What is the future of money? Some say digital currency is more efficient and provides better security and privacy. Others worry about the Fed exercising an even heavier hand on monetary policy. We visit with NYU Law Fellow and digital currency expert Max Raskin to seek some answers..
By Ron Paul
During the 2008 economic crisis, Iceland’s government froze offshore accounts held by foreign investors in that country’s currency, the krona. Recently, the government of Iceland announced it would unfreeze the accounts if the account holders paid a voluntary “departure tax,” which could be as high as 58 percent. Investors who choose not to pay the departure tax would have their investment “segregated” into special funds that only invest in CDs issued by Iceland’s central bank. These CDs are expected to only provide a rate of return of at most 0.5 percent a year. So investors in offshore accounts can thus choose between having their money directly seized via the departure tax or indirectly seized via the inflation tax.
Iceland’s freezing of offshore krona accounts was part of a “stabilization and recovery” program implemented under the guidance of the International Monetary Fund (IMF), which also provided Iceland with a $1 billion loan. So US taxpayers not only helped the IMF bail out Iceland’s government, they may have helped the IMF advise Iceland on how best to steal property from American investors!
The IMF's role in Iceland’s seizure of the property of foreign investors shows the hypocrisy of IMF officials, who recently expressed concerns about the increasing support for protectionism supposedly exemplified by the Brexit vote. However, freezing of assets held by foreign investors is a particularly harmful form of protectionism, while Brexit was more about rejecting the European Union’s bureaucracy than rejecting free trade. Perhaps what the IMF and its supporters are really worried about is losing their power to use taxpayers’ money to force other countries to adopt IMF bureaucrats’ favored economic policies.
Iceland is not the only government to turn to a departure tax to raise revenue. Just last year, in order to raise revenue for federal transportation programs, Congress gave the IRS the power to revoke the passport of any American accused of owing more than $50,000 in back taxes.
As an increasingly desperate Congress looks for new ways to squeeze money out of the American people to fund the welfare-warfare state, it is likely that more Americans will have their liberties limited because the IRS accuses them of not paying their fair share of taxes. It also is likely that the Federal Reserve will follow the example of its counterpart in Iceland and devalue the holdings of anyone who dares to resist the IRS’s demands.
Those hoping that the presidential election will result in real changes are bound to be disappointed. While Donald Trump seems to appreciate how current Fed policies help the incumbent administration while harming the people, he does not appear to understand that the problem is not with certain Fed policies, but with the Fed's very existence. While Mr. Trump does support tax cuts, he also supports increasing government spending on infrastructure at home, militarism abroad, protectionism, and an economic cold war with China.
Hillary Clinton has actually said it is inappropriate for candidates to criticize the Fed. Sectary Clinton has also called for massive increases in government spending and taxes. Hillary Clinton may be more hawkish than Donald Trump, since Mr. Trump has rejected Secretary Clinton's calls for a new cold war with Russia.
Instead of looking to politicians to save us, those of us who understand the dangers of our current course must continue to spread the ideas of liberty among our fellow citizens. Politicians will only change course when a critical mass of people stops falling for the war party’s propaganda, stops demanding entitlements, and starts demanding liberty.
By Chris Rossini
The Wikileaks John Podesta email dump contained a very eye-opening email from Bill Ivey, who was Bill Clinton's appointed chairman of the National Endowment for the Arts from 1998-2001.
Ivey wrote to John Podesta (highlight added):
Government forces a vast majority of American kids into a cookie-cutter manufacturing plant (called "schools").
The inputs are young, innocent, curious, creative and unique kids. The output is a homogenized group that can't wait to leave because they've learned to hate learning with a passion. Many will never read a book again in their entire life.
The kids have been also been drilled for 18 years to (a) always defer to and revere "authority" (b) follow orders, and (c) embrace statism. We all know that the "great" presidents are those who snuffed away the greatest amount of individual liberty.
Does this mean that we're all supposed to hate teachers and that teachers are bad people? Of course not. But it should also be understood that teachers are so far removed from the motivations and inner workings of the manufacturing plant (i.e., schools) that it's perfectly understandable for them not to know what is actually going on.
In the rare instance that a teacher does understand why this "system" was created (the early plotters were blunt about what they were doing) and what it does to kids, that rare teacher certainly has no power whatsoever to do anything about it. The best that rare teacher can do is quit and search for more noble work.
In the meantime, the "system" will continue its dirty deeds, even looking to possibly start conscripting kids for "Universal Pre-K". What's next, a government teacher waiting in the delivery room for the infant to be born?
But at the top of the indoctrination totem pole, the truth can be seen very clearly. The above email is not an exception. It's the rule. Government conscripts kids into its manufacturing plants for very important reasons.
Once kids leave school, they graduate to getting their information from government's FCC-licensed media.
What an accomplishment...
Government media takes over where the government schools leave off.
The Ivey email points out that "unawareness remains strong". In other words, the schools and media have done their job in dumbing down America.
But Ivey also worries that "compliance is fading rapidly."
What will government cook up in its schools and media to gain more "compliance"?
That's a pretty scary thought, don't you think?
(h/t - TargetLiberty)
The great Austrian economist, Ludwig Von Mises, used to say that "Government is the negation of liberty." One of the most often used excuses by government to negate liberty is in the name of "national security." Ron Paul addresses this tactic on this week's edition of Myth-Busters.
What have the central bankers and the governments they serve done to our money? Legendary forecaster and publisher of Grant's Interest Rate Observer Jim Grant joins us to discuss the bankers' war on the rest of us.
An internal FBI report on what causes homegrown terrorism reveals that almost everything said in the media and by politicians on the topic is abjectly false. We discuss what the FBI found out.
By Jacob Hornberger
The following is excerpted from The Future of Freedom Foundation:
Trump correctly points to the horrors that have come with Obamacare, with insurance companies fleeing the marketplace, leaving millions of people without medical insurance.
Trump’s solution: Abolish Obamacare.
And then what? Trump says he will come up with a plan where everyone has health insurance, only he doesn’t specify what the plan is or how it will work. He’s just sure he can do it.
Clinton acknowledges that Obamacare is a disaster but opposes repeal because that will eliminate the mandatory coverage that the law provides. So she wants Obamacare to remain.
And then what? Clinton says she’ll make it work, only she doesn’t specify how she’s going to do that. She’s just sure she can do it.
Notice something important: Despite their disagreement on Obamacare, both candidates — and most Republicans and Democrats — favor Medicare and Medicaid, which are the root cause of America’s healthcare crisis. Before Medicare and Medicaid, there was no healthcare crisis.
Even if Obamacare were to be abolished, there would still be a severe, ongoing healthcare crisis because Medicare and Medicaid would still be existence. That’s why Obamacare was enacted in the first place — because there was healthcare crisis, brought on by Medicare and Medicaid. That crisis would continue to exist on the day that Obamacare was abolished.
So, here you have Trump and Clinton saying, “Elect me because I have a plan to fix the healthcare crisis,” while, at the same time, they both exclaim, “Elect me and I’ll make certain to preserve Medicare and Medicaid.”
Those two candidates can debate until they are blue in the face but one thing is for certain: As long as Medicare and Medicaid remain in existence, there will be a severe healthcare crisis. Neither Trump nor Clinton will be able to do anything to fix it. That’s because socialism is inherently defective. Nobody can make it work.
Read the whole article here.
In a recently-leaked speech from 2013, Hillary Clinton said that it is important to take both public and private positions on each issue. Is this the language of the typical politician, or something even more deceptive? How does that explain her positions on Syria and Saudi Arabia?
By Chris Rossini
Life, liberty, and property rights may be taking another massive hit in this year's election, but there is a silver lining for libertarians. The most important things that government relies upon from its submissive subjects continue to decay right before our eyes.
Government depends upon on a massive amount of smoke and mirrors in order to garner sufficient belief in its legitimacy. If there's one good thing that we can say about Donald Trump, it's that his candidacy has exposed the mainstream media as a full-blown arm of the government and establishment elites. Of course, Ron Paul supporters already knew this to be the case for years now, but the media has now shown its cards to everyone. They are FCC licensed lapdogs of the state.
This widespread understanding is huge! For decades, Americans have believed the media to be legit. Remember, prior to the Internet, government had a lock on the information that Americans were Fed. There were a few TV stations, all parroting the same government line, and they would go off-the-air every night to the playing of the star-spangled banner. Belief in the political class was a shoe-in.
Now, the government's licensed media has no choice but to embarrassingly promote Hillary Clinton 24 hrs a day. What a job to be handed...and what poetic justice. The media has lost what little credibility it has left by pumping up (and covering up) for someone who is widely despised by the American public.
That brings us to the next area where government is losing its grip on American minds: the reverence of politicians. People in the "land of the free" are trained starting at a very young age in government schools to sing hosannahs to politicians. These so-called "public servants" are placed on gigantic pedestals. Government has built monuments to itself and has carved faces into mountains to remind all the "little people" that they live in the palm of the politician's hand.
This election has helped to smash that myth into a thousand pieces. Everyone can clearly see the ugliness of power and politics. The mask has been ripped off and behind it lays debauchery, immorality, and criminality that cannot be missed. Anyone who looks at politicians today and says "I want to be like that" needs some serious intervention from family and friends.
The beliefs in government omnipotence are dying and it's important to take notice that libertarians didn't have to "do" anything to bring this about. There was no need for marches, rallies, rebellions, or any other public displays of dissatisfaction.
Government, on its own, is decaying from within. On its own, government continues to spend itself into insolvency and bankruptcy. The nature of politics ensures to us that government must ultimately knock itself out. No outside help is necessary.
At some point, the U.S. federal government will have to default on the outrageous promises that it can never keep. It will have to bring the troops home and shut the military empire down. It will have to face a very angry public that is used to "benefits". These same individuals will not like hearing the news that the check will not be in the mail.
This is the grave that government has dug for itself. It was warned the entire way down. Modern libertarians stand on the shoulders of giants who tried to stop the avalanche when it was a mere snowball. But power, being what it is, yearns to expand itself. Living at the expense of others is too hard a temptation to resist.
What happens when the jig is up? What happens when people realize that the goose who laid the fiat money eggs has run out of ink?
That is the time when libertarians can "do" something. Libertarians can come in to pick up the pieces. That's the time to tell your neighbors (who are searching for answers and ready to hear them) about the superiority of liberty to fake government omnipotence. That's the time to tell them about sound money, free markets, voluntary exchanges, and private property rights.
That's the time to persuasively convey to them that the non-aggression principle is the moral and just way to live on this Earth. No one (including government) may use aggressive force against anyone else.
Here's the good part....there's no reason to wait. Libertarians can tell those who are willing to listen about these ideas right now. Sure, many will pooh-pooh until the checks start to bounce, but there are millions of people that have open minds and clearly see that government does nothing but pave the road to serfdom.
Donald Trump, Hillary Clinton, the media, and the entire government apparatus have given us all a gift. They've continued to smash the beliefs that Americans have been bamboozled by for at least 100 years. They have shown the true face of government to America, and Americans realize that it stinks!
Liberty might be on the horizon, if we want it bad enough.
Where does Ron Paul buy his gold?
Did you watch the second round of Hillary vs. Trump? We did. Was it about character, or issues, or both? Our take today...