You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Which Central Banks are PRIVATE ???
- Thread starter Tresor
- Start date
Congressman Ron Paul adheres to the 'Austrian School' of economics.As does Peter Schiff. Go to www.mises.org for numerous downloadable articles and mp3 audio files. A very basic,good read is 'What Has Government Done To Our Money'? (which you can read in pdf form there for free also).Which introduces the basics of money as a commodity and why it's obvious in hindsight that any Government would seek to create a central bank while trying to still appear Democratic.There are links there to many blogs including that of leading current 'Austrian' Economists. Also the point about the true meaning of 'inflation' and 'deflation' having been obscured for so many years is interesting too.By accident or design? After reading anything about the Austrians you'll wonder what happened to your Country.At least here Cameron is talking about no more spending so there is small hope but not for 2 years.I like America but I'm sure China/Japan and the rest will pull your debt sooner than later.
This video is spot on. The Federal Reserve <b>created</b> the Great Depression by creating a massive credit bubble. By the time it popped I imagine the Board of Governors were in an office somewhere going, "Oh shit. What do we do?" :eek:
They did the obvious thing and tightened credit because they knew they had inflated the bubble too high. Their tight money policy, after the fact, did not cause the Great Depression. It was the loose money policy that inflated the economy that caused the Great Depression.
Now we are going through the same thing and the general public is giving the Fed a high five for waging such a battle to stop a second great depression. It's like the Fed punching you in the nose and then handing you a Kleenex to wipe the blood off.
And, going back to the gold standard won't work either. That method has failed throughout history.
They did the obvious thing and tightened credit because they knew they had inflated the bubble too high. Their tight money policy, after the fact, did not cause the Great Depression. It was the loose money policy that inflated the economy that caused the Great Depression.
Now we are going through the same thing and the general public is giving the Fed a high five for waging such a battle to stop a second great depression. It's like the Fed punching you in the nose and then handing you a Kleenex to wipe the blood off.
And, going back to the gold standard won't work either. That method has failed throughout history.
Well I don't agree that a true Gold Standard coupled with true unfettered capitalism has ever been tried. There was a good chance when the American Republic was new but Hamilton was there right away introducing a National Bank.It seems to be too tempting for powerful men to leave the money alone.Ron Paul would have brought about an American Golden Age instead you bought a pretty boy whose portrait you'll kiss while he leads you straight to hell.
Link to the Rothbard book at mises.org
http://mises.org/books/whathasgovernmentdone.pdf
http://mises.org/books/whathasgovernmentdone.pdf
From page 86 of the Rothbard pdf of 'What Has Government Done To Our Money' copied from www.mises.org
'It is true that the interventions of governments previous
to the nineteenth century weakened the speed of this market
mechanism, and allowed for a business cycle of inflation
and recession within this gold standard framework. These
interventions were particularly: the governmentsâ monopolizing
of the mint, legal tender laws, the creation of paper
money, and the development of inflationary banking propelled
by each of the governments. But while these interventions
slowed the adjustments of the market, these
adjustments were still in ultimate control of the situation.
So while the classical gold standard of the nineteenth century
was not perfect, and allowed for relatively minor
booms and busts, it still provided us with by far the best
monetary order the world has ever known, an order which
worked, which kept business cycles from getting out of
hand, and which enabled the development of free international
trade, exchange, and investment.'
'It is true that the interventions of governments previous
to the nineteenth century weakened the speed of this market
mechanism, and allowed for a business cycle of inflation
and recession within this gold standard framework. These
interventions were particularly: the governmentsâ monopolizing
of the mint, legal tender laws, the creation of paper
money, and the development of inflationary banking propelled
by each of the governments. But while these interventions
slowed the adjustments of the market, these
adjustments were still in ultimate control of the situation.
So while the classical gold standard of the nineteenth century
was not perfect, and allowed for relatively minor
booms and busts, it still provided us with by far the best
monetary order the world has ever known, an order which
worked, which kept business cycles from getting out of
hand, and which enabled the development of free international
trade, exchange, and investment.'
It hasn't been fully tried in the US but it has been used throughout history and the problem is Gold is a scarce material. For the sake of argument, let's say $100 is tied to 1 oz of gold. For every $100 the government creates 1 oz of gold has to be at Fort Knox, or some other location but what happens when the demand for money - that being a growing economy that's fueled by capitalism - increases faster than the supply of gold? The obvious answer becomes, let's make $200 equate to 1 oz of gold. If you don't do that the economy doesn't expand and recessions and/or depressions occur but if you do it then all is well until the next expansion occurs. Now let's make $400 equal 1 oz of gold. Keep repeating that over and over again and you eventually leave the gold standard or your economy stalls or collapses. It's my belief that an efficient money system is impossible because of evolution and because of the human curse. People are inherently greedy and someone will find a way to exploit whatever system is in place. What we are witnessing is a civilized form of survival of the fittest with the Federal Reserve being at the top of the food chain. It's all about the evolution of mankind.
Quote from jonnyy40:
Well I don't agree that a true Gold Standard coupled with true unfettered capitalism has ever been tried. There was a good chance when the American Republic was new but Hamilton was there right away introducing a National Bank.It seems to be too tempting for powerful men to leave the money alone.Ron Paul would have brought about an American Golden Age instead you bought a pretty boy whose portrait you'll kiss while he leads you straight to hell.
Quote from Anaconda:
1-Why do you even bother posting?
2- They hire out a Big 5 accounting firm,
3-"Conspiracy Theory" Congress members want an independent audit.
4-It's obvious you have an agenda and are paid to promote it.
1- to see you idiots slobber all over yourselves trying to prove your conspriacy theories...
2- who else are they gonna hire? Your cousin Ernie up the street? Better yet, who would you trust, if you're convinced that "they're all in on it"?
3- they get one every year
4- it's obvious that you're an insane, delusional, slobbering idiot..
Quote from Office Wally:
With regards to auditting of the Fed, the 97% profit returned to the Treasury consists only of the interest on governmental securities it holds as 'reserves'. There is no reference to the member banks profits that use these 'reserves' in the creation of loans.
So are you saying that they shouldn't make loans?
Quote from ProfitTakgFool:
And, going back to the gold standard won't work either. That method has failed throughout history.
The thing is, the FED, as controversial as it is..... is preferable to politicians running things, right?
Could you imagine the amount of politics that would be any guv agency would be put under?
Ridiculous.