Facebook
Fark
Digg
Reddit
Stumble
Republican presidential candidate Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, speaks during a rally at the Green Valley Ranch Resort in Henderson on Tuesday, Jan. 31, 2012.
By J. Patrick Coolican (contact) 
Wednesday, Feb. 1, 2012 | 2 a.m.
J. Patrick Coolican
Sun archives
Reaction to Rep. Ron Paul usually veers from mild amusement at the crotchety uncle or respect for his consistency. Sure, he wants to do away with Medicare and Social Security, but hey, he hates all the wars and would legalize pot, so go Ron Paul.
In a brisk 10-minute speech at Green Valley Ranch Resort in Henderson Tuesday, Paul laid out his message of personal freedom, asking Americans to “assume responsibility for themselves and the consequences of their actions.” The crowd, some 400 strong, roared.
In the end, we tend not to engage his often dangerous ideas. But we should.
The conservative echo chamber is relentless — Valerie Plame wasn’t a covert operative, Barney Frank caused the housing meltdown, global warming is a hoax. If you don’t debunk the errors, before long you’re at Thanksgiving and your eyes are popping out of your head after you hear, “Well, everybody knows Obama is a fascist. Someone forwarded me an email telling me all about it!”
Paul would like to do away with the nation’s central bank, the Federal Reserve, and return to the gold standard, which means we could only issue as much money as we have in gold to back it up.
Paul claims this would stop the problem of inflation.
When Paul called for new monetary policy at Tuesday’s rally, the crowd broke out into a chant: “End the Fed! End the Fed!”
The argument is that the Federal Reserve, which has the greatest influence over the money supply, has given us inflation, thus destroying our purchasing power.
To start with, inflation is not a problem right now. The Fed has effectively controlled inflation since Paul Volcker, who was appointed by President Jimmy Carter, began to rein in inflation 30 years ago. (Most important, inflation rates have been stable and predictable, which allows for economic planning by firms and households.)
Since the 2008 financial crisis, the Fed has tripled the money supply. And ever since, gold obsessives like Paul have been predicting rapid inflation. But it hasn’t happened — inflation has been about 1.5 percent per year — because the economy has been so depressed.
The real risk after the financial panic of 2008 was deflation, a rapid decline in prices and wages that would have stifled economic activity even more, which is why the Fed fought it with aggressive action.
Second, Paul is mistaken about how rosy things were before the Federal Reserve, which was created in 1913, or before President Franklin Roosevelt took us off the gold standard.
Here’s Elliott Parker, a UNR economist: “It’s an absurd argument because before the Fed prices were unstable in the short term, and long term there was a long period of deflation.”
Parker’s data from the 19th century show that inflation and deflation rates swung wildly, which stifled economic activity because of uncertainty. There were frequent financial panics, exacerbated by the lack of a stabilizing hand like the Fed. (You think 2008 was bad? The world would have collapsed without aggressive action by the Federal Reserve.)
Also, Parker points to what’s known as the “Long Depression,” which lasted from the mid-1870s to nearly 1900. The problem was that to bring about more economic activity required more money, but there was a limited supply of gold so the amount of money stayed the same. As a result, prices kept falling. (You have 100 widget firms chasing $100. Then you have 200 widget firms chasing $100. Each dollar is now more valuable, and prices fall.)
Soon there’s less incentive to build widgets. Factories produce less, requiring fewer workers. With fewer workers earning money to buy goods demand falls and prices continue to decline. The economy grinds to a halt.
“Prices falling may seem attractive for consumers, until they realize that wages and everything else are all falling, too,” Parker says.
Is the Fed perfect? Of course not. In fact, its policies helped contribute to the Great Depression — though in that case it failed to deal with deflation, not inflation.
And as Paul points out, after the tech bubble and 9/11 recession, the Fed left interest rates too low for too long, which helped fuel the housing bubble. The even bigger failure of the Fed in the run-up to the financial crisis, however, was its failure as a key banking regulator to scrutinize the banks. But of course, Paul doesn’t believe in regulation, so he can hardly complain about that.
Here’s Parker again: “Criticize the Fed all you want, and perhaps even propose improvements. But there is no evidence that getting rid of the Fed and replacing it with private banking along the lines of a gold standard would help the economy at all. None. In fact, the idea scares the hell out of me.”
Wow. This article is just so biased and wrong on a lot of points. Inflation is not a problem? While yearly inflation may not rise at a huge level, prices on everything have KEPT inflating over and over and over to the point where everything is so expensive nowadays. Of course that is excepting well-to-do guys like yourself. People like me who work minimum wage jobs go paycheck to paycheck, not because we don't work enough, but because everything is SO expensive. This is due to inflation. Deflation has to happen or prices only rise and never fall. Deflation is not always a bad thing.
"The real risk after the financial panic of 2008 was deflation". Yes, deflation was a risk. But instead the Fed kept inflating prices. So now, we are creating ANOTHER bubble by propping up prices, when the free market demands that prices need to be lower. That is a BIG reason we are in this economic mess today. NO ONE, including the government (excluding really rich people like Romney) can afford anything anymore. In turn wages keep being raised, putting a burden on businesses, causing joblessness. I mean it's just all a big vicious circle that you are COMPLETELY ignoring!
You talk about the "Long Depression" going until around 1900. Well what happened around 1900? McKinley became president. What was his platform? The gold standard!!! Aha! We have found something here!
So while it was nice for you to "dissect" (tear down) one of Ron Paul's "dangerous ideas", a more unbiased, journalistic approach to this article would be to look at BOTH sides of the issue, instead of just giving a couple sentences to fly by a couple things the Fed has done wrong. But of course you people in the media can't leave bias out of anything...
I think this article is flawed.
First of all, Ron does not necessarily want to return to a gold standard. In his book, End The Fed, he talked about doing away with legal tender laws to open a door for competing currencies so that the market can decide which is most stable.
Secondly, gold has been a good store of wealth historically. The Federal Reserve Note has not, seeing as how it has lost more than 90% of its value since the Fed was created.
Next, the author said inflation was not a problem...right now. There are a few flaws within this one assertion alone. How much of a problem inflation is, is an objective analysis and depends on what you think a problem is. First off, the author uses the figure of 1.5%, which I am assuming is the "core" Consumer Price Index. This, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics is the index of the prices of all goods EXCEPT energy and food. Energy and food, you know...things people spend money on.
Looking at the BLS' latest CPI press release, I see that when energy and food are included, inflation is 3%. Even 3% is still an "official figure" and I've seen alternative measurements of recent inflation as high as 9%. You might think that 3% is still not a problem, but this is where the other flaw comes into play. Exponential function. Start with a base figure, say ten, and calculate the exponential function of an annual 3% increase for ten years and you'll end up close to $13.50. This of course is a roughly 30% increase, but it also represents a destruction of nearly a quarter of the value.
To say that inflation is predictable, and that people can plan for it, is no consolation. Especially when wages fail you outpace inflation. Even if inflation is a "meager" 3% annually, unless your income increases 3% annually then you're becoming gradually poorer...and if your income increases a whopping 5% annually then you're still only 2% ahead each year. Not very impressive.
Regardless of that, inflation destroys the value of savings. Put $10k in a savings account and take it out in ten years, and your money won't have the same purchasing power. In this regard, deflation is actually a GOOD thing. I feel like I could go on about the destructive power of inflation for awhile, but if you're still reading this I will spare you.
On to my final criticism, which is the point about wild and unpredictable monetary fluctuations before the Fed came to be. The fundamental cause was still the same as it is now...credit expansion. There existed what were called "wild cat banks". To save time here, I suggest you go look into wild cat banks. My point is that when the market is allowed to operate freely, especially in our modern world where a few lone actors would find it difficult to get away with scamming people, then the responsible actors will be rewarded with business and the irresponsible actors will be run out of business.
The federal reserve was passed by Woodrow Wilson, not Franklin Roosevelt who was signed in 20 years later! This is a good example of straight uneducated bias. Great job Las Vegas!
Made an account just to respond and I hope you take the time to read this J. Patrick Coolican.
"The argument is that the Federal Reserve has given us inflation, thus destroying our purchasing power.
To start with, inflation is not a problem right now"
Even you wrote OVER TIME but then completely ignore your own words and only focus on the present. There are inflation calculators all over the internet, here one: http://www.westegg.com/inflation/
What cost $1000 in 1980 would cost $2611.10 in 2010.
That is a 75% loss of purchasing power.
Additionally, the CPI numbers that you are using to proclaim today's inflation is low are flawed and have been changed and manipulated to exclude food, gas, medical care, etc. The only reason inflation is low is because housing is in the toilet.
I also want to address this, "The argument is", while you might be mentioning a PART of the argument, the actual argument is Congress is Constitutionally mandated to have control over our money supply. Instead they voted to have a PRIVATE institution take over their duties which the FED does in secret without oversight of any kind.
Would you be okay with this privatization if Congress today voted that a private company should be writing all of the laws and regulations for our country in secret?
If you're okay with them giving the most important power away then why not give all of their powers away? Why do we need Congress at all? We could even privatize the presidency and the courts.
In summation, you are no financial expert and you sure don't understand the subject you are writing about. Please go educate yourself.
The theme here is "Dangerous".
Why don't you discuss SOPA, PIPA or the NDAA, all of which Paul oppose, while other people in the Congress try to sneak it through.
Let's talk about ther other falsehoods you're telling:
The Fed saved us. They did nothing of the sort. The banks should have been allowed to falter in 2008-2009, with the govt. selling all assets (esp. houses) at ABSOLUTE PUBLIC AUCTION, immediately.
Paul does NOT want a pure gold standard. He wants COMPETING currencies, backed by GOLD, SILVER, and even baser metals like COPPER & NICKEL.
He wants to give people the chance to OPT OUT of Social Security. Great, I'll be first in line.
There's a lot of Keynesian points in your article, which, if you did any homework with Milton Friedman, you would know is disastrous, and only a mirage -- seemingly sustainable through endless war, theft of resources, endless spending, and a bloated federal blimp. Sooner or later there is an accounting of everything. It is a law of the universe.
As a small-business owner, I can tell you that your economics are whack. You have never bought or sold anything, and simply strike me as another "analyst" of sorts. There are too many of them already.
You also forget to mention that people bartered, traded, swapped good & services, before we all got programmed to the Plato's Cave of Paper in 1913.
And what is wrong with a transparent Treasury printing our money instead of being punked by the secretive Fed. Better yet, let the states print their own currency, and THE FREE MARKET, Mr. Coolican, THE INVISIBLE HAND OF CAPITALISM, really dictate what is true, and what is BS.
Your article is enormously filled with premeditated bias, not objective reporting, and lacking anything other than a rehashing of the media slam of Paul already.
I don't get it. Even the FED does not claim that inflation is at 1.5%. They claim it is 2% even though they disclude all vital commodities such as food and energy. If these were included, as they were in 1980, inflation is extremely higher.
The deflation you speak of pre-1913 was a whopping 13% increase in buying power from 1790 till 1913. This is the direct result of hard work, innovation and efficiency. When you create something using less resources, you are able to lower the price. One of the rewards of hard labor is lower prices. This is very common in a free market and mostly benefits the consumer or average person.
Since then, in less time, we have lost 98% of our purchasing power due to inflation. The government purposely steals from savers by devaluing the currency in order to pay their debts with money that is worth less than the money they borrowed. The poor and elderly are hurt the worst as they are on fixed incomes while prices of essential goods continue to soar. The growing number of people that need help does not surprise me one bit. The government and the connected corporations that get the higher valued money have a huge advantage; which is the reason that the gap between rich and poor continues to widen.
There is only one person in government with the integrity to call these crooks on this attrosity. Hopefully we can change coarse and give our children the gift of freedom and prosperity. Ron Paul 2012
End the Fed!
Mr. Coolican needs to tell the real story, who owns the fed, Patrick?
Certainly not an American asset...
We have a top secret private organization running America, into the ground...
We think that unless Mr. Coolican is uninformed, he must be part of the system, pretending to be a journalist.
4 American presidents who wanted to end the fed ended up assassinated since Abe Lincoln.
Shame on you Patrick...
Without the Fed our economy would still be fighting its way out of a depression if it weren't for the Fed's action in 2008 as Coolican pointed out. The Fed may not be the solution to combating economic issues in our economy (responsibility, rather, is key), however in recent years the Fed has done more good than bad. Ending the Fed now might be good policy, but who is to say that banks will hold themselves accountable in the future for handing out loans to people unable to pay them back? The Fed acts as a stabilizing hand and keeps our economy in check in times of economic strife. Paul's argument for ending the Fed only holds if we can trust banks and corporations to be responsible for their decisions. It is common knowledge that government or the Fed's intervention in economic matters causes inefficiency in our economy. The solution here would be to limit the Fed's power and only use their remaining power in times of economic disparity. A true laissez-fair system would be best if we can trust individuals to be responsible, as the economy would regulate itself to efficiency. It is difficult to decipher what the right policy would be going forward as the economy is still struggling.
You're confusing price fluctuation with inflation. Inflation is literally an increase in the money supply. And prices have been under control since Voelker? If you consider 4 percent a year under control, consider that under the gold standard prices fell while wages remained steady. More stuff, same money. That's called economic growth. It's just a different metric than we're used to. This Elliot Parker fellow is just extremely stupid or sublimely evil. What he calls a depression is in fact a contraction. If you fear contractions, consider that the German economic miracle under Erhard in the post war period took place with a 93 PERCENT contraction in the money supply. In fact, the "long depression" period that Parker refers to was the greatest period in the increase of true wealth in this country's history.
Outside simple barter, using something besides the US dollar will land you in prison.
As others have pointed out, when given time to go in to detail, Paul explains that what he opposes is the US government's complete monopoly on currency. But, he is a politician and "gold standard" is a much better sound bite versus trying to explain in mere seconds how money would work (and has worked in the past) outside of a centrally planned system.
If you were really interested in the history of the dollar and its relationship to gold, there are sources of information outside of the political sphere. For more serious works visit Amazon and search for the works of Richard Timberlake, Geroge Selgin, and Lawrence White.
Or, you could just not bother and pretend that inflation is really really low and that the Fed is just there to protect us little people.
Patrick, first of all I am a native Las Vegan. I was born here in Sunrise Hospital over 47 years ago. I do not know where you are from, hopefully your feet first touched the same soil as mine.
I will tell you this however. No other candidate in the race epitomizes the spirit of Nevada and Las Vegas like Ron Paul. Gaming casinos are everywhere now. So if we loose our wild and independent spirit what will he have left to offer the tourists coming here? A hot-baked waterless desert. That is all.
While you may be concerned about some of Paul's Ideas. The truth is most of them will not get passed. What promise I do believe in he will keep is to bring our sons in the military home from foreign lands. I want my son to come home on a plane, walking. Not in a flag draped box. Think about, vote for your heartland. Vote for Ron Paul. You can still see the light Patrick.
I think part of Mr. Coolican's trouble is one of definition. When he says inflation is not a problem right now, at 1.5% or 2.0% or whatever, he is accepting some of amount of inflation as being ok. but as previously stated by others, even 1.5% annual inflation is a pretty big deal when it compounds over long periods of time. Over 25 years, this would be a loss of purchasing power approaching 50%!
This compares to the period before a central bank, when inflation over 150 years approached zero.
There are actually benefits to having a central bank. But you simply cannot argue that inflation is less of a problem now than it was prior to the Fed.
The standard myths about deflation are only injected into mainstream thought by those that easily and purposefully misunderstand its actual nature to serve their own ends. That said, deflation occurs for two reasons: increasing productivity (where the money supply stays static and economic productivity rises, bringing more value to the currency, encouraging savings, and lowering prices healthily) and monetary contraction (forcing a static market to lower prices while rising unemployment and bankruptcies occur due to the rising value of debt). Obviously, one kind represents health and the other represents a failure of monetary policy.
The association made between deflation and depression is due to economists' obsession with the entangling relationship the Great Depression had with deflation. Ironically, Bernanke himself agrees that it was the Federal Reserve's monetary policy and their gold contraction that turned a simple market failure - similar to failures throughout the existence of the market, except for the absence of economical suicide - into a "deflationary spiral," forcing bankruptcy, loss of jobs, and generally destroying the entire economy. Had it not been for governmental attempts to ease the market crash in 1929, we may have just bounced back like we had in the market crash in 1920. (Which no one remembers, despite its almost exact severity; why? Because the president at the time specifically did nothing and allowed the markets to heal themselves. And so they did, before 5 months had passed, making way for the productivity and prosperity of the Roaring Twenties).
The trusted comment above suggests that we (read: our government - possibly no correlation) feared deflation after the subprime mortgage crisis, and instead inflated our currency, thus causing commodities prices to rise. This is true, but masks the deeper deception that has been at work: that the dominating monetary and economic philosophy we as a nation have promoted over the past 70 years is one of consumerism and credit funded by inflation, rather than a healthy balance between the dichotomies of consumption/borrowing and saving/investment. Without the second part to this dichotomy dichotomy, we have created for ourselves a nation bent on accumulating debt and paying it off with more debt, raising prices and taxes to cover our short-term expenses, forcing our productive manufacturing and production jobs overseas, sending corporations fleeing to other nations, and simply increasing the country's credit allowance to foot the bill for the recession that has come of it. And it can only get worse until we begin to treat our currency as a commodity in and of itself rather than destroying and diluting it to divert attention from our overabundance of governmental power and corruption.
I would need a book to dissect the incredible # of mistakes in this article. Here are just one:
"Soon there's less incentive to build widgets. Factories produce less, requiring fewer workers. With fewer workers earning money to buy goods demand falls and prices continue to decline. The economy grinds to a halt."
The implication here is that between 1870-1900 (the time period you stated) is that the U.S. economy "grinded to a halt" and the gold standard was to blame. You FAIL to mention that it was during the Civil War we temporarily broke off our ties with gold and by returning to gold, the worthless paper currency had to be shed - much like the depression after Andrew Jackson ended the 2nd national bank of the U.S. in the 1830's.
MORE IMPORTANTLY, you fail to mention that between the end of the Civil War to 1900, GDP DOUBLED (and that's not an inflationary doubling, but by you're very words a DEFLATIONARY doubling). Thereby GDP doubled even as the value of the dollar strengthened.
SOURCE: http://ushistory.councilforeconed.org/vi...
You're lack of historical fact and reliance on a few economists without and Austrian economist to argue the opposing viewpoint created a poorly articulated article and lessened your journalistic credibility.
The only person sillier than Runny Paul is a Runny Paul backer and that is going some!
I really really hope that Runny doesn't get the republican nomination for prez because I really really don't want to vote for Barry!
Ahhh..smell that? The bozone layer around the libertarian posters is particularly strong. They remain a small fraction of the public that will never be in touch with reality. Good article Mr. Coolican!
"Inflation is not a problem?"
My house is worth $40,000 less than when I bought it in 2002. You call that inflation? Wow.
"Inflation is literally an increase in the money supply."
This comment uses one of many creationist definitions of 'Inflation', chosen out of a hat, which support the argument of the moment, not facts.
"The even bigger failure of the Fed in the run-up to the financial crisis, however, was its failure as a key banking regulator to scrutinize the banks. But of course, Paul doesn't believe in regulation, so he can hardly complain about that."
Coolican -- you stepped in it with this one. For starters, the primary fed regulator for the big banks is the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC). Historically it runs interference far them more than it regulates them. And Paul has a point -- this country went from the gold standard to one based on paper, meaning true value became just an illusion. Repeated crashes are inevitable.
"...the actual argument is Congress is Constitutionally mandated to have control over our money supply. Instead they voted to have a PRIVATE institution take over their duties which the FED does in secret without oversight of any kind."
dawnrising -- excellent point! Congress abdicated to the bankers then and now. Nothing new -- see Jefferson below.
"Or, you could just not bother and pretend that inflation is really really low and that the Fed is just there to protect us little people."
btreynolds -- another excellent post! Sadly that applies to government at any level, including our very own Metro. Proof -- what happened to that $62 million the Supreme Court made the state give back to the local water ratepayers for a system never built? Last I saw in the Sun all the local governments were squabbling over who was going to get it to balance their budgets.
"While you may be concerned about some of Paul's Ideas. The truth is most of them will not get passed."
Dmitchell -- your post nailed it all. Paul is the only one talking about the basics, starting with the Constitutional limits our imperial federal government likes to ignore. And why not? He's labeled a kook by We the herd when he brings them up.
"...I sincerely believe, with you, that banking establishments are more dangerous than standing armies; and that principle of spending money to be paid by posterity, under the name of funding, is but swindling futurity on a large scale." -- Thomas Jefferson in his May 28, 1816, letter to John Taylor
Has any Ron Paul supporter figured out how many [few?] pennies a dollar would be worth if we returned to the gold standard?
Or don't Ron Paul supporters have any dollars or money saved for their retirement?
Are any Ron Paul supporters aware that Ron Paul has a considerable portion of his net worth tied up in gold futures,gold and mining interests?
Inflation by the CPI is over 3%. How much interest do you get in a savings account? ~1%? That means you are losing 2% just by saving your money.
The government's CPI also doesn't include raising prices of food and energy -which have gone up a lot over the last 4 years.
It's outright foolish to write-off free market/libertarian economists who saw the housing bubble building while the mainstream was asleep at the wheel. The reality is that it was supplied by credit from the fed.
Free markets don't need a central bank. Our constitution doesn't grant the authority to create one either.
Here is another fantasy:
"using something besides the US dollar will land you in prison."
Freedom does not mean that anyone can print their own money. America as a country has a monopoly on the currency, not the FED. Anyone who thinks otherwise is in Tra-la land.
Also, deflation isn't synonymous with recessions/depressions. We experienced deflation for most of our history -especially during the industrial revolution when we created the middle-class of America.
It's not deflation you need to fear -it's the bubbles caused by inflation and interest rate manipulation. Falling prices will allow consumers to buy more. It's good for everyone except big banks and the federal reserve.
We've had deflation in the computer industry for over a decade. Yet people buy more and more computers?
This has to be the most misconstrued article I've read in a LONG time. J. Patrick, have you been to a grocery store as of late? Have you gone out to a restaurant lately to enjoy dinner? How can you say that inflation is NOT a problem??? The price increases you are seeing everywhere is in fact largely due to inflation!! Sorry, but you have NO business writing about a topic you are so blatantly ignorant of. I suggest picking up a few of Dr. Paul's books and educating yourself. Please ... do us all a favor!!
Wow, you must have a wife that buys EVERYTHING for you, I assume? Inflation is NOT a problem? Are you freaking joking me??? Anyone who regularly does the grocery shopping for their family can see that the price of food has gone up about 40% in the past two years-- yep, I am NOT making that number up, as I have been a stay at home wife and mom for 3 1/2 years now, and I keep track of these things(my husband is a Marine so we need to keep close track of money). I used to be able to EASILY buy two weeks worth of groceries for $120.00. I have not moved, and I still use the military commissary to buy groceries this whole time, yet now the SAME GROCERIES cost me at least $200.00 for two weeks. Yep, do the math, that's an increase of 40%. Heck, cheese alone has gone from $3.50 for a 4 lb bag to about $7.50 for the same bag! Inflation is MAJOR problem, and every idiot who thinks they are a journalist, like yourself, keeps brushing it off as though it's no big deal, and I am SICK of the misinformation!!! RON PAUL 2012!!!
If we take in the rabid fanaticisam of the Ron Paul followers[a.k.a. BIG sillys]!
What would LV odds makers give for the president gaving an 'accident'IF Mitt Romney picked Ron Paul as his VP and won the presidential election?
I'm not so sure doing away with the fed isn't a good idea. There role in the housing bubble/collapse has to be one of the all-time screwups ever.
Mr J. Patrick Coolican, would you rather have a current ten dollar bill or ten dimes from 1965? Figure out which would be worth more.
No mention that the counterweight to inflation-- cost of living-- has been frozen for many of us for three years now. I guess that doesn't matter when you just want to discredit somebody.
And you can marginalize issues like ending marijuana prohibition all you want: ending pot prohibition resonates with the public, even if the talking heads, media elite (liberal and conservative) and oligarchic politicians do not care about it. It's a waste of money, it's used as an excuse for police actions that would never be tolerated elsewhere and it does nothing to stop the use of marijuana by young people (which is, in theory, the reason we have prohibition).
Just wanted to say how impressed I am by the answers presented in response to this article. There is one thing that can be said about Ron Paul supporters, they are fiesty and knowledgeable lot.
Lately, (over the past 15 years or so), I have stated that most Americans are cowards when it comes to issues directly affecting their lives here on good ole American soil. When there is trouble in small town USA, it's usually the women who stand up for their childrens safety concerning the effect crime has had on their neighborhood. The men? oh they are ready when they finally get a gun.
The time to be vocal was yesterday but at least when articles biased and uninformed as this come out reflecting an opinion openning with: "mild amusement at the crotchety uncle" "he hates all the wars and would legalize pot", one has to wonder who this writer listens too.
Legalizing 'pot'? Dr. Paul has said repeatedly
that he dosen't support the use of any harmful drug legal or otherwise, sees 'users' as ones who need support and help, not incarcerated. He wants the Federal Government to stop interfering with what should be states rights to govern themselves in most matters of personal liberty as guarnteed by our Constitution.
Note: The states dictate now how to deal with 'death sentences', some have none. The Federal Government isn't involved in this issue of 'life and death'
Recently, 'pot has no medicinal use' as declared by the Federal Government.
Here in Pennsylvania it is illegal to use, buy or grow 'pot' for medicine. Yet a close friend has a prescription for marinol. A substance supported by our Federal Government and by pharmasutical companys @ $5.00 per capsule.
Dr. Ron Paul dosen't talk out of both sides of his mouth.
"Crotchety"?..hmmm...at 76 dealing with Congress for this many years and no one taking him serious, (even when he 'hit the nail on the head' when he warned about the finacial bubble many years ago) I'd be a little crotchety too.
Thank you for letting me share my thoughts.
In May 2011, Paul said he would not have ordered the raid that killed Osama bin Laden, calling the operation "absolutely not necessary".
He would have done it differently, stating that America should have worked with the Pakistani Authorities who had arrested Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and other terrorists who were then tried in court.
So Ron Paul believes that Osama bin Laden could have been found Guilty in Pakistan! Ron Paul is a freak.
Paul has such a collection of pathetic political nonsense that it's not possible to know where to start.
Vote = None of the above.
"So Ron Paul believes that Osama bin Laden could have been found Guilty in Pakistan! Ron Paul is a freak."
SunJon -- you're being hasty here. Paul has a very good point. The promise of our Fifth Amendment is "No person shall be ... deprived of life ... without due process if law." I don't see a qualification for citizenship. Yet our government is murdering people around the globe, including their families and other innocents, with impunity. Some on the hit list are American citizens living abroad. Vote for whoever you want, naturally, but be sure your reasons are better than this.
"In a government of laws, existence of the government will be imperiled if it fails to observe the law scrupulously. Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a lawbreaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. " -- Olmstead v. United States, 277 U.S. 438 (1928), Justice Brandeis dissenting
No, thanks.
YOU dissect what goes on in Mr. Ron Paul's head.
I personally don't care what sloshes around in his brain pan cavity.
And if you actually look at it objectively how his campaign is running, his numbers show he ain't that popular. Especially after the revelation of writings earlier on in his life that border on hate crimes. Whether he wrote them or not, they STILL appeared in his newsletters. He had to sanction them. Can't disengage himself from something that came from literature that has been confirmed were edited by him.
He's unelectable. His ideas are only pick and choose this, but neglect other things. And he does that to pander for votes. He don't have an overall idea of how to help America. And if he does, it would be an unmitigated disaster.
Keep him back in Texas.
I have had enough of politicians from Texas on the national stage representing me or anybody. Texas is a fine State and I have nothing against anybody from there, but their politics sucks. I only need to point to recent political history. We're supposed to learn from mistakes, not repeat them. I don't want to go back to the Bush years. I want them relegated to history. I don't want them re-visited.
Hey JPC, not alot of early support for your point of view.
It seems when you note the loss of purchasing power by average citizens over the last century, most of us have paid a heavy price for this "stability."
The only ones supporting you, I suspect, have "We are from the government, we are here to help" embroidered on their pillows.
An examination of how the increased power of the Fed has lead to crony-capitalism is sorely needed.
More bias from Coolman. The Fed is artificially keeping inflation under control and it can't do that forever. Obama has been printing money, running up the money supply. We all know about bubbles after the internet and housing bubbles. This one will make them look like play toys. Paul is right to get rid of this bastardized thing that was prohibited by the constitution. And he's right about his entire platform. We need him badly right now, but unfortunately, with the left wing media like Coolman spreading lies, we'll never get him.
Dissecting in this case equals, "I've spent enough time thinking about this idea to put a negative spin on it"
Here's a fun little homework assignment for the author. Pick a product, anything. It can be a house, a car, clothes, food, oreos, anything. Compare the price right now to the price in 1971 (which is when we actually left the gold standard, might want to fix that). Then look at the price of the same product in 1930. Then come back and tell us again how inflation is no biggy and it's been totally under control for decades now. I think you'll find that it's laughable to believe we've averaged even 4% year over year since 1971. Go read a book, and then attend an "end the fed" rally.
Ah, yes, another shill for global money powermongers. You are so wrong on so many counts, but your beginning preamble already sets the tone and the mindset, complete with the hackneyed catch-phrases automatically spewed out:
"Reaction to Rep. Ron Paul usually veers from mild amusement at the crotchety uncle or respect for his consistency. Sure, he wants to do away with Medicare and Social Security, but hey, he hates all the wars and would legalize pot, so go Ron Paul."
Tedious. Your commentary isn't even original, just a watered down version of the "Fed as necessary for our economic survival" drone. The only ones who take you seriously are the ones as hoodwinked as you have been.
Why not be a man and just say "Down with the Constitution; it's no longer relevant". Come on, be a man and say it
The federal Reserve has been artificially keeping interest rates low. This is killing fixed income households. They can barely survive at these bond rates and are forced to risk their retirement in alternative markets. It would be nice to see you mention how the Federal Reserve is also a private organization that answers to nobody for monetary control. They simply report when required. Bailouts were given to a various "too big to fail" banks while the smaller community banks were forced out by the Fed who was using our money to give favorable treatment to certain banks.
The price of homes were artificially inflated by loose lending in the early 2000's. Ron Paul warned us about Fannie and Freddie in 2003. Everyone was making money and it was fine until the bubble burst.
Jefferson said it best. I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around [the banks] will deprive the people of all property until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered. The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it properly belongs.
"More bias from Coolman. . .Paul is right to get rid of this bastardized thing that was prohibited by the constitution."
Dave202 -- I don't see any bias in Coolican's article. This is highly controversial and complicated issue about what this country's actual, unaccountabile power players do behind closed doors. Good call on Rep. Paul.
"Nothing exists except atoms and empty space; everything else is opinion." -- Democritus (460-370 B.C.E.)
One can only assume after reading this article that the author lives if not solely on credit cards. Also take into account that the meaning "gold standard" can go beyond just " backed by gold" this implies instead of being backed by thin air like the fed does now where every year your money is worth less and less, and inflation runs ramped. We could adapt the gold standard and tie it to not only gold but also silver, platinum, palladium, rhodium, iridium, osmium and so on. So when you are sold the idea that there isn't enough gold. And this standard cant work. I ask you to think. Would you be more comfortable knowing that your hard earned money is backed by something tangible that only goes up in value, and not lies FED to you, where you wake up one day and your moneys worthless? Think about it....
I am a Ron Paul supporter. I admit he is not electable but if we can get the pendulum swinging back as we address the cases of power out of control it will be a win for the cause. The National Guard should never be deployed off US soil, we need to avoid lengthy involvement in distant lands and we need to clean our own houses. I never understood the line "you cannot legislate morality". You can't, someone will be finding a hole and exploiting others. That's why we are in the mess we are in and it's our responsibility to personally and individually turn the collective.
By ColinFromLasVegas
Feb. 1, 2012 8 a.m
"...I don't want to go back to the Bush years. I want them relegated to history. I don't want them re-visited."
Haven't you been paying attention? There is hardly a change from the bush years and now. We are still in Iraq, Afghanistan, launching drone attacks in Pakistan, sanctions on Iran with talks of bombing them. Libya, whatever he is doing in Africa, and now Egypt.
We STILL have the Patriot act, and now we have NDAA.
I could go on and on and on and on, but I think you get it. There is NO difference between the left or the right side of the constitution shredding, liberty stealing, money hungry party.
Stop voting for these people! They DO NOT care about you!
Dear Mr. Coolican:
By the tone of your article it seems you are under the impression you have fully researched and verified all your comments before printing!
Before stating that Dr. Paul's ideas are dangerous, did you read his minority report for the US Gold Commission, "The Case for Gold", written in 1982? Have you read Murray N. Rothbard's "What Has Government Done to our Money?", first published in 1963?
Perhaps you should verify where Dr. Paul's comments come from before stating what would be considered a "bias." After all, old-school journalism went by the WHO-WHAT-WHEN-WHERE-HOW. The WHY was sometimes discussed, as I recall.
Thank you for your attention.
The fact that a headline is being writen (poorly, at that..but thats expected...except moderators who dont like it when the critics are criticized) about someone who never gets more than about 7%, consistently poor placings, track record of iffy performance in Congress, and takes a LEFTIST view socially (drugs) and with foreign policy, shows the Sun's decline. Make that Vegas' decline since the late 90's. And ya'll want this guy as Prez? Why not a story on folks who throw their vote away, just as Sarah Palin keeps plugging for.
I see cowards all around me....cowards (and DONT tell me off topic, personal attack, and all other BS meow meow meows....)
Is inflation really under control?
Food prices have been rising on a good clip last year and this year.
Gas prices remain high.
And that is during a recession.
How much higher will prices go once full employment and full demand returns?
You can't dump all those dollars (Feds have printed trillions of green to buy back bonds for the last 3 years) on the market without it coming back and hitting you.
I am not sure about getting rid of the Fed but they are not exactly rocket engineers. They completely missed the boat on reconigizing and dealing with the housing the bubble.
They get one big fat F- on that one.
By rusty57
Feb. 1, 2012 7:12 a.m
"I'm not so sure doing away with the fed isn't a good idea. There role in the housing bubble/collapse has to be one of the all-time screwups ever."
Actually rusty57 the Great Depression so far is the Feds biggest screw up. This comes a close second though.
anyone of the three is better then Romney. We called kids like him goodie to shoes. He demonstrated that in the debate when he asked the moderator for help.
What would he do in a time of crises? I believe you all know the answer to that question. Let him show his tax returns for the last 10 years .
Last but most importantly even though he had a blind trust he was free to tell the trustee what are you doing you know I am running for president I cannot hide my money off shore don't do that to me.
Oh yes guys like him are legal yet they are also very immoral
Vote for any of the 3 just be smart and not vote for goodie to shoes
Chunky says:
Artificially suppressing inflation is hardly any different than artificially increasing the money supply which has lead us to our most recent financial meltdown. The inflation bubble will inevitably pop as do all bubbles.
Detaching our money supply from the gold standard has led to the government running the presses in excess of $14t dollars of debt.
The general populace is paying the price now for spending more than they could afford. Our country will inevitably pay the price too and it won't be pretty.
Why is balancing the budget such a difficult concept?
That's what Chunky thinks!
This poor man's ignorance is so sad. I hate to tell it to him but inflation may not be a 'problem' right now to him but it is to me. Does he not realize that M3 money numbers are no longer published by the FED and therefore you have no idea on how bad inflation is at this point in time?
However, since 1974 my dollar has lost almost all of its purchasing power. Inflation is the enemy as well as deflation. Both of these go away when the money is real and good.
Go Freedom! Go Real Money! Go Revolution! Go Ron Paul!
Just to take one of your points: "You think 2008 was bad? The world would have collapsed without aggressive action by the Federal Reserve." I can't fathom why people rush to believe this sort of thing just like we rushed to believe the Iraq WMD thesis.
From 1999, when congress repealed the Glass-Steagall act in order to enable the merger of Citibank+Travelers, Wall St investment banks knew they had Washington's guarantee and acted accordingly, bundling undocumented mortgages into exotic derivatives and selling $trillions of what they knew was junk. Then when the asset bubble burst in 2008 Wall St got its Washington bailout (performed by Geithner then head of the NY Fed!). There was never any risk to our FDIC-insured bank deposits. The bad loans needed write-downs and the investment banks needed to go bankrupt - it's called capitalism. David Stockman (interviews on NPR, Moyers, etc - see youtube) calls it an urban legend that credit would have dried up. On the contrary trillions in free money from the Fed didn't ease credit to mainstreet b/c the bailout prevented asset prices from adjusting.
Anyway, thanks for writing an article on issues, even if I don't agree with much of anything you say.
Does chunky think that we can pretend we don't have a deficit and that we can reset the clock to 1880 or do the Paulites want to draw a line and start fiscial policy tomorrow?
The sad fact is the deficit is here, it's real and we [USA] owes a HUGE amount of interest on it and that interest has to be paid with todays dollars and not Runny Paul play dough!
And before you say that my thinking is out of Kilter B eleave me I have said for the last 20 or 30 yrs. that the national debt is going to be the trigger that decides how America functions in future yrs. and that BOTH PARTYS have a vested interest in the running up our national debt so that they can repay their special interests!
This artical grossly misrepresents everything Ron Paul has given as reasons about the Fed. Ron Paul mentions inflation in passing only. This article is really just a "straw man attack" (i.e. a logical fallacy) against Ron Paul. Here is what Ron Paul said in his video speaches.
A fiat currency shrinks the middle class making them poorer while funding the rich through political opportunity.
A fiat currency makes government grow faster because the pain of "paying the freight" can be delayed and not passed down to the citizen tax-payer.
It is humorous to note that while Europe is in the midst of a great debt crisis and has a fiat currency, the author does not mention this.
My absolute favorite line in this article is "The world would have collapsed without aggressive action by the Federal Reserve" Not even one sentence is offered as proof. That is called "begging the question", which is another logical falacy.
I humbly request the Las Vegas Sun actually dissect Ron pauls issued with the Fed. Bring it to the light of day.
"Prices falling may seem attractive for consumers, until they realize that wages and everything else are all falling, too," Parker says.
If both are falling then it is basically a zero sum issue. If my income is halved, but so are my expenses - what is the problem? The posters who pointed out that inflation and price increases are not the same hit the nail on the head. If the money supply has tripled - then we have 300% inflation, regardless of prices.
What the real issue is here, is that the Fed and Congress are attempting to eliminate RISK. By doing so you also eliminate REWARD. This concept can be observed throughout our whole society and is destroying individuality and freedom at an increasing pace. We are trying to turn the world into a padded cell for ordinary citizens which is supervised from a fortress for the wealthy, who demand there be no opportunity for the citizens to escape. The walls are built with the red tape of finance.
The biggest joke of all is that the Fed's action of lowering rates to inject cash into the system has absolutely no benefit to the citizens. The BANK gets the sweet deal of 0-1% rates, but we still get to pay 5-30%. All that cheap money goes to the ones who already have it to make even more money from the ones who do not have it. Insult to injury when the bank can lend 10x the actual amount of cash it has and expect to collect interest on something that it never owned. The whole system is a freaking joke and the only ones who support it are those who are benefiting from the exploitation of others.
Inflation is caused by too many dollars chasing too few goods.
Glad I got my two cents in....oops three cents when adding for inflation.
The Ron Pauloonies are fine with their mans ideas so I guess that means that they are fine with his idea that we should ignore illegal immigration so my question [that Paul and the Pauloonies never answer]is do/does he/they think[?] that it would be ok if 100 million Hispanics and 100 million improvished Asians ,100 million 3rd world Africans and 100 million underpriviliged Euroopeans wandered here and set up camps and announced that they are here to stay?
If, the Federal Reserve has done nothing wrong since 1913, I don't see why there is such resistance to them being audited as Ron Paul has suggested and pushed for - for several years! I believe that a good part of the problems that we have in this country presently have very much to do with the lack of transparency in all levels of government. I believe that we, as American citizens have the right to know the TRUTH. I for one, am tired of hearing rhetoric that suggests that we wouldn't be able to understand what the Federal Reserve has done. I am suspicious of what the Federal Reserve has done because they have hidden their deeds behind an iron curtain since their inception. Half of our nation's debt is interest that we owe to the Federal Reserve. It is ludicrous that we do not control our own monetary system. It has been said: "the one that controls a country's monetary system has the TRUE control of that country." I want the Federal Reserve to be audited and if in that audit it is found that there has been criminal activity I want all responsible to be prosecuted to the full extent of the law...ALL!
Another question for Ron Paul/Pauloonies?
Why isn't he running for prez as an independent party candidate since he dislikes all things government which is republican and/or democratic party?
My opinion is that the USA needs to eliminate both major political parties so that we can elect the best man/woman for each elected government position based on that individuals honesty and previous decision making and that that man/woman isn't running for prez today!
The Pauloonies will whine that an independent candidate cannot win an election and I can assure that approaching the idea with the attitude of a loser is a guarantee that you will be correct!
As the Emperor said: "Good. Use your aggressive feelings, boy. Let the hate flow through you."
Obviously I don't have time to respond to all of the comments, but Prof Parker has created a Web page on the subject: http://www.business.unr.edu/faculty/park...
He includes academic papers showing, in the first one, for instance, linkages between deflation and recessions. Be sure your bomb shelter has plenty of food and that your guns are locked and loaded, everybody.
My last whine about Ron Paul and the Pauloonies posting on here today.
Weigh the Pauloonie supporters posts and then consider these fine folks rants/comments on other articles over the years!
NUFF SAID!
"Be sure your bomb shelter has plenty of food and that your guns are locked and loaded, everybody." - J. Patrick Coolican
Good advice, especially after reading some of the more extreme comments here.
More to the point, cigarettes were used as an alternative currency immediately following WW2 in Germany, mainly Berlin, for a while. It is not entirely unreasonable to think ammunition could serve as well, in coming years.
Laughing at J. Patrick's "Return of the Jedi" quote.
When libertarians (and particularly those who happen to be Austrian in their economics) speak of inflation or deflation, we are referring to increases or decreases, respectively, in the money supply. Yes, it is true that these words have come to mean increases or decreases in the general price level, because, all other things being equal, that is the effect of increasing or decreasing the money supply. However, this misses an important point. If the money supply is increased 3% per yer, and real GDP increases 3% per year, prices will not go up because the increased amount of currency in the economy is matched by an equal increase in economic growth. In this way, true inflation is masked during a period of economic growth (what Austrians call the "boom" portion of the business cycle). Eventually the lengthening of the production chain caused by artifially low interest rates catches up with the fact that the extra money available for investment was printed rather than made available through decreased consumption (savings), which causes the bust portion of the cycle. I don't have time or room to fully explain the Austrian view of the causes of the business cycle here, and others have done it much better anyway. The point is that just comparing average price changes with GDP changes shows and proves nothing, not to mention ignores correlation vs. causation.
My second point is that there are two types of deflation, one good and one bad. The first type occurs when the amount of dollars in the economy stays constant while the economy grows. In other words the same amount of dollars are chasing more goods, which causes prices to decline. This is the good type of deflation because it means purchasing power is going up and it induces people to save money which funds investment which increases productivity, etc. This type of deflation was generally characteristic of the United States until the 20th Century. The other type of deflation results from monetary contraction, and is bad. As always, people much more qualified than myself can explain it much better than I can. If you are actually interested in learning about the beliefs of those who disagree with you (rather than just smearing Ron Paul), please read Joseph T. Salerno's article on deflation here: http://mises.org/daily/1583
Say anything you want but there is one main reason that Mr. Paul will NEVER be elected to lead this county.
"Americans to "assume responsibility for themselves and the consequences of their actions."
That is a great idea but it is not the American way. To many want everyone else to support them and be responsible for all the bad decisions they make in life.
To many want someone else to "pay their fair share" for the way of life they want but are not willing to work for.
The biggest problem is not the elected leaders, they give to many what they think they want. The biggest problem in America is Americans.
Be careful what you wish for because you might not really want the results.
FYI: Fuzzy numbers. There were roughly 900 or more in attendance last night, not the misguided 400 you reported. What do you think this was? A Santorum rally? :)
Paul has a couple of good ideas and on everything else he's just plain Crazy. I'm concerned though that the electorate is so disenfranchised by Both Parties Pandering to Wall-Street, The Banks, Oil Companies, Billionaires and everyone else willing to buy them. Ordinarily a voice like Paul's would never be listened to. The Political Parties had better take heed, there is extremism in the winds from many sides that are totally fed up with the entire Corrupt Capitalist system.
"many sides that are totally fed up with the entire Corrupt Capitalist system."
It's not capitalism that is corrupt. It is a corrupted government and crony capitalism that is corrupt. Remove those two entities and society will prosper.
Here is an excellent, if light-hearted, look at Keynes vs. Hayek ideas: http://econstories.tv/2010/06/22/fear-th...
There are other items on the site that are worth looking at, too.
"Capitalism is relatively new in human history. Prior to capitalism, the way people amassed great wealth was by looting, plundering, and enslaving their fellow man. Capitalism made it possible to become wealthy by serving your fellow man".
Walter Williams
Does Ron Paul have some good ideas.. yes. Will I vote for him.. no.
your article i believe is very biased and flawed. the first factual flaw is that the US came off to the Gold Standard actually in 1971. it was called "the nixon shock"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nixon_Shock...
please do your research a bit more. i know Ron Paul has, and you apparently haven't. i'll stop there, but there are lot more points that you didn't research or look into.
J. Patrick...
LOL!!!
Of course you KNEW this would happen, dintcha'?
The 'Ron Paul Revolution' is manned...er...personed...by 'Ronulans', and as BOTS for the cause, they are vociferous & fanatical...
http://www.ronpauldirectory.com/index.ht...
http://r3publican.files.wordpress.com/20...
Inflation?? The way this gov't looks at it changes as fast as the odds on a betting table. Don't like what the see for unemployment, let's take out the people no longer looking for jobs... Better numbers. We need drastic change, until the Gov't can get it's own house in order, i.e. 10 billion in taxes owed by Gov't employees this year alone, stay the he ll out of our business. I'm not for Ron Paul, but at least he's talking about his visions, not like the rest of these knuckleheads that want to spend their time tearing down each other instead of the real enemy, Obama...
Most of Ron Paul's ideas are not practical.
He also claims to be a purist on the Constitutional as a original intent believer but he has made tons of exceptions to his "purist" beliefs. So what's up with that?
If he runs a 3rd party candidate then Obama will be continue to be our President for the next 5 years.
He could have an impact on the Republican platform adoption.
Mr coolican
If you were not aware that whenever you publish data that shoots down the tea party's stated ideological goals you will be bombarded with with insults and other foul comments. But I believe you were aware and still had the courage to do so.
KUDOS TO YOU SIR.
You know I'm just waiting for a candidate to propose we get back to the way of life in the 1600's...you know all those Pilgrims??
Not to mention, you all realize that Pres. Obama, Mr. Romney and Mr. Paul are all just talking out their collective a$$e$??? I mean seriously, why do they care??? They're all rich, they've got money coming out their pores. It doesn't matter what they say, anything they promise will NOT come to fruition....
I for one have lot ALL faith in our Gov't. They all say one thing and do another. All they care about is themselves and whose bribes they should take without getting caught.
"Paul would like to do away with the nation's central bank, the Federal Reserve, and return to the gold standard, which means we could only issue as much money as we have in gold to back it up."
An our money would again have value!
"An our money would again have value!"
Tommy
I'm assuming that you are a Paulite with your comment but are you one of the Pauloonies who refuses to answer a simple question for your hero?
That question is ..if we return to the gold standard and link the money supply to that standard how many pennys would todays dollar buy and how would you have America repay the HUGE debt that it has run up with both Americans and other countries?
You Pauloonies might not realize that some of us normal average Americans have slaved and saved all of our lives so we could afford to survive in our retired yrs. and sitting by and watching some loon like Runny Paul and his wackey backers isn't going to go down as easily as you might hope!
The massess are restless, no doubt about that. If Paul could do a better job explaining his economic policies, how he'd implement them, and their benefits; back off some on his neo-isolationist views, to at least work with current treaty allies; pledge to go slow on drug legalization, other than maybe MJ, and avoid the "conspiracy" commentary, he'd probably have a good shot at actually winning vice making a statement. And he should work through his web site -- relying on the media or media run debates won't cut it.
@pmmart: The economic destruction that will be caused by the federal debt is inevitable. The only question is how we deal with it. We can either slash spending now and pay it off as soon as possible, or monetize it. Paying it off ASAP and restoring the value of our currency will be difficult, but the burden will be small compared to what will happen if we monetize the debt i.e. print what we owe. Not to mention that monetizing the debt will result in high inflation, the burdens of which will (as always) fall largely on the poor and middle classes as the value of their paychecks and savings (if they even have any) is wiped out.
You can reply with an ad hominem by calling me a Paulooney or whatever, but this is the truth. You can choose to face reality or bury your head in the sand.
NunyaBizness asks: "Haven't you been paying attention?"
I have.
There are incredible differences between now and the Bush years. The economy is not slowing down anymore. There is an uptick in employment. Not big differences, but we are progressing, slowly getting out of the hole that Bush left us in.
Correction to your argument: We are not still in Iraq. Just the embassy and troops to protect them. As of December 31, 2011, all American involvement in war has ceased in Iraq.
We're still in Afghanistan, but it just came out today that all wartime troops will be gone in 2013, leaving only military for training purposes.
Drone attacks in Pakistan have been objected to by the Pakistan Government. And they have ceased. Just recently.
You talk about sanctions on Iran with talks of bombing them. Partially true. Sanctions are ongoing, along with other nations, against them. The talk of bombing Iran is not coming from President Obama nor anyone in his administration. That talk of bombing is directly linked to Tea/Republican Party politicians only.
Another correction: After a request for help from the Arab League, and in conjunction with NATO, America became involved in a limited campaign to help the Libyan freedom fighters. And it worked. Our cost? Just about one billion dollars. It was the thing to do. Because we are a part of the United Nations. To do nothing would have been worse.
I don't understand how you blame Egypt on the American Government. Perhaps in the past we provided aid to Mubarak, but we do that with other countries we altogether don't agree with. It's just how things work when you are a superpower. But in fairness to President Obama, he did call for him to step down, offering solidarity with the people of Egypt and their decision how to run their country.
None of your things you bring up make sense. They are just generalities that mean nothing, but by saying them it's supposed to fit your agenda.
One thing for sure, Mr. Paul could not have done any better in foreign affairs than President Obama has.
Actually, if Mr. Paul got involved, we would have ended up somewhere else than the forward progress we are seeing now.
Question for GOPReallySUX:
Why is it that when you type the truth here in comments, there are right wing nutnoids that take the facts you have pointed out, twist them around, spout them back to you, and make you sound like you are Charles Manson and bent on nothing but the decline of America and world destruction all of a sudden?
I swear to Christ that some of these comments on LV Sun articles are pretty much the same as when Admiral Turner Joy faced when he sat across from the Korea People's Army (KPA from north Korea) and the Chinese People's Volunteers (CPV) negotiators in the early 1950s, trying to hammer out a truce agreement to end the conflict on the Korean Peninsula. Said negotiations took approximately TWO YEARS to figure out. Mostly because KPA/CPV were hardheaded and kept wanting more and more and more and more and most concessions they could get.
I just think it's incredibly hilarious how you have to fight to get the truth out there all the time. And the truth is the truth. Can't be anything but that.
To some of the commenters out there, it's just about the same as trying to explain to a caveman what the hell a wheel is.
Capitalism is an economic system and not social. In its simplest form, it is survival of the fittest. One of it's many unregulated forms can produce poverty, sweat shops, child labor, child slaves, deadly working conditions, dictators and killers, who are among the many in its ranks.
Slavery is an institution that survived nearly 240 years in the 'land of the Free', simply because property rights had a priority over human rights...and this can also be a form of Capitalism.
Ron Paul thinks he is going to 'Fix' the Capitalistic system by eliminating or re-designing the Federal Reserve. Paul ignores wars like Iraq without justification, which are used to enrich the contractors. Paul ignores the thieves at the head of American Financial empires that created this destructive recession and instead, focuses on the Federal Reserve as the 'root of the problem'.
Ron Paul lives in La-La land and could never know what he is looking at, like so many other tulip brained minds from Texas.
KillerB: "Paul has a very good point. The promise of our Fifth Amendment is "No person shall be ... deprived of life ... without due process if law."
How would you assure due process of law in Pakistan? Will you be setting up an American Tribunal or Military Court in Pakistan or leaving those tasks to the Pakistanis?
Bin Laden could no more experience due process of law in Pakistan then Adolf Hitler could among his native countrymen in an imaginary post war Germany that ran without the presence of the Allied Military. After the Nazi leaders were tried and put to death, or committed suicide, their bodies were usually burned and the ashes scattered to prevent pilgrimages by thousands to their burial sites. Nazi leaders are still idolized in Germany today.
The Taliban can't wait to take Afghanistan back after NATO leaves and they will bring in their own form of justice, not ours.
"Since the 2008 financial crisis, the Fed has tripled the money supply. And ever since, gold obsessives like Paul have been predicting rapid inflation. But it hasn't happened -- inflation has been about 1.5 percent per year -- because the economy has been so depressed."
So if it hasn't caused inflation (by becoming part of the usable money supply), where has that money gone? Perhaps exclusively to the banks to cover losses from the 2008 financial crisis.
BTW: It was Fed actions (and the promise of action) that caused the ever-increasing risky behavior by the banks (including Freddie and Fannie). This lead to the 2008 financial crisis.
Let's see; I think you don't go to the supermarket and buy milk or grain products if you think inflation is at 1.5%..it is what CAUSED the Arab spring....And it was Woodrow Wilson who signed the Federal Reserve Act in 1913. This is what he said afterward: don't believe me then GOOGLE IT: http://www.salon.com/2007/12/21/woodrow_...
Last I checked Woodrow Wilson was a Democrat; on OUR SIDE; the 99% you cretin churl....
This following quote from the editorial is ridiculous,
To start with, inflation is not a problem right now. The Fed has effectively controlled inflation since Paul Volcker, who was appointed by President Jimmy Carter, began to rein in inflation 30 years ago.
The current inflation stats are understated, you can go to shadowstats.com to see the real figures. The currently suppressed interest rates allow people like myself to game the system by borrowing at less than the inflation rate (my last loan was at 3%) and invest in higher yielding assets. The big banks have it even easier as they can borrow at nearly 0% and do the same thing. If the Federal Reserve were ended, this gravy train would cease and the knowledgeable and wealthier wouldn't be able to stealthily take money from those on fixed incomes and the middle class. The bank bailouts were even a more egregious theft of money from the average citizen.
I have no problem with the current rigged system continuing, but the average U.S. citizen would be better off if it ended. Convincing them of this is a different matter.
SunJon: "Capitalism is an economic system and not social." This is the only thing you got right. As for the rest; capitalism has delivered more out of poverty than any other system ever has or ever will. Child labor was a way to help support the family. The alternative was scratching in the dirt for daily survival. And, it was capitalism and with its increases in productivity which was reducing the need for child labor before any legislation was passed. It was also those productivity increases and the need to lower production costs which helped create a safer workplace, and not OSHA.
Ah, but then you really step in it. Realize that the unjustified war in Iraq--and all other needless wars on foreign soil--could only be funded by the Fed. And that the thievery in the financial sector would not have been possible without the Fed's massive credit expansion in the first place.
Don't people understand that without the Fed, gov't wouldn't be able to sustain the out-of-control spending. It couldn't fund the military occupations on foreign soils. It wouldn't be able to facilitate the transfer (destruction) of wealth from the hard-working people of this country. It couldn't destroy our savings or lower the standard of living of the 99%. Or, that it would effectively put in check the increased power that our elitist political classes usurp year after year.
This is the epitome of mainstream thinking in this country. It's all about the political rhetoric, and a severe lack of economic understanding. This is where the term "sheeple" originates, folks.
The only glimmer of hope that I can see, and which I find refreshing, is that I'm seeing more and more Austrian views popping up.
Wow. So many problems with this story. I think much of the problem is that most people don't understand how inflation occurs/works and what it means to the average citizen. For those who want to tie it to the decreasing value of their homes, they'd better study the law of supply and demand, as well as how inflation affects jobs, and what fewer jobs/higher unemployment does to an oversupply of homes.
Deflation is neither bad nor good by definition. What the author fails to speak about is what happens when a currency supply contracts in an economy. He is correct when stating that the price of goods typically decreases. Historically, when the price of goods decreases, money pours in from foreign economies to purchase those cheaper goods. This also helps to drive an economy upward. However, in a debt ridden economy, like ours... deflation means that fix debt becomes relatively more expensive, because you have to pay a fixed debt with fewer dollars. The issues are complex. But one thing is for sure-- exponential expansion of the currency supply has, throughout history, resulted in one thing and one thing only: the demise of that economy.
To prevent writing a thesis here, I'll spare everyone a lengthy comment. But what I will point out is that one should look more clearly into what is meant by a gold standard. The point of a gold standard is that "currency" (which is technically not money) is back by a tangible "thing" of value. Fiat currency, which is what we use is merely paper currency. It is technically not money because it is not backed by anything of value. Federal Reserve Notes (paper dollars) are debt driven instruments whereby every printed dollar is a debt owed plus interest. Remember, the Treasury must buy the right to print a paper dollar from the Fed. To buy that right-to-print, you must pay back that "borrowed" dollar plus interest... even though that dollar was created from thin air. Thus the term "fiat." Here is the scary part: you must borrow more of those fiat dollars to pay the interest on the ones you've already borrowed - THUS, YOU CAN NEVER GET OUT OF THE DEBT CYCLE. A gold standard would insure that there is something of tangible value to back currency. People would have the option of hedging the inflationary practices of a central bank by trading their fiat currency for something of tangible value, maintaining their buying power. Put another way... if you print more currency (inflation) which makes things more expensive for me to buy, I can trade those worth-less fiat notes for gold which rises in value (a finite commodity backing the fiat currency in circulation will rise in value as more currency is created), therefore maintaining my original buying power.
cont'd
cont'd
In terms of the current true rate of inflation, one place (but not the only place) to take a more accurate look at this is at www.shadowstats.com
I would also suggest that one study up on the differences between Keynesian economics and the Austrian school of economics to better understand some of what Dr Paul speaks about.
To totally dismiss what Dr Paul stands for economically is to throw the baby out with the bathwater simply because you don't necessarily agree with everything he says. This is exactly the type of "black and white, either/or" thinking that has lead this country down the road it is currently on. Alternatively, bringing this topic to the table is far more educational than another Kardashian story.
A big VOTE NO for Mr. Magoo!
what qualifies this author to write about this subject. I cant even begin to dissect this article. There are numerous factual inaccuracies, misconceptions and in some cases misleading statements strewn in every single paragraph.
you hold a position of responsibility because someone might read your drivel and believe it to be true. in the future please refrain from writing about subject you obviously know NOTHING about.
If a hidden agenda is what's at play here, I hope people see through this shameful despicable attempt at a hatchet job/
Wow, inflation is not the problem? Really, well tell that to my pocket book everytime I go to the store to by Milk, Eggs, Butter, you know, all those things we need to live on, oh and don't forget gas, especially gas! I'm sure everyone can relate to that one, even our narrator Mr. Coolican. When was the last time that you were at the store and realized that your dollar doesn't go as far as it did six months ago??? But hey, don't worry, it's not inflation stupid as they all like to say. When you really get down to it, it doesn't take a rocket scientist or a narrator to understand that one, #hello???? Oh one more thing you might want to consider. Once upon a time, many moons ago, and seems like an eternity, my house appraised for $329K, now I will be lucky that it will come in at $200K not to mention the equity I lost as well. Inflation not a problem? Really????
I have read through the comments several times and have concluded that many simply do not understand why Ron Paul takes the positions that he does. It is simply he took an oath of office to defend the Constitution, and his positions are based on a careful analysis of that document. Thus, Ron Paul knows that the Federal Government should not be exercising certain powers that should be only exercised by the States . . . and he wants to shut down those Federal powers, and let the States assume those roles. Ron Paul is a believer is Austrian Economics, as am I, and believes that Keynesian Economic, which provides justification for Government Intervention into the private sector, is simply very wrong. And in matters of Foreign affairs, who on this board will argue with his message of peace with a very strong self defense posture?
Why are you still quoting Parker? Goodness.
The long depression was a period of incredibly rapid rising standards of living and wealth. Production went up, innovation marched on, prices fell and most people were made better off. Farmers and bankers didn't like it very much though because everyone else was doing quite well while they were struggling.
Parker doesn't know his economic history.
Coolican, why don't you talk with other economists besides Parker? George Mason University has a bunch of austrian and non-austrians who can give you a better account of what is going on and why...
yes, I clicked your link. Please stop quoting Parker. He leaves out too much important information. Parker is the reason why everyone should learn economics - so you don't get fooled by economists.
GDP is an imperfect measure of quality of life - especially in the long run. It does not capture rapid the impact of many technological changes.
Government spending also impacts GDP - government spending can prop up GDP by definition (its counted as part of GDP) not that the spending actually helps anyone (it may or may not).
Innovation can also push prices down while also increasing productivity and standard of living. It can also bring down GDP even though people are better off. Oil prices dropped significantly during the long depression - so much so Standard Oil almost single handily put the whaling industry out of business. Oil prices dropped dramatically, even after adjusting for inflation.
Parker would have us believe this is all a bad thing. Nonsense. He's not giving the reader enough information and Coolican doesn't know enough economics to ask the hard questions.
One last thing to consider. The U.S. is backed into a corner with its current monetary policy. It cannot stop its reliance on printed currency (thus increasing inflation) because it has no way of meeting its current financial liabilities (government funded entitlements and particularly its debt). It has to borrow more to simply keep the current lines of credit flowing. You know what happens when you borrow from one credit card to pay the other don't you?
Here's the dilemma. If the U.S. contracts the currency supply (stops printing even more currency, which = greater inflation), and deflation sets in, the first thing that happens is interest rates begin to rise dramatically. Why? Fewer dollars in circulation means they become more expensive, particularly to borrow. This also means more people would default on their debts (per higher interest rates), loans become more expensive (particularly for companies who rely on them to operate) and salaries begin to decrease. The U.S. of, course, would also teeter even closer towards defaulting on its debts. Deflation is less drastic when you are a net producer of goods... which we aren't. Because as foreign countries begin buying the cheaper goods that result from deflation - your economy is stimulated. However, since we are not a net producer, but rather net consumers, any economic benefit from deflation goes down the tubes. However, the pain of deflation is the only reasonable course to salvage what is left. Continued inflation, on the other hand, guarantees total collapse.
The old saying, "stuck between a rock and a hard place" is fitting. No matter how you slice it up, there is only one outcome: pain.
This is why it is of the utmost importance that a country practice sound monetary policy from its inception. Every empire in history that has attempted to operate outside of the most fundamental laws of economics fails to exist today. To think that somehow we are special, or that those laws do not apply to us, borders on sheer narcissism. Better yet, psychopathy.