By Ron Paul
In her recent address at the Jackson Hole monetary policy conference, Federal Reserve Chair Janet Yellen suggested that the Federal Reserve would raise interest rates by the end of the year. Markets reacted favorably to Yellen’s suggested rate increase. This is surprising, as, except for one small increase last year, the Federal Reserve has not followed through on the numerous suggestions of rate increases that Yellen and other Fed officials have made over the past several years.
Much more significant than Yellen’s latest suggestion of a rate increase was her call for the Fed to think outside the box in developing responses to the next financial crisis. One of the outside the box ideas suggested by Yellen is increasing the Fed’s ability to intervene in markets by purchasing assets of private companies. Yellen also mentioned that the Fed could modify its inflation target.
Increasing the Federal Reserve's ability to purchase private assets will negatively impact economic growth and consumers’ well-being. This is because the Fed will use this power to keep failing companies alive, thus preventing the companies’ assets from being used to produce a good or service more highly valued by consumers.
Investors may seek out companies whose assets have been purchased by the Federal Reserve, since it is likely that Congress and federal regulators would treat these companies as “too big to fail.” Federal Reserve ownership of private companies could also strengthen the movement to force businesses to base their decisions on political, rather than economic, considerations.
Yellen’s suggestion of modifying the Fed’s inflation target means that the Fed would increase the inflation tax just when Americans are trying to cope with a major recession or even a depression. The inflation tax is the most insidious of all taxes because it is both hidden and regressive.
The failure of the Federal Reserve’s eight-year spree of money creation via quantitative easing and historically low interest rates to reflate the bubble economy suggests that the fiat currency system may soon be coming to an end. Yellen’s outside the box proposals will only hasten that collapse.
The collapse of the fiat system will not only cause a major economic crisis, but also the collapse of the welfare-warfare state. Yet, Congress not only refuses to consider meaningful spending cuts, it will not even pass legislation to audit the Fed.
Passing Audit the Fed would allow the American people to know the full truth about the Federal Reserve’s conduct of monetary policy, including the complete details of the Fed’s plans to respond to the next economic crash. An audit will also likely uncover some very interesting details regarding the Federal Reserve’s dealings with foreign central banks.
The large number of Americans embracing authoritarianism — whether of the left or right wing variety — is a sign of mass discontent with the current system. There is a great danger that, as the economic situation worsens, there will be an increase in violence and growing restrictions on liberty. However, public discontent also presents a great opportunity for those who understand free-market economics to show our fellow citizens that our problems are not caused by immigrants, imports, or the one percent, but by the Federal Reserve.
Politicians will never restore sound money or limited government unless forced to do so by either an economic crisis or a shift in public option. It is up to us who know the truth to make sure the welfare-warfare state and the system of fiat money ends because the people have demanded it, not because a crisis left Congress with no other choice.
Where does Ron Paul buy his gold?
Connor Boyack discusses the problems with federally-funded education in the U.S. Is the U.S government prohibiting teachers and students from truly educating and learning? Find out on this segment of the Liberty Report.
There are a lot of misconceptions when it comes to the foreign policy proposals of Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton. Ron Paul's Myth-Busters attempts to clear the air.
By Ron Paul
There's a big difference between national defense and militarism. The former means defending our national borders from an invasion. The latter means to aggressively go out and meddle in the affairs of foreign nations. Our foreign policy of militarism is backfiring, and the idea that we have to "rebuild" a military that is the largest in the world by huge margins is very flawed. I discuss on Fox Business:
By Ron Paul
When it comes to the secretive central planners at the Federal Reserve, who has the better position? Trump or Clinton? I give my opinion on this very important (and very neglected) subject below:
Where does Ron Paul buy his gold?
By Chris Rossini
If there's one thing that can always be counted on, it's that all good will be attacked. If there's a garden somewhere, the weeds are always on their way. The ideas espoused by a critical mass of Americans in 1776 and the principles laid out in the Declaration of Independence fall into that category. Ever since 1776, and up until the present day, those ideas have come under relentless attack both from foreign and domestic antagonists. What remains of those powerful ideas both sustain us and keep our heads above water.
However, the antagonists never stop. They have whittled away at liberty and will continue to do so until it's completely gone (if we let them). A tried and true tactic is to replace the original meaning of words and events. For example, did you know that "Liberals" were originally those individuals who opposed state power and were champions of individual responsibility and liberty? Of course, the modern "Liberal" believes in the exact opposite today. That's just one of many examples where opponents of liberty have co-opted a term or event.
The Statue of Liberty now has a different meaning than it's original. The Statue was a gift from France, and as strange as it may seem to Americans today, it was given in honor of the ideas of 1776.
The great historian Ralph Raico writes:
The statue was a gift from the French people on our hundredth birthday, in 1876. Her name is “Liberty Enlightening the World,” which is why she’s carrying a torch. What she’s enlightening the world with is shown on the book she’s holding in her left hand, marked “1776″–the ideals of the American Revolution and the Declaration of Independence.
Notice the French didn't engrave 1787, the year that U.S. Constitution and a centralized government was created. They definitely had the option. But that wasn't the special year. The creation of a federal government often destroys liberty as power becomes centralized.
The special and very unique year that the French were drawing attention to was 1776. That was the year that powerful declarations were made against power itself.
The antagonists of liberty have now had a solid 240 years to wipe away even what the Statue of Liberty originally stood for. Today, many Americans believe the myth that the statue has to do with "immigration" and "huddled masses."
Ralph Raico again on the truth:
Many people, including some libertarians, misunderstand the significance of the Statue of Liberty. It has nothing to do with immigration, or huddled masses yearning to breathe free (or just yearning to get on the welfare gravy train). That stuff came years afterwards, in a poem by Emma Lazarus tacked on.
The poem from Emma Lazarus was added in 1903 to the Statue of Liberty. The ideas swirling through American minds in 1903 were quite different from those of 1776. This was a time that the weeds of so-called "Progressivism" began to take root. An all-encompassing government coupled with an imperial military empire were sprouting forth.
When the "huddled masses" lines were added to the Statue of Liberty, Theodore Roosevelt, who had an unquenchable lust for war and presidential power, sat at the head of the U.S. government. Needles to say, liberty and the ideas of 1776 were not his thing.
It's now been 100+ years since the weeds of "Progressivism" took root. And as the ancient saying goes: "By their fruits, ye shall know them."
The Statue of Liberty still stands. However, the original intent and meaning behind it have been scrubbed by the opponents of liberty.
They never stop.
Neither should we.
Where does Ron Paul buy his gold?
By Ron Paul
My wife Carol and I join Phyllis Schlafly’s many friends and admirers in mourning her passing and sending our deepest sympathies and prayers to her family. While Phyllis and I did not always see eye-to-eye, we were always willing to work together on those issues—such as protecting the unborn, dismantling the Department of Education, and protecting America’s sovereignty—where we agreed.
Phyllis was also a valued ally of the liberty movement in our battles with the GOP establishment. In 1996, when many Republicans, and even many so–called conservative leaders, were waging a well-funded smear campaign to prevent my return to Congress, Phyllis defied the establishment and endorsed me. In 2012, she stood with my supporters at the Republican convention in opposition to the RNC rules disenfranchising grassroots activists.
I was honored when she asked me to write the foreword to the 50th anniversary of her classic work “A Choice Not an Echo," which details the underhanded tactics used by the establishment, with the support of many inside-the-beltway conservatives, to maintain control of the Republican Party. I hope that the new generation of liberty activists discover this book and learn from Phyllis how to effectively offer the American people a choice of liberty instead of an echo of authoritarianism.
What is it like to be a Jewish citizen of Iran? Today's Liberty Report speaks with an Iranian-American of Jewish background who just spent three months in Iran. His take on Iran is far different from what the neocons want us to believe. His experiences might surprise you.
By Chris Rossini
For eons, governments have practiced dividing and conquering their subjects. Modern-day America is an example of how it's taken to the extreme. The political divisions have become too numerous to keep track of anymore. Say something (anything) and you're bound to offend some group that has designated itself "victim" status. Public apologies have become an almost daily occurrence.
One of the many government apologists at the New York Times, David Brooks, believes that these divisions have run amok.
...this year, it seems, everything has been stripped down to the bone. Politics is dividing along crude identity lines — along race and class. Are you a native-born white or are you an outsider? Are you one of the people or one of the elites?
These are the results of an all-powerful government. It is an unfortunate irony that the "land of the free" has morphed into the "land of government power."
Since government is a monopoly on the legal use of force, the bigger and more aggressive that it becomes, the more people look for an angle to get in control of wielding it. Ultimately, a battle of everyone against everyone must ensue. Either your compartmentalized group uses the violence of government against others, or others will use it against you.
At first, these groups were simple to identify. There were Democrats versus Republicans and Liberals vs. Conservatives. But the distinctions between these groups have all but disappeared. No matter who holds the reins of power, war and welfare ratchet upwards. No one (beyond campaign rhetoric) wants peace, liberty and individual responsibility.
Over the last century, as government gobbled up American liberties, divide and conquer birthed groupings that are based on race, sexuality, gender, age, height, weight, etc.
Because Americans are trained in government schools (that they're conscripted into attending) to always look to government for solutions, no human act is permissible without some kind of bureaucratic touch. If there's a problem, every American is conditioned to first reach for the healing power of the apparatchik.
Ultimately, people start to making up imaginary rights for themselves, like "gay rights" and "women's rights" and "minority rights". There are now claimed rights to another person's labor, like a "right to healthcare" and "right to a college education."
Cries for aggressive government force against "sexism" and "racism" and "ageism" reach a high pitch. Meanwhile, the government itself practices these very things with everyone's approval. Government wants to know the minutest details about everyone so that it can get the "black vote" or the "gay vote" or the "hispanic vote".
As reality keeps getting pushed further and further away from the conscious mind, government gets exactly what it wants (i.e., everyone looking to it for everything).
The whole process of divide and conquer must decay into a form of tongue-tied chaos, where no one knows what to think, what opinions to hold, who they can hire, who they can fire, what they can say, or what they can do.
There is another option to this nightmare, but Americans must sober up from this government power stupor. That option is liberty. It is the principle of "live and let live." No aggressive force against your neighbor. Likewise, your neighbor cannot (legally) use aggressive force against you.
No freebies. No attempts to get something for nothing. If it's wrong for you to walk to your neighbors house to steal his property, it's wrong for a third-party (government) to do it on your behalf. Theft is morally wrong even if you're not directly ripping the property from your neighbor's hands.
Despite the government albatross, we still see hints of how voluntary interactions work in the marketplace. You can go to the store and exchange property voluntarily with others. If you go to a retailer, you're most likely not concerned with the political opinions of the owner. It doesn't matter if he's black or white, or hispanic. You trade your money for his goods.
The cashier that rings you up may hold wacky religious beliefs and practice sexual acts that you find disgusting. But it doesn't matter. You hand over your money, take your goods, and you're outta there.
If the appearance of the owner and cashier do happen to bother you, you're perfectly free to never step foot in that retailer's store again.
Live and let live.
No government force, and no aggressive violence.
Liberty is a philosophy of peace, and it's a much better alternative than a war of all against all, with government supplying the guns.
It is possible to go from the "land of government power" back to the "land of the free".
But it has to be greatly desired first.
Where does Ron Paul buy his gold?
Should we really be selling more weapons to Saudi Arabia? Why did the Obama Administration send weapons from Libya to rebels in Syria? Special Guest Senator Rand Paul joins the Liberty Report to let us know how he's fighting the mad interventionists in Washington.