Ron Paul Economics

Quote from gaj:

i agree with many of the things paul says.

i saw the interview this morning.

liesman was spot-on with the "run on the banks" - there were runs on the banks long before there was a "fed". i'm surprised (and disappointed) that paul didn't know that.
More...

I didn't see the interview and don't know how you are interpreting what you saw. (Who knows, maybe he was tired and had a bad day. Maybe the interviewer or time constraints limited his ability to get into details for a general audience. I have seen him, and others, do this when they didn't want to waste time on issues off the central point they want to get across.) But I have read, seen, and heard a great deal from Ron Paul. He is very aware that there were bank runs before the Fed was established. As a matter of fact, bank runs are a protective mechanism from outrageous money expansion under fractional reserve banking . The banks tried to get around this check on their fraud before the Fed, by all expanding money at the same time and providing funds to troubled banks in order to prevent all of them being causht in the act by their depositers. (As you probably know JP Morgan himself saved his fellow banksters during one of these fraud discoveries.) - - The Fed was designed & established as a way for them to create money out of thin air, privatize the profits, and socialize the losses. - - Ron Paul has spoken on this for many years. - - -

You may enjoy this talk:

http://mises.org/media/2917
 
I am so very happy to hear that somebody out there has a clue. Thank you for your well written post.

Quote from Tigerjaw:

Youre kidding right ? The value of the dollar is down to 5 cents from what it was when the Fed was created in 1913. Is that your idea of 'stability' ?

This thread is full of so much b.s. that its hard to start. Most have no idea what Austrian economics is about, the point of the gold standard, or the CENTRAL ROLE of central banks in creating booms and their subsequent busts. Booms and busts are monetary phenomenon created by bank money expansion. (Many do try to talk as though their heads aren't stuck up their behinds, however.) And as for the guy who seems to think that the Keynesians, Austrians, etc all had a part in the current mess (must have been taught that equal blame is 'good' and 'fair') - - well he is absolutely ignorant. He is mentioning economic philosophies which are 180 degrees opposed to one another. Austrian economics hasn't had a part in U.S. economic policy (kinda) for 90 years. Check out the Depression of 1920 - - never heard of it ? That's because the Feds did nothing, and after a year or so things corrected and the economy was back on track - - - until bank money expansion bloated the stock and real estate market bubbles and later lead to the crash and Great Depression 1. If you want a great illustration of Keynesian economics check out Japan. They didn't let companies 'too big to fail' go under (their excuse was Japanese social 'unity' or some such rubbish). They dropped their interest rates down to zilch. And they did so many 'stimulus' public works projects that at one time Japan was pouring as much concrete as the U.S., even though they only had half the population and 4 % of our land mass. The results ? A crap economy for the last 20 years.

Ron Paul is the only politician that I know who has a clue about economics, and has been a proponent of the Austrian school for a very long time. It is amazing to me that Keynesians and Friedman followers can go back and watch the 'predictions' of Bernanke going back for years and keep believing the guy and the failed economics practiced in Washington. - - -

But then again, I just got back from having a discussion with a guy in the economics section of a bookstore. He was a Keynes admirer. I was amazed to hear that he thought the banks just 'wrote checks' expanding the money supply & causing so many problems. He thought the Fed had no role or power to create money at all :confused: Not that he had a clue of the role of central banks in the economic cycle. - - While he lived in Japan for awhile (as did I) and recognized the Japanese economic mistakes, he seemed to think it was some kind of mystery as to why they got those results - - another sad product of the American public 'education' system, no doubt. - -
More...
 
Quote from sjfan:

What exactly didn't work?
More...

A very good question. Since the establishment of the Fed, life expectancy has nearly doubled, nobody goes hungry, and the standard of living and quality of life has exploded upwards.

This is a form of "not working" much of the world would love to emulate.
 
You know what's also fun? Watching Steve get neutered by Santelli. Liesmans an idiot, he's proved it several times.

He's trying to grill the wrong person by going after Ron Paul. He should use all that wasted energy on someone that actually deserves it. Which he never does.
 
Quote from Enginer:


AIG made the mistake of accepting Wall Street' s risk models, which were greatly in error for CDOs and derivatives. I'm inclined to think that we should have bailed them out with 12% loans, and shot Paulson when he refused to let Bank of America buy Merrill Lynch at a discount.

How GS got 1oo cents on the dollar from AIG will never be told.
More...

The risk models were all messed up from the beginning. Nobody had the intellect to actually use them correctly/properly and ignored underlying assumptions. That's the difference between people in science and people on wall street, the rigorousness they use when applying models. The more you read about it the crazier it gets. It just makes you sick how ignorant and greedy those people are.

I'd love to see Paulson suck a tail pipe.
 
Quote from Random.Capital:

A very good question. Since the establishment of the Fed, life expectancy has nearly doubled, nobody goes hungry, and the standard of living and quality of life has exploded upwards.

This is a form of "not working" much of the world would love to emulate.
More...

You know your equating those things with the Fed is false logic don't you ? (Jeez - - this is Logic 101 stuff)

Since the establishment of the Fed, the two worst world wars in history were fought resulting in the deaths of millions of people, nuclear weapons were invented, and the means to deliver those weapons with the push of a button anywhere in the world was put into operation. - - -
 
Quote from Random.Capital:

Then it's a good thing I didn't do that.

Would you like to try again?
More...

Is that your quote or not ?

Quote from Random.Capital:

A very good question. Since the establishment of the Fed, life expectancy has nearly doubled, nobody goes hungry, and the standard of living and quality of life has exploded upwards.

This is a form of "not working" much of the world would love to emulate.
 
Please show me a source to back that ridiculous comment up please.

We've had two recessions since the fed was established one global. Stop staying in bloody denial.
 
tigerjaw -here's the link:

http://www.cnbc.com/id/15840232?video=1329475430&play=1

starts about 4:45 (then 5:24)

quick summary, he prefaces it with ending deposit insurance, but done with private insurance companies.

liesman: you're familiar with the 30s, when we had runson the bank, right?
paul: the fed's been around since 1913 {note: i didn't know that, thought it was a bit later}.

liesman: on to something else. it took about 1 minute of the interview.

so it wasn't a "there were no bank runs before 1913", but it sure didn't seem that way. if i was liesman, instead of limiting it to the 30s, i'd have asked about ALL bank runs (because there have been bank runs long before the fed was created).

btw, liesman is generally an idiot. there's a reason he's not a trader or anything close to it. i LOVED when paul said housing should crash.

and, yes, i was aware of morgan's influence. thanks for including it, though - many aren't aware of when he jumped into things.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top