Posts Tagged ‘Ron Paul’

Ron Paul on Gold

March 12, 2009

Sometimes when I get an idea about something to post, I find that someone has said it infinitely better than I could.

This is one of those times.  Read this from Ron Paul – which I copied from a DailyReckoning.com email unashamedly because they took it from Paul’s website.  🙂 There’s a link to it at the bottom of the post.  (I voted for Dr. Paul, but not enough others did.  Just think about how great it would be if we had elected him!)

Enjoy!

gk

IN GOVERNMENT WE TRUST? (PARTS 1, 2 AND 3)
By Congressman Ron Paul

Many who agree with me on a lot of other issues, do not understand my enthusiasm for gold and sound money or why I spend so much time studying and talking about monetary policy. It’s true that I talk about money differently than most, but the fact is sound money offers many benefits. For example – peace.

Can sound money really bring about peace? Actually, it plays a big part in peaceful international relationships. Money based on commodities, rather than paper, is not subject to government manipulation, and is a key component to free and honest trade. History shows that if countries engage in trade with each other, their governments tend to find ways to get along for the same reason you do not kill your customers at your place of business, even if they occasionally annoy you. If someone outright cheats you, however, you may engage in “war” by taking them to court, for example, and the relationship will sour. Governments and central banks with unfettered power to manipulate currency also have the ability to cheat their creditors. One way they do this is to simply create enough currency to pay off debts. This devalues the currency and “cheats” the recipient out of what they are owed. It would not be fair if you watered down your product the way our government waters down its currency, so it is not hard to understand, in these simplified terms, why loose monetary policy contributes so much to ill will and war around the world.

Sound money, on the other hand, simply is what it is. Removing governmental power to manipulate money, removes the temptation for government to spend, print and cheat. Sound money ensures that our government’s spending priorities would be brought into sharp focus and reduced to only what we can afford.

Sound money also limits the ability to wage wars of aggression. Imagine how much more careful Washington would have to be about starting a war if they did not have this financial sleight of hand at their disposal! Fiat currency allows government do expensive things they should not be doing while paying the bills with cheap money. The Federal Reserve has lately been auctioning off large amounts of treasury bills as a way to finance the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and our crushing entitlement burden. The resulting devaluation of the dollar is quickly eroding our image as a good trading partner in the world. As a consequence, there is therefore more talk of economic isolation and war.

This vicious cycle of spending, fighting and inflating is not what Americans want. It is what the government wants, and it has had to deceive the citizens into allowing and supporting it. Sound money curbs the government’s ability to engage in these shenanigans and reduces the wars we fight to only truly defensive ones, for which Americans are more than willing to stand and fight. So in these ways, sound money is very conducive to peace.

Another benefit of sound money is financial security.

Can sound money give you financial security? There is something very comforting in knowing that what you earn today will retain its purchasing power in the years to come. Indeed, the same silver dime that bought a loaf of bread in the 1960’s can still buy a loaf of bread with its precious metal content – which is worth about $1.00 today. An ounce of gold has always been about evenly exchangeable for a finely tailored men’s suit, which these days is roughly $800. And in these days of fluctuating gas prices, when priced in gold, oil has been stable. Meanwhile, since the creation of the Federal Reserve, the fiat dollar has lost 94 percent of its purchasing power. The erosion of purchasing power rapidly accelerated when it was completely uncoupled from gold in 1971. This sort of fluctuation in the medium of exchange creates a lot of uncertainty in the marketplace and necessitates that you either take extraordinary defensive maneuvers, or face financial ruin. Trusting in government for financial security in retirement is not a safe option. Indeed, a recent study by the Consumer Bankruptcy Project shows that bankruptcies among those 75 and older has more than quadrupled since 1991. This represents wealth and savings that have been eroded by inflation, and trust in entitlement promises that were more fantasy than reality. Even with the pittance that social security pays to seniors, it is bankrupt and bringing the economy to its knees. It is no wonder that many in the younger generations want no part of it, and they should not be forced into a failed system.

On the other hand, holding physical gold can defend against aggressive government monetary policies that threaten to inflate away the value of your life savings. During the hyperinflation in post WWI Germany, what used to be a comfortable nest egg was suddenly the value of a postage stamp. If one held just a portion of their savings in precious metals, the crisis was greatly softened. Gold will never be worth nothing, even if the exact price fluctuates. There is a famous photograph, however, of a German woman during this time period burning piles of tightly bound banknotes to keep warm.

Imagine if the money you earned had honest, stable value, or even appreciated like an investment! No such special measures, like converting dollars to gold, would be required to ensure that your savings would sustain you in your golden years. That is the way it could be and is supposed to be. However, the government’s thirst for power will not be easily, or cheaply, quenched. Fiat currency is one tool governments have to extract wealth quietly from the working class. It is time for the people to wake up to this ruse and look to the Constitution to restore sound currency.

Sound money keeps government spending in check, keeps trade fair and honest, which reduces the temptations, and many underlying causes, for governments to wage wars. It also gives you the peace of mind of knowing that your savings will be able to sustain you in your retirement.

So if sound money is such a good thing, what is stopping people from simply trading with each other in gold and silver? Why are you still being paid in fiat dollars, and why can’t you pay for gas in gold? The answer is that the government has enacted policies that provide considerable stumbling blocks to such transactions.

One of the main stumbling blocks is Federal legal tender laws, which state that government-controlled fiat currency MUST be accepted for many kinds of monetary transactions. In light of this, Gresham’s Law takes effect. Gresham’s Law states that bad money drives out good money. Meaning, if someone is forced to accept your bad money, it is to your advantage to pass it off, like a hot potato, in exchange for something of value. Any good money you have, you will hoard. Eventually, real money is driven out of circulation and under people’s mattresses, so to speak. In the absence of legal tender laws, people are free to accept the medium of exchange of their choice, and are likely to insist on payment in something of real value.

Related to legal tender laws, contracts in gold are not enforced. Meaning if two parties agree to exchange goods or services for gold, and end up in a dispute, the courts will simply settle the dispute in Federal Reserve notes. While gold clauses have been legally enforceable since the late 1970’s the fact remains that disputes over gold clauses might well be resolved in court with a dollar figure calculated in terms of Federal Reserve Notes. In the recently decided case of 216 Jamaica Ave v. S&R Playhouse, which reversed a district court decision, the court upheld the enforceability of a gold clause, but sent the case back to the district court to decide what obligations the gold clause imposed on the defendant. It is not inconceivable that this will result in a decision that the value of the “gold coin” referred to could be valued by the court in terms of Federal Reserve Notes, not in terms of ounces of gold. Furthermore, given the federal government’s actions against Robert Kahre (the Nevada businessman who paid his employees at the legal tender face value of gold bullion coins) it is obvious that the government is still waging a war on gold. Whether either of these cases establishes a precedent remains to be seen. Additionally, because 31 USC 5103 establishes Federal Reserve Notes as legal tender, it would likely take a court challenge to determine whether a gold clause or legal tender law takes precedence.

Governments should do very little, in my estimation, but it should enforce contracts and property rights through the courts. But in this instance it shirks this basic duty, when it comes to gold, as one way to keep control of our economy and the medium of exchange. One is also expected to pay sales tax on the purchase of gold. This is as ludicrous as if you paid sales tax at the bank when you converted dollars into quarters! The IRS also expects you to pay capital gains tax on gold, which is so backwards, since gains on gold really represent decline in the value of the dollar!

Legal tender laws should be repealed at the Federal level. Congress has the Constitutional duty to protect the integrity of our money. However, since it has passed this duty off, and the Federal Reserve has only debased our currency, Congress should no longer force Americans to do business in dollars if they would prefer to transact in gold, or silver, or cigarettes or seashells, for that matter. Free people should be free to associate and do business in ways that benefit them. Instead they are forced to use the unstable dollar to their own detriment, and the benefit the government.

Regards,

Ron Paul
for The Daily Reckoning

Editor’s Note: The above was reprinted from Congressman Paul’s weekly column, “Texas Straight Talk”. You can find this, and more, here.

We should've elected Ron Paul

February 6, 2009

Ron Paul knows economics.  He knows how the free market system is supposed to work.  I say “supposed to” because we haven’t had a free market system in the US for almost 100 years.

And yet people say the dumbest things, like “this proves the free market system doesn’t work without regulation” and “we need more regulation of the banks” like they have a clue what they’re talking about.

Yes, this rant has a point.  I’ll get there.

As a country, we have now spent over $3 trillion on bailing out idiots – both individual and corporate – with absolutely nothing to show for it.  Now Obama is saying that any delay in passing his almost $900,000,000,000 bailout plan is “inexcusable and irresponsible“.

Please look at the balloon tags on the right of this web page.  By far the largest (which shows that it’s been used more than any other tag) is “Bush is an idiot”.  I’ve made dozens of posts where I detail why Bush sucked as President.  I wanted to mention that before I get flamed by Obamaniacs saying that I’m a pissed off Republican.

I’m not.  I’m a pissed off US Citizen who can’t believe that this is the path that people of our country want to go down.  I wonder whatever happened to individual responsibility.  I wonder whatever happened to the free market economy.  I wonder if we can ever eliminate the thousands of areas of government interference in our daily lives.  I wonder if we can ever again have a federal government that governs within the rules set forth in the Constitution – no more, no less.

I wonder all this because I happened upon the text of a speech tonight.  It’s a speech that Ron Paul made on the floor of the US House of Representatives on February 3rd, just 3 short days ago.  None of it is new – Dr. Paul has been talking about it for years – but I think it speaks to the problems we are facing today (Feb 6th, 2009) better than any blatant pandering by Obama or the Republicans.

His speech is available online here, but I’m going to quote it in it’s entirety because it’s part of the public record, and I support what he says 100%.   I fear that it’ll be a cold day in hell before anything Ron Paul proposes is adopted into law, but who knows – maybe one day the people of this country will wake up and demand a real solution – not simply rhectoric and irresponsible spending.

Here’s the speech.  Enjoy!

gk

Statement of Congressman Ron Paul

United States House of Representatives

Statement on Federal Reserve Board Abolition Act February 3, 2009

Madame Speaker, I rise to introduce legislation to restore financial stability to America’s economy by abolishing the Federal Reserve. Since the creation of the Federal Reserve, middle and working-class Americans have been victimized by a boom-and-bust monetary policy. In addition, most Americans have suffered a steadily eroding purchasing power because of the Federal Reserve’s inflationary policies. This represents a real, if hidden, tax imposed on the American people.

From the Great Depression, to the stagflation of the seventies, to the current economic crisis caused by the housing bubble, every economic downturn suffered by this country over the past century can be traced to Federal Reserve policy. The Fed has followed a consistent policy of flooding the economy with easy money, leading to a misallocation of resources and an artificial “boom” followed by a recession or depression when the Fed-created bubble bursts.

With a stable currency, American exporters will no longer be held hostage to an erratic monetary policy. Stabilizing the currency will also give Americans new incentives to save as they will no longer have to fear inflation eroding their savings. Those members concerned about increasing America’s exports or the low rate of savings should be enthusiastic supporters of this legislation.

Though the Federal Reserve policy harms the average American, it benefits those in a position to take advantage of the cycles in monetary policy. The main beneficiaries are those who receive access to artificially inflated money and/or credit before the inflationary effects of the policy impact the entire economy. Federal Reserve policies also benefit big spending politicians who use the inflated currency created by the Fed to hide the true costs of the welfare-warfare state. It is time for Congress to put the interests of the American people ahead of special interests and their own appetite for big government.

Abolishing the Federal Reserve will allow Congress to reassert its constitutional authority over monetary policy. The United States Constitution grants to Congress the authority to coin money and regulate the value of the currency. The Constitution does not give Congress the authority to delegate control over monetary policy to a central bank. Furthermore, the Constitution certainly does not empower the federal government to erode the American standard of living via an inflationary monetary policy.

In fact, Congress’ constitutional mandate regarding monetary policy should only permit currency backed by stable commodities such as silver and gold to be used as legal tender. Therefore, abolishing the Federal Reserve and returning to a constitutional system will enable America to return to the type of monetary system envisioned by our nation’s founders: one where the value of money is consistent because it is tied to a commodity such as gold. Such a monetary system is the basis of a true freemarket economy.

In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to stand up for working Americans by putting an end to the manipulation of the money supply which erodes Americans’ standard of living, enlarges big government, and enriches well-connected elites, by cosponsoring my legislation to abolish the Federal Reserve.

Why Ron Paul Scares the GOP

March 26, 2008

Excellent writeup in TIME Magazine (of all places!) last week regarding Ron Paul and what he stands for.   Too bad more Americans weren’t exposed to him during the campaign, and I personally don’t think the idea of returning to a sound currency is “wacky.”

Here’s a quote from the story: “But he is an extremist — partly in the Barry Goldwater extremism-in-defense-of-liberty-is-no-vice sense of the word, but also in the wacky let’s-relitigate-the-currency-debates-of-the-1820s sense of the word. The late William F. Buckley wanted conservatives to stand athwart history yelling stop; Paul seems to want to slam history into reverse. The guy genuinely wants to abolish the Federal Reserve and start circulating gold again.

For those of you not familiar with Ron Paul, I encourage you to read the story and check out his website.

gk

Ron Paul Looking Ahead

January 4, 2008

After finishing in fifth place in Iowa with just 10% of the vote, Ron Paul is looking ahead to New Hampshire, where he’s getting the support of about 7% of voters in the polls.  Given that New Hampshire’s motto is “Live Free or Die” Paul supporters hope that he’ll at least double those numbers and receive about 15% in the GOP primary next Tuesday.  Personally, I don’t think 15% will be enough to get him recognized as a “top tier” candidate, and I believe he needs to pull in 20% or more before he’ll be taken seriously.

However, Dr Paul does has the money to stay in until at least Super Tuesday.  Supporters have a blimp floating around New Hampshire, TV ads in South Carolina are starting, (you can watch the ad titled “Defender of Freedom” here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4AmY-fW3gdc) and according to Reuters at http://www.reuters.com/article/pressRelease/idUS12688+05-Jan-2008+BW20080105, Paul has a new radio ad that will be airing in Alabama, California, Colorado, Georgia, Florida, Louisiana, Maine and North Dakota.  The 60 second radio ad can be heard here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qvY7KzPTdfE

After New Hampshire comes South Carolina and Nevada, then the big Super Tuesday contests in 22 states.  Ron Paul needs a good showing in at least one of them before Super Tuesday in order to be considered a serious candidate in this front loaded primary season.  At least that’s my considered opinion – what do you think?

gk

South Carolina 

Early Iowa Results

January 3, 2008

Based on what CNN and FOXNews are reporting, it looks like Huckabee will be the winner in Iowa with about 31% of the vote, followed by Romney at 23%, Thompson at 13%, McCain at 12%, Giuliani at 11%, Paul at 10%, and Hunter with less than 1%. That’s with about 40% of the precincts reporting. If these results stand, Huckabee and Romney have to be considered the front runners, with the foursome of Thompson, McCain, Giuliani, and Paul as second tier candidates – at best.

Since I had expected Paul’s supporters to be more motivated and possibly show up in higher numbers than others on a cold evening, I have to admit that I’m very disappointed in his (current) 5th place standing. That’s not going to get him into any debates, and it certainly isn’t going to build any momentum going into next week’s New Hampshire primary.

Maybe there will be a surprise later when more precincts report – but I don’t expect it.

gk

GOP Presidential Race

December 29, 2007

Ok, any opinions on who’s going to be the GOP candidate?  Since I think the federal government does way too much anyway – things that it doesn’t have the Consitutional authority to do – I’m thinking Ron Paul is getting my vote on February 5th.  I especially like his thoughts on monetary policy, and I agree that we should get rid of a bunch of agencies in Washington.  

 I’m curious to see what opinions I get here.  It’s a brand new blog, so there’s no history to plow through to see how others feel – tell me what you think.  I’ll post something later which tells a bit about me, my background, and why you should give a damn about what I think. 🙂 

gk