2009 5:58:55pm

re: #78 Ojoe

The GOP is going down, IMHO.

This may be better. It appears so to me.

Modern Whig Party platform.

Or Christie Whitman and Jack Danforth's group The Republican Leadership Council. [Link: www.republican-leadership.com...]

227 funky chicken  Thu, May 7, 2009 6:00:23pm
They want conservatives, heavy on the fiscal conservatism, but social issues as well.

I don't want politicians lecturing me about social issues.

228 Slumbering Behemoth Stinks  Thu, May 7, 2009 6:02:18pm

re: #225 Slumbering Behemoth

And for the record, I most certainly do think the GOP needs to moderate some of their positions.

229 Charles Johnson  Thu, May 7, 2009 6:07:12pm

re: #224 medaura18586

The reality is that almost no reputable economists believe the gold standard is a viable basis for a modern economic system. One of the main causes of the Great Depression, in fact, was ... the gold standard. If we ever had a government that tried to re-establish the gold standard, our current economic troubles would look like a walk in the park. It's a recipe for global disaster.

And the idea of abolishing the Federal Reserve is nearly as crazy.

230 researchok  Thu, May 7, 2009 6:09:16pm

There are some things that cannot be fixed. We may at times desperately that were not so, but it is an immutable truth.

More and more, it appears that the GOP is broken beyond repair. If that is so, conservatives in America need to rebuild the party in a way that best exemplifies inclusion. That means a focus on real conservative and universal values, not only religious values. Conservative values embrace science- and embrace an individuals right to private expressions of faith, whatever those expressions may be.

Religious values are not excluded from the town square- only religious expressions are meant to be excluded, so that the tent of democracy is all encompassing.

These are lessons the Republican party must relearn. If they don't they will have themselves irrelevant.

231 Dr. Shalit  Thu, May 7, 2009 6:10:35pm

re: #218 Charles

Anyone who wants to defend Ron Paul's insanity needs to explain why he is a frequent guest on the Alex Jones conspiracy show, gave the keynote speech for the John Birch Society's 50th anniversary meeting last year, and took money from the neo-Nazis at Stormfront and refused to return it when it was revealed.

And that's just scratching the surface of the problems with this guy. He's a creationist, he's connected with the hardcore extreme right paleocons at the Robert Taft Club, and much, much more.

Charles -

I would be for "Laup Nor" for President - in - like maybe 1880. Laup Nor basically has economics right, for a second or third world nation. As to
today, "Laup Nor" forgets that the UK is no longer the "Biggest" Power in the Anglosphere. We - and The Indians - ARE. We by economics, They by Population. We Both Have "Cousins." OUR Cousins are CANADA, AUSTRALIA, and perhaps NEW ZEALAND and "SUD AFRIKA." The Indians' cousins are the Punjabis, Bengalis etc. and so on.
The US/India alliance, once OLD POLITICS were removed is SO natural that thought is NOT required.
We are both - "Elective Republics" - Both Forward Looking.
What is the so called "PAKISTAN?" - It is the invention of Muhammad Ali Jinnah. An Apostate from the "Indian Congress Party" - who chose HIS Muslim Religion above Progress, i.e. the opposite of Congress. That is all, and HAS been the way it HAS been for the last +/- 60 years.
WHY MUST WE MAINTAIN THIS SILLINESS? Pray Tell?

-S-

232 jcm  Thu, May 7, 2009 6:11:55pm

re: #224 medaura18586

Hyak and von Mises are fine, as free market economists.

However, history has shown with large economies there is a need for some central banking authority, that doesn't mean our Federal Reserve system doesn't need a few tweaks, and maybe a face lift. The global economy has simply outgrown any utility of a fix monetary system, again that doesn't mean ours can't use a few touch ups.

RP is stuck in many was in 1776. Economy realities as well has national defense strategies are far different now.

233 Dr. Shalit  Thu, May 7, 2009 6:12:57pm

re: #232 jcm

jcm -

AND SO THEY ARE! That is all.

-S-

234 Spare O'Lake  Thu, May 7, 2009 6:13:04pm

The gold issue is not what worries me about Ron Paul.

I am not an economist but what the heck, here goes:
Gold is an asset.
Money is a debt instrument, a form of security, which is guaranteed by the government.
By requiring that money be backed by gold, one is transforming the currency into an asset-backed security.
On the one hand, this would tend to limit the government's ability to inflate the economy by printing money unless they were able to increase the gold inventory.
On the other hand, this would not constrain the government's ability to boorrow from others by issuing bonds, T-bills or other non-money debt instruments.
The gold standard existed for many years before it was done away with, and I am willing to allow that it is possible to argue for its reintroduction without being called a nut for that reason alone.

And that is why the gold issue is not what worries me about Ron Paul.

235 gogogodzilla  Thu, May 7, 2009 6:16:53pm

How is the John Birch society racist? I've spent some time researching that claim and there was really only one time in 2008 that AP had an article about it.

So from just one incident, you'll tar the entire history and membership of the organization?!?

Now, I could be wrong... and I'm definitely not an expert on this group, either.

236 freetoken  Thu, May 7, 2009 6:17:03pm

re: #230 researchok

Religious values are not excluded from the town square- only religious expressions are meant to be excluded, so that the tent of democracy is all encompassing.

Don't agree with you here because technically, in the US, religious expressions are allowed in the "town square."

What is not allowed is using the power of the government to establish said expressions.

237 Charles Johnson  Thu, May 7, 2009 6:20:16pm

re: #235 gogogodzilla

How is the John Birch society racist? I've spent some time researching that claim and there was really only one time in 2008 that AP had an article about it.

So from just one incident, you'll tar the entire history and membership of the organization?!?

Now, I could be wrong... and I'm definitely not an expert on this group, either.

Let me get this straight. You don't know much about the John Birch Society, but you're going to defend them anyway?

I think you are at the wrong website. Bye now. I'm sure you'll find somewhere else that's more in line with your views.

238 Kosh's Shadow  Thu, May 7, 2009 6:21:00pm

If Ron Paul becomes mainstream in the Republican Party, I won't have any party I can vote for.
He's associated with Stormfront and other bigoted groups; Obama went to a church that is anti-Semitic and anti-American.
Israel's crazy politics is starting to look better and better.

239 researchok  Thu, May 7, 2009 6:21:25pm

re: #236 freetoken

You are right- my point was meant to be broader.

To clarify, I believe religious expressions as expressions are not problematic.

It is when religious expressions become a source of national identity that is the problem.

240 Dr. Shalit  Thu, May 7, 2009 6:21:29pm

re: #234 Spare O'Lake

Spare O' Lake -

For sure, "GOLD" is an asset - AND - What Kind of Asset is it? GOLD IS - At Best - An Inflation Hedge, as are Diamonds. Folks who Buy Gold are betting against the US Dollar.
Are they right?
History will tell. That is all. As for me, maybe stupid me, I am still in US Dollars.

-S-

241 Charles Johnson  Thu, May 7, 2009 6:22:16pm

I do not freaking believe this.

People defending the John Birch Society at LGF. We're down the rabbit hole.

242 researchok  Thu, May 7, 2009 6:23:29pm

re: #241 Charles

'What hath God wrought?'

243 born conservative  Thu, May 7, 2009 6:23:29pm

re: #106 Devil's Advocate

Educators have been teaching that gold is a barbaric relic for decades now. Few people know what you're talking about re: a gold ratio certificate. All fiat currencies have failed. Period. It's only a matter of time before they will be abandoned around the globe in favor of a gold or gold/silver ratio certificate. It's already being discussed, but you'll never be able to convince anyone on this website -- you'll just have to wait until they realize that the paper money in their wallets is just paper. In the 60s Alan Greenspan wrote a great essay about the importance of a gold standard and as recently as the 90s Volcker lamented standing by while Nixon took us off the gold standard. Most people have to learn by their own experience, which will be upon us shortly -- probably 2012 from what I'm reading. I read Meltdown -- unfortunate that Ron Paul did the intro, but he is right on this one issue.

244 Kosh's Shadow  Thu, May 7, 2009 6:24:47pm

re: #242 researchok

'What hath God wrought?'

More like the other guy.

245 medaura18586  Thu, May 7, 2009 6:26:07pm

Before I go any further, I want to make it clear, for anybody who may not be familiar with my positions, that I have zero sympathy for Ron Paul. His rhetoric falls into an ideological uncanny valley for me, because while I happen to agree with a vast majority of his economic ideas (only those, and arrived at independently from him), his rationale for them seems perverted, and his intellectual support of them, dogmatic. I also don't believe he is a libertarian at all, in the sense of classical liberalism. He is, in fact, an anarchist (I can't stress that enough): His entire circle of friends, associates, and ideological fellow travelers, consistently glorify Murray Rothbard's openly anarchist philosophy and are vocal Southern-Confederacy supporters. True libertarians are socially liberal and advocate for a secular rule of law, while Paulbots are socially conservative (in many ways, socially regressive) -- combined with their anarchist sympathies, this is an indicator of their ultimate Dominionist intentions: I have good reason to believe (based on their own writings) that if they could have their way, Paulbots and other Paleo-cons (or Paleo-libertarians, as Charles called them on this post) would dismantle the government of the United States of America, both at a federal and at a state level, and would embark into a dystopian project of independent tribalist compounds ruled by Biblical laws, Gary North style. (Gary North is in fact a flaming Ron Paul supporter and has organized fund-raising efforts for him.)

For these reasons and others, I fully second Charle's concern over the mainstreaming of Ron Paul and his minions. Ron Paul may be the single most dangerous individual involved in U.S. politics for the overriding reason that he's an anarchist -- he'd like to see the demise of this country's institutions. He should be shunned, unmasked for the libertine anarchistic racist fundamentalist he is, and driven out of public life.

It is perfectly natural to view his controversial economic theories with profound distrust. They are out of fashion, have not seen practical implementation since 1913 (arguably even earlier), and are being advocated by a quack who is not only wrong, but insane and malicious on pretty much every other front (race relations, civil war history and merits, anti-Semitism, foreign policy, and overall intentions toward the U.S. government and its institutions).

It nearly brings me to tears that monetary policy issues I care deeply about and I believe influence our country's (nay, the world's) economy probably more, in the long run, than every visible act by the Congress or the White House, have to be polluted by the insanity of Ron Paul, Lew Rockwell, and their paleo-freaks, for they discredit everything they get involved in.

246 acidtrash  Thu, May 7, 2009 6:26:17pm

Errr guys, hate to be a superior Brit and all but you're making the same mistake our tories made. You're resorting to navel gazing, looking inward while the Dems are pushing the self destruct button.

Paul is a kook playing on peoples ignorance of banking and finance, Bachmann is probably a loon as well, but they are hammering home the message that Americas very survival depends on low taxes and less restrictive government. The side issues can wait. Unite under that banner and you can win it. Because the Tories over here haven't pushed conservative principles in over ten years theyve lagged behind and now they will inherit power not because they have a worthwhile vision but because we are sick of Labour. Thats no way to move forward.

I say this to you, and this goes especially for Charles Johnson...

Instead of running a witch hunt for conservatives you don't like how about hitting up google and finding some new people you would proudly stand for and start pushing them forward. This negativity, this self destruction, this bickering is not attractive. You cannot fight this on a negative. Find a conservitve you can get behind and really go with it. I would suggest Newt Gingrich as a starting point. And who gves a damn if theyre creationists or whatever. That only matters if government controls schools. If you push a real conservative agenda, schools would be outside government control and if parents want to set up a creationist school them let them build it, send their kids to it and leave them be. Isn't that what america is about? freedom to choose?

Push a positive message instead of airing dirty laundry in public. This is no time for a right wing civil war. Ron Paul is a kook but he's done much to excite people to the possibility of low taxes and small government and made it trendy rather than the domain of fat balding corporate bosses. Thats a massive asset. Exploit it! Celebrate his kookyness but keep him on a leash.

Gingrich is right. The GOP is just the right wing of the big government one party state and we need to start referring to the past and present as the Bush-Obama administration to distance ourselves from big wasteful government. If David Cameron came out with Bachmanns speech on spending I'd be chomping at the bit to vote tory but while we have this tory lite leftoid pastiche of conservatism I can't even vote.

Regaanomics won it for Reagan and Thatcher and kept the right in power for a long time. It worked then and if it worked then it will certainly work now. But only if you find your messiah as the left did with Obama.

Mccain was a big government guy and he compromised for the media. He had no courage of conviction and cow towed on Cap and Trade and global warming, even Palin was too timid to stake her ground on CNN. They sold out to the media. Can you see Ron Paul saying anything other than that which he is truly convinced of however wrong he may be? And thats why he's attractive to voters. Conviction politicians are few and far between.

Now if you can find a conservative with principles, a decent monetary and foreign policy, someone of conviction and courage, you will leave Ron Paul standing looking rather silly. The electorate will not be impressed with negativist sniping. You want to defeat Obama? You want to defeat Ron Paul? Give us something WE can believe in.

247 Killian Bundy  Thu, May 7, 2009 6:27:13pm

re: #234 Spare O'Lake

Gold is an asset.

Really, why, who says? If the economy totally collapses, what good would it be, of what practical utility?

/at least paper has some marginal nutritional value when you're really hungry

248 freetoken  Thu, May 7, 2009 6:30:21pm

re: #246 acidtrash

You're resorting to navel gazing,

Our navels have lots of lint.

249 Charles Johnson  Thu, May 7, 2009 6:30:42pm

re: #246 acidtrash

Push a positive message instead of airing dirty laundry in public.

I could not possibly disagree more. The time for "airing dirty laundry" is right now. The kooks and the extremists are making a big push to gain control of the Republican Party, and they're winning. The only way that a sane leader can possibly emerge is if the GOP throws the kooks out onto the street where they belong.

And if they don't ... well, they'll be losing me. I don't want to be associated with a political party that exalts the likes of Michele Bachmann and Ron Paul.

250 Dr. Shalit  Thu, May 7, 2009 6:31:05pm

re: #238 Kosh's Shadow

If Ron Paul becomes mainstream in the Republican Party, I won't have any party I can vote for.
He's associated with Stormfront and other bigoted groups; Obama went to a church that is anti-Semitic and anti-American.
Israel's crazy politics is starting to look better and better.

Kosh's Shadow -

In the event, Laup Nor becomes "Mainstream" in the Republican Party. THE DOCTOR BECOMES A MODERN WHIG. That is all.

-S-

251 born conservative  Thu, May 7, 2009 6:35:51pm

re: #229 Charles

Charles, you really need to read "The Forgotten Man" by Amity Shlaes -- a lot of the long held beliefs about the Great Depression simply aren't true.

252 medaura18586  Thu, May 7, 2009 6:36:23pm

re: #232 jcm

Hyak and von Mises are fine, as free market economists.

However, history has shown with large economies there is a need for some central banking authority, that doesn't mean our Federal Reserve system doesn't need a few tweaks, and maybe a face lift. The global economy has simply outgrown any utility of a fix monetary system, again that doesn't mean ours can't use a few touch ups.

RP is stuck in many ways in 1776. Economy realities as well has national defense strategies are far different now.

I'm afraid Ron Paul is stuck in the dark ages, or further back yet, in the Biblical Age, where he and his buddy Gary North would gladly take us back to, in ways far more palpable than anything involving monetary policy.

253 Charles Johnson  Thu, May 7, 2009 6:37:16pm

Looks like we're flushing out some Ron Paul fans tonight.

254 Dark_Falcon  Thu, May 7, 2009 6:38:38pm

Well, at least Bloodnok gave us tonight's Luap Nor Thread Program:

Act I: Overture, featuring Righteous Indignation.

Act II: Dance of the Paulian Troll

i. Flounceoff in 11/8
ii. The Wielding of the Stick (solo by Mr. S. Beaumont)

INTERMISSION and snacks

Act III: Regaining the Ship

Act IV: There's Killgore......GET HIM!

curtain

255 Killian Bundy  Thu, May 7, 2009 6:38:48pm

re: #243 born conservative

All fiat currencies have failed. Period.

Name one from the last century or so.

It's only a matter of time before they will be abandoned around the globe in favor of a gold or gold/silver ratio certificate. It's already being discussed

Discussed where, by who?

you'll just have to wait until they realize that the paper money in their wallets is just paper.

What makes gold worth any more than paper?

/watch a lot of Glenn Beck?

256 Acidtrash  Thu, May 7, 2009 6:39:10pm

Frankly, Paul is engaging with voters because he's the only fresh thing on the menu. Over here in the UK, none of us is especially for fascism but while the main parties conspire to be big government, big spending wasteful crooks people are holding their noses and voting for the "anti-politics" party; the BNP. And I think many Americans are doing the same.

I think most right wingers will fundamentally disagree with Ron Paul on foreign policy, which is about as moonbat as you can get, but when US finances are in tatters and you're borrowing heavily to fight in Afghanistan and making a pigs ear of it, I'm sure a lot of people can forgive him. Primarily because nobody has quite put economic reform at the top of the bill like Paul has. You need to snatch that away from him and mainstream the idea that low taxes and small government are at the core of the GOP. You wouldnt have got that idea from John Mccain.

257 jvic  Thu, May 7, 2009 6:39:25pm

re: #243 born conservative

...as recently as the 90s Volcker lamented standing by while Nixon took us off the gold standard...

The Brittanica:

As undersecretary for monetary affairs in the Treasury Department from 1969 to 1974, Volcker was the chief architect of the United States’ abandonment of the gold standard and the devaluations of the U.S. dollar in 1971 and 1973.

PBS 9/26/00:

INTERVIEWER: You led the charge against the gold standard. Do you feel that some sort of fixed exchange rate should be used?

PAUL VOLCKER: I certainly agree with more stable exchange rates. What we are seeing and will see is that some economies will search for some way to get some stability and they will be driven a bit to abandon their own currency...I don't think we're going to go to a gold standard. Someday, but not in my lifetime, [and] not in your lifetime, we'll have a world currency or something looking like it.

258 Dark_Falcon  Thu, May 7, 2009 6:40:56pm

re: #251 born conservative

I'm sure he has read it or at least knows what its about. However, Ron Paul is to the modern GOP what Father Coughlin was to the Democrats back in the 30's: A crazy with a following of haters best sent packing.

259 Athos  Thu, May 7, 2009 6:43:44pm

Charles is right. The GOP is being hijacked by the kooks because those who should be standing up and leading aren't and the people think that the only other leaders they have to choose from are the kooks....with a huge assist by nitwits like Beck, Judge Napolitano, and others at FNC who either promote him or don't do the proper job of identifying Paul and the others as the fringe by highlighting their fringe beliefs.

If the GOP fails to embrace a return to cogent conservatism, then it will be over as a party.....because any party that embraces Paul, the John Birch Society, Alex Jones, Lew Rockwell, Beck, creationism / intelligent design (religion) being taught as science, anti-vaccination as acceptable, and isolationism is going not going to win middle America or be good for the country.

You don't compensate for losing elections because of crappy leadership and elected officials who forget why they were voted in by looking to the extreme fringe for the nutballs jumping up and down saying we know better. You win by going back to the basics and back to the core values...without letting the fringe anywhere off the fringe reservation....regardless of what the media does to sell advertising.

260 ArchangelMichael  Thu, May 7, 2009 6:44:45pm

re: #243 born conservative

Educators have been teaching that gold is a barbaric relic for decades now.

That's because it is. That's a Gary North talking point anyway. It doesn't work as currency in a dynamic service based economy with 330 million to 6 billion people. It was just fine when we were manufacturing products in factories and had no trade deficit. That is not the case now. Which is why most kooks pushing for the gold standard also say "we need to get back to manufacturing our own goods" which is another step backwards not forward. In this, they at least half-ass acknowledge it requires us to make things other than services.

It's only a matter of time before they will be abandoned around the globe in favor of a gold or gold/silver ratio certificate. It's already being discussed, but you'll never be able to convince anyone on this website -- you'll just have to wait until they realize that the paper money in their wallets is just paper.

NO SERIOUS ECONOMIST advocates this now. Those that do are either conspiracy-theorist kooks or people who desperately want to stop government deficit spending and think this is the gimmick of last result without fully thinking it out.

Yes I know the paper money is just "paper" given value by fiat, but that value is supposed to be based on the amount of human capital and potential for economic growth. It's not just a number pulled out of someones ass. Does this work all the time: no of course not. Fiat currencies only fail when those determining the value are crooks or idiots. It's an indictment on current politicians and Fed members, not the system itself. There might be a better way of doing this but a gold standard is not it.

Using gold as a hedge against inflation is a good idea for individuals, but it doesn't work when everyone does it. There is physically not enough gold for this, there definitely is not enough for a nation or the world to use it as a currency base.

261 barb42  Thu, May 7, 2009 6:46:10pm

re: #246 acidtrash

Good one! This negativity rant fest is a loser's Paradise. I believe the phrase is 'lead, follow, or get out of the way'!

262 Killian Bundy  Thu, May 7, 2009 6:46:34pm

re: #243 born conservative

And exactly what would be the mechanism for converting back to the gold standard that wouldn't result in an immediate global economic collapse?

/just announce it one day, give everyone 10 days to voluntarily turn in all their gold to the government before it's forcibly confiscated, what?

263 Bill Dalasio  Thu, May 7, 2009 6:47:23pm

As a practical matter, a return to the gold standard, or even a commodity basket standard like that proposed by Ron Paul, would produce some very bad results. Money works best when its rate of growth matches that of the productive capacity of the economy. Really, there's no reason to suppose a particularly high correlation between the availability of gold or any other commodity and the growth of human productive capacity. If anything, technology has only further reduced the correlation. Thus we could find the money supply wreaking havoc with normal economic functions as the availability of commodities fluctuates in patterns unrelated to real economic growth. That said, the weakness of the gold bugs' alternative does not necessarily invalidate all of their critiques. Over the last year, the pace of monetary growth can only be characterized as genuinely disturbing. Moreover, the Fed's relatively recent introduction of quantitative easing into its policy mix suggests that things might well get worse. Yes, it probably has bought us some temporary, modest, relief from the consequences of the bursting of the real estate bubble. However, its far from clear that this inflation of the currency will kick off a period of real, self-perpetuating, economic growth. If that doesn't happen, we will see a return to the economy's downward path with the addition of price inflation. At that point, the central bank's credibility severely eroded, the cost of relief in terms of growth will be higher, meaning still more severe inflation. That puts us in a spiral of inflation and contraction that gets very, very ugly very, very, quickly.

264 ArchangelMichael  Thu, May 7, 2009 6:48:03pm

re: #261 barb42

Good one! This negativity rant fest is a loser's Paradise. I believe the phrase is 'lead, follow, or get out of the way'!

When those making that demand are moonbats, kooks, morons, nazis, or assholes...

I obstruct.

265 Charles Johnson  Thu, May 7, 2009 6:48:29pm

Sleepers coming out of the woodwork for this one.

266 Dark_Falcon  Thu, May 7, 2009 6:48:42pm

re: #259 Athos

Charles is right. The GOP is being hijacked by the kooks because those who should be standing up and leading aren't and the people think that the only other leaders they have to choose from are the kooks....with a huge assist by nitwits like Beck, Judge Napolitano, and others at FNC who either promote him or don't do the proper job of identifying Paul and the others as the fringe by highlighting their fringe beliefs.

If the GOP fails to embrace a return to cogent conservatism, then it will be over as a party.....because any party that embraces Paul, the John Birch Society, Alex Jones, Lew Rockwell, Beck, creationism / intelligent design (religion) being taught as science, anti-vaccination as acceptable, and isolationism is going not going to win middle America or be good for the country.

You don't compensate for losing elections because of crappy leadership and elected officials who forget why they were voted in by looking to the extreme fringe for the nutballs jumping up and down saying we know better. You win by going back to the basics and back to the core values...without letting the fringe anywhere off the fringe reservation....regardless of what the media does to sell advertising.

Agreed. Though I fear things will get worse before they get better. The only thing that can oush back the crazies is someone with enough clout to banish at least one of them. At present, no such non-crazy exists and such a person is unlikely to emerge before 2011-2012.

267 researchok  Thu, May 7, 2009 6:51:23pm

re: #265 Charles

More like sleepwalkers.

Ron Paul Kool-aid drunk sleepwalkers.

268 jcm  Thu, May 7, 2009 6:52:01pm

re: #256 Acidtrash

Frankly, Paul is engaging with voters because he's the only fresh thing on the menu. Over here in the UK, none of us is especially for fascism but while the main parties conspire to be big government, big spending wasteful crooks people are holding their noses and voting for the "anti-politics" party; the BNP. And I think many Americans are doing the same.

I think most right wingers will fundamentally disagree with Ron Paul on foreign policy, which is about as moonbat as you can get, but when US finances are in tatters and you're borrowing heavily to fight in Afghanistan and making a pigs ear of it, I'm sure a lot of people can forgive him. Primarily because nobody has quite put economic reform at the top of the bill like Paul has. You need to snatch that away from him and mainstream the idea that low taxes and small government are at the core of the GOP. You wouldnt have got that idea from John Mccain.

That's the logic that got us BHO, only from the right instead of left.

People are no longer thinking about things, just feeling about them.

269 irongrampa  Thu, May 7, 2009 6:52:07pm

re: #221 ArmyWife


Sarah.

270 PatriotLizardoid  Thu, May 7, 2009 6:52:12pm

re: #266 Dark_Falcon

I'm ok w/ Romney's stance on evolution, at least he was pro-science as gov of Mass and advocated for the teaching of evolution. I don't care what his religion is.

271 Athos  Thu, May 7, 2009 6:53:15pm

re: #267 researchok

More like sleepwalkers.

Ron Paul Kool-aid drunk sleepwalkers.

Paulbot zombies - their minds have to be dead if they accept that rubbish from him and can't see that he is nothing but a fringe kook.

272 Deseeded  Thu, May 7, 2009 6:53:33pm

It's honestly not that surprising that those people the media calls "Republicans" and "moderate conservatives" would "lean" towards "Ron Paul"....


I really hope all my quotations explain the entire situation better than words.....

/laughing

273 Dark_Falcon  Thu, May 7, 2009 6:54:34pm

re: #270 PatriotLizardoid

I'm ok w/ Romney's stance on evolution, at least he was pro-science as gov of Mass and advocated for the teaching of evolution. I don't care what his religion is.

I don't care either but most of the party base does care. You and I are right, but those in the wrong have the numbers and in electoral politics that counts for more.

274 ArchangelMichael  Thu, May 7, 2009 6:55:18pm

re: #266 Dark_Falcon

Agreed. Though I fear things will get worse before they get better. The only thing that can oush back the crazies is someone with enough clout to banish at least one of them. At present, no such non-crazy exists and such a person is unlikely to emerge before 2011-2012.

Someone needs to get a megaphone and scream through it that Ron Paul is a KOOK, the same KOOK that many of these "conservatives" were booing off the stage in 2007 at the debates. The same KOOK who while running for president, a good 90% of his support come from liberal college students who want to legalize pot and are afraid they were going to get drafted to fight the endless war Chimpy McBushitler started.

He needs to be the first banished, and it needs to happen more sooner than later.

275 ArchangelMichael  Thu, May 7, 2009 6:56:26pm

re: #263 Bill Dalasio

For the most part, I agree with this other than your apparent allergy to paragraphs.

276 dmens  Thu, May 7, 2009 6:56:59pm
The problem with this outlook is that kooks tend to obsessively cobble together bits and pieces of a whole passle of lame-brained ideas scraped from all sorts of sources. Like a monkey pounding on a typewriter, some small portion of these ravings will occasionally seem to make sense.

I disagree, his views are consistently laissez-faire, and this country needs a serious dose of that medicine instead of bipartisan bailouts.

277 AlexM  Thu, May 7, 2009 6:57:17pm

I think we should return to the gold standard because in the Bible stories they are always paying with gold, and that's good enough for me. It's been gold for most of recorded human history, if not since life began on Earth 6,000 years ago.

278 Randall Gross  Thu, May 7, 2009 6:57:30pm

re: #261 barb42

So who are you proposing we follow?

279 freetoken  Thu, May 7, 2009 6:58:00pm

Charles must be using extra smelly bait tonight.

280 Charles Johnson  Thu, May 7, 2009 6:58:08pm

dmens
Registered since: May 25, 2007 at 12:19 am
No. of comments posted: 2
No. of links posted: 0

281 Spare O'Lake  Thu, May 7, 2009 6:59:17pm

re: #255 Killian Bundy

What makes gold worth any more than paper?

/watch a lot of Glenn Beck?

Gold is rare and durable.
Paper is plentiful and disintegrates easily.
That is what makes gold more valuable than paper.

282 Killian Bundy  Thu, May 7, 2009 7:00:52pm

re: #263 Bill Dalasio

Over the last year, the pace of monetary growth can only be characterized as genuinely disturbing. Moreover, the Fed's relatively recent introduction of quantitative easing into its policy mix suggests that things might well get worse.

Bernacke gave a speech today and acknowledged that potential problem.

/they're looking for opportunities to decrease the Fed's balance sheet but don't currently see inflation as an issue

283 Randall Gross  Thu, May 7, 2009 7:02:37pm

re: #276 dmens

Bullshit. He's anti immigration, isolationist and a turd on social issues. That's not libertarian, that's not Laissez-faire.

284 Acidtrash  Thu, May 7, 2009 7:02:42pm

re: #249 Charles

Why do you suppose Bachmann is gaining traction? I've only been familiar with her for a few days, Ive seen a few presentations to congress and she talks my language. She's talking about big government, pork barrel, big taxes and the effect they have on american prosperity. That is the message she is putting out. That would be Reaganomics would it not?

Similarly Paul says the same, Beck says the same. It is a popular message and right now for many Brits and Americans; everthing is secondary to the economy. And are they sounding like extremists? Well in ordinary times perhaps yes but you may have noticed that this current administration is now pissing trillions up the wall and if now isn't time to get serious I don't know when is.

America and the west cannot afford to go into a negative spiral of defeatism and parrochial navel gazing because Obamas spendathon will bring the US economy to its knees. So learn form your nutjobs. Theyre on to something. Low taxes, smaller government, more liberty, greater prosperity. There's nothing wrong with the message, if you don't like the messengers then you need to find a new messenger who will deliver the same message with convition and credibility.

No-one with close links to the Bush era will be able to push that message with any credibility because Bush was a massive spender too so you have to really go out there and float some ideas as to who we DO want to go with as opposed to who we don't.

Find an alternative, never mind what Paul and Bachmann are doing. Give us an alternative and we the electorate will do the rest of the work.
If you go on the attack, always on a negative you will not win, you gratify them. Obama wasn't elected on the backfoot. He brought forward a positive message of hope. Never mind that it was phoney, it was a positive message. If all the people can see in the GOP is a party in self destruct, a party that talks more about itself than the world out there, they will not come knocking on our door.

The UK Tories languished as a minority by engaging in a decade long civil war, changing leaders and always fighting in public. People got sick of it.
Had they looked to their roots, had the courage of conviciton to stand by their principles instead of fighting on the medias turf, we'd have had Labour out four years or more ago. But not one single guy they put up would dare push the agenda of public sector cuts and low taxes. They failed to inspire, they failed to push a new vision and now the BNP and UKIP are mopping up the core vote and the grass roots activists.

Civil war isn't a luxury we righties can afford. If you tear down the people you dont like without offering up the people you do, you will destroy your only electoral asset and with it you take down your message.

What was that about being a big tent party?

285 Killian Bundy  Thu, May 7, 2009 7:03:01pm

re: #281 Spare O'Lake

Gold is rare and durable.
Paper is plentiful and disintegrates easily.
That is what makes gold more valuable than paper.

In a total economic collapse?

/think anyone with food or water is going to trade you for gold?

286 Randall Gross  Thu, May 7, 2009 7:03:48pm

re: #284 Acidtrash

It's a popular message for kook pundits and their paranoid followers.

287 Randall Gross  Thu, May 7, 2009 7:04:51pm

re: #284 Acidtrash

No tent big enough for WN parties, racists like the BNP, nor Ron Paul.

288 medaura18586  Thu, May 7, 2009 7:04:56pm

Take this insight from a quasi-insider, for I have read more than my fair share of what I naively thought was classical liberal economic literature, but later found out to be nothing but anarchist, maniacal, conspiratorial filth:

Ron Paul does not seek to abolish the Fed for the reasons Von Mises or Hayek would have been opposed to central banking (i.e., on purely theoretical grounds). He uses their powerful intellectual arguments to further his perverse goal, which at heart, is the dismantling of all institutions of the U.S. government! His reason for being anti-Fed has very little to do with monetary policy (though he will readily use economic arguments as a facade) and very much to do with New World Order paranoia of Joos or Free Masons controlling the commanding heights of our economies and our lives,.. nefariously pulling the invisible strings... or any such dementia.

Likewise, his foreign policy isolationism does not derive out of a respect for other countries' sovereignty, as he claims, but rather out of a fanatical belief, articulated by Murray Rothbard, that states are immoral constructs to be abolished in favor of an anarchist paradise that only his demented brain could conceive would work. He wants to undermine any foreign policy activity as a means of undermining the functions of the U.S. government, whereby he feels it would make it easier to entirely dismantle that government in the future.

I'm not making this up... I've read enough of this lunacy to understand Ron Paul's agenda from the inside out.

There is a strong tendency for people susceptible to crazy ideas to coalesce toward crazier yet ideas on miscellaneous topics. I have always been a big AGW skeptic, but it's so unsettling to see Climate Change denial strongly correlated with anti-vax lunacy and creationism, that I am going to dive head-first into the scientific data to reexamine my position on AGW. Yes, insanity by association has quite some clout.

Yet, however Ron Paul and his circle have me sickened to my stomach, monetary policy is a field I have been interested in long before ever hearing his name, and which I have painstakingly studied at university (I'm an Economics major with a specialization in finance, but my academic interests revolve around monetary policy).

re: #229 Charles

The reality is that almost no reputable economists believe the gold standard is a viable basis for a modern economic system. One of the main causes of the Great Depression, in fact, was ... the gold standard. If we ever had a government that tried to re-establish the gold standard, our current economic troubles would look like a walk in the park. It's a recipe for global disaster.

And the idea of abolishing the Federal Reserve is nearly as crazy.

You are correct that the gold standard is shunned by virtually all mainstream economists. But theirs, while being expert opinions, have historically shifted with time on every economic topic, often making 180, and even 360 degree turns. Economics is not like science in that controlled experiments are not possible. What economists do is try to retroactively come up with rationalizations that would fit with the course of economic events, and they hope that their rationalizations provide useful in the future. To cement their theories, or at least give them an air of scientific rigor, they often use a lot of statistical modeling, the suitability of which to economic phenomena has come under attack by one of the most brilliant polymaths of our century. Though approaching the topic from an entirely original angle, Mandelbrot's findings validate a lot of Mises's and Hayek's early thinking.

289 Dark_Falcon  Thu, May 7, 2009 7:05:12pm

re: #284 Acidtrash

No downding this time, since you make a good point. We need a popular alternative to Ron Paul and the crazies. I don't know who that would be though.

290 kansas  Thu, May 7, 2009 7:06:12pm

Is Ron Paul any crazier or dishonest that Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Barney Frank, Maxine Waters, Shelia Jackson Lee, and on and on.....I'm pretty sure out of 535 senators and congressman we'd be lucky to name 10 who are not complete idiots or sell outs. Or at least seem to play one on the evening news.

291 Deseeded  Thu, May 7, 2009 7:07:21pm

re: #289 Dark_Falcon

No downding this time, since you make a good point. We need a popular alternative to Ron Paul and the crazies. I don't know who that would be though.

RON PAUL! A great alternative to RON PAUL! haha!

292 Bill Dalasio  Thu, May 7, 2009 7:08:18pm

re: #282 Killian Bundy

Bernacke gave a speech today and acknowledged that potential problem.

/they're looking for opportunities to decrease the Fed's balance sheet but don't currently see inflation as an issue

Neither did Arthur Burns.

/old Fed joke

293 hazzyday  Thu, May 7, 2009 7:08:20pm

re: #75 Killgore Trout

I'm not expecting apologies from everybody here who told me to shut about Ron Paul and the Tea Parties.

At my tea party that was a non sequitur. I view the opportunity to participate in a tea party as an opportunity to press my case forward. If just by the census of my attendance. These are people wanting to be more active.

294 jcm  Thu, May 7, 2009 7:09:30pm

re: #284 Acidtrash

What was that about being a big tent party?

Why let racists, and idiot ideas into the tent?

We have enough trouble getting out the conservative / libertarian / classical liberal message, our founding message without getting tarred and feathered with kooks, nuts, and idiots.

Who does the MSM turn to for the "conservative" viewpoint more often than not? The likes of Pat Buchanan and Ron Paul.

295 hazzyday  Thu, May 7, 2009 7:10:03pm

re: #285 Killian Bundy

In a total economic collapse?

/think anyone with food or water is going to trade you for gold?

Vodka and bullets and medicine in a total econmic collaspe. Maybe old copies of Playboy from the good old days.

296 Charles Johnson  Thu, May 7, 2009 7:10:15pm

re: #284 Acidtrash

So learn form your nutjobs. Theyre on to something.

For a "superior Brit," that was one of the most stunningly dumb comments in this thread. Not to mention, two typos in two sentences.

Maybe there's a different definition for "superior" in Britain?

297 jcm  Thu, May 7, 2009 7:11:05pm

re: #288 medaura18586

Yeah! What she said!

Great post.

298 BignJames  Thu, May 7, 2009 7:11:36pm

re: #281 Spare O'Lake

Gold is rare and durable.
Paper is plentiful and disintegrates easily.
That is what makes gold more valuable than paper.

When investors sell their gold they're paid with paper.

299 Spare O'Lake  Thu, May 7, 2009 7:11:41pm

re: #290 kansas

Is Ron Paul any crazier or dishonest that Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Barney Frank, Maxine Waters, Shelia Jackson Lee, and on and on.....I'm pretty sure out of 535 senators and congressman we'd be lucky to name 10 who are not complete idiots or sell outs. Or at least seem to play one on the evening news.

Yes he is way crazier.

300 JHW  Thu, May 7, 2009 7:12:48pm

re: #288 medaura18586

Is not Rothbard some kind of big-shot at the von Mises institute?

301 kansas  Thu, May 7, 2009 7:12:55pm

re: #299 Spare O'Lake

Yes he is way crazier.

I'm jus sayin they're all nuts.

302 Sharmuta  Thu, May 7, 2009 7:13:13pm
So learn form your nutjobs.

Rotating title nomination.

303 SecondComing  Thu, May 7, 2009 7:14:04pm

What's a paleo-libertarian?

304 Spare O'Lake  Thu, May 7, 2009 7:15:42pm

re: #302 Sharmuta

Rotating title nomination.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

305 Killian Bundy  Thu, May 7, 2009 7:16:45pm

re: #243 born conservative

a gold ratio certificate

/hilarity ensues as people try to redeem their dollar "certificates" for 1/50,000th of an ounce of gold

306 Sharmuta  Thu, May 7, 2009 7:17:02pm

re: #290 kansas

People who want to undermine our society can be found on the fringes of both ends of the political spectrum. Both are equally dangerous.

307 Randall Gross  Thu, May 7, 2009 7:17:28pm

re: #303 SecondComing

Ron Paul

308 born conservative  Thu, May 7, 2009 7:17:50pm

re: #260 ArchangelMichael

To you and everyone else who so vehemently opposes what I say, I'm used to being ridiculed. I've been buying gold since the late 90s. January of last year I convinced the two guys I work for to meet with the chairman of our bank (which was asked to take TARP funds btw) to discuss their solvency -- and, per usual I was met with skepticism, but I've since been vindicated on my predictions of a major melt down in the financial markets. At our last board meeting the idea of diversifying into gold bullion was considered. My 401k is intact and I didn't lose any significant money in the recent stock market downturn. How about the rest of you? Time will determine who is correct on this issue.

309 kansas  Thu, May 7, 2009 7:18:40pm

re: #306 Sharmuta

People who want to undermine our society can be found on the fringes of both ends of the political spectrum. Both are equally dangerous.

Thank you.

310 ArchangelMichael  Thu, May 7, 2009 7:19:18pm

re: #303 SecondComing

What's a paleo-libertarian?

Basically without getting too in depth they are strain of libertarians who among other things believe that the financial/banking model and foreign policy model of the United States in 1789 is applicable to 2009 with no modification.

311 patb01  Thu, May 7, 2009 7:20:54pm

The Republican party is tearing itself apart, and not in the good way, we cannot go full crazy.

Right now the GOP is seen as anti science, and catering to the extreme elements, and if we do that moderates will go to either the Democrats or just not vote, and then elections get lost, and lather rinse repeat. We need to open the doors, but not lose our principles.

Main way we can do that is we need to have that soul search conversation about what are our core beliefs as Republicans, and how can we share it with potential voters. And we can't do that with Ron Paul leading the charge, he has too much baggage, and too many ideas that would work great in the 1800's but in the 2000's are a disaster waiting to happen.

312 Randall Gross  Thu, May 7, 2009 7:21:18pm

Paleolibertarian hallmarks:
Hating on Jews
Nativism/ White or Euro tribal nationalism
Isolationism
Anti-war
Secessionism
Income tax is illegal and other crackpot theories
Survivalism

Excepting the first two listed if you have streaks of one or two of these it doesn't make you a Paleo; usually they have most if not all of the above.

313 Killian Bundy  Thu, May 7, 2009 7:23:00pm

re: #308 born conservative

I've been buying gold since the late 90s.

Taking physically delivery or on paper?

/in a conversion to the gold standard you know the government's not going to let you keep it, at least not the equivalent of any overnight windfall

314 ArchangelMichael  Thu, May 7, 2009 7:23:09pm

re: #308 born conservative

To you and everyone else who so vehemently opposes what I say, I'm used to being ridiculed. I've been buying gold since the late 90s. January of last year I convinced the two guys I work for to meet with the chairman of our bank (which was asked to take TARP funds btw) to discuss their solvency -- and, per usual I was met with skepticism, but I've since been vindicated on my predictions of a major melt down in the financial markets. At our last board meeting the idea of diversifying into gold bullion was considered. My 401k is intact and I didn't lose any significant money in the recent stock market downturn. How about the rest of you? Time will determine who is correct on this issue.

You apparently didn't read most of what I said. I clearly stated, not only now, but often in other threads about this very subject that diversifying your portfolio into gold and other precious metals is a good hedge against inflation. Knowledgable individuals should consider taking these steps. I have myself.

That does not mean it's a good idea for every last person in the country or on the planet to do so. It's one of those things that doesn't work when everyone does it.

315 Flyers1974  Thu, May 7, 2009 7:23:10pm

re: #50 jvic

I'm a Democrat, and while I'm not sure what you mean by Ron Paul being "built up," I am indeed glad for his existence - only assuming however, that his followers stick with him and refrain from voting for the eventual GOP nominee.

316 Sharmuta  Thu, May 7, 2009 7:23:55pm

re: #309 kansas

You're welcome. As has often been noted- one of the key shared elements of any fringe group tends to be anti-Semitism.

317 jcm  Thu, May 7, 2009 7:24:47pm

re: #302 Sharmuta

Rotating title nomination.

Excellent!

318 Desert Dog  Thu, May 7, 2009 7:27:02pm

re: #308 born conservative

To you and everyone else who so vehemently opposes what I say, I'm used to being ridiculed. I've been buying gold since the late 90s. January of last year I convinced the two guys I work for to meet with the chairman of our bank (which was asked to take TARP funds btw) to discuss their solvency -- and, per usual I was met with skepticism, but I've since been vindicated on my predictions of a major melt down in the financial markets. At our last board meeting the idea of diversifying into gold bullion was considered. My 401k is intact and I didn't lose any significant money in the recent stock market downturn. How about the rest of you? Time will determine who is correct on this issue.

You need to read what 3Wood says about Gold, he laid it all out and I cannot find that link. But, I did see this:

What is Wrong with Gold?

We cannot go back to the gold standard....not the way things are now. As far as an investment. It is doing ok now, but it is a commodity and as much as you can get rich off of it, you can lose your shirt in one day as well. Be careful and do not put all of you eggs in one basket

319 Fat Bastard Vegetarian  Thu, May 7, 2009 7:27:12pm

re: #296 Charles

Too tiepoes in won sentence? ruki.

320 Acidtrash  Thu, May 7, 2009 7:27:36pm

re: #287 Thanos

Well this does rather miss the point. Over here, the people now voting for and working for the BNP are not racists. The management of the BNP are but we in the UK are so sick and tired of a one party state where the oppositon is virtually indistinguishable from the government that we have come to the conclusion that the only way to get them to come to account it to threaten them. We lend them the power to go to westminster and this is a reminder that we can just as easily take it back from them. I belive their is a similar dynamic with Ron Paul. We I an American I probably would hold my nose and vote Ron Paul but not if there were any danger of him winning.

What I want to see is the mainstream parties listening to us. An I suspect the same is true in the states. The most robust opposition I have seen against the Obama spendathon is from Bachmann and Ron Paul. Where the hell are the mainstream?

Sarah Palin was a radical who excited the grassroots but she blew it by backtracking on AGW and so what do we have, yet another politico with beleifs they will sell out to obtain power. If you have a party that is willing to compromise on anything at any time for the sake of power they will acheive nothing with that power and wont know what to do with it when they get it. I havent seen Ron Paul backtrack on anything he's said for the media.

We are tired of media puppets who will say and do anything. We are sick of politics as a soap opera. We want principled substantive policy and we would prefer it to be rooted in conservatism. Really there is an open goal to be had and the GOP is wasting the opportunity.

In Afghanistan right now there is a war for the hearts and minds of the people. It isn't to do with Capitalism vs Islam. Afghanistan is a poor country. Right now they lean toward the taliban because poppy crops pay the bills and keep people fed. Until we can provide roads to get goods to market so that other crops are more profitable than poppy, we will always be on the back foot. The social and religous elements are secondary to them. They are no different to us. If you can say to the people that if you co-operate with us we will make you richer, your jobs will be safe and sustaibale then you will inspire their loyalty and it wouldn't matter if we were exporting our social values with it. The US electorate is just the same. What good are liberal social values if you dont have a job?

321 FurryOldGuyJeans  Thu, May 7, 2009 7:27:49pm

The Silver Standard was idiocy when it was advocated and promoted by William Jennings Bryan and others, and the Gold Standard push by RP and his Dumbots is even loopier.

322 Fat Bastard Vegetarian  Thu, May 7, 2009 7:28:31pm

re: #315 Flyers1974

Very honest post, sir/madam.

323 Honorary Yooper  Thu, May 7, 2009 7:28:34pm

re: #284 Acidtrash

So learn form your nutjobs. Theyre on to something.

We are learning from our nutjobs. We're learning how not to be like them. You guys should do likewise.

BTW, FIFY.

324 Fat Bastard Vegetarian  Thu, May 7, 2009 7:30:12pm

re: #323 Honorary Yooper

Funny, Yoops!

325 FurryOldGuyJeans  Thu, May 7, 2009 7:31:00pm

re: #308 born conservative

Ooh, ooh! Martyr points! Martyr points!

You must be used to being ridiculed because you sure haven't a lick of common sense or the brains G-d gave a turnip.

But don't let me stop you from continuing to make yourself out to be a horse's ass, we need the entertainment.

326 Dark_Falcon  Thu, May 7, 2009 7:32:02pm

re: #320 Acidtrash

And now you admit you vote BNP. That leaves only one thing left to say:

GAZE

327 Flyers1974  Thu, May 7, 2009 7:32:25pm

re: #322 Fat Bastard Vegetarian

Thank you. The way I figure it, if you don't give your true feelings about the matter being discussed, no point in participating.

328 kansas  Thu, May 7, 2009 7:32:32pm

re: #311 patb01

The Republican party is tearing itself apart, and not in the good way, we cannot go full crazy.

Right now the GOP is seen as anti science, and catering to the extreme elements, and if we do that moderates will go to either the Democrats or just not vote, and then elections get lost, and lather rinse repeat. We need to open the doors, but not lose our principles.

Main way we can do that is we need to have that soul search conversation about what are our core beliefs as Republicans, and how can we share it with potential voters. And we can't do that with Ron Paul leading the charge, he has too much baggage, and too many ideas that would work great in the 1800's but in the 2000's are a disaster waiting to happen.

It's hard for me to tell what's real about the GOP and what's the image painted by the MSM and the likes of Carville, Begala, Olbermann, Maddow, Matthews, Joe Klein, Nick Kristoff, Katie Couric, Charlie Gibson, Bryan whatever, and the list does go on. I'm in the heart of GOP land and Ron Paul carries no weight around here. I wouldn't claim to know for sure, but I have a suspicion since he's a nut case, that the national MSM has built him up, characterized him as a leader, and get's him the air time, all to make the whole GOP look nutty. My observation is that the ones who they attack and ridicule are the possible true leaders. The ones they cover with any degree of positivity are the total nut jobs they are using to damage the party.

329 FurryOldGuyJeans  Thu, May 7, 2009 7:34:34pm

re: #284 Acidtrash

So learn form your nutjobs. Theyre on to something.

Rest assured we do learn from our nutjobs, just as we learned from you.

See what you do and then with forthrightness and conviction totally avoid doing even remotely the same.

330 Flyers1974  Thu, May 7, 2009 7:35:15pm

re: #322 Fat Bastard Vegetarian

Although, I will say, I have a personal reason for not liking Ron Paul. My otherwise normal and previously apolitical brother is intrigued with him and it worries me a little.

331 Acidtrash  Thu, May 7, 2009 7:36:09pm

re: #296 Charles

The term "superior brit" is one used to describe knowitall Brits who condescend to Americans, who are supposed to be the dumber of our two cultures. I believe I have amply illustrated this concept. I use it in irony. Compare the WSJ to the Daily Telegraph and tell me which is the smarter culture. I'll take the WSJ any day of the week.

But your kooks are on to something. Why else would they be gaining such traction in the media, on the internet and subsequently on TV? Before I worked out RP was a foaming moonbat in sheeps clothing I was salivating at his speeches on fiscal responsibility, similarly with Bachmanns presentation to congress on youtube. That is what speaks to the electorate. Doesn't sound very credible coming from John "Cap'n'Trade" McCain does it?

332 ArchangelMichael  Thu, May 7, 2009 7:36:25pm

re: #308 born conservative

And by the way, my 401k and IRAs are well intact too. I lost about 10-12% in them from Oct 2008 until Mar 2009. I know many people who lost 50% or more in that same time and that is about what was lost by the market in general so despite some small losses, I beat the market by 40%. I had a little gold in my IRA but not the 401k (and the 401k lost less value than the IRA did). That and I also have 30+ working years ahead of me still and I trade outside of tax-sheltered vehicles for current supplementary income.

Again this is personal finance, not macroeconomics. Not the same thing.

333 Randall Gross  Thu, May 7, 2009 7:36:42pm

re: #320 Acidtrash

I notice that a lot of Ron Paul supporters in forums come from offshore, and always have the tendency to pimp a far right Euro tribal nationalist party. Go Away BNP boy, we are on to you.

334 FurryOldGuyJeans  Thu, May 7, 2009 7:38:39pm

re: #320 Acidtrash

What is it about people from other countries that demand we listen to anything and everything they have to say about our internal politics and policies, yet throw a hissy fit if an American even thinks about commenting about foreign politics?

335 patb01  Thu, May 7, 2009 7:39:11pm

Of course they have, he's out there and willing to give interviews, we need Republicans to step up and disavow the creationists, RP brigade and the nativists we will have problems.

We need to find the ones they ignore and push them out there, those are our leaders, hell I know I am going to have to seriously soulsearch if I see Palin/Jindal in 2012.

336 Killian Bundy  Thu, May 7, 2009 7:39:47pm

re: #308 born conservative

January of last year I convinced the two guys I work for to meet with the chairman of our bank (which was asked to take TARP funds btw) to discuss their solvency -- and, per usual I was met with skepticism, but I've since been vindicated on my predictions of a major melt down in the financial markets.

And what about now, have you been sleeping since March? Banks have been pretty much leading the 20%+ market rally, up in today's after market/after stress test too.

/by the way, which "TARP" bank is currently in danger of insolvency?

337 FurryOldGuyJeans  Thu, May 7, 2009 7:39:50pm

re: #331 Acidtrash

Seeing the drivel you spew sure earns you the label of "Superior Brit" hands down, no questions asked.

338 Acidtrash  Thu, May 7, 2009 7:40:01pm

re: #326 Dark_Falcon

I don't vote BNP. All this prattle about them being "right wing" annoys the living hell out of me. Go to their site and read their economic policy. Its about as corporatist socialist as you can get. aka Fascist. But I can quite see the logic of voting for them in that it is an anti-politics vote. Were I of the mindset that negative voting was worth my vote I perhaps might, and even then only if there were no danger of them winning. But I prefer to abstain until such a time as the Tory party presents us witha viable conservative agenda. That is not Mr Cameron. I believe the GOP is about to embark on the same mistake by going to the polls with a Democrat-Lite agenda.

339 Mr Spiffy  Thu, May 7, 2009 7:41:05pm

re: #48 HelloDare

Does anybody hear remember how Corporal Agarn on F-Troop pronounced, "The bandit from Banff."

It was his cousin, the burglar of Banff-ff

340 Charles Johnson  Thu, May 7, 2009 7:41:17pm

Good grief.

341 Randall Gross  Thu, May 7, 2009 7:41:45pm

re: #331 Acidtrash

Here's a clue: Populist pundits always grab a popular theme and wear it like a banner, screaming the loudest about it so the lackwits and morons will hear their kindred voice.

342 kansas  Thu, May 7, 2009 7:41:45pm

re: #331 Acidtrash

Your kooks are on to something.. Why else would they be gaining such traction in the media, on the internet and subsequently on TV? ..

Part of the plan to make the Democrats look good. Remember, our MSM will scorn and ridicule anyone who threatens their power grab. So look at those they scorn the most and think those are the ones they actually think could damage them. Those who gain traction and air time are put there to make the GOP look bad.

343 FurryOldGuyJeans  Thu, May 7, 2009 7:42:44pm

re: #338 Acidtrash

Frankly I don't give a rat's ass how you voted, and care even less what your opinion is regarding our politics.

JUST GET THE FUCK OUTA HERE.

344 Randall Gross  Thu, May 7, 2009 7:43:04pm

re: #335 patb01

The real candidates and leaders are not going to step forward until the bloodletting is done and the creeps are kicked to the curb. Don't expect anything before August or so.

345 Sharmuta  Thu, May 7, 2009 7:43:12pm

re: #331 Acidtrash

Fiscal responsibility isn't ripping down the current infrastructure- that's not the root of the problem. What needs correction is government spending.

346 Honorary Yooper  Thu, May 7, 2009 7:44:24pm

re: #331 Acidtrash

No, you're being a "superior Brit" in two ways. One, you're coming off as a condescending asshole. Two, by being in line with the BNP, you make yourself a part of the "British Master Race", goosestepping into the future.

347 Charles Johnson  Thu, May 7, 2009 7:46:08pm

re: #338 Acidtrash

I don't vote BNP.

You just promote their racist, extreme right wing crap at LGF.

Gotcha.

348 medaura18586  Thu, May 7, 2009 7:46:36pm

re: #229 Charles

Monetary policy is not a sexy topic. Whoever sitting next to you on a plane is yapping on in your ear and you can't stand to make conversation? Start talking about monetary policy, and I guarantee it will shut them up. Want to get out of a lousy date? It will work for that too. But monetary policy is very important and unfortunately, it is understood even more poorly by the general public than evolution, or other basic scientific concepts are.

I am not coming out in the defense of the "gold standard" per se, but of free banking in general. There is no world-central-bank, no world-treasury, yet the U.S. dollar has naturally arisen as a vehicle currency, not by UN or world-government fiat, but out of natural economic dynamics that push market participants toward the most desirable asset. Likewise, if the U.S. or any other country operated under a free banking system (that is, if the government stopped printing paper money and voided the legal-tender status of existing paper currency), asset-based currencies would emerge in the market to fulfill money's vital functions of means of exchange, unit of account, and store of value. There would be diversification and specialization (different asset-backed currencies dominating different markets) but gold would likely emerge as a top player. The government wouldn't sanctify or enforce its role in the economy; the market would.

Most people harbor some very obscene misconceptions regarding asset-backed currencies (otherwise known as hard money). They see it as retrograde, primitive, obstructive to economic growth, impractical to conduct transactions with, but those are regrettable myths. Free banking is still banking. People would not be carrying around gold bullions or bushels of wheat for transactions, but rather privately-issued bank notes redeemable in the fungible asset/commodity backing the currency. Electronic transfers would continue to be the norm, modernization in banking practices would continue unattenuated. But the tangible assets backing such currency would act as self-regulating control valves on the financial sector, and would prevent or, at any rate, strongly discourage, the formation of asset bubbles. Such self-regulatory qualities of "hard money" arise out of the stable relationship they impose on interest rates, price levels, and economic calculation. Fiat money is less stable, and easily bubbles up from collective market hysteria or the Fed's (often ill-advised) manipulations. When your currency is backed by real assets instead of government fiat or popular opinion/trust, which can waver like the wind, it is much more difficult for an economic system, especially a highly complex one like ours, to depart from reality. The asset backing serves as a reality check, and a gravitating force toward reality.

349 FurryOldGuyJeans  Thu, May 7, 2009 7:47:17pm

re: #346 Honorary Yooper

No, you're being a "superior Brit" in two ways. One, you're coming off as a condescending asshole. Two, by being in line with the BNP, you make yourself a part of the "British Master Race", goosestepping into the future.

Doing touch and go's on the fellow's cranium, eh Yoop? It won't sink in, we will always be Crass Americans.

350 Charles Johnson  Thu, May 7, 2009 7:47:25pm

re: #348 medaura18586

Bad HTML in your comment.

351 Acidtrash  Thu, May 7, 2009 7:48:00pm

re: #334 FurryOldGuyJeans

Well, lemme see, at the end of the Thatcher government, a damn popular one to begin with, which gradually lost its credibility (much like Bush), along comes a charming, young, but big spending socialist Tony Blair, (your Obama) who wins hands down and then we see the Tories in a ten year civil war (wondering how and why it lost) and became an enfeebled opposition which allowed the New Labour project to get away with murder. There are exceptional paralells going on and I fail to see how the experience of UK conservatives isn't relevant. Kimberly Strassel of the WSJ was saying similar a few weeks ago. I am not especially pushing an agenda here other than not wanting to see the GOP in the political wilderness for a devade. And I am certainly not opposed to the US having a voice in foreign affairs. Not sure how I might have given you that impression.

352 Honorary Yooper  Thu, May 7, 2009 7:48:11pm

re: #349 FurryOldGuyJeans

Doing touch and go's on the fellow's cranium, eh Yoop? It won't sink in, we will always be Crass Americans.

Oh, but of course, to him we always will. It's just fun to poke the troll with a stick until Stinky takes care of him.

353 born conservative  Thu, May 7, 2009 7:48:16pm

re: #314 ArchangelMichael

I actually did read and understood what you said, but I was trying to do a blanket response to the many comments I received -- it didn't work. I'm not as adept as many on this site, plus I have little time to spare. I initially posted because I wanted to let Devil's Advocate know that someone else shared his pov.

The USD is about to do a swan dive. I'm glad you're holding some gold.

354 Acidtrash  Thu, May 7, 2009 7:48:22pm

re: #347 Charles

Er how?

355 Honorary Yooper  Thu, May 7, 2009 7:49:44pm

re: #354 Acidtrash

Er how?

Go back and re-read your posts.

356 Acidtrash  Thu, May 7, 2009 7:50:30pm

re: #345 Sharmuta

I quite agree. Paul has attached a dangerous policy to a popular ideal. The task for the gop is to steal the ideal but forumlate a better policy. You dont win by trashing policies. You win by coming up with better ones. That applies as much internally as externally.

357 jvic  Thu, May 7, 2009 7:50:42pm
I'm a Democrat, and while I'm not sure what you mean by Ron Paul being "built up," I am indeed glad for his existence - only assuming however, that his followers stick with him and refrain from voting for the eventual GOP nominee.

I mean "legitimized" as a major Republican figure.

358 FurryOldGuyJeans  Thu, May 7, 2009 7:51:11pm

re: #351 Acidtrash

Your opinion around here is worthless, bub. Nothing you have to say do most of the people here care about one whit.

Just shut the fuck up and go away.

359 Natasha  Thu, May 7, 2009 7:53:47pm

There is a reason why kooks are gaining traction in the mainstream media, and it has a lot to do with the majority of people's intellectual laziness, and an almost pathological aversion to rational thinking. People treat ideas like fashionable items, they seem to wear them like trendy rags. As with trendy clothing, trendy ideas and their proponents tend to be on the obnoxious, kooky side. To such a mindset, rationality is quite boring.

I will admit, I am more libertarian than conservative, but I am not crazy, and I will be damned if I can claim that any of the kooks out there represent me. Basically, the way things are standing, I do NOT have a party that speaks for my interests.

360 FurryOldGuyJeans  Thu, May 7, 2009 7:53:52pm

re: #351 Acidtrash

Oh, and for your information, Obama isn't mine. He is a Citizen of the World, not America.

361 erraticsphinx  Thu, May 7, 2009 7:53:56pm

re: #351 Acidtrash

There is no "logic" to voting BNP, Ever.

White Nationalist parties do not deserve the vote over Labour, sorry.

362 Acidtrash  Thu, May 7, 2009 7:55:09pm

re: #355 Honorary Yooper

Sorry, which BNP policy have I advocted?

I was just explaing the dynamics of protest voting. One does not necessarily have to agree with a party to vote for it. And I have clearly stated that I do not, will not vote for the BNP and my primary concern is small government and low taxes of which the BNP are not adherents to idealogically.

363 FurryOldGuyJeans  Thu, May 7, 2009 7:55:14pm

re: #354 Acidtrash

Er how?

What the hell are you? A 1 watt? A wet match in a dark cave?

364 Acidtrash  Thu, May 7, 2009 7:56:08pm

re: #361 erraticsphinx

Oh there is a logic. You and I may not like it but there is indeed a logic.

365 ArchangelMichael  Thu, May 7, 2009 7:56:45pm

What part of "there isn't enough physical gold in existence on the planet Earth to support the modern economy of the US with a gold-backed currency" don't people get?

366 Killian Bundy  Thu, May 7, 2009 7:57:08pm

re: #353 born conservative

The USD is about to do a swan dive.

Foreign investment will flood in to U.S. markets.

/yay exports!

367 FurryOldGuyJeans  Thu, May 7, 2009 7:57:51pm

re: #365 ArchangelMichael

What part of "there isn't enough physical gold in existence on the planet Earth to support the modern economy of the US with a gold-backed currency" don't people get?

Logic doesn't enter into a feel-good policy, especially when they think they would be at the top of the heap when the new policy is enacted.

368 Acidtrash  Thu, May 7, 2009 7:59:55pm

re: #341 Thanos

Well I agree but populism is popular policys. That's a risk you're going to run in a democracy if your government has abandoned any kind of accountability or your party has abandoned its principles. That IS going to have blowback.

369 Killian Bundy  Thu, May 7, 2009 8:01:11pm

re: #365 ArchangelMichael

What part of "there isn't enough physical gold in existence on the planet Earth to support the modern economy of the US with a gold-backed currency" don't people get?

/they're into these "fractional" certificates, where a quantity of gold only visible under an electron microscope can back a U.S. dollar

370 erraticsphinx  Thu, May 7, 2009 8:02:02pm

re: #368 Acidtrash

blowback.


!

371 Natasha  Thu, May 7, 2009 8:02:23pm

re: #367 FurryOldGuyJeans

Logic doesn't enter into a feel-good policy, especially when they think they would be at the top of the heap when the new policy is enacted.

And that is something "right" and "left" crazies have in common. They all think they get to be in charge and decide which animals are more equal than others.

372 NelsFree  Thu, May 7, 2009 8:03:02pm

I posted this on another RP thread: gradegov.com allows registered members to assign grades to members of congress. The founder was interviewed and said the top grades went to Ron Paul.

/Coincidence? I. Think. Not.

373 Acidtrash  Thu, May 7, 2009 8:03:25pm

re: #323 Honorary Yooper

Fair enough, but dont throw the baby out with the bathwater.

374 medaura18586  Thu, May 7, 2009 8:03:56pm

re: #229 Charles

The reality is that almost no reputable economists believe the gold standard is a viable basis for a modern economic system. One of the main causes of the Great Depression, in fact, was ... the gold standard. If we ever had a government that tried to re-establish the gold standard, our current economic troubles would look like a walk in the park. It's a recipe for global disaster.

And the idea of abolishing the Federal Reserve is nearly as crazy.

The causes of the Great Depression are far from settled (every economic school has its own variant, none of which can be scientifically falsified because the event cannot be recreated). In fact, they are hotly debated to this day, albeit in obscure circles of economic-theory discussions, largely sealed off from the public. What you are paraphrasing in your comment, is the position of the Monetarist School (Milton Friedman et al.) Personally, while I have enormous respect and admiration for Friedman as both an economist and a human being, I am convinced that his monetary positions were his most wrong-headed ones.

I do not deny that "the gold standard," as instituted at the time, played a factor in catalyzing the Great Depression. But that was "gold standard" in name only, because as soon as the Federal Reserve was legislated into being in 1913, it started pumping the money supply as if, for all intents and purposes, currency needn't be backed by gold reserves. More money in circulation made people feel richer, and, combined with enthusiasm over the genuine commercializable technological breakthroughs of the day (e.g., the radio) it led to an investment frenzy into half-baked projects. What do you do with this intractable flow of extra cash? You invest it in the stock market. This was the root of the asset bubble of the 1920s. The monetary over-stimulation was even more drastic than the above explanation indicates: Not only were people investing more (into projects whose profitability did not warrant it), they did not curtail their consumption. In general, in order to allow for increased investment to achieve higher consumption in the future, an economy must save today, by cutting present consumption and diverting some of its resources (in the form of capital) into investment. (This is a simplified schematic, that doesn't account for the possibility of financing invariable consumption vis a vis increased investment via foreign debt, but it's not relevant in this case since then, the U.S. was a net creditor to the world.) But when the money supply is manipulated into artificially higher levels, people are not saving. In the 1910s and 1920s, they still believed they had the same amounts of money in their bank accounts, fully backed by gold. So consumption was not decreasing, quite the contrary (assuming a positive marginal propensity to consume), but investment was increasing too. A two front bubble! And an unsustainable capital structure to boot. All this wealth, this luxury, was being paid finances by assets that simply weren't there; the country's asset pool was squandered... Money supply and interest rates act as neuro-transmitters of sorts to the brain of the economy. What the newly created Fed did was inject heroin in the blood stream. After the high, came the low, once the artificial stimulant was flushed out of the economic system (i.e. interest rates returning to normal as prices adjust, upward, to the new money supply).

375 medaura18586  Thu, May 7, 2009 8:04:29pm

re: #350 Charles

Bad HTML in your comment.

Oh crap! Is my comment lost forever?

376 Randall Gross  Thu, May 7, 2009 8:04:55pm

re: #368 Acidtrash

When populism works through fear it's always a formula for defeat in US politics, something BNP boys and UKIP Klowns aren't familiar with.

377 erraticsphinx  Thu, May 7, 2009 8:08:54pm

re: #364 Acidtrash

I wouldn't be proud of voting BNP as a protest vote.

An openly racist party does not deserve any kind of vote.

378 Killian Bundy  Thu, May 7, 2009 8:08:58pm

The Krugerrand weighs one ounce.

/under a gold standard, that could easily represent more than most peoples yearly wage

379 Dark_Falcon  Thu, May 7, 2009 8:10:32pm

re: #373 Acidtrash

Fair enough, but dont throw the baby out with the bathwater.

No, we'll just throw you out with the trash.

380 Flyers1974  Thu, May 7, 2009 8:10:36pm

re: #357 jvic

I understand your meaning now. I think however, that much of the mainstream media treats Ron Paul as a spectacle. In fact, I'm not aware of any media outlet, mainstream or not, that takes him seriously. Not that they should in my opinion, but thats another matter. From LGF I understand he's on Fox a lot. Not sure how he's treated there though.

381 medaura18586  Thu, May 7, 2009 8:11:26pm

re: #300 JHW

Is not Rothbard some kind of big-shot at the von Mises institute?

Yes he is. That "institute" should be named after Rothbard instead. He was a student of Mises, true, and that, in and of itself, does not reflect well on the latter. But Mises was ideologically out of touch with the collectivist intelligentsia of those days; he was an outcast, left Vienna to escape the Death Camp (he was Jew). And he was a staunch individualist and free-marketeer, at a time in history when the tide of public opinion was very much in lock-step with socialist or, at the very least, Keynesian orthodoxies. So he attracted a small group of people who, to associate with him, had to have been eccentrics. Hayek was his greatest pupil. Rothbard was a disgrace. BUT it should be noted, that while Mises was alive, Rothbard had not espoused anarchic sympathies. I am sure Mises would have repudiated such thinking, and Rothbard must have known it too, for he waited until Mises died to jump the shark.

Ludvig von Mises, even for those who may disagree with some or most of his economic ideas, was a great humanist and intellectual. One of the most underrated figures of the 20th century. His treatment of the "economic calculation problem" is genial, and I think, the most devastating conceptual argument ever erected against central planning in general, and communism in particular.

382 Acidtrash  Thu, May 7, 2009 8:11:30pm

re: #376 Thanos

Fair enough but popular doesn't always equate with populism. To turn away from a sensible idea because it has traction with idiots is nuts. You have to snatch it back and rebrand it. And for that you need leadership. To do that I think your efforts are better placed building up an alternative vision with the same values with a new guy from scratch rather than wasting time and resources with a civil war and this wierd mcarthyism you got goin' on over here.

383 SecondComing  Thu, May 7, 2009 8:12:18pm

re: #110 Guanxi88

Twin Peaks: The Black Lodge:


Two of my favorite scenes:

384 Cato  Thu, May 7, 2009 8:13:09pm

Ron Paul is clearly a nut job with some idea of what he is talking about in economics. He is squarely in the Austrian camp.

To understand what that means, you can think about it as being (1) subjectivist, (2) dynamic and (3) libertarian.

By subjectivist I mean that ONLY THE PARTIES TO A TRANSACTION can judge the value of that transaction to themselves. Suppose you go to a cafeteria and want to buy an apple. The server tells you it is $1 dollar. Is it worth it? It depends on how much you want the apple, whether there are cheaper alternatives, whether the apple is Fuji or delicious, whether it is the last one or one of hundreds, whether it has bruises or not, etc. Facts, the relative positions of the bargainers and the supply of money all affect the calculation of the actors. No objective, universal answer can be derived.

By dynamic I mean that prices can only be determined in action. Transactions need to occur to know the relative value of a thing. One of the reasons this recession has been difficult is because no one wants to get screwed by overpaying, yet no one knows what that means since transaction volume stopped in the wake of the credit crumble. Activity is a value to the system in and of itself as a means of conveying information about the system.

Finally, it is libertarian in the sense that only free actors can make the subjective determinations necessary to price goods and services. If it is not free, then the parties cannot have the subjectivity necessary for choosing price.

These principles started with the Spanish scholastics like De Mariana and were later picked up by the Austrians like Menger, Hayek and most greatly, Mises. Human Action by Mises is the most important text in the field, one that Ronald Reagan critiqued in the 1950's in a hand-written letter to Mises that is quite interesting.

Paul may be fruit loops, but these guys were real thinkers.

385 Killian Bundy  Thu, May 7, 2009 8:13:22pm

Someone should divide the total mined ounces of gold in this world by the U.S. money supply.

/the answer won't be pretty

386 Desert Dog  Thu, May 7, 2009 8:13:44pm

re: #381 medaura18586

Great posts tonight, Medaura. It is bringing back all that stuff I thought I had forgotten over the years. Keep it up, you are making things very clear!

387 Acidtrash  Thu, May 7, 2009 8:14:22pm

re: #379 Dark_Falcon

No, we'll just throw you out with the trash.

Bit harsh.

388 SecondComing  Thu, May 7, 2009 8:15:27pm

re: #310 ArchangelMichael

Basically without getting too in depth they are strain of libertarians who among other things believe that the financial/banking model and foreign policy model of the United States in 1789 is applicable to 2009 with no modification.

Thank you.

389 Randall Gross  Thu, May 7, 2009 8:17:34pm

re: #382 Acidtrash

re: #382 Acidtrash

Fiscal conservatism and capitalism has always been the back bone of the republican party. We don't have to adopt "we're all doomed!" crackpot theories to further fiscal conservatism or capitalism.

Besides that RP is quite the hypocrite, he certainly put hognose to trough and snuffled out more than his share of pork for his district, and he's anti-free trade. Not very libertarian, not very capitalistic to be an Isolationist.

390 SecondComing  Thu, May 7, 2009 8:18:19pm

re: #312 Thanos

Paleolibertarian hallmarks:
Hating on Jews
Nativism/ White or Euro tribal nationalism
Isolationism
Anti-war
Secessionism
Income tax is illegal and other crackpot theories
Survivalism

Excepting the first two listed if you have streaks of one or two of these it doesn't make you a Paleo; usually they have most if not all of the above.

Thank you as well.

391 Cato  Thu, May 7, 2009 8:18:23pm

re: #388 SecondComing


I guess Volcker is one of those guys. He said that the only advancement in banking worth anything in the last 100 years was the ATM.

392 brandon13  Thu, May 7, 2009 8:19:04pm

Slightly off topic.

Young Americans Are Far Less Religious Than Their Parents

Just goes to show that the Republican party is going to have to distance itself from the religious faction if it's going to be relevant in the future.

393 erraticsphinx  Thu, May 7, 2009 8:20:09pm

re: #382 Acidtrash


I'm sorry, I could be wrong, but to me you just sound like you want crazy ideas.

But with a pretty face! I hear Vlaams Belang, SD, and the FN are much better at hiding themselves than the rather clumsy BNP.

Would you vote for them ?

394 medaura18586  Thu, May 7, 2009 8:20:11pm

Milton Friedman's critique of the gold standard has more to do with what the Federal Reserve could or should have done AFTER the market crash, and how its actions were limited by the gold standard. Friedman thought the proper response should have been a sharp injection of liquidity, to prevent banks from going under and thus to stop the spread of panic and bank-runs. The gold standard limits the amount of money federal authorities can print, for they ought to be redeemable in gold. Friedman completely ignores, though, that it's the departure from the proper operations of the gold standard that caused the market bubble in the first place. He just never addresses the causes of the bubble and initial crash itself. From what we can see in our own present financial trials and tribulations, when the public's trust is lost, liquidity injections are not even well-absorbed by the financial sector. In 2008, banks borrowed like crazy from the Fed, but they didn't trickle down the chain that liquidity: they kept lending to each-other at rates above LIBOR, because they feared systemic risk, they doubted one-another's solvency. Also, it was impossible to just "keep lending" because the non-financial, tangible side of the market was in a mess. There were simply very few credit-worthy prospective borrowers out there. These are complications Friedman couldn't have foreseen, because ultimately, his theory was of how the Great Depression could have been managed was a simplified "alternative universe" scenario. The world is much more complex than even the most towering of geniuses can imagine, when events unfold in real time.

395 Flyers1974  Thu, May 7, 2009 8:20:18pm

re: #384 Cato

I think you hit on a big reason why he is so popular. To many, many people, a "regular" politician reminds them of a used car salesman. They speak in wishy-washy terms and sound bites, don't want to offend voters, they seem neutered. Ron Paul offers heavy duty stuff with facts and figures. He seems different. Most people probably have no idea what those facts and figures mean, but no matter.

396 Salamantis  Thu, May 7, 2009 8:21:54pm

Why do I suspect that many of the people who are advocating a return to the gold standard are gold-hoarders themselves, who desire to be rendered instantly rich when gold prices skyrocket to 50 grand an ounce?

All I see is a dystopian Clockwork Orange future, with bands of thugs roaming the streets with pruning shears, to snip off fingers for the wedding bands.

397 Dark_Falcon  Thu, May 7, 2009 8:22:21pm

re: #392 brandon13

Slightly off topic.

Young Americans Are Far Less Religious Than Their Parents

Just goes to show that the Republican party is going to have to distance itself from the religious faction if it's going to be relevant in the future.

Younger people have always tended to be less religious. That said, you point to a dangerous trend. We need to work to reverse declines in religion, not accept them.

398 jvic  Thu, May 7, 2009 8:23:52pm

re: #380 Flyers1974

I understand your meaning now. I think however, that much of the mainstream media treats Ron Paul as a spectacle. In fact, I'm not aware of any media outlet, mainstream or not, that takes him seriously. Not that they should in my opinion, but thats another matter. From LGF I understand he's on Fox a lot. Not sure how he's treated there though.

Nolo contendere.

But if there's a Bizarro World GOP ticket in 2012: Oldtay ouyay osay.

:-)

399 Lynn B.  Thu, May 7, 2009 8:23:58pm
Perhaps the most influential guest has been Thomas Woods, a conservative scholar whose previous books include “The Politically Incorrect Guide to American History” and ...

Not to take this guilt by association thing beyond its rational limits, but I'd just point out that Regnery Publishing, which publishes the Politically Incorrect guides, has published at least four of Robert Spencer's five most recent books.

400 Randall Gross  Thu, May 7, 2009 8:24:57pm

The other thing noteworthy about this whole gold thing: many are counting on a "four and out" failure scenario for Obama, and comparing him to Carter and Johnson. I don't see that coming. It's probably going to be more like Clinton. So you gold pimps might want to take a look at what gold did during the Clinton years...

401 Cato  Thu, May 7, 2009 8:25:12pm

re: #394 medaura18586

In game theorhetical terms, the panic is a Nash equilibrium point.

402 coldwarrior  Thu, May 7, 2009 8:25:16pm

re: #385 Killian Bundy

9.8 trillion more or less m1 m2

403 jvic  Thu, May 7, 2009 8:25:24pm

re: #391 Cato

I guess Volcker is one of those guys. He said that the only advancement in banking worth anything in the last 100 years was the ATM.

That bothered me at the time because I thought of online banking.

Everyone gets old...

404 ArchangelMichael  Thu, May 7, 2009 8:25:36pm

re: #396 Salamantis

Why do I suspect that many of the people who are advocating a return to the gold standard are gold-hoarders themselves, who desire to be rendered instantly rich when gold prices skyrocket to 50 grand an ounce?

All I see is a dystopian Clockwork Orange future, with bands of thugs roaming the streets with pruning shears, to snip off fingers for the wedding bands.

They overlook the fact that to even *think* about doing it, the government would have to confiscate every last bit, piece, and molecule of gold laying around. They wont be rich over night when Feds with guns come and give them pennies on the dollar for that hoard.

405 Cato  Thu, May 7, 2009 8:26:02pm

re: #395 Flyers1974

You might be right.

406 Sharmuta  Thu, May 7, 2009 8:27:15pm

re: #356 Acidtrash

I quite agree. Paul has attached a dangerous policy to a popular ideal. The task for the gop is to steal the ideal but forumlate a better policy. You dont win by trashing policies. You win by coming up with better ones. That applies as much internally as externally.

The populists stole this issue of fiscal responsibility so they could promote their lunatic ideas.

407 SuperdaveTWC  Thu, May 7, 2009 8:29:27pm

Re: Ron Paul's economics and Rep. Bachmann's grilling f Geitner on Constitutionality:

Even a broken clock is right twice per day.

Don't automatically reject the message just because the messenger has goofy views about other nonrelevant issues. The Nazis and the Japanese did unbelievably horrible things to people (Nazis to Jews, Slavs, Gypsies, homosexuals, and "worthless eaters", Japanese to Chinese, other Asians, even Americans and British), but the scientific and medical information about painkiller efficacy, disease transmission and incubation rates have benefited us all (although it makes me sick to think of the human sacrifice involved as well as the US government's hiding of its knowledge for over fifty years).

408 Cato  Thu, May 7, 2009 8:29:30pm

re: #396 Salamantis


You should read Alan Greenspan's pro-gold article in Ayn Rand's "Capitalism-The Unknown Ideal". Very interesting, but it doesn't work today. The creation of gold derivatives would lead to manipulation of a relatively small market. But a synthetic standard of a variety of commodities is possible.

409 Killian Bundy  Thu, May 7, 2009 8:29:57pm

re: #402 coldwarrior

9.8 trillion more or less m1 m2

Getting closer to the math here.

/okay, now who's not lazy like me who wants to look up the number of existing mined ounces of gold?

410 ArchangelMichael  Thu, May 7, 2009 8:31:54pm

re: #409 Killian Bundy

145,000 tonnes according to wiki

411 ArchangelMichael  Thu, May 7, 2009 8:33:27pm

re: #409 Killian Bundy

Getting closer to the math here.

/okay, now who's not lazy like me who wants to look up the number of existing mined ounces of gold?

Heres more info:

"Gold reserves (or gold holdings) are held by central banks as a store of value. In 2001, it was estimated that all the gold ever mined totaled 145,000 tonnes. One tonne of gold equated to a value of US$30.27 million as of February 14, 2009 ($941.35/troy ounces). The total value of all gold ever mined would be US$4.39 trillion at that price."


Last time I checked, our economy is bigger than 4.39 trillion.

412 coldwarrior  Thu, May 7, 2009 8:33:28pm

114 billion dollars

126986263.578 ounces on hand global
9.8 trillion m1 m2
gold at about 900 an ounce....

sooo...114,000,000,000 dollars of gold global
9,800,000,000 just in us economy m1 m2

this was quick and dirty and probably wrong!

413 medaura18586  Thu, May 7, 2009 8:34:33pm

Again, I am using the "gold standard" as a practical implementation of free banking, which it doesn't have to be. Free banking is not wedded to gold or any other commodity or asset. But for simplification purposes, I'll speak of gold.

The trouble with the "gold standard" is that it's never been actually implemented as it's meant to be. The Bretton Woods system, for example, was a perversion of what the gold standard is supposed to do. This assertion may ring bells of "Well, Communism didn't work because it was never implemented properly, not REAL Communism." I am aware of the superficial similarity of the arguments (especially to those not greatly familiar with intricacies of economic theory) but while Communism doesn't work because it can't ( a] it runs counter human nature b] the problem of economic calculation ), the gold standard works too well, which has been its undoing, because it tempts governments to muddle with it, incrementally, until only a shell of the standard is left, economic chaos follows, which is then promptly blamed on the gold standard.

I could try to explain the intricacies myself, but I think the arguments would be much more authoritative coming from Alan Greenspan, the central bankers' central banker, himself. Check out his essay Gold and Economic Freedom. His 2 cents on the gold standard's merits should also mitigate the commonly held (and largely accurate) belief that no authoritative economist supports hard money. There is some Ayn Rand-esque flavor to that essay, but that's just in the presentation, not the meat of the theory. Greenspan has been lately interviewed on whether he takes back his thoughts in this essay, and his answer was that he wouldn't change a single word.

414 medaura18586  Thu, May 7, 2009 8:35:59pm

re: #401 Cato

In game theorhetical terms, the panic is a Nash equilibrium point.

Very true.

415 Acidtrash  Thu, May 7, 2009 8:37:50pm

re: #389 Thanos

re: #382 Acidtrash

Fiscal conservatism and capitalism has always been the back bone of the republican party. We don't have to adopt "we're all doomed!" crackpot theories to further fiscal conservatism or capitalism.

Fiscal conservatism was the backbone of the Bush administration?
Remind me, what are corpoate taxes in the US at the moment? What does capital gains tax stand at right now? Hardly the tax rates of the land of the free, the bastion of enterprise!

This is exactly what Bachmann outlines here...

Is that nutjob extremism? Though if she has been duped by RP into this witch hunt of the fed then that is a bad thing I agree but I can't argue with her economics. Why is this economic view seemingly out on the fringes even during a Republican presidency? Is it so radical?

The US is bleeding jobs and it's going to get worse under Obama. Conservative economics can get the US out of this mess but RP is stealing that agenda because the GOP isn't pushing it hard enough, and because they cannot speak with any credibility on it while key players are tied to the Bush administration.

The republicans also have an abysmal record on giving way to transnationalism which is just as much economic suicide as high taxes. Do you think Cap and Trade is a domestic policy? The fact is that America is just as susceptable to quasi regulation from treaties as the UK is. You have it with Basel2 and Kyoto and I'm pretty sure your motor industry regs came via UNECE as did ours. Bolton outlines the phenomenon here...

Does this make Beck a nutjob extremist kook?

416 Slumbering Behemoth Stinks  Thu, May 7, 2009 8:38:21pm

re: #246 acidtrash

Errr guys, hate to be a superior Brit and all...

No sweat, certainly no danger of that happening, not even remotely. We have a fair number of Brits here far superior to you. Lizard Jimmah comes to mind.

417 Acidtrash  Thu, May 7, 2009 8:40:05pm

re: #406 Sharmuta

The populists stole this issue of fiscal responsibility so they could promote their lunatic ideas.

Thats why you have to steal it back with urgency and what I was saying originally is that you need a new guy with a new zeal to take it back and build him/her from the ground up rather than going to war over Ron Paul.

418 Flyers1974  Thu, May 7, 2009 8:40:54pm

re: #398 jvic

My favorite cartoon Bizarro World.

419 Acidtrash  Thu, May 7, 2009 8:41:05pm

re: #416 Slumbering Behemoth

No sweat, certainly no danger of that happening, not even remotely. We have a fair number of Brits here far superior to you. Lizard Jimmah comes to mind.

Somebodys sense of irony is not firing on all thrusters tonight.

420 American Sabra  Thu, May 7, 2009 8:41:06pm

What's a paleolibertarian and how do they differ from libertarians?

421 Killian Bundy  Thu, May 7, 2009 8:41:23pm

re: #412 coldwarrior

114 billion dollars

126986263.578 ounces on hand global
9.8 trillion m1 m2
gold at about 900 an ounce....

sooo...114,000,000,000 dollars of gold global
9,800,000,000 just in us economy m1 m2

this was quick and dirty and probably wrong!

You seem to be good at math. The price of gold would obviously skyrocket well beyond $900/ounce.

/ounce of gold per dollar should straight up equal existing ounces of gold/"dollar" supply figure

422 coldwarrior  Thu, May 7, 2009 8:42:52pm

re: #421 Killian Bundy

gold standard makes my head hurt, and i understand economics.

423 Acidtrash  Thu, May 7, 2009 8:43:21pm

re: #396 Salamantis

Why do I suspect that many of the people who are advocating a return to the gold standard are gold-hoarders themselves,


Oh hell yes. Just look at RP's advisors... Peter Schiff! Plus look who sponsors Glenn Becks video blog. You REALLY are onto something there.

424 Acidtrash  Thu, May 7, 2009 8:44:03pm

re: #420 American Sabra

What's a paleolibertarian and how do they differ from libertarians?

It has something to do with dinosaurs dunnit?

425 Cato  Thu, May 7, 2009 8:45:31pm

re: #423 Acidtrash

Gold standard bad. Synthetic gold standard good.

426 coldwarrior  Thu, May 7, 2009 8:45:56pm

re: #421 Killian Bundy

You seem to be good at math. The price of gold would obviously skyrocket well beyond $900/ounce.

/ounce of gold per dollar should straight up equal existing ounces of gold/"dollar" supply figure

ack!

lets try this again

114 billion dollars

126986263.578 ounces on hand global
9.8 trillion m1 m2
gold at about 900 an ounce....

sooo...114,000,000,000 dollars of gold global
9,800,000,000,000 just in us economy m1 m2

this was quick and dirty and probably wrong!

thats better

427 Flyers1974  Thu, May 7, 2009 8:50:43pm

Damn, where'd everybody go? I thought it was all interesting.

428 coldwarrior  Thu, May 7, 2009 8:52:05pm

re: #427 Flyers1974

as soon as monetary policy conversation starts, the conversation ends.

429 Killian Bundy  Thu, May 7, 2009 8:54:07pm

re: #426 coldwarrior

ack!

lets try this again

114 billion dollars

126986263.578 ounces on hand global
9.8 trillion m1 m2
gold at about 900 an ounce....

sooo...114,000,000,000 dollars of gold global
9,800,000,000,000 just in us economy m1 m2

this was quick and dirty and probably wrong!

thats better

I get a dollar would be worth 0.012957781997755102040816326530612 of an ounce of gold, 1%.

/that can't be right

430 Slumbering Behemoth Stinks  Thu, May 7, 2009 8:54:30pm

re: #419 Acidtrash

Somebodys sense of irony is not firing on all thrusters tonight.

Were that irony, it would mean that this character was intentionally claiming superiority while clearly displaying obvious inferiority.

I do not think it's display was intentional.

431 Killian Bundy  Thu, May 7, 2009 8:56:39pm

re: #426 coldwarrior

ack!

lets try this again

114 billion dollars

126986263.578 ounces on hand global
9.8 trillion m1 m2
gold at about 900 an ounce....

sooo...114,000,000,000 dollars of gold global
9,800,000,000,000 just in us economy m1 m2

this was quick and dirty and probably wrong!

thats better

Forget the current price of gold.

/just divide the total ounces by total dollars

432 Flyers1974  Thu, May 7, 2009 8:58:36pm

re: #428 coldwarrior

Yes, an important subject no doubt, but when you get into it, it makes your head spin.

433 Killian Bundy  Thu, May 7, 2009 9:09:44pm

re: #429 Killian Bundy

I get a dollar would be worth 0.012957781997755102040816326530612 of an ounce of gold, 1%.

/that can't be right

Gold certainly isn't trading at $100/ounce

/probably need to determine the current ounces in the U.S. gold reserve and divide that by the dollar supply

434 Acidtrash  Thu, May 7, 2009 9:17:33pm

re: #430 Slumbering Behemoth

Were that irony, it would mean that this character was intentionally claiming superiority while clearly displaying obvious inferiority.

I do not think it's display was intentional.

Then you have an underdeveloped sense of irony. ;)

435 YankeeBaseball  Thu, May 7, 2009 9:19:25pm

BRAVO! Ron Paul
The country needs 50 more just like him.

436 Killian Bundy  Thu, May 7, 2009 9:20:01pm

re: #435 YankeeBaseball

BRAVO! Ron Paul
The country needs 50 more just like him.

/just 50?

437 YankeeBaseball  Thu, May 7, 2009 9:21:46pm

re: #436 Killian Bundy

You eat a pie one bite at a time, not all at once.

438 Mosse  Thu, May 7, 2009 9:22:13pm

It's very peculiar that the Birch Society is suddenly being legitimized through Ron Paul, just as Vlaams Belang is being promoted as acceptable (see Charles' posting of Bruce Bawer's piece), while Judge Napolitano promotes Alex Jones on FOX, Megyn Kelly asserts, also on FOX, that women who abuse their children should have forced sterilization, and Glenn Beck presents the Mormon interpretation of "Satan" as a being who intended to force human beings to believe in God (NOT the mainstream Christian interpretation but apparently Beck's attempt to link "Satan" to current threats of government control) on his radio show. Ideas that have long been identified as dangerously paranoid, or false and perverse science, and/or openly affiliated with National Socialism are simultaneously being promoted by mainstream sources. As the entire world system is being restructured, it's worth keeping an eye on what ideas are promoted and by whom. Slow-motion stampeding of people into positions they would never embrace, ordinarily, was a common technique of totalitarian regimes in the last century. We (Lizards) all tracked the techniques used by the Obama astro-turf coordinators to develop and hold their following to secure the election; are we seeing something similar being done on the right, tailored to what are perceived as the rank and file's prejudices and "hopes"? We'll soon find out... Do see, also, Mark Steyn's article in the May edition of Commentary. Serious moment, this.

439 Acidtrash  Thu, May 7, 2009 9:23:56pm

Ron Paul is a Fraud...

[Link: peteslettersfromlimbo.blogspot.com...]

440 Killian Bundy  Thu, May 7, 2009 9:27:27pm

re: #437 YankeeBaseball

You eat a pie one bite at a time, not all at once.

/really

441 YankeeBaseball  Thu, May 7, 2009 9:27:42pm

re: #439 Acidtrash

No! The fraud is occupying the White House.

The GOP needs to be undermined, it is run by turds and losers.

442 medaura18586  Thu, May 7, 2009 9:28:23pm

Oh crap, my most important comment was scrapped due to bad HTML.
I'll try to recreate it and then go to bed (I'm so tired I can't believe I'm thinking and typing remotely clearly):

Monetary policy is not a sexy topic. If the fellow sitting next to you on a plane starts making annoying conversation you don't want to get sucked into for hours, start discussing monetary policy. I promise it will shut 'em up. Want to get out of a lousy date? It will work for that too. Monetary policy is highly complex, plays a crucial role in the world economy, is implemented by unelected officials who do not operate with transparency as a matter of policy principle (for otherwise, they say, the public would lose confidence in the Fed, -- their words, not mine), and is regrettably understood by the general public even less than basic scientific facts and notions are (e.g., evolution). But it's an important and incredibly fascinating discipline.

Most critics of free banking tend to get even its most basics tenets wrong. Free banking involves the absence of monetary central-regulation and the absence of official currencies. The government would be required to stop printing paper money and void the legal-tender status of existing currency (there are a great many problems, however not insurmountable, about smoothly implementing such a change, even in theory, because it would render current money balances, people's savings in cash, worthless; but there are ways of getting around that problem). Then private, asset-backed currency (otherwise known as hard money) would be generated by and within the market itself. This may sound incredibly far-fetched but on closer examination, it isn't. There is no world-government, world-central-bank or world-treasury decreeing the U.S. dollar as the global monetary standard, but the dollar has nevertheless emerged as a vehicle currency, because market participants want to hold U.S. dollars. The rising of one or few currencies to vehicle-currency status without any government involvement or other central regulation is brought about by network effects in the scale-free network that is the global economy (as well as each big national economy, for monetary purposes anyway). Gold would hold no special legal status, but its properties and stable human demand for it make it likely that it would emerge as a big player, simply by market preference. But there would be currency diversification: people would hold portfolios of currencies backed by a variety of commodities -- oil, wheat, silver, natural gas, other precious metals, etc. These currencies would serve different sectors of the market, with the prices and terms for longer-term transactions or investments dealt in currencies backed by assets of limited, nearly fixed supply (i.e., precious metals). Gold, platinum, and silver would probably dominate every-day commerce transactions, as well as for storing value over the long term, while volatile commodities would serve speculative purposes.

The whole idea of an asset-backed currency sounds retrograde to some; primitive, weighed down by heavy metals or tangible goods, closer to barter by mental association. These are unfortunate myths: Under free banking, finance and commerce would still operate with bank notes (only they'd be private, and redeemable in fungible commodity). People wouldn't be carrying gold bullions and the like around, electronic transfers would still be the norm, future banking innovations would not be forestalled. The difference from the current fiat system is contractual, rather than physical. Basically, you'd be able to go to your bank and redeem a commodity with your banknotes. Banks wouldn't have to physically store impractical quantities of commodities either. They'd clear in the futures market.

443 YankeeBaseball  Thu, May 7, 2009 9:32:23pm

re: #440 Killian Bundy

I like Pie
Like, custard pie.
Like the Led Zeppelin song.
hehehe

444 FurryOldGuyJeans  Thu, May 7, 2009 9:34:52pm

re: #435 YankeeBaseball

BRAVO! Ron Paul
The country needs 50 more just like him.

Yeah, America needs more nuts, idiots, kooks, and morons.

445 YankeeBaseball  Thu, May 7, 2009 9:38:16pm

re: #444 FurryOldGuyJeans

Democrats? Liberals? Progressives?

Only left wing moonbats allowed?

446 Killian Bundy  Thu, May 7, 2009 9:41:06pm

re: #442 medaura18586

Paper is a commodity and a hard asset.

Like paper, gold is also a "fiat" only because the population believes it has intrinsic worth and the government has the gold reserves to back it.

/yeah, multiple private currencies backed by various commodities, that's condusive to orderly market function

447 Eclectic Infidel  Thu, May 7, 2009 9:47:41pm

re: #4 erraticsphinx

Ron Paul doesn't belong in the Republican Party.

Ron Paul is exactly where he needs to be at the moment. Consider this...the GOP just got its ass handed to it in the last major election. The party is rife with religious conservatives, who support prayer in school, outlawing abortion, demonizing gays at every turn, promoting creationism over science, and some even align themselves with Euro-fascists, with the help of major media. The GOP has paid little more than lip service to "less government," and fiscal responsibility. Perhaps Ron Paul is EXACTLY what the GOP needs right now, so the party leaders can watch their beloved base slip away into the night, fleeing from the kooks. So they can observe how holding onto right-wing social ideals costs them positions of power in elections, so they can watch their party fall into ruin for embracing rigid, authoritarian values. Perhaps this is the kind of house cleaning that will work on the GOP.

448 medaura18586  Thu, May 7, 2009 9:54:58pm

re: #442 medaura18586

I'm elaborating on my lost comment, so it's turning out to be much longer. Sigh...

Why undergo or contemplate a transition to free banking, operated by asset-backed currencies? Two points: It protects the market from government meddling and manipulation, and it protects the market against itself, against its own recurring bouts of "irrational exuberance."

The government can't just print money and force its citizens to accept it, in order to finance its spending programs. Inflation is a hidden and vicious tax that punishes everybody (except for the immediate recipients of the freshly printed money) but especially savers. So asset-backed currencies impose a rigorous mechanism for fiscal decorum. Even most importantly though, tying the currency to the value of tangible goods, stabilizes the market by keeping interest rates and price levels in check. The constraints of reality curb down the pure psychological effects of market speculations (for example, inflation expectations couldn't affect actual inflation) which are unstable and can be very destructive. Asset bubbles would be prevented, or at any rate, greatly attenuated. The backing of currency by real valuable goods would act as a gravitating force toward stability and away from unhinged speculation. Over-extending credit by individual banks would be practically impossible to do, as hard money doesn't afford high leveraging. It could still be done, of course, but in the derivatives market, as unalloyed speculation; we wouldn't get bankers apologizing over how they didn't realize how risky their investments were, yada yada, because they would be cut out of such games with other people's money, out of which they could be hoped to be bailed out by a fiat-money-printing Fed.

With economic growth, a gradual depreciation would occur, simply because when the supply of money is fixed (limited by the natural availability of the commodity it's backed on) the purchasing power of currency increases over time. That is a good thing! It would be a gentle gradual deflation, by which we would measure GDP growth! People are still scarred by the debilitating deflation associated with the Great Depression, which was purely a monetary phenomenon, unbelievably drastic at that: failing banks, by going under, eliminated their reserves, and with that, the money-multiplier effect they had, thus shrinking the total money supply. Under free-banking via hard currency(ies), the money supply is rock-stable, because banks can't leverage through fractional reserve operations, and they not only can't create money out of thin air, they also can't make it disappear either.

If anyone asks, I can provide several examples (would take me a couple of days to dig out the sources) of stable economic growth in America and Europe, accompanied by an overall price decline, aka deflation. They all occurred under relatively hard money standards.

449 medaura18586  Thu, May 7, 2009 10:07:50pm

re: #446 Killian Bundy

Paper is a commodity and a hard asset.

Like paper, gold is also a "fiat" only because the population believes it has intrinsic worth and the government has the gold reserves to back it.

/yeah, multiple private currencies backed by various commodities, that's condusive to orderly market function

There is no intrinsic value to anything. Value is determined relative to usefulness to humans, reflected by market demand. Guess what, all human societies, even those that developed independently of one-another for millenia, have always valued gold. Think Aztec empire. The whole conquista of the Americas was fought over gold. It tells you something. People wanted gold to the very end, they still do. The price of gold has fluctuated a lot since the adoption of the fiat system, but only in terms of paper money. And that's because paper money is unstable. The government inflates it away at will, or devalues the currency, corrodes its value. Look at some charts of the value of gold relative to other currencies, say oil. Plot it over the last few decades (use the price of gold in $ terms, to the price of oil in $ terms). You'll be amazed.

And the fact that huge vibrant commodity markets exist, is a solid indicator that commodities would serve as units of exchange and for certain classes of transactions, as well as stores of value (since their demand is relatively stable). Not so much as unit of account, however... The main currency, dwarfing all others, would serve as unit of account. That currency would probably end up being gold.

If paper holds just as much intrinsic value as gold, then why the beef with gold? Would paper circulate as money unless the government MADE it legal tender? Its supply is limited. The government can't pull it out of its ass to stealthly finance its operations.

450 Killian Bundy  Thu, May 7, 2009 10:13:47pm

re: #449 medaura18586

If paper holds just as much intrinsic value as gold, then why the beef with gold? Would paper circulate as money unless the government MADE it legal tender? Its supply is limited. The government can't pull it out of its ass to stealthly finance its operations.

Money supply under the Federal Reserve expands and contracts over time.

How would a private "commodity" monetary standard stop our government from borrowing and going into debt?

451 Killian Bundy  Thu, May 7, 2009 10:15:00pm

/just thinking ahead

452 medaura18586  Thu, May 7, 2009 10:20:44pm

I'm dead tired now, so I'll retire for good.

What I feel rotten about is there clearly being a vast body of legitimate scholarship regarding the merits of free banking, and the side-effects of monetary central planning (the Federal Reserve), while freaks like Ron Paul completely discredit even the legitimacy of discussing these issues academically. These issues need to be considered on their own merits, not on who their loudest kooky advocates are.

By the way, I have zero hope that these issues will be impassionedly considered, not just because the involvement of Ron Paul and the Paleo-cons tarnishes them by association, but because the economic and institutional Zeitgeist of our society is far too collectivisitc and statist-friendly to be open to these ideas. Public opinion is on the brink, between capitalism and socialism. We are close to nationalizing healthcare, the auto-industry, and a good chunk of the financial sector (oh, wait, we've actually done that already).

Ideas so radical as the abolishing of the Central Bank, and further still, the abolition of currency controls, are beyond the pale. From a practical standpoint, I wouldn't even come close to insinuating them into the public agenda. Not if I were a Republican, that's for sure. THEY'RE OUT OF TOUCH WITH MAINSTREAM THINKING and will alienate the center-left electorate in droves! Why can't Republicans understand that? Their behavior is so self-destructive, it baffles me.

Nonetheless, I still consider these ideas with the utmost seriousness in the realms of academics and economic research. And in that context, I hate to see them contextualized by the Paulbots.

453 medaura18586  Thu, May 7, 2009 10:24:30pm

re: #450 Killian Bundy

Money supply under the Federal Reserve expands and contracts over time.

How would a private "commodity" monetary standard stop our government from borrowing and going into debt?

It wouldn't. But it would make the size and scope of the deficits crystal-clear. It would distribute the consequences of that borrowing contractually, instead of collectively. People would still know how much real money they have in the bank, its actual worth, and could plan for the future with far fewer uncertainties involved. There would be no arbitrary redistributions of wealth. There would be fewer and smaller bubbles, lower levereging, greater financial stability.

454 medaura18586  Thu, May 7, 2009 10:24:48pm

I'll check this thread again tomorrow, but for now, good night everyone.

455 Killian Bundy  Thu, May 7, 2009 10:31:01pm

re: #453 medaura18586

It wouldn't. But it would make the size and scope of the deficits crystal-clear. It would distribute the consequences of that borrowing contractually, instead of collectively. People would still know how much real money they have in the bank, its actual worth, and could plan for the future with far fewer uncertainties involved. There would be no arbitrary redistributions of wealth. There would be fewer and smaller bubbles, lower levereging, greater financial stability.

No, see that's a big hazard that the Paulians always trip over. It's called a global economy.

IT ONLY MIGHT WORK IF ALL THE ECONOMIES IN THE ENTIRE WORLD GO ALONG WITH THE SCHEME!

/good luck with that

456 Killian Bundy  Thu, May 7, 2009 10:38:30pm

re: #453 medaura18586

It wouldn't. But it would make the size and scope of the deficits crystal-clear.

No, it wouldn't do that either.

/as long as China, et al, enables our government by lending us money, by definition, it dilutes our currency, it doesn't matter one whit what it's backed by, if anything

457 Athos  Fri, May 8, 2009 12:04:11am

re: #406 Sharmuta

The populists stole this issue of fiscal responsibility so they could promote their lunatic ideas.

And they could only do that because the GOP (mainly the Congressional leadership, but 43 also owns responsibility) abandoned it from 2004 on....

458 Athos  Fri, May 8, 2009 12:07:33am

re: #417 Acidtrash

Thats why you have to steal it back with urgency and what I was saying originally is that you need a new guy with a new zeal to take it back and build him/her from the ground up rather than going to war over Ron Paul.

Yep, it does need to be reclaimed by the GOP - it's one of the core conservative principles that the GOP needs to return to. But, the GOP also needs to go to war with Ron Paul.......and the rest of the fringe nutters that are trying to leave from the fringe and get into the mainstream. This is fundamentally no different from the fight in conservatism to get the Birchers and their ilk out from the conservative tent in the 1960's.

459 acidtrash  Fri, May 8, 2009 12:46:19am

re: #458 Athos

Yep, it does need to be reclaimed by the GOP - it's one of the core conservative principles that the GOP needs to return to. But, the GOP also needs to go to war with Ron Paul.......and the rest of the fringe nutters that are trying to leave from the fringe and get into the mainstream. This is fundamentally no different from the fight in conservatism to get the Birchers and their ilk out from the conservative tent in the 1960's.

I dont see it as that big a threat tbh. He will run out of steam the more exposure he gets on fox because he's a one trick pony. He's got the same few mantras he keeps repeating but once you've heard it a few times the novelty wears off. I would much rather see some decisive positive leadership against Obama. And after all, his mainstream exposure is still only cable news. Glenn Beck is a big hitter and what's he get? 2.2m viewers tops?

The extreme fringes are always a sandbox for ideas and policy and its still good there is a marketplace of ideas. The GOP should have more confidence in republicans and have the confidence to stand up for their own beliefs. Palin wouldn't have blown it if she'd stood up to the party machine and done that CNN interview without a party brief. RP is attractive because he believes what he's saying. I always felt Mccain Palin were compromising to get past the media. Here is a lesson that if you speak through the media and not to it, you WILL connect with voters. If you do that RP will be a minor irritant.

Over here the BNP and UKIP would evapourate overnight and conservative abstainers like myself would vote again if only the Conservative party would truly stand up for national sovereignty, low tax and small government. It worked for Thatch and Reagan and will for the GOP. Since they didnt we've had socialists 8 years longer than we needed to. Like the BNP, RP is a symptom of the problem, not the cause of it.

The tories spend a great deal of time attacking the BNP and that gives them all the oxygen they need. But they wouldnt have to go on the attack IF they addressed the real reasons why people arent voting conservative.

460 freetoken  Fri, May 8, 2009 12:57:34am

re: #459 acidtrash

So I checked out your website (which is why you're here, right?)

You are sooooo out of touch with what is called the "culture war" over here. For you to be pushing Bachmann and Paul as idealistic models for the GOP is really looney.

Look - that you don't like your own Tory party is your problem.

LGF is not an extension of the GOP. We here come from a wide variety of backgrounds. I personally have no vested interest in the GOP (though I was registered as a Republican once.) I do have a vested interest in the future of the US, and because of that I reject the Bachmanns, Pauls, Baldwins etc. of our political landscape.

Speaking of Baldwin, I'm kind of surprised you don't have any of Chuck Baldwin's videos on your site, given your fondness for Paul and Palin.

461 Acidtrash  Fri, May 8, 2009 2:19:06am

re: #460 freetoken

So I checked out your website (which is why you're here, right?)

You are sooooo out of touch with what is called the "culture war" over here. For you to be pushing Bachmann and Paul as idealistic models for the GOP is really looney.

Look - that you don't like your own Tory party is your problem.

LGF is not an extension of the GOP. We here come from a wide variety of backgrounds. I personally have no vested interest in the GOP (though I was registered as a Republican once.) I do have a vested interest in the future of the US, and because of that I reject the Bachmanns, Pauls, Baldwins etc. of our political landscape.

Speaking of Baldwin, I'm kind of surprised you don't have any of Chuck Baldwin's videos on your site, given your fondness for Paul and Palin.

I'm certainly not pushing Paul as an example of anything. Though I do think he is a phenomenon worthy of study. I don't agree on foreign policy, or his more extreme fiscal policies but what he is, is a conviction politician which a refreshing change to wafty media spivs we are usually presented with. Bachmann, I know little of but what I do see I agree with. Spending is out of control, taxes are too high, government is too big. That is the message that is gaining traction and ecause the GOP only pay lip service to it, the looney wing can run riot with it. Ideally speaking I would like to see an unleashed Sarah Palin/ Gingrich leadership. Neamely because neither of them favour Cap and Trade and Gingrich saw the damage mark to market was doing and saw that a bailout could have been avoided. He also undertsands the neccessity of Afghanistan AND how to win!

But then you have yto appreciated I only get the edited highlights of US politics and news through youtube and the press and I dont get through it all. I just have a deep running interest in this because the UK's future is inextricably linked to the US in every possible way. The US is a country I love and I see it being eaten alive by socialism and fear it will end up a backwater social democrat state in terminal decline. I dont think there has ever been a more urgent case for low taxes and restrained government and I have just as much of a stake in seeing the US succeed against enemies foreign and domestic as you have.

I am not a Paulbot, I am not a fascist, I support Israel in every possible way and have been a long standing fan of LGF but there's something going on here and I think RP is being scapegoated for a dysfunctional GOP which has lost its way and lost confidence in itself long before it was thrashed at the polls.

I don't know this Baldwin you speak of. I am just attuned to people who speak my economic language. I thought Paul was perhaps one of them. Thanks to this debate I am now 100% convinced he is not. One thing I am sure of, now is not the time for the GOP to self destruct.

462 freetoken  Fri, May 8, 2009 2:26:20am

re: #461 Acidtrash

Baldwin's ideas on economics likely would resonate with you. Especially if you ♥ Bachmann.

463 Acidtrash  Fri, May 8, 2009 2:55:12am

re: #462 freetoken

Baldwin's ideas on economics likely would resonate with you. Especially if you ♥ Bachmann.


Just checked out Baldwin but the same thing is going on as Paul. The use of fiscal responsibility to pursue a witch hunt against he federal reserve system. Not at all sold on that idea. And all I really know of Bachmann is those two vids on the site. I think she's probably been duped by the Paulists but that that makes it all the more important for some leadership in the GOP to steal back the principles of fiscal responsibility and put the waivering Paulites in check. In that respect I suppose I've undone my original point in that Paul does need to be neutralised. But I dont think going after the messenger is the right way of doing it. Voters are contrary buggers and the more you slate and slander an opponent the uglier you look and the stronger your opponent gets. The GOP needs to fight with a new vision and fresh leadership.

464 freetoken  Fri, May 8, 2009 3:13:26am

re: #463 Acidtrash

I guess I don't get your fascination with US politics. Have you lived in the US, or have you lived in the UK all your life? (Or have you lived anywhere else overseas?)

Reading one's own culture into a foreign culture debate is full of potholes.

465 [deleted]  Fri, May 8, 2009 3:36:15am
466 freetoken  Fri, May 8, 2009 3:39:57am

re: #465 QueenUlia

So I take it you too are in support of Paulian economics?

467 QueenUlia  Fri, May 8, 2009 3:53:31am

re: #466 freetoken

No, I am in support of stopping the international socialists. The strange McCarthyite witch hunts going on here is weird. I have been a long reader of this site, never really got a chance to register due to time differences between the US and Israel, but the tone and tenor of this site has changed drastically over the last couple of years. So when someone is making cogent arguments he should be listened too and not shouted down, like that foul mouthed cretin Furry old man jeans did up thread to Acidtrash and also Charles did with his insinuation that Acid was a white supremacist.

Get a grip people, it is you the majority here, that are starting to look like the kooks.

468 Fat Bastard Vegetarian  Fri, May 8, 2009 3:58:38am

re: #467 QueenUlia

Please point out the witch that I may burn him/her.

469 Acidtrash  Fri, May 8, 2009 4:15:16am

re: #464 freetoken

I guess I don't get your fascination with US politics. Have you lived in the US, or have you lived in the UK all your life? (Or have you lived anywhere else overseas?)

Reading one's own culture into a foreign culture debate is full of potholes.

Well I have a fascination with US politics because it still has substance. You guys take your democracy for granted. It may be cliche for you to hear a representetive talking of free market values but in this social-democratic consensus UK such talk is heresy even from the tory back benches.

Say what you like about Glenn Beckl, cretin though he might be, you just dont get philosphical politics or opinion on prime time TV. We get a legislated pastcihe of "neutrality" and thus there is zero debate. Even your moonbat newspapers have better, more in depth news than our so called grown up newspapers. Type in Afghanistan into google news and you will see that the US news is actually what is happening rather than feel good stories and MOD propaganda. People in the US actually give a fig about their destiny. Over here there is a complete retreat from politics, even by our politicians. You on the other hand have a rich and diverse political culture where people talk about policy not politicians.

For someone who lives for politics, the ground is dryer than saudi arabia in a drought in the UK. We have abdicated our politics to the technocrats of Brussels and the transnationals. We are beyond hope in the UK. America can still be saved. Like I say, I love america with all my heart. I have never been there, probably will never afford to go either but the US constitution is the very embodiement of liberty for me and I would sooner swear an oath on the american flag than the Treaty of Lisbon. Every american is my cousin. You have been there for Europe more times than you should have and I hate it that we drag our feet politically and militarily where US relations are concerned.

The UK has already destroyed itself. We are now a third rate country. I can see that political and military suicide is looking appealling to the US for some reason and so far as I can see conservatism, REAL economic conservatism is our last line of defence before the West walks quietly into the night.

I know transposing our politics on yours is full of potholes but if you chart the demise of conservatism in the Uk and our subsequent subservience to transnationals you will see a great many paralells and the UK is a warning to the US you should heed well.

Ron Paul looked like an answer for a short while until you scratch the surface and see the real agenda. He is no conservative. But then Bush wasn't either and nor was CapnTrade Mccain.

God save America. Because nobody else can at this point.

470 Acidtrash  Fri, May 8, 2009 4:16:19am

re: #467 QueenUlia

Thank you. Thought it was just me.

471 QueenUlia  Fri, May 8, 2009 4:48:17am

No probs Acidtrash, someone has to speak up before LGF disappears up its own backside.

472 Acidtrash  Fri, May 8, 2009 5:07:38am

re: #471 QueenUlia

No probs Acidtrash, someone has to speak up before LGF disappears up its own backside.

I have read and loved LGF for many years and it pains me to see it go so introverted, going after the people within when the real enemy is out there. I'm no lover of Ron Paul but he's got one thing straight, you gain traction when you put the economy first. If the GOP did that, RP would vanish. Attack Obama, not a fringe of the GOP no-ones ever heard of, except for the political geekery. It's wasted ammo.

473 quickjustice  Fri, May 8, 2009 5:20:14am

The two of you are articulate sophists, clever at arguing for support of neo-Nazis and their ilk as a "protest" vote.

Does that work out in the real world? I don't think so. I understand "lesser of two evil" politics, but I don't advocate for it, as do you.

474 Acidtrash  Fri, May 8, 2009 6:12:20am

re: #473 quickjustice

The two of you are articulate sophists, clever at arguing for support of neo-Nazis and their ilk as a "protest" vote.
Does that work out in the real world? I don't think so.

That is a textbook how you immunize yourself from criticism.
As someone who lives in Bradford (the seat of UK Jihad), someone who lives and works with pakistani muslims, the worst racism I have seen in recent years has been on these hallowed pages!

The BNP is a racist party, but it is no longer a racist vote (I know it hurts your brain). The mainstream like to pretend that it is just a racist vote; It's much easier to ignore that way. Slap a big ugly label on your opponents and you don't have to address your own shortcomings.

Tell the British public not to vote BNP because theyre fascists is an idea they will listen to, but when it comes form the mouth of David Cameron and Gordon Brown after selling us out to the EU, they WILL vote for them because we're contrarian bastards at heart.

They didnt give us a referendum on joining an EU superstate, they allowed an open door immigration policy when our infrastructure is creaking and our council taxes are high, with no sign of a reduction, we are bleeding jobs and we're looking at a credit card crunch... I'm not even started. Yes the BNP are a populist, ethnonationalist (aka racist) party and they are corporatist socialists (aka fascists) but in the absence of real democracy and choice at the ballot box, even the most mild mannered Bradfordians can see no other way to shake the mainstream parties out of their self assured arrogance. And you know what, I can show you the odd Sikh who feels the same way too.

When we have been so royally shafted by the EU and Westminster there is only one real response and that is to give the mainstream parties the middle finger. Voting BNP is the metaphorical equivalent. I do rather enjoy the irony that Briain might just return some nationalists to the EU transnational authority. But get one thing clear, if the brits presently voting for the BNP thought for a second there was any danger of them winning power in any signifcant way we would turn our backs on them. This is more a flirtation with defiance.

We tried voting for third parties which were marginalised by the media. We had Sir James Goldsmiths Referendum Party and the Libertarian Conservative UKIP and they were easily dismissed as whackjobs and obsessives and the old "single issue party" cannard. They didn't listen.
They went ahead with further EU integration. After a while when UKIP gained traction we of UKIP, for I was UKIP, cost the Tories over a million votes and kept a lot of Tories out of marginal seats as punishment for their betrayal. And what did we get for our trouble? Another two terms of Labour and more integration as the Tories moved left.

And so the point is obvious. The GOP must reclaim its natural ground because if the Paulians et al run wild with it the GOP has nowhere but left to move to distance itself from it then all is lost. Then you have two virtually indistingushable parties in the centre left and then people see the ugly option as the only way to communicate to the mainstream. And thats how we ended up with the BNP on the brink of political legitimacy. Sound familiar?
The Tories, by attacking and using the mechanisms of politics to ridicule the core moderate (but desparate) right wing vote ended up losing out. Now that they have moved to the left, when they take power, nothing will actually change and then the BNP really will be a problem. So either find a way to include the dissident voices in the GOP or be destroyed. For that you need a better message rather than alienating those who would be sympathetic.

But if you'd rather just label ordinary hard working, right leaning people trying hard to make ends meet as fascists, loonies and kooks, go right ahead. Politically, it's your funeral.

475 Acidtrash  Fri, May 8, 2009 6:15:20am

Whoever said Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned never met a betrayed UK Conservative.

476 Afton  Fri, May 8, 2009 6:17:26am

The Leftists in America have attacked two Republicans in America more directly than any others because these two have voiced the strongest Conservative views - these two have been attacked mercilessly by the folks on the left that are doing their best to stop the Conservative message. Those two Republicans just happen to both be women - Michelle Bachmann and Sarah Palin.

Sarah Palin had the "nerve" to question Barack Obama's intentions and the Left put together a well orchestrated attack machine up against her, focusing of course on her personally as opposed to being men (and ladies) and debating her views. We see the same with Bachmann. Bachmann's now a kook or an extremist because she speaks Conservative talking points and had the "nerve" to question Obama's patriotism and long term goals.

Isn't it amazing how in America, a Conservative politiican's view on religion makes her "dumb" while a Democrat politician who breaks the law still either sits in Congress or is a member of the President's cabinet?

Don't be fooled - an attack on Bachmann's "social" or "religious" positions is nothing but a smokescreen for the Left being very afraid she's gonna gain traction with her asking Tim Geithner how constitutional his TARP plans are or her call for limited government.

477 Salamantis  Fri, May 8, 2009 6:23:04am

So let me get this straight:

If you were French, you would have voted for LePen's party as a protest vote, but what you REALLY would have wanted would have been for Chirac's party to welcome the LePenists in?

Sorry, but a racist is a racist is a racist, a fascist is a fascist is a fascist, and a nut is a nut is a nut. And none of them are welcome in my foxhole.

Especially the first two (some nuts can be merely benign kooks who insist upon the political equivalent of running with scissors). My father and uncles fought their Nazi ideological progenitors, and one of my uncles died of his wounds.

478 Acidtrash  Fri, May 8, 2009 6:31:20am

re: #476 Afton

Well it makes it all the more dumb for right leaning blogs to be hunting down our own when there's an entire media establishment willing to do it for us. I wouldn't be surprised if Bachmann scares the pants off the leftoids; we know Palin does. And the right are evidently too busy lynching their heavy artillery.

Frankly I couldnt care less if Bachmann was a creationist Paulist who believes in the resurrection of Elvis so long as she does her job of holding the government to account and she does what she said she'd do on the ticket. The electorate in her state can be the judge. In the meantime the GOP needs to come up with better aguments than the Paulists, starting with a reappraisal of accounting rules and start winning congressmen back into the moderate fold.

That there is Republican drift in Congress to the Paulist cause shows a spectacular failure of leadership.

479 Acidtrash  Fri, May 8, 2009 6:39:43am

re: #477 Salamantis

So let me get this straight:

If you were French, you would have voted for LePen's party as a protest vote, but what you REALLY would have wanted would have been for Chirac's party to welcome the LePenists in?

Sorry, but a racist is a racist is a racist, a fascist is a fascist is a fascist, and a nut is a nut is a nut. And none of them are welcome in my foxhole.

Especially the first two (some nuts can be merely benign kooks who insist upon the political equivalent of running with scissors). My father and uncles fought their Nazi ideological progenitors, and one of my uncles died of his wounds.

Well no I wouldn't vote for Le Penn nor would I vote BNP. I use "we" in the collectivist context. Personally I am a Conservative in exile. I will vote for the conservative party when it starts being a conservative party and not "Blue Labour".

And there you are, assuming that all voters for the BNP are intrinsically racist. It aint so. Like I say, its a racist party but it is no longer a racist vote. It is blowback for having a right wing party that has drifted away from the founding ideologies, the idologies which incidentally kept Mrs Thatcher in power longer than any other Prime Minister.

If you label those the GOP has betrayed by becoming the right witng of the big government partyas kooks and extremists then you will lose them and the Paulists will grow. They are holding their noses as they vote for the alternative.

You may see the GOP as the lesser of two evils and on a surface level, perhaps I might agree but then looking at the cumulative damage big, intrusive government has done, combined with transnationalism and high taxes, I would venture that the mainstream is easily on a par.

480 Salamantis  Fri, May 8, 2009 6:41:46am

re: #478 Acidtrash

Well it makes it all the more dumb for right leaning blogs to be hunting down our own when there's an entire media establishment willing to do it for us. I wouldn't be surprised if Bachmann scares the pants off the leftoids; we know Palin does. And the right are evidently too busy lynching their heavy artillery.

Frankly I couldnt care less if Bachmann was a creationist Paulist who believes in the resurrection of Elvis so long as she does her job of holding the government to account and she does what she said she'd do on the ticket. The electorate in her state can be the judge. In the meantime the GOP needs to come up with better aguments than the Paulists, starting with a reappraisal of accounting rules and start winning congressmen back into the moderate fold.

That there is Republican drift in Congress to the Paulist cause shows a spectacular failure of leadership.

If the GOP hitches its wagon to the Paulite train, it will be out of power for the forseeable future - and what's more, it will deserve to be.

I wanna see the Repubs return to bedrock fiscal and foreign policy principles, not glom onto kooky fringe notions - precisely because this country has a GWOT against jihadis to fight, and only the Repubs seem willing to fight it. So I want them to be nationally electable. Which they won't be if they embrace such loons.

481 Acidtrash  Fri, May 8, 2009 6:42:54am

By the way kids, this is what you get when you make politics about politicians and not policy...

[Link: eureferendum.blogspot.com...]

If you don't engage in policy, you're screwed, because the politicians sure as hell won't.

482 SecondComing  Fri, May 8, 2009 6:45:13am

re: #94 Killgore Trout

It's also worth noting that Ron Paul's proposal to audit the Federal reserve is a ruse. One of his main goals to the abolish the Federal Reserve so this is the approach he's taking. He's going to use the audit system to hassle and sabotage the institution.

I was going to post something similar to this last night.

It's his own wedge strategy. He's using the secrecy of the bailouts and what happened to the bailout money, Tarp money etc to gain access to the Federal Reserve meetings. I don't know if he thinks there's something nefarious going on or what. He wants everything of the Federal Reserve to be open and public. Which would be disastrous. Because for one, markets hinge on every word from the fed. Every hint of an interest rate change sends people into a frenzy. I can only imagine his endgame is the elimination of the Federal Reserve and probably some vague notion of doing the same to the IRS.

483 Salamantis  Fri, May 8, 2009 6:46:21am

re: #479 Acidtrash

Well no I wouldn't vote for Le Penn nor would I vote BNP. I use "we" in the collectivist context. Personally I am a Conservative in exile. I will vote for the conservative party when it starts being a conservative party and not "Blue Labour".

And there you are, assuming that all voters for the BNP are intrinsically racist. It aint so. Like I say, its a racist party but it is no longer a racist vote. It is blowback for having a right wing party that has drifted away from the founding ideologies, the idologies which incidentally kept Mrs Thatcher in power longer than any other Prime Minister.

If you label those the GOP has betrayed by becoming the right witng of the big government partyas kooks and extremists then you will lose them and the Paulists will grow. They are holding their noses as they vote for the alternative.

You may see the GOP as the lesser of two evils and on a surface level, perhaps I might agree but then looking at the cumulative damage big, intrusive government has done, combined with transnationalism and high taxes, I would venture that the mainstream is easily on a par.

If one is voting for an openly racist party, one is condoning their racism by supporting them despite it - which, pragmatically, counts at the polls just as much as someone supporting them because of it.

George Orwell once spoke just before WW II of peace marchers being objectively pro-fascist, because they were helping the fascist cause. The same thing goes for those who vote for a racist party; they are objectively pro-racist.

You can try to sugarcoat that turd all you want, but a bite out of it will still taste like shit.

484 Acidtrash  Fri, May 8, 2009 6:46:44am

re: #480 Salamantis

If the GOP hitches its wagon to the Paulite train, it will be out of power for the forseeable future - and what's more, it will deserve to be.

No-one ever said the GOP should hitch itself to the Paulite train. Merely that it should examine which of its principles it has sold out in order to cause the drift to Paul. I would wager that has something to do with big spending, of which the GOp has a pretty lousy rap sheet right now.


I wanna see the Repubs return to bedrock fiscal and foreign policy principles, not glom onto kooky fringe notions - precisely because this country has a GWOT against jihadis to fight, and only the Repubs seem willing to fight it. So I want them to be nationally electable. Which they won't be if they embrace such loons.

Not saying they should embrace loons. Only take back what is theirs. Ie economic liberalism.

485 quickjustice  Fri, May 8, 2009 6:49:02am

re: #474 Acidtrash

I understand your rage, and I sympathize with it. I have no sympathy for your conclusion, which is support for BNP. There's a disconnect in there, although I'm not familiar enough with UK politics to identify it with precision.

I am familiar with the British Union of Fascists and its unhappy history. It's a shame someone of your obvious intellect seems impelled to return to that sad and pathetic place.

486 Salamantis  Fri, May 8, 2009 6:50:56am

re: #481 Acidtrash

By the way kids, this is what you get when you make politics about politicians and not policy...

[Link: eureferendum.blogspot.com...]

If you don't engage in policy, you're screwed, because the politicians sure as hell won't.

Ron Paul's policies are fully as reprehensible as his racist connections. Gold standard? Letters of fucking MARQUE?

This guy doesn't belong within a light year of the levers of genuine power.

487 freetoken  Fri, May 8, 2009 6:54:35am

re: #481 Acidtrash

You aren't, perchance, related to the Dr. R. North of that blog, are you?

488 pingjockey  Fri, May 8, 2009 6:55:04am

re: #486 Salamantis

Oh I don't know Sal, letters of Marque sounds like a wonderful idea to this retired squid! ///

489 Acidtrash  Fri, May 8, 2009 6:55:25am

re: #483 Salamantis

If one is voting for an openly racist party, one is condoning their racism by supporting them despite it - which, pragmatically, counts at the polls just as much as someone supporting them because of it.

Well thats half the problem. Most BNP voters dont actually know what they are voting for. The BNP have wiped the floor with the mainstream in terms of internet activism and their strategy is second to none. They have the biggest hits of any political website in the UK and they have done everything they can to mask the pure racism that used to exist when it was the National Front. They have duped a lot of UKIP members, old tories and old labour that they have "reformed" and now those members probably outweigh the outright racists. There are even pro israel BNP blogs these days. That doesn't change anything, theyre still racists but its memeber want to believe it has changed and there is a mass self decpetion going on people people really do want change and a choice at the ballot box.


George Orwell once spoke just before WW II of peace marchers being objectively pro-fascist, because they were helping the fascist cause. The same thing goes for those who vote for a racist party; they are objectively pro-racist.

You can try to sugarcoat that turd all you want, but a bite out of it will still taste like shit.

Oh I completely agree. But that is why our Tories need to give us a referendum on EU membership and start actiting like conservatives by cutting taxes and reducing the massive, massive public sector. If they did that the UKIP and the BNP would vanish almost overnight.

We brits don't vote for fascists because we like fascism. We explicitly don't like fascism. We lost rather a lot of Spitfires demonstrating this point.

This is just what you get when the mainstream parties conspire to fight over the middle ground and concentrate on non-issues to court the politically disinterested swing vote. You have all this to come.

490 Acidtrash  Fri, May 8, 2009 6:56:06am

re: #486 Salamantis

Ron Paul's policies are fully as reprehensible as his racist connections. Gold standard? Letters of fucking MARQUE?

This guy doesn't belong within a light year of the levers of genuine power.

Then come up with a beter person with better arguments.

491 Acidtrash  Fri, May 8, 2009 6:56:30am

re: #487 freetoken

You aren't, perchance, related to the Dr. R. North of that blog, are you?

The very same.

492 quickjustice  Fri, May 8, 2009 6:57:52am

re: #486 Salamantis

I think Ron Paul personally despicable because of his deliberate and knowing neo-Nazi and 9/11 Truther associations. That doesn't mean all of his ideas are unworthy of discussion. The gold standard is an argument for hard money. Gold is the wrong choice in a modern economy, because there's only a finite supply of it. As economies grow, money supply should expand with them. You can't expand a finite resource. So the economic debate about how hard money should be, or should become, is a valid one.

Letters of marque and reprisal have been suggested as a serious solution to the pirate problem off Somalia. I haven't thought that one through, and it appears that using them in any context except maritime commerce is problematic, but they're not a "joke".

My point is only that the underlying points are debatable, and hence worthy of attention and respect.

493 Salamantis  Fri, May 8, 2009 6:59:14am

re: #490 Acidtrash

Then come up with a beter person with better arguments.

That would be just about anybody. Except for Alan Keyes and Pat Buchanan.

494 Acidtrash  Fri, May 8, 2009 7:00:40am

re: #485 quickjustice

I understand your rage, and I sympathize with it. I have no sympathy for your conclusion, which is support for BNP. There's a disconnect in there, although I'm not familiar enough with UK politics to identify it with precision.

Er hello? At which point have I expressed support for the BNP? I have offered a cold analystical reason why perchance the electorate might consider alternatives and why there may be a parallel between the BNP and Ron Paul. I am trying to communcate the dangers of labelling because you can bet your ass a lot of RP supporters will be ordinary GOP people who are just sick to the back teeth with big government waste.


I am familiar with the British Union of Fascists and its unhappy history. It's a shame someone of your obvious intellect seems impelled to return to that sad and pathetic place.

I am not, I do not believe I have give any indication that I do. I am a libertarian through and through with the exception of foriegn policy in which respect I am a foaming neocon, in fact I'm not a neocon because Ive never been a liberal. John Bolton is my god!

495 Acidtrash  Fri, May 8, 2009 7:02:42am

re: #493 Salamantis

That would be just about anybody. Except for Alan Keyes and Pat Buchanan.

Well get to work then!

Though I would offer Newt Gingrich. He passes my Youtube test on the economy and afghanistan and green hysteria. I think he's the geeza! But now you're going to spoil it now by telling me he's a creationist or something. :(

In fact lets have John Bolton for Supreme Permanant Dictator of the Universe!

496 Salamantis  Fri, May 8, 2009 7:03:00am

re: #492 quickjustice

I think Ron Paul personally despicable because of his deliberate and knowing neo-Nazi and 9/11 Truther associations. That doesn't mean all of his ideas are unworthy of discussion. The gold standard is an argument for hard money. Gold is the wrong choice in a modern economy, because there's only a finite supply of it. As economies grow, money supply should expand with them. You can't expand a finite resource. So the economic debate about how hard money should be, or should become, is a valid one.

Letters of marque and reprisal have been suggested as a serious solution to the pirate problem off Somalia. I haven't thought that one through, and it appears that using them in any context except maritime commerce is problematic, but they're not a "joke".

My point is only that the underlying points are debatable, and hence worthy of attention and respect.

Paul has an ulterior motive. He wants to privatize national security and national defence, so he can argue that we don't need a military, and should abolish it.

Make no mistake about it; he is an anarchist, whose goals are to dismantle very governmental institution, including essential ones.

I'm all for using our perfectly good military to deal with those bastards. It worked 200 years ago. And letters of marque and reprisal didn't.

497 quickjustice  Fri, May 8, 2009 7:04:40am

re: #494 Acidtrash

I tell Ron Paul supporters to dump him over the side, together with the tea. Then let's have the policy debate over the substantive ideas.

America does have the European political disease, but not to the same degree. Obama is trying to accelerate it. He's getting an usually strong reaction for such a new Administration.

498 Acidtrash  Fri, May 8, 2009 7:06:05am

re: #492 quickjustice

Really, props to RP just for starting the debate on that one. Far too many of us politico obsessives have been far too economically illiterate for too long and so have the public. The man has brought economics to the forefront again and for that we should be grateful. Well, him and economic armageddon.

499 Salamantis  Fri, May 8, 2009 7:06:24am

re: #495 Acidtrash

Well get to work then!

Though I would offer Newt Gingrich. He passes my Youtube test on the economy and afghanistan and green hysteria. I think he's the geeza! But now you're going to spoil it now by telling me he's a creationist or something. :(

In fact lets have John Bolton for Supreme Permanant Dictator of the Universe!

Gingrich has personal ethics problems. He divorced his much older wife, whom he met and married at college when she was a professor and he was a student, in order to marry a much younger woman, whom he also met at college, when he was the professor and she was the student. His wife was suffering from breast cancer at the time; he had the divorce papers delivered to her hospital bedside.

500 quickjustice  Fri, May 8, 2009 7:07:25am

re: #494 Acidtrash

I've heard Bolton speak several times at the Manhattan Institute. He's a thoroughly decent and intelligent man. I support the Manhattan Institute: [Link: www.manhattan-institute.org...] MI does programs in Europe. You should invite us over.

You also may know Theodore Darymple, an English psychiatrist whom MI also supports.

501 quickjustice  Fri, May 8, 2009 7:10:04am

re: #496 Salamantis

The libertarian argument is for less government. I'm a combination conservative/libertarian. I favor a robust military, so in that respect I'm certainly not a libertarian. I find Charles Murray's ideas about replacing social welfare programs with cash payments intriguing.

We must examine libertarian ideas carefully to see where they may be useful. The problem always is finding the right balance.

502 Acidtrash  Fri, May 8, 2009 7:11:38am

re: #496 Salamantis

Paul has an ulterior motive. He wants to privatize national security and national defence, so he can argue that we don't need a military, and should abolish it.

That isn't entirely a bad idea you know. Armies are horrendously inefficient. Better to subcontract some jobs out. Espcially if they were integrated reconstruction teams merged with specialist combat engineers capable of securing their own projects. Pay them on completion of specific tasks like sections of road building. Reconstruction and security budgets being separate is utter madness. There's a lot to be said for making the best use of companies like blackwater but only if they are sufficiently regulated for accountability.


Make no mistake about it; he is an anarchist, whose goals are to dismantle very governmental institution, including essential ones.

Well show me something government does well,cost effectively that can't generally be done by the private sector better and cheaper? Health, education and garbage colection is all state run here and it sucks a big one.
Other than the courts, the police and the army, the state should seek to mininze its influence. even subsidiarity doesn't cut it.

503 Acidtrash  Fri, May 8, 2009 7:14:28am

re: #497 quickjustice

I tell Ron Paul supporters to dump him over the side, together with the tea. Then let's have the policy debate over the substantive ideas.

America does have the European political disease, but not to the same degree. Obama is trying to accelerate it. He's getting an usually strong reaction for such a new Administration.

Oh you have the same virus, same strain and everything. You're just in the early stages.

504 quickjustice  Fri, May 8, 2009 7:14:38am

re: #499 Salamantis

I've heard Gingrich speak as well. He's quite brilliant, but has serious character flaws that handicap him.

505 Acidtrash  Fri, May 8, 2009 7:15:15am

re: #499 Salamantis

Gingrich has personal ethics problems. He divorced his much older wife, whom he met and married at college when she was a professor and he was a student, in order to marry a much younger woman, whom he also met at college, when he was the professor and she was the student. His wife was suffering from breast cancer at the time; he had the divorce papers delivered to her hospital bedside.

bugger. What a bastard.

506 Salamantis  Fri, May 8, 2009 7:15:54am

re: #502 Acidtrash

That isn't entirely a bad idea you know. Armies are horrendously inefficient. Better to subcontract some jobs out. Espcially if they were integrated reconstruction teams merged with specialist combat engineers capable of securing their own projects. Pay them on completion of specific tasks like sections of road building. Reconstruction and security budgets being separate is utter madness. There's a lot to be said for making the best use of companies like blackwater but only if they are sufficiently regulated for accountability.

Well show me something government does well,cost effectively that can't generally be done by the private sector better and cheaper? Health, education and garbage colection is all state run here and it sucks a big one.
Other than the courts, the police and the army, the state should seek to mininze its influence. even subsidiarity doesn't cut it.

Yep, you are as kooky as Ron Paul if you are talking about abolishing our military. When we let our generals run our wars, without being dictated to by civilian overseers except to tell them its time to fight, they perform splendidly.

Generals Petraeus and Odierno are cases in point.

507 quickjustice  Fri, May 8, 2009 7:21:08am

re: #502 Acidtrash

With respect, I don't think mercenary armies are a prescription for political stability. Americans worship George Washington, because he turned down his officers' plea that he seize power from the Congress using the Army he commanded. Quite the reverse of Caesar crossing the Rubicon. Instead, he supported the Congress and Republican government with the power of the Army. That's why the President of the United States also is Commander in Chief of the U.S. military. Civilian control of the military is paramount under the Constitution. It's also inculcated into our military culture. We don't want to repeat the mistakes of ancient Rome.

508 Acidtrash  Fri, May 8, 2009 7:21:55am

re: #501 quickjustice

I favor a robust military, so in that respect I'm certainly not a libertarian.

Oh you are. Active foreign policy and libertarianism are not ireconcilable. When I've had some sleep and I'm not running on adrenalin I intend to write an essay along the lines of "Why UK and Us libertarian foreign policy is wrong and distinctly illiberal"

The fact is that poppy is the profitable crop in afghanistan thanks to the Bumper ammendment (democrat quel surprise) to the USAid rules meaning that no foreign agricultural development programme can include prodcue that directly competes with US produce. Afghanistan is prime cotton country! If we assist in helping developing nations build markets and infrastucture we are following libertarian trade doctrine and we use military to protect the livelihoods of our trading partners. It has nothing to do with imposing regimes. Add to that the whole ethos of libbertarianism is do what you want so long as you harm no-one, well, the west is the market for the opium crop that imprisons the afghan populace and therfore defacto we do harm and it is our responsibility to fix it.

It takes a bit of mental gymnatics along the lines of liberal interventionism crossing over to neconservatism but you get the picture.

509 Acidtrash  Fri, May 8, 2009 7:25:38am

re: #506 Salamantis

Yep, you are as kooky as Ron Paul if you are talking about abolishing our military. When we let our generals run our wars, without being dictated to by civilian overseers except to tell them its time to fight, they perform splendidly.

Generals Petraeus and Odierno are cases in point.

I dont advocate it in entirety but there are some functions the army doesnt do that well and could be done better by other means and there is room for debate on this issue. You see armies aren't very good at factoring in economics. Why have an F15 at $64000 and hour dropping $30000 bombs when a turbo prop monoplane like the Tucano with rocket pods does the same thing better? If not actually privatising air support of reconstruction then certainly running squadrons as though they were businesses may be an idea. That would be fun., Foward observers starting radio auctions to take out targets!

510 Acidtrash  Fri, May 8, 2009 7:26:55am

re: #507 quickjustice

With respect, I don't think mercenary armies are a prescription for political stability. Americans worship George Washington, because he turned down his officers' plea that he seize power from the Congress using the Army he commanded. Quite the reverse of Caesar crossing the Rubicon. Instead, he supported the Congress and Republican government with the power of the Army. That's why the President of the United States also is Commander in Chief of the U.S. military. Civilian control of the military is paramount under the Constitution. It's also inculcated into our military culture. We don't want to repeat the mistakes of ancient Rome.

I think you might choke if you realised exactly how much Blackwater security were used in Iraq.

511 Salamantis  Fri, May 8, 2009 7:27:56am

re: #509 Acidtrash

I dont advocate it in entirety but there are some functions the army doesnt do that well and could be done better by other means and there is room for debate on this issue. You see armies aren't very good at factoring in economics. Why have an F15 at $64000 and hour dropping $30000 bombs when a turbo prop monoplane like the Tucano with rocket pods does the same thing better? If not actually privatising air support of reconstruction then certainly running squadrons as though they were businesses may be an idea. That would be fun., Foward observers starting radio auctions to take out targets!

If we try to low-tech this, we get blown outta the air. And outta the water. And off the land.

Our technology and our expertise in employing it are our combat edges.

512 Salamantis  Fri, May 8, 2009 7:31:31am

re: #510 Acidtrash

I think you might choke if you realised exactly how much Blackwater security were used in Iraq.

Blackwater security is employed to guard civilians and civilian targets such as hotels and public works projects; they don't run around the desert gunning for Al Qaeda and sectarian death squads. However, them being there doing the jobs that they do frees up more of the US Military to go jihadi hunting.

513 Land Shark  Fri, May 8, 2009 7:32:48am

The rise of Ron Paul is testimony to the leadership vacuum in the GOP. It's party struggling to find itself after the '08 debacle. Unfortunately, too many Republicans are wasting their time on silly issues that do nothing to address the cause of their loss (here I go again like a broken record), the move away from fiscal restraint and small government. Too much Creationism, not enough real Conservatism.

The fact remains no political party of movement is going to be perfectly pure on every issue in a representative democracy or republic. Whether Democrat or Republican, there is always a range of views on issues, people basically compromise and agree to disagree on some issues because they agree on other issues they believe are more important. A party comprised only of people who are "ideologically pure" won't get enough votes to win an election, period.

When the GOP was successful not so long ago, people with very different views on social issues or evolution banded together on their common belief in (wait for it) fiscal restraint and small government. And a strong national defense. It's what attracted so many who disagree with the Republican stand on social issues to vote for them anyway. Until most GOP politicians realize this and focus on these issues, they will not return to power.

I'm hopeful that eventually the GOP will find some leadership on these issues and the kooks will be marginalized. I also think as the Obama Thug-administration continues it's assault in liberty and common sense you'll see a movement coalesce around fiscal restraint, small government and strong national defense. Meanwhile, the GOP won't be a pretty sight.

514 Salamantis  Fri, May 8, 2009 7:34:54am

re: #507 quickjustice

With respect, I don't think mercenary armies are a prescription for political stability. Americans worship George Washington, because he turned down his officers' plea that he seize power from the Congress using the Army he commanded. Quite the reverse of Caesar crossing the Rubicon. Instead, he supported the Congress and Republican government with the power of the Army. That's why the President of the United States also is Commander in Chief of the U.S. military. Civilian control of the military is paramount under the Constitution. It's also inculcated into our military culture. We don't want to repeat the mistakes of ancient Rome.

Then there was the example of the good

515 Salamantis  Fri, May 8, 2009 7:38:00am

re: #507 quickjustice

With respect, I don't think mercenary armies are a prescription for political stability. Americans worship George Washington, because he turned down his officers' plea that he seize power from the Congress using the Army he commanded. Quite the reverse of Caesar crossing the Rubicon. Instead, he supported the Congress and Republican government with the power of the Army. That's why the President of the United States also is Commander in Chief of the U.S. military. Civilian control of the military is paramount under the Constitution. It's also inculcated into our military culture. We don't want to repeat the mistakes of ancient Rome.

Oops!

Then there was the example of the GOOD Roman general, Cincinnatus:

[Link: en.wikipedia.org...]

I think that maybe George Washington had heard of him, and was following his example.

516 quickjustice  Fri, May 8, 2009 7:38:29am

re: #510 Acidtrash

IIRC, Blackwater is comprised overwhelmingly of U.S. military vets with a culture compatible with that of the U.S. military. And after the U.S. military overran Baghdad, the nature of the mission changed. Without claim of expertise, Blackwater and many other military contractors likely were a more efficient way to deliver goods and services in Iraq.

I'm talking about U.S. military culture and tradition. The U.S. military was originally conceived to be both domestic and defensive. After our experience with King George III's ministers quartering British soldiers in American homes without our consent, suspicion of a standing army ran rampant. It wasn't until after the Second World War that maintaining a large standing army became accepted. Prior to that, the regular U.S. Army was kept small during time of peace.

517 quickjustice  Fri, May 8, 2009 7:40:00am

re: #515 Salamantis

Ever hear of the Cincinnatus Society?

518 Salamantis  Fri, May 8, 2009 7:43:18am

re: #517 quickjustice

Ever hear of the Cincinnatus Society?

Nope. But I have now. Physicians.

519 quickjustice  Fri, May 8, 2009 8:12:32am

re: #518 Salamantis

Honoring their decision to follow the example of the Roman General Cincinnatus by refusing to seize power, the original Cincinnatus Society was comprised of George Washington, his descendants, his officers, and their descendants. I don't know if it still exists.

As for the physicians, for a brief time more than a decade ago, they were my clients.

520 Acidtrash  Fri, May 8, 2009 8:12:35am

re: #511 Salamantis

If we try to low-tech this, we get blown outta the air. And outta the water. And off the land.

Our technology and our expertise in employing it are our combat edges.

Thats not true at all. The russians have been keeping their high tech air to ground missiles very close to their chest otherwise they end up having them used against them in Chechnya etc. The Russians tend to lose more aircraft to small arms fire and zoomies are just as susceptable. Thats how we brits lost tornados by depolying the JP233 runway buster system.

Dont forget this is an asymetric war. That means we are fighting a propaganda war, a shooting war and an economic war. If the enemy can make it cripplingly expensive they get nuts like Ron Paul back home gaining traction pushing for withdrawal. Thats why we have to keep an eye on what we spend and the size of bombs we drop because civillian casualties are a self inflicted owund in the propaganda war.

There's no way in hell an RPG can take out a Tucano and modern turboprops aint slow either. And they can lauch stand off ordinance from quite away away form the hot zone. This isnt vietnam where we used skyraiders as lawnmowers.

521 quickjustice  Fri, May 8, 2009 8:16:47am

re: #517 quickjustice

Oops. Should have said Society of the Cincinnati: [Link: en.wikipedia.org...]

522 n2stox  Fri, May 8, 2009 8:22:43am

The emergence of kooks on the right goes hand in hand with the massive power grab the left is putting on the country. Camps on the right are dividing into tribes out of desperation and survivial. Much of what the left has done thus far is not irreversible, but once we go down the path of more entitlements and a weakend national security apparatus, we're going to get some things rammed down our throats that will be irreversible.

We have a far left POTUS, a far left VPOTUS, a far left Speaker of the House, and a far left Senate Majority Leader. We have Al Gore winning Nobel prizes and Oscar awards, we have increased taxes, decreasing freedoms (or the threat of), and now, in the midst of a media spun pandemic, kooks getting the limelight for shucking vaccinations. On top of that, we have a Sec of Treas that is a tax cheat, an AG that is at the center of one of this biggest pardon SNAFUS ever, and a DHS secretary that thinks the 9/11 hijackers came from Canada.

The right is splitting into two camps: the moderates who continue to fight the moderate fight, and the hardcore who, well, don't pull punches. I have moderate views, mostly, but if something isn't done, we're all really screwed.

I've always been a moderate, but here in Seattle, where fraudulent elections are becoming commonplace, the mayor is about to ban guns, increased taxes are the answer to anything and everything, and virtually any elected office is simply a revolving door for any Dem candidate, I myself am struggling with things. Of course the libs will tell me "You lost the election, deal with it" which just makes me more pissed off. McDermott wins elections with 85% of the vote, and he went so far to give interviews in Saddam's Iraq saying he trusted Saddam more than our sitting POTUS.

I live in Reichert's district, and I find myself getting pissed at him often. Aside from supporting Bush on Iraq, he hasn't put forth a single conservative idea. Not one. He's supported a few, but that's it.

It's getting to the point I say "screw it" and just pack up my family and move to Texas. But then I'd have to deal with Cowboys fans on a daily basis.

523 quickjustice  Fri, May 8, 2009 8:25:13am

re: #522 n2stox

Seattle's always been known as a "pink" community.

524 gnargtharst  Fri, May 8, 2009 8:43:04am

re: #229 Charles


Your opposition to the gold standard and abolishing the Federal Reserve are completely unsupported. Assertions are not arguments.

And you are package dealing these concepts by tying them to Ron Paul. Paul may be a freak, but those particular ideas are sound (and they certainly pre-date Paul's political career.

525 MPH  Fri, May 8, 2009 8:46:51am

re: #300 JHW

Is not Rothbard some kind of big-shot at the von Mises institute?

It should be called the Rothbard Institute. Calling it the von Mises institute is a disgrace.

526 quickjustice  Fri, May 8, 2009 8:59:43am

re: #524 gnargtharst

Ron Paul is a freak. And instead of going ad hominem against Charles, I suggest you provide some support for your own assertions, carefully delinked from Ron Paul.

527 JHW  Fri, May 8, 2009 9:08:11am

re: #525 MPH

It should be called the Rothbard Institute. Calling it the von Mises institute is a disgrace.

Agreed. From what (little) I know of von Mises, it tallies with medaura's assessment in comment 381.

528 Salamantis  Fri, May 8, 2009 9:16:04am

re: #520 Acidtrash

Thats not true at all. The russians have been keeping their high tech air to ground missiles very close to their chest otherwise they end up having them used against them in Chechnya etc. The Russians tend to lose more aircraft to small arms fire and zoomies are just as susceptable. Thats how we brits lost tornados by depolying the JP233 runway buster system.

Dont forget this is an asymetric war. That means we are fighting a propaganda war, a shooting war and an economic war. If the enemy can make it cripplingly expensive they get nuts like Ron Paul back home gaining traction pushing for withdrawal. Thats why we have to keep an eye on what we spend and the size of bombs we drop because civillian casualties are a self inflicted owund in the propaganda war.

There's no way in hell an RPG can take out a Tucano and modern turboprops aint slow either. And they can lauch stand off ordinance from quite away away form the hot zone. This isnt vietnam where we used skyraiders as lawnmowers.

We need high-tech precision guided missiles precisely TO minimize civilian casualties. And that kind of high tech fire control ain't gonna work on low tech aircraft.

529 gnargtharst  Fri, May 8, 2009 10:40:02am

re: #526 quickjustice

"Ron Paul is a freak."

Hmm, that sounds familiar.

"... And instead of going ad hominem against Charles..."

"ad hominem" means directing your argument against the person, rather than the idea. In what sense can my comment in comment #524 be considered an ad hominem?

"... I suggest you provide some support for your own assertions..."

My own "assertions" simply referred to Charles' comments in post #229, and said his claims there were "unsupported" -- meaning, he offered no reasons nor explanations, merely assertions. So "support" for *my* "assertions" would be simply to read the text of comment #229.

"...carefully delinked from Ron Paul."

I don't know what "delinked" means. But if you're suggesting that my support for gold money and privatizing the Fed equates to support for Ron Paul, then, not only are you dead wrong, but you missed my explicit opposition to this notion in the 2nd paragraph of my comment: advocacy of classical liberal economics does not equate to (nor, I would argue, is it even compatible with) support for Ron Paul. That's why I went to the trouble to call him a freak.

In fact, the more that Charles and others link Ron Paul with the sound (but radical) economic ideas of the classical liberals, the harder time we will have overcoming the freaky Ron Paul factor, to introduce classical liberalism back into economic discussion.

530 medaura18586  Fri, May 8, 2009 11:10:15am

re: #455 Killian Bundy

No, see that's a big hazard that the Paulians always trip over. It's called a global economy.

IT ONLY MIGHT WORK IF ALL THE ECONOMIES IN THE ENTIRE WORLD GO ALONG WITH THE SCHEME!

/good luck with that

None of that is true. You don't seem to understand the basics. Not that I blame you... it's become such an obscure topic.

531 Charles Johnson  Fri, May 8, 2009 3:13:02pm

Sorry, folks -- the gold standard is not ever coming back to this country. You can argue all day about whether it's feasible or not, but the reality is it's never going to happen. It's a pipe dream.

532 medaura18586  Fri, May 8, 2009 5:19:11pm

re: #531 Charles

Sorry, folks -- the gold standard is not ever coming back to this country. You can argue all day about whether it's feasible or not, but the reality is it's never going to happen. It's a pipe dream.

I already conceded that point. Free banking is even less likely to be adopted than the "gold standard." However, the academic discussion of these ideas is extremely useful, because they deal with models on how the economy would behave in the absence of monetary central planning. The causal effects of each monetary restriction or manipulation (of the kinds we are subject to in the real world) can then be studied as specific violations or tweakings of the free-banking model. If economists lack a sound understanding of how the economy, and especially the financial sector would behave unrestricted, they cannot build reasonable theories, hypotheses, or models, capturing the dynamics of our centrally controlled monetary system. A lot of basic economic research deals with "pipe dreams" for this very reason.

Free banking is not gonna happen. Not in this country, perhaps not in this planet, ever. The temptations to meddle with the monetary system are powerful and everlasting.

But there is great use in studying these theories. Ron Paul and his minions shouldn't discourage anyone from delving into the topic with a curious skeptic attitude.

That's all she wrote.

533 mph  Sat, May 9, 2009 7:40:57am

I always recommend Economics in One Lesson by Henry Hazlitt:

[Link: www.amazon.com...]

It is very accessible and at the very least, you'll walk away from the short book with a rock solid understanding of "opportunity cost," a concept at the root of every economics problem we consider.

Here is it for free on the web:
[Link: jim.com...]

And here is a free PDF version:
[Link: www.fee.org...]

534 gnargtharst  Sat, May 9, 2009 5:23:06pm

re: #531 Charles

We free market wackos were told a couple of decades ago that lowering tariffs and other international trade barriers was a pipe dream and was never going to happen, ever.

Any claim that the future of idea X [free banking, gold standard, lowered trade barriers, separation of church and state, etc.] is predetermined, is preposterous.

The gold standard was abandonded after a long evolution of changing ideas in politics and economics (not good changes, imho). But the ideas that flourished prior, were *also* a product of a long era of revolutionary political thought. Cultures change; change is brought about by the thinkers who integrate and communicate new ideas (not by those who deny that such can happen).

The gold standard (and free banking), is certainly possible. More so, when it becomes more commonly known that even unilateral moves towards such policies most benefit those who adopt them (which is very similar in principle to unilateral adopters of reduced trade barriers).

[Link: www.capmag.com...]

535 Salamantis  Sat, May 9, 2009 9:39:50pm

re: #534 gnargtharst

We free market wackos were told a couple of decades ago that lowering tariffs and other international trade barriers was a pipe dream and was never going to happen, ever.

Any claim that the future of idea X [free banking, gold standard, lowered trade barriers, separation of church and state, etc.] is predetermined, is preposterous.

The gold standard was abandonded after a long evolution of changing ideas in politics and economics (not good changes, imho). But the ideas that flourished prior, were *also* a product of a long era of revolutionary political thought. Cultures change; change is brought about by the thinkers who integrate and communicate new ideas (not by those who deny that such can happen).

The gold standard (and free banking), is certainly possible. More so, when it becomes more commonly known that even unilateral moves towards such policies most benefit those who adopt them (which is very similar in principle to unilateral adopters of reduced trade barriers).

[Link: www.capmag.com...]

The gold standard, like genesis literalist creationism, a sun-circled flat earth, the four elements, the four humours, phlogiston, the ether, the doctrine of signatures, and spontaneous generation, is a discrdited concept with a past, but no future.

Marching bravely backwards is simply reactionary conceptual luddism.

536 gnargtharst  Sat, May 9, 2009 11:19:02pm

re: #535 Salamantis

Wow. The gold standard is like a list of 8 discredited things. That's a powerful argument.

[yawn]


This article has been archived.
Comments are closed.

Jump to top

Create a PageThis is the LGF Pages posting bookmarklet. To use it, drag this button to your browser's bookmark bar, and title it 'LGF Pages' (or whatever you like). Then browse to a site you want to post, select some text on the page to use for a quote, click the bookmarklet, and the Pages posting window will appear with the title, text, and any embedded video or audio files already filled in, ready to go.
Or... you can just click this button to open the Pages posting window right away.
Last updated: 2016-01-01 10:29 am PST
LGF User's Guide RSS Feeds Tweet

Help support Little Green Footballs!

Subscribe now for ad-free access!Register and sign in to a free LGF account before subscribing, and your ad-free access will be automatically enabled.

Donate with
PayPal
Square Cash Shop at amazon
as an LGF Associate!
Recent PagesClick to refresh
Midnight Blue (Remastered) Provided to YouTube by Universal Music Group Midnight Blue (Remastered) · Kenny Burrell Midnight Blue ℗ A Blue Note Records Release; ℗ 1999 Capitol Records LLC Released on: 1999-01-01 Producer: Alfred LionStudio Personnel, Recording Engineer, Mastering Engineer: Rudy Van ...
Thanos
15 hours, 19 minutes ago
Views: 114 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 0
Tweets: 2 • Share to Facebook
Shares: 0
Comments: 0
: 0
Wilco - Love Is Everywhere (Beware) Ode to Joy – Wilco’s 11th studio album – will be released Oct. 4, 2019 via dBpm Records. The album features 11 new songs written and produced by Jeff Tweedy and recorded by Wilco at The Loft (Chicago, IL) ...
Thanos
19 hours, 55 minutes ago
Views: 126 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 0
Tweets: 3 • Share to Facebook
Shares: 0
Comments: 0
: 0
Orville Peck - Dead of Night (Live on KEXP)kexp.org presents Orville Peck performing "Dead Of Night" live in the KEXP studio. Recorded May 20, 2019. Host: Cheryl WatersAudio Engineer: Kevin SuggsCameras: Jim Beckmann, Alaia D'Alessandro, Scott Holpainen & Justin WilmoreEditor: Jim Beckmann kexp.orgorvillepeck.com
Thanos
1 day, 19 hours ago
Views: 174 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 0
Tweets: 3 • Share to Facebook
Shares: 0
Comments: 0
: 0
Limited World Feat Caleb Hawley VIDEO get the album → woooong.com smarturl.it Caleb Hawley - lead voxCory Wong - guitar/perc/vox/producerRicky Peterson - B3Cody Fry - wurliMarti Fischer - synth/voxSonny Thompson - bassPetar Janjic - drums*THE HORNHEADS*Michael Nelson - trombone/horn arrangementKenni Holmen - saxSteve Strand - ...
Thanos
3 days, 18 hours ago
Views: 204 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 0
Tweets: 2 • Share to Facebook
Shares: 0
Comments: 0
: 0
Black Pumas- ‘Colors’Live in Studio 1A on June 21, 2019. Host: Jody DenbergAudio Engineer: Cliff HargroveProducer: Deidre GottCameras: Julia Reihs, Giulia Hjort, Micheal MinasiEdit: Julia Reihs
Thanos
3 days, 18 hours ago
Views: 211 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 0
Tweets: 5 • Share to Facebook
Shares: 0
Comments: 0
: 0
PJ Morton Feat. JoJo - Say So - Official Music VideoFollow PJ: Instagram: instagram.comTwitter: @PJMortonFacebook: facebook.comWebsite: pjmortonmusic.com Follow JoJo:Instagram: instagram.comTwitter: @iamjojoFacebook: facebook.comWebsite: iamjojoofficial.com
Thanos
3 days, 18 hours ago
Views: 233 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 0
Tweets: 2 • Share to Facebook
Shares: 0
Comments: 0
: 0
Man Dies After Attacking Migrant Detention Center Just another day in Trumpmerica TACOMA, Wash. — A man armed with a rifle threw incendiary devices at an immigration jail in Washington state early Saturday morning, then was found dead after four police officers arrived and opened fire, ...
Thanos
4 days, 15 hours ago
Views: 248 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 0
Tweets: 1 • Share to Facebook
Shares: 0
Comments: 0
: 0
Durand Jones & the Indications - Morning in America (Live on KEXP) It's still in San DiegoYou can hear a baby cryin'As the trains in New York CityRoll thunder down the lineThe teachers rise in RichmondAs they sleep in San AntoneWhile the harbor lights on BaltimoreGot nurses headed homeAnd the jails ...
Thanos
5 days ago
Views: 226 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 0
Tweets: 4 • Share to Facebook
Shares: 0
Comments: 0
: 0
Jeremy Renner - ‘Main Attraction’ Music Video for Main Attraction New Music out now! Heaven Don’t Have a Name: awal.lnk.toHouse of the Rising Sun: awal.lnk.toMain Attraction: awal.lnk.toNomad: awal.lnk.toSign: awal.lnk.to Watch more Original Content from Jeremy Renner ▶ youtube.com Follow Jeremy Renner:Instagram: instagram.comFacebook: facebook.comTwitter: @Renner4RealSpotify: ...
Thanos
5 days ago
Views: 240 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 0
Tweets: 3 • Share to Facebook
Shares: 0
Comments: 0
: 0
Cosmic Sans (Feat. Tom Misch)preorder the album → woooong.comCory Wong - guitar/bass/synth/mixTom Misch - guitarNate Smith - drumsJoe LaPorta - mastering
Thanos
5 days ago
Views: 268 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 0
Tweets: 1 • Share to Facebook
Shares: 0
Comments: 0
: 0