Ron Paul Liberty Report
  • Home
  • Archives
  • About

Ron Paul Classic: Blame The Fed For The Housing Crash

9/23/2015

 
Picture
By Norm Singleton

This month marks the eight-year anniversary of the bursting of the housing bubble and the resulting stock market downturn. Following the crash, Congress passed the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act, which authorized the use of taxpayer funds to bailout powerful corporations. As President Bush so memorably put it: “I’ve abandoned free-market principles to save the free market system.”

The atmosphere on Capitol Hill following the crash was almost as hysterical as what followed September 11th. In both cases, the panicked atmosphere resulted in the passage of hastily written legislation.

Sadly, but not surprisingly, the failure of the so-called "Emergency Economic Stabilization Act" to stabilize the economy did not stop Congress and the Fed from their unprecedented program of bailouts, stimulus spending, and money creation.  As those who understand economics predicted, this attempt to spend-and-inflate our way to prosperity has failed miserably, although it has benefited Wall Street, the Big Banks, and well-connected crony capitalists. This is why none other than Donald Trump once said that Quantitative Easing is a "great deal for guys like me."

Of course the American people still do not know the full truth about what, if any, plans the Federal Reserve has to bailout Wall Street, the big banks, and foreign governments in the (inevitable) event of a major crash. This is why Campaign for Liberty is pushing for a Senate vote on Audit the Fed this year.

Here is Ron Paul's official statement on the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act:


Madam Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to this bill. This is only going to make the problem that much worse. The problem came about because we spent too much; we borrowed too much, and we printed too much money; we inflated too much, and we overregulated. This is all that this bill is about is more of the same. So you can't solve the problem. We are looking at a symptom. We are looking at the collapsing of a market that was unstable. It was unstable because of the way it came about. It came about because of a monopoly control of money and credit by the Federal Reserve System, and that is a natural consequence of what happens when a Federal Reserve System creates too much credit. 

Now, there have been a fair number of free market economists around who have predicted this would happen. Yet do we look to them for advice? No. We totally exclude them. We don't listen to them. We don't look at them. We look to the people who created the problem, and then we perpetuate the problem. The most serious mistake that could be made here today is to blame free market capitalism for this problem. This has nothing to do with free market capitalism. This has to do with a managed economy, with an inflationary system, with corporatism, and with a special interest system. It has nothing to do with the failure of free markets and capitalism. Yet we're resorting now, once again, to promoting more and more government. Long term, this is disastrous because of everything we're doing here and because of everything we've done for 6 months. We've already pumped in $700 billion. 

Here is another $700 billion. This is going to destroy the dollar. That's what you should be concerned about. Yes, Wall Street is in trouble. There are a lot of problems, and if we don't vote for this, there are going to be problems. Believe me: If you destroy the dollar, you're going to destroy a worldwide economy, and that's what we're on the verge of doing, and it is inevitable, if we continue this, that that's what's going to happen. It's going to be a lot more serious than what we're dealing with today. We need to get our house in order. We need more oversight--that is a certainty--but we need oversight of the Federal Reserve System, of the Exchange Stabilization Fund and of the President's Working Group on Financial Markets. Find out what they're doing. How much have they been meddling in the market?

What we're doing today is going to make things much worse. The process of this bailout reminds me of a panic-stricken swimmer thrashing in the water only making his situation worse. Even a ``bipartisan deal''--whatever that is supposed to mean--will not stop the Congress from thrashing about. The beneficiaries of the corrupt monetary system of the last 3 decades are now desperately looking for victims to stick with the bill after they have reaped decades of profit and privilege. The difficulties in our economy will continue because the legislative and the executive branches have not yet begun to address the real problems. The housing bubble's collapse, as was the dot corn bubble's collapse, was predictable and is merely a symptom of the monetary system that brought us to this point. 


Indeed, we do face a major crisis, but it is much bigger than the freezing up of Wall Street and dealing with worthless assets on the books of major banks. The true crisis is the pending collapse of the fiat dollar system that emerged after the breakdown of the Bretton Woods agreement in 1971. For 37 years the world built a financial system based on the dollar as the reserve currency of the world in an attempt to make the dollar serve as the new standard of value. However since 1971, the dollar has had no intrinsic value, as it is not tied to gold. The dollar is simply a fiat currency, which has fluctuated in value on a daily, if not hourly, bias. This worked to some degree until the market realized that too much debt and malinvestment existed and a correction was required. Because of our economic and military strength, compared to other countries, trust in America's currency lasted longer than deserved. This resulted in the biggest worldwide economic distortion in all of history.

The problem is much bigger than the fears of a temporary decline on Wall Street if the bailout is not agreed to. Money's most important function is to serve as a means of exchange--a measurement of value. If this crucial yardstick is not stable, it becomes impossible for investors, entrepreneurs, savers, and consumers to make correct decisions; these mistakes create the bubble that must eventually be corrected. Just imagine the results if a construction company was forced to use a yardstick whose measures changed daily to construct a skyscraper. The result would be a very unstable and dangerous building. No doubt the construction company would try to cover up their fundamental problem with patchwork repairs, but no amount of patchwork can fix a building with an unstable inner structure. Eventually, the skyscraper will collapse, forcing the construction company to rebuild--hopefully this time with a stable yardstick. This $700 billion package is more patchwork repair and will prove to be money down a rat hole and will only make the dollar crisis that much worse. But what politicians are willing to say that the financial ``skyscraper''--the global financial and monetary system-is a house of cards. 

It is not going to happen at this juncture. They're not even talking about this. They talk only of bailouts, more monetary inflation, more special interest spending, more debt, and more regulations. There is almost no talk of the relationship of the Community Reinvestment Act, HUD, and government assisted loans to the housing bubble. And there is no talk of the oversight that is desperately needed for the Federal Reserve, the Exchange Stabilization Fund, and all the activities of the President's Working Group on financial markets. 

When these actions are taken we will at last know that Congress is serious about the reforms that are really needed. In conclusion, there are three good reasons why Congress should reject this legislation: It is immoral--Dumping bad debt on the innocent taxpayers is an act of theft and is wrong. It is unconstitutional--There is no constitutional authority to use government power to serve special interests. It is bad economic policy--By refusing to address the monetary system while continuing to place the burdens of the bailout on the dollar, we can be certain that in time, we will be faced with another, more severe crisis when the market figures out that there is no magic government bailout or regulation that can make a fraudulent monetary system work. 

Monetary reform will eventually come, but, unfortunately, Congress' actions this week make it more likely the reform will come under dire circumstances, such as the midst of a worldwide collapse of the dollar. The question then will be how much of our liberties will be sacrificed in the process. Just remember what we lost in the aftermath of 9-11. The best result we can hope for is that the economic necessity of getting our fiscal house in order will, at last, force us to give up our world empire. Without the empire we can then concentrate on rebuilding the Republic.
This article was originally published at The Campaign For Liberty.

Ron Paul: "I see a tremendous opportunity for homeschooling"

9/22/2015

 
Picture
By Ron Paul

Homeschooling is very important to me. That’s why I responded so favorably to both Tom Woods and Gary North on putting the Ron Paul Curriculum together. Of all the things that I do, even politically, I’ve always concentrated on education. Politics was an educational bully pulpit for me. On it’s own, politics is rather annoying.

If the Ron Paul Curriculum does what I expect and anticipate, it could be one of the most important things that I have done. It doesn’t happen overnight, however. Work on the program has taken place over a couple of years now, and things are growing steadily. The curriculum has spread by word-of-mouth thus far. Parents don’t have to be wealthy, as people with modest incomes have been signing up.

I sincerely believe that the Ron Paul Curriculum is an answer to counter all the misinformation that we get from government schools. I believe that we’re living in a time where we’re going through a transition. We’re seeing the failure of government education, foreign policy, and welfare. 

It’s all going down the tubes. 

That’s why I see a tremendous opportunity for homeschooling.

Please visit the Ron Paul Curriculum to see if it can be of value to you or anyone in your family.

Thank you, and be sure to tune in tomorrow to the Liberty Report!



As Greeks Return To Barter, The Lies of Government Money Are Laid Bare

9/21/2015

 
By Chris Rossini

The New York Times reports:
As Greece grapples with a continued downturn, bartering is gaining traction at the margins of the economy, part of a collection of worrisome signs for Prime Minister Alexis Tsipras who was re-elected on Sunday.

Graphic artists are exchanging designs for olive oil. Accountants swap advice for office supplies. In the agricultural heartland and on the Greek islands, informal bartering, which has historically helped communities survive, has intensified as more people exchange fruits, vegetables, other crops, equipment, clothing and services.

Let us not forget the images as well, of Greeks finding out that they have been swindled by their government and banks:
Picture
How can this be?

Millions of people believe that the money in their possession is (in fact) theirs, and yet one day they wake up to find that the monetary system is a giant government scam! The banks don't have their hard earned money!

Imagine taking a family heirloom, like an antique clock, to a storage facility. In your mind, the clock is absolutely your property, and you pay the storage facility a fee for keeping it safe for you. Then one day, you go to pick-up your clock, and the storage facility tells you "Sorry, it's gone." 

The clock wasn't stolen by a bunch of street bandits. There was no Ocean's Eleven type break-in. No, the storage facility just decided to lend it out, and now it's not coming back! However you never gave permission for the storage facility to lend out your clock. In fact, your understanding was that you could come to pick up the clock any day that you pleased. It would always be there (in storage) waiting for you. Do you think the storage facility would get away with such fraud? Better yet, would it ever be "legal"?

Sadly, government's monopolized money "system" works the same way....Yes even in America. In fact, especially in America. The moment that you put your money into the government's banking "system", you're surrendering it. 

Government blows a smoke screen in your face by saying that you're "insured" up to $250 thousand. But that's about as true as government signs outside of schools that say they are "Drug Free". 
In other words, it's not true at all!

When the scam is ultimately exposed (and there has never been an exception in mankind's entire history) people are forced to return to barter....chickens for medical care....tomatoes for sticks of butter. 
Government shoves people back into primitive times.

Such is happening in Greece right now. It's a shame, it doesn't have to happen. People don't have to trust government, and allow it to monopolize money. But government is very good at generating fear of any alternatives. How will you survive without government lording over you?

Free market money (such as gold & silver) are the time-tested solution to this cycle of madness. They're always patiently waiting in the wings, just standing by to be re-discovered. Time is not against them. They have all the time in the world. They've been here since the beginning of time, and they're not going anywhere.

Governments cannot create gold and silver. They cannot type into a keyboard and conjure them out of thin air, like they can do with dollars, or euros. If government wants another war, or to dole out more welfare, it types into a keyboard. Gold and silver would severely limit them.

Governments hate gold and silver. They will do anything and everything 
to make sure that the people believe in their "system" instead.

Those that do, continue to weep.


Blame America? No, Blame Neocons!

9/20/2015

 
Picture
By Ron Paul

Is the current refugee crisis gripping the European Union “all America’s fault”? That is how my critique of US foreign policy was characterized in a recent interview on the Fox Business Channel. I do not blame the host for making this claim, but I think it is important to clarify the point.

It has become common to discount any criticism of US foreign policy as “blaming America first.” It is a convenient way of avoiding a real discussion. If aggressive US policy in the Middle East – for example in Iraq – results in the creation of terrorist organizations like al-Qaeda in Iraq, is pointing out the unintended consequences of bad policy blaming America? Is it “blaming America” to point out that blowback – like we saw on 9/11 – can be the result of unwise US foreign policy actions like stationing US troops in Saudi Arabia?

In the Fox interview I pointed out that the current refugee crisis is largely caused by bad US foreign policy actions. The US government decides on regime change for a particular country – in this case, Syria – destabilizes the government, causes social chaos, and destroys the economy, and we are supposed to be surprised that so many people are desperate to leave? Is pointing this out blaming America, or is it blaming that part of the US government that makes such foolish policies?

Accusing those who criticize US foreign policy of “blaming America” is pretty selective, however. Such accusations are never leveled at those who criticize a US pullback. For example, most neocons argue that the current crisis in Iraq is all Obama’s fault for pulling US troops out of the country. Are they “blaming America first” for the mess? No one ever says that. Just like they never explain why the troops were removed from Iraq: the US demanded complete immunity for troops and contractors and the Iraqi government refused.

Iraq was not a stable country when the US withdrew its troops anyway. As soon as the US stopped paying the Sunnis not to attack the Iraqi government, they started attacking the Iraqi government. Why? Because the US attack on Iraq led to a government that was closely allied to Iran and the Sunnis could not live with that! It was not the US withdrawal from Iraq that created the current instability but the invasion. The same is true with US regime change policy toward Syria. How many Syrians were streaming out of Syria before US support for Islamist rebels there made the country unlivable? Is pointing out this consequence of bad US policy also blaming America first?

Last year I was asked by another Fox program whether I was not “blaming America” when I criticized the increasingly confrontational US stand toward Russia. Here’s how I put it then:


I don't blame America. I am America, you are America. I don't blame you. I blame bad policy. I blame the interventionists. I blame the neoconservatives who preach this stuff, who believe in it like a religion -- that they have to promote American goodness even if you have to bomb and kill people.
In short, I don’t blame America; I blame neocons.

Ron Paul on Fox Business: Migrant crisis is America’s fault

9/19/2015

 

We're Witnessing The Slow Death of The Command Economy

9/18/2015

 
Great myths die hard, and one of the greatest of the last century is the myth that a group of central planners at The Federal Reserve can run an economy.

Hedge Fund manager and Senior Economic Advisor to Rand Paul's 2016 campaign, Mark Spitznagel, appeared on Fox Business to discuss the slow death of The Fed:

Ron Paul on Fox Business: The middle class is being wiped out

9/18/2015

 

If Only the Fed Would Get Out of the Way

9/17/2015

 
Picture
By Rand Paul and Mark Spitznagel

The recent tumult in U.S. equity markets has prompted many analysts to urge the Fed to postpone any increase in interest rates. This advice assumes that rock-bottom interest rates are balm for a weak economy, with the only possible side effect being price inflation. Yet it is the Fed’s artificially low interest rates that set up the economy for the 2008 crisis, not to mention previous crises.

The “doves” are right to point out that higher interest rates will lead to a repricing of many securities, aka a crash. But years of near-zero interest rates have made this inevitable. Continuing on the current course will only allow structural distortions caused by these interest rates to fester and an inevitable reckoning that will be much worse than seven years ago.

The master fallacy underlying so much economic commentary is to imagine that a handful of experts in Washington should be setting the price of borrowing money. Instead, the Fed should set markets free.

In their theory of business cycles, the Austrian economists Ludwig von Mises andFriedrich Hayek explained several decades ago that artificially cheap credit misleads entrepreneurs and investors into doing the wrong things—which in the current financial context includes making unsustainable, levered investments in risky assets, including companies loading up on debt to buy back and boost the price of their stock. Low interest rates may create an illusion of robust markets, but eventually rates spike, assets are suddenly revealed to be too highly priced, and debt unpayable. Many firms have to cut back production or shut down, unemployment rises and the boom goes bust.

The Austrian diagnosis leads to an unorthodox prescription: Rather than provide “stimulus” to boost demand during a slump, the Federal Reserve and Congress should stand aside. Recessions are a painful but necessary corrective process as resources—including labor—are guided toward more sustainable niches, in light of the errors made during the giddy boom period.

In 2000 the stock market, bloated by earlier Fed rate cuts, started falling when the tech bubble burst. Markets bottomed out in 2002, as the Fed slashed rates. Although people hailed then-chairman Alan Greenspan as “the Maestro” for providing a so-called soft landing, in hindsight he simply replaced the dot-com bubble with a housing bubble.

When the housing bubble eventually burst, the crisis was much worse than in 2000. When Lehman Brothers failed in September 2008, it seemed as if the whole financial infrastructure was in jeopardy. And Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke followed the same playbook: cut interest rates.

Read the rest at The Wall Street Journal [Subscription Required]



Used with permission from The Wall Street Journal, WSJ.com. Copyright 2015 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All rights reserved.

Ron Paul on Bloomberg: There Is No Right Fed Decision

9/17/2015

 

The Fed Can't Know What Interest Rates Should Be

9/16/2015

 
Picture
By Ron Paul

I’d like to talk about the silliness of The Federal Reserve. Here we have 12 people, secretly in a room, and they’re pretending to know what interest rates ought to be. The real problem is that they believe they’re smart enough to figure it out. My argument is that they don’t have the vaguest idea what interest rates should be. Nobody in the world knows what they should be!

Just as all prices should be set in the marketplace, it takes hundreds, thousands, and millions of people to buy and sell, as well as borrow and lend, for interest rates to be determined. 

Central bankers merely deceive themselves. I have met Federal Reserve Board members who really believe in this. It’s almost like a religious belief that the world would be totally chaotic if you didn’t have smart people doing central economic planning by manipulating interest rates and the money supply.

I’d like to share a quote from Friedrich Hayek, who is the one and only Austrian economist to win a Nobel Prize. Hayek won that prize in 1974. Interestingly enough, in the early 1980’s, he was in Washington D.C., while I was a member of Congress. I was fortunate enough to have dinner with Hayek, which was really a fascination for me.

Hayek is well known for a statement and concept that he called “The Pretense of Knowledge”: 

"To act on the belief that we possess the knowledge and the power which enable us to shape the processes of society entirely to our liking, knowledge which in fact we do not possess, is likely to make us do much harm."


There can’t be anything more straightforward than that. Hayek has been proven absolutely right. Look at the harm done by The Federal Reserve’s manipulations.

Unfortunately, at the present time, we have socialism in money. However, the markets always win out in the end. We have a tremendous opportunity before us. As the failure of The Federal Reserve becomes more apparent, changes will have to come. 

Hopefully, enough people will be open to the ideas of sound money when that time does, in fact, arrive.


Thank you, and be sure to tune in to tomorrow's Liberty Report!


<<Previous
Forward>>

    RSS Feed

    Archives

    March 2021
    February 2021
    January 2021
    December 2020
    November 2020
    October 2020
    September 2020
    August 2020
    July 2020
    June 2020
    May 2020
    April 2020
    March 2020
    February 2020
    January 2020
    December 2019
    November 2019
    October 2019
    September 2019
    August 2019
    July 2019
    June 2019
    May 2019
    April 2019
    March 2019
    February 2019
    January 2019
    December 2018
    November 2018
    October 2018
    September 2018
    August 2018
    July 2018
    June 2018
    May 2018
    April 2018
    March 2018
    February 2018
    January 2018
    December 2017
    November 2017
    October 2017
    September 2017
    August 2017
    July 2017
    June 2017
    May 2017
    April 2017
    March 2017
    February 2017
    January 2017
    December 2016
    November 2016
    October 2016
    September 2016
    August 2016
    July 2016
    June 2016
    May 2016
    April 2016
    March 2016
    February 2016
    January 2016
    December 2015
    November 2015
    October 2015
    September 2015
    August 2015
    July 2015



  • Home
  • Archives
  • About