Ron Paul “We Should Never Be Fearful Of The Truth/Federal Reserve & Banks Think Its Their Money”

I guarantee you, you can find 100 people on current that I have not connected with. And what about the people who don't like the item and article?!? Are you saying that they are not allowed to vote the article down?!? As if all the people on current are just followers of my belief system.....

No, the truth is......most people here do find my articles refreshing....much more refreshing than what you see today......it's not my fault the republicans and democrats have become to repulsive to so many people.....they most just like transparency and accountability out of their officials....and that is what Liberty brings.....

What is sick is all the people on here complaining about the messengers while having no defense against the message......how people can be so hated and despised for preaching goodness......how people try to censor others who are 100% in line with the website policy.....what is sad, is the people who would rather complain about our posts versus debating them. You can continue to have us censored....we will continue to offer a better direction with actual policy debate versus horrific and unjustified attacks....

>"I guarantee you, you can find 100 people on current that I have not connected with"<

ROFL! 100 people!? That's it!? What's the membership count on this site anyway? Even bizarre obscure text adventure MUDs generally have memberships above 3000. So you're saying that you have not attempted to connect with what? 5% of the people on this site? Less?

>"What is sick is all the people on here complaining about the messengers while having no defense against the message."<
Dude when the messenger is this annoying the message loses meaning anyway. I am happy to comment on your actual message, and do when you post it in a non obfuscated fashion, but that rarely happens. I personally think that this is the case because while you do occasionally have something useful to say, often it is simply drivel.

Mike works hard for what he believes in.
So give unto mike, what is mike's.
A little well deserved credit.
Unbrainwashing is a difficult task.

The truth is in the voting record.

Why would anyone think the fed should be accountable to no one, not even us?

i think its great, i dont understand why so may people dislike this politician. so your saying that current should censor what people think is important to put across?

What uni is saying is that Ron Paul cannot fix all problems, its his nature, he lies...like all politicains, Ron Paul lies....

He is just as guilty as the government itself..

If you haven't been paying attention.....Unimatrix name appears on the front page, featured articles at least once to twice a week.....not because people voted her up, but because a rare group of people propped her article up over everyone elses. I post articles and send it out to a few people, just as you do, and people vote them up, does that mean we are cheaters?!? Unimatrix calls us a fraud and for what?!? Because she disagrees with us?!? Because she gets upset we are calling for transparency and an accountable government. Unimatrix can attack me twice on the same article and it will never be deleted. I be you this comment is deleted almost immediately because it has some attack on her, even though this is mostly a defensive piece. These baseless attacks and calls for censorship should give you an ideal what her policies would be like if they are in place....not very altruistic and compassionate. I can only imagine what people like her have done to this country over the last 100 years and sigh, knowing that brainwashed minds like her continue to try to silence transparency and Liberty.....unimatrix makes me sick to my stomach, watch out for her and people like her...THEY are the enemies towards prosperity and peace!

Don't like it don't post.

I'm flagging your comment. You shouldn't post in this if you don't like it. Flagging it with what?

You're spamming a Current Poster's threads with your hate every single time and it's unnecessary.

I don't know that what he is doing is illegal per se but it is suspicious. Peacfreedom posts shoot to the top of the news ranking in minutes. Much faster than the posts of anyone else. Not higher, but far far faster.

They also have some other unique qualities.

1) They Always have the peacefreedomprosperity.com prefix. Great pains seem to be taken to make sure of this.

2) they almost always are a click though link. This used to b always but I have seen it not happen enough that it leads me to believe this is not a critical requirement.

3) they seem to have a following of posters many of whom read, or at least comment ONLY on peacefreedom posts or posts on which shanklinmike has already commented.

4) Peacefreedomhappybunnhies posts are only ever placed in the News section even though they are actually news maybe only one in five times.

5) they are placed with great regularity. I have no statistics, but it looks like they quite closely follow net traffic load, and if it is "prime time" there will be at least one happybunnies post n the top 20, and if it starts to eventually fall, as all posts do, another will come to replace it. It doesn't seem to be about actual data or content it is simply about being up there.

6) happybunnies posts are easily the most ad ridden posts as a group seen on current, including those actually posted BY current. They invariably have links back to their organization and advertise a competing radio show. Though this has happened somewhat less lately many of the print, as opposed to video based articles turned out to be basically advertisements for books produced by the Missus.org group.

I don't know. It is theoretically possible that he simply may have a slavish group of sycophantic followers who hang out on current doing nothing at all except waiting for one of his posts to come up at which point they all read it, vote it up, and then sit there waiting for him to do it again. Unimatrix seems to be assuming that these followers are bots rather then human. I have no proof that they are, but you must admit it is quite bot like behavior and there is evidence of motive, method, and opportunity for this to be the case.

There are other possiblities. It may simply be that the happybunnies followers are very botlike in character.

Just to speculate wildly for example It may for instance be that there is an entire off board notification system designed to get people to vote things up. It could be a combination of the two. One could for example circulate a script that followers keep on their email programs that would open happybunnies links on current when they have been sent the "yo shanklinmike has sent you a.." post that one can arrange to be automatically sent by the site.

it is simply difficult to tell but the behavior is not normal for the site.

1) Not all of the posts are from the peacefreedomprosperity.com website

2) Current even states not to put too much information in the current article so that people have to link to the story

3) Most people who post share with their friends, this is not wrong, even if they only vote up the 1 article

4) The last 7 out of 10 posts were within 3 days of posting.

5) What are you talking about?

6) Who is the PFP Radio show competing with on current, a article posting site?

Liberty supporters will always fight hard against slavery. Normal behavior for people who understand how they are enslaved.

1) well over 9 out of 10 are. The missus site and one other have also been used that i notice. Both are controlled by, shall we say, interesting groups. All seem very fond of selling missus.org books for one thing.

2) actually an interesting point. While it may condone the behavior it still doesn't particularly explain it.

3) true, but the question is not whether they are doing it but, how, why, and whether or not they know they are even doing it.

4) yes, which is part of the reason the number is not even higher. Squeaky wheels perhaps.

5) this is kind of a squishy point. it has to do with when you post and when you choose to leave the site happybunnies free. It seems to me to follow a pattern of general activity level on the internet, much like companies pay more attention to drive time radio. Of all these things though this is the most likely to be coincidence.

6) PFP competes with .current. They may not agree which of course their business, but it is unambiguously an ad which is somethng no one else does on this site with anything like your kind of regularity. This speaks to motive.

Ahh slavery. The other Godwyn's law word. Seriously dude sometimes you sound like a 1960's issue of "The Common Worker". It's like Trotsky writes your dialogue or something.

Obviously, you do not even know what fraud is.

keep in mind happy bunnies is only theoretically about libertarianism. It is mostly about Ron Paul. Ron Paul is socially extremely conservative so issues like marriage are unlikely to come up.

CreditFargo,

Ron Paul wants the Federal Government out of marriage.....that's better than Obama's support of the gay marriage ban.

What better way to shrink the size of government than to get rid of their ability to counterfeit money? If they can't print it, then chances are they can't afford it.

bbar, your tiny comment betrays a dramatic lack of understanding about the way the fed, and the federal government operate.

You're right shanklin, but I am totally against his tax policy. I doubt RP would have the charisma equity that Obama seems to have, either.

@CreditFigaro

What's up with everyone on current being assholes these days? And, moreover, why do most users default on the "ignorance/you're an idiot/you don't understand" rebuttal? Seems like no one justifies their claims. I don't know, maybe there's a connection with the two.

I have plenty to say, but let's just see how you do with this one. It's estimated that 21% of the first world war was funded through taxation, 56% through Fed-backed borrowing and 23% of outright money creation. Without the Fed, our involvement in the war would have been dramatically different (and, at this point, I'm not bringing up other governments backed by a central bank). The government uses the federal reserve to either directly print money for their projects, or capitalize on the idea that they are a "lender of last resort", which is the only reason treasure bonds are worth anything on the free market. As a result, we have an inflation tax disguised in the form of monetary expansion which is spread over all of society.

If you'd like to, we can talk a lot more about the first and second central banks of the US, Fed creation, our fiat money system, our fractional reserve system, the demise of massive empires which failed from the Byzantine Empire all the way up to the Soviet Union and the relationship between a central bank and the constant devaluation of not only the country's currency, but its citizens' liberties as well.

I'm down to play your game.

Beautiful response.

I find it ironic that the same crowd that loves to make the flat tax argument seems to have a problem with the inflation "tax." I digress.

I'd love to engage you in such a discussion, and we ought to try to keep it to one or two points of discussion in order to facilitate some level of process and progress.

My choices are the fractional reserve system and the concept of the government using the central bank to fund projects.

I have no preference though. So, make your pick, and submit an argument. I'll gladly give you a better rebuttal than "ur an idiot."

How about we start with governments' use of a central bank for expansion? And my first point will be the United States' funding of WW-I.

It's estimated that 21% of the first world war was funded through taxation, 56% through Fed-backed borrowing and 23% of outright money creation.

...I can't wait until we get to Hoover and FDR's new deal:)

(Disclaimer: I do get off topic, but I am attempting to cut to the chase. Please excuse my delay, I have been job hunting!)

OK, great place to start. In fact, I think that this is the crux of the issue:

Should or should not the government finance expansion, investment and operations?

With a central bank, these things are possible with uncollected (and preferably accrued) tax revenue.

Ultimately, it is all paid for through taxes in some form or another. (inflation vs. taxation)

I like the concept of inflation as a tax. The rising ocean of currency sucks up and covers up the poor decisions of yesteryear. Perhaps if the government were running a surplus, it would be more fiscally sound NOT to have inflation.

Unfortunately, whenever the democrats come in and fix everything, resulting in a surplus, the republicans win on tax cuts and screw everything up again.

Therefore, your (assumed) case that the government ought pay for everything with savings and/or current tax revenue is a fallacy because it's never ever going to happen in the real world, simply due to the stupidity of the american people.

I empathize with your position... a utopia may exist in the libertarian ideal, but I would argue that a better and more achievable utopia lies in sound management of enabled, centralized government.

When the country makes shitty decisions and wastes a lot of money, it has to be paid for, and boy do we pay for it. So, ultimately the problem is the wasting of money, not the central bank.

In other words:

Your argument seems, to me, to hinge upon the assumption that the US government makes terrible choices with their money, and should, therefore, be forbidden from having access to credit resulting in better outcomes for all through less taxation.

Hence, a relatively common sense argument for smaller government, based on that assumption.

Ironically, people who make the "smaller government" argument tend to be republicans, who are also Hawkish and, historically, can't balance a budget for shit. They cut the taxes, first, and do so before they stop making shitty decisions. Further, they tend to make shittier decisions, in the first place.

E.G.: what do you think has a worse impact on the economy, spending trillions of dollars on war, or trillions of dollars on healthcare. I would argue the former.

I can see why so many are breaking from the republicans into libertarianism... it does make more sense.

Okay, cool – it’s seems like we are now in agreement that certain governments do, in fact, use a central bank (assumes they are also using a fiat currency) for their own expansion. Now we can discuss what you were getting at; that is, “should” they?

Let’s talk about inflation tax. It’s great, if you’re trying to shift money from the poor and middle class to the rich. If that’s not what you want to happen, though, then you might want to read Richard Cantillon and see his criticisms of inflating the money supply with a fiat currency. Let’s assume that the amount of Mickey Mantle baseball cards increases a millionfold. The result would yield every Mickey Mantle card almost valueless. Money acts the same way. When the money supply is increased, prices increase and the purchasing power of each dollar you have decreases. Someone might object and say, “Well, look, that’s true, but wages and salaries also increase as a result of inflation so there’s no real problem.” This is where Cantillon comes in. The price increases due to inflation (defined as an increase in the money supply) don’t occur all at once and to the same degree. The people who get that new money first have the upper hand because they get to spend it first. And by spending it first, that means prices haven’t increased yet (because the money hasn’t circulated through the market yet). So the first people spend the money, and they get great deals. Then the next people spend it, and so on… But who gets the new money though? It’s the politically well-connected (the government itself, businesses with government contracts, big banks, etc…). By the time the money trickles down to the people in poor/working class (in the form of wage increase), those people have been paying higher prices the whole time. That’s called an inflation tax. It’s a redistribution of wealth from the poor and middle class to the politically well-connected. (It’s called distribution effects, or Cantillon effects, if you want to read more.) I can’t think of a worse tax. It’s basically the rich steeling from the poor/middle class. And our Federal Reserve, along with our fiat paper money system, make it possible.

Okay, let’s see what else… What did you mean by when the democrats come in and fix everything? And can you define the term “surplus” as you intend to use it?

I don’t accept your claim that because Americans are stupid, the government cannot fund itself from a direct tax alone. I don’t see how you came to that conclusion.

Also, I don’t see a difference in spending trillions on war, spending trillion on welfare projects, spending trillion on healthcare, spending trillions on bailing out failing companies, spending trillions on bailing out bankrupt countries, spending trillions on bailing out other foreign banks, etc… If we can’t afford it, then we can’t afford it. As far as the economy is concerned, it’s all equally damaging. If we print too much money, our dollar will eventually be devalued and our system will follow in the footsteps of every other empire that has ever used a fiat currency; that is, it will collapse. In 1932, our debt was 300% of GDP. That was the highest ever (hold on though). In 1971, when the Brenton Woods agreement was abandoned by Nixon, our debt was 150% of GDP. Since then, our debt has been increasing and our production has been decreasing. Our debt is now 350% of GDP. If we continue on our current path, the future looks bleak.

Fantastic, you make a tremendous point about the fact that the inflation tax most heavily influences those in the middle, and on the bottom.

Apparently there is a LOT of lag, too. During the entire bush presidency "wealth" grew, but 90 some percent of the growth occurred in the top 1%. That's trickle up economics.

Regardless of this point, there is still no case made because of it: if we have inflation, protections can be put in place to ensure that it doesn't affect the bottom and the middle as much (e.g. changing all tax law and wage law to be adjusted for inflationary effects so that the investment class eats it, and not the common worker).

Unfortunately, you are completely wrong in your understanding of the national debt. As of the end of july, the national debt clocked in at 11.4 trillion dollars. US GDP is, typically, around 14 trillion dollars. Not the highest (relatively) it's ever been, and remember: Bush put at least $6 trillion of that on the books. Big Bama is responsible for about $2-3 trillion of it I would think.

At the end of the Clinton presidency, we had something like a $300 billion budget surplus, because he hiked taxes and cut the military. That doesn't mean he eradicated the debt, he balanced the budget, and made a dent in the debt by eliminating deficit spending. It would have taken another 8-10 years of democrat control to finally eliminate the debt.

However, Bush II, who wanted the presidency, ran on the fact that we shouldn't HAVE a surplus, because that's

"not the government's money, it's the people's money!"

-big cheers from audience full of stupid people-

Little did we discuss the fact that the national debt was still at least 10 times the budget surplus... but who cares? We are getting tax breaks!

I think the case for the stupidity of the public can be made.

As we've agreed, the point of contention is whether or not a government ought to be able to finance. Inflationary tax is, indeed, a tough tax. The question is: is it worth it?

People like to throw around the GDP figure a lot. I think it is a false figure on which to base the health of the economy. The figure that I like to lean upon is NDP or Net Domestic Product.

If you don't know, Net Domestic Product is calculated as the number of dollars of production within our borders - depreciation.

Do we produce more in our country than wastes away due to the activity of time? Is our standard of living rising, or falling?

The GDP is the same, regardless of whether we conduct war or implement welfare programs. The GNP, however, is much different. If we implement welfare programs, the money is spent almost immediately, stimulates the production of more goods, and increases the standard of living. If we conduct war, huge amounts of money disappear quickly.

What improves our way of life more, for a longer period of time: A bomb (depreciates in 3 seconds and has no domestic benefit) or a refrigerator (depreciates over 5-10 years and improves standard of living).

So, yes, it DOES matter what we spend our money on, and the decision whether to finance something is affected by its cost/benefit ratio and its net impact on our economy.

If we spend the money on the right things, I think it most definitely is worth it. Investing in education, science, and manufacturing all have a positive net impact.

If we knew how much the Fed was increasing the money supply, then, I guess, it “might” be possible (maybe…and that’s a maybe with an exponent) to use wage and price controls to HELP combat the vicious inflation tax on the poor and middle class. However, we don’t know what the Fed is doing. Under US code, they don’t have to tell us or congress anything about their current, active role in monetary policy (that’s why there’s huge push to pass HR 1207). Here’s one example of close to $24 trillion: http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aY0tX8UysIaM. So, to respond to your question (or claim), we cannot combat the inflation tax with price and wage controls. I guess we can try to guess, but it would be a shot in the dark to guess M3. The Fed doesn’t even track it anymore. Further, even if you could do it accurately, why wouldn’t you want to advocate a stable currency? If our debt keeps increasing, and we keep monetizing our debt in order to pay it off, then how is that a sustainable path? It isn’t. Eventually our currency will collapse. There is no other possible outcome – it must happen.

When I refer to the term “debt” I’m mean to define it as REAL debt; not just public debt. Read this: http://www.pgpf.org/about/nationaldebt/. Our real debt is currently close to $57 trillion.

This is kinda irrelevant to our discussion, but during the Clinton administration, even if mean public debt decreased (I haven’t looked at it), REAL debt increased. That’s a fact; and that’s what really matters.

You can scale debt by whatever you want (GDP, GNP, NNI, NDP, etc…), but ultimately what really matters to this discussion is that debt keeps increasing. Regardless of the scalar, all graphs would have a positive correlation and show that we are on an unsustainable path.

Philosophically, you’re right – there’s a moral argument for bombs vs refrigerators. However, like I said earlier, “As far as the economy is concerned, it’s all equally damaging.” But we’re not on a sustainable path. We cannot ignore inflation. That’s what the Weimar Republic did in the early 1920s. Hungary 1945-1946. Zimbabwe. Soviet Union. Byzantine Empire. What about the first user of fiat currency (China) in the late 1940s? Not to mention the insane hyperinflation in the Yuan Dynasty. Post WWII Japan? What about the continental currency in 1860-65 in the United States where the Lerner Commodity Price Index increased from 100 to over 9000? I can literally go on and on.

Many of your arguments aren't holding water. Some of them are, though.

Consumer protections (including a minimum wage) are one thing, I never said anything about price controls... abolishing price controls on most consumer products is one of the greatest things Reagan ever did... that's coming from me!

I agree: The Fed ought to be audited

You are correct: Our debt does get monetized reduce its relative size.

You are correct: The real debt, both public and private, is a high figure.

You are correct: The fed creates money, which is the main cause of inflation.

The facts, figures, data and information that you are quoting are correct. The conclusions you are drawing from these data and information... well, I would beg to differ from many of them.

Calling for the end of the Fed when we don't know the facts about its operations is a foolish thing to do. Like I said, I am all for auditing, but abolishment is a totally different issue.

You claim that monetization isn't a sustainable path... that's really the opposite of the truth. Inflation through monetization is a form of paying off debt. Yeah it stinks for those who eat it, but it brings more balance at the cost of the value of people's savings, amongst other things. By function it improves the position of debtors and damages investors.

That doesn't make it unsustainable. Your case that the dollar will collapse is unsupported, too... It's relatively stable now (it inflates an average of

Yeah, I agree with you -- it is better to spend money on certain things, but if we're just going to print it and continue to devalue our dollar, I wouldn't advocate spending it in the first place. Since the Fed Res Act passed in 1913, our dollar has been devalued by 96%. And yeah, you're right -- our currency hasn't collapsed yet, but did you research any of those other empires I listed? Because they all collapsed, just like we will if we continue on this path. And when they did collapse, it wasn't really over a long stretch of time; rather, there was a build up, and then inflation just ran away.

So, I have to ask, how do you suggest we combat inflation tax?

I don't think abolishing the Fed is so out of line. We know enough. The more they print, the more our dollar is devalued. The more our dollar is devalued, the closer we come to economic collapse. History is on my side.

You said this:

"You claim that monetization isn't a sustainable path... that's really the opposite of the truth. Inflation through monetization is a form of paying off debt. Yeah it stinks for those who eat it, but it brings more balance at the cost of the value of people's savings, amongst other things. By function it improves the position of debtors and damages investors."

That's scary. That's called defaulting on your debt. Say you and are are the only two people in society and I owe you $10. Also, assume there are only $10 in circulation (you have $5 and I have $5). So, to pay you off, I decide to just counterfeit $10. I pay you back, right? Great, but now prices have doubled and you're purchasing power has been decreased by 1/2. Consequently, so have mine, but it works out for me because I know how to counterfeit.

Last point: even if we treat America as an asset, if we had to sell it, then something was definitely unsustainable. IF it was purchased, it would need to be changed to become sustainable.

I really encourage you to research the following empires and the effect inflation had on all of them: Hungary, Zimbabwe, Soviet Union, Roman Empire, Byzantine Empire, China, Yuan Dynasty, Japan and even the continental currency of the United States. Like I said before, history is on my side.

I am not going to go read so that you can prove your point. Proving your point is your job, not mine. Besides, research isn't necessary if we are addressing issues with logic, anyway. All you are telling me is that these empires fell and happened to have inflation.

Correlation doesn't mean cause.

Empires fell before there was money, so there has to be some other factor. Inflation doesn't explain the fall of societies.

Do you know what does?

Overspending on military, high poverty, lack of incentive to be productive, high income disparity, spending money on religious and symbolistic projects (been to a mega-church, lately?), expanding too fast/imperialism, poor management of alliances, committing mass murder, etc.

Inflation? I could see it resulting from some of those factors, but it can be a result of something good, too.

What really matters the most, at the end of the day, is whether our government (a.k.a. we the people) can invest in such a way as to bring more prosperity in a cost effective manner, I don't see anything wrong with that. In this case, I do see something wrong with abolishing the fed.

You are right that the fed can be used to hurt people. I totally get that, and agree with it.

If we use the fed to invest in dumb shit and keep the population oppressed, that's no different than using the military for the same thing. That doesn't mean we should have no military. The military's potential to do good (protect us from invaders) outweighs the risk of having one (martial law). I think the same of the fed... it is just a tool.

You'd ask me how to combat the inflation tax... there are plenty of ways, but I don't happen to care about the tax, in the first place. It's truly marginal compared to the huge list of injustices that should be dealt with.

I guess the reason why it doesn't bother me all that much is because I don't see how it damages the society more than dumping trillions of dollars into war, tax breaks for the wealthy, and the profiteering off of the sick. So many trillions and trillions of dollars of productivity and happiness are wasted because of these issues.

You have shown me the correlation between inflation and the failure of societies. You have yet, however, to demonstrate cause.

Remember, many of these societies fell amidst hyper-inflation, not inflation. They are two VERY different economic environments, so do note that societies that fell due to hyper-inflation do not apply to this discussion as we only have modest inflation in this country... and history is on my side, there.

Ha yeah I've read David Hume and I'm familiar with his "Problem of Induction." This is going to be short due to your apathy.

First off, I asked what better way to promote the libertarian cause than to shrink the government by taking away their capability to print money. And you said...hold on let me quote it, "bbar, your tiny comment betrays a dramatic lack of understanding about the way the fed, and the federal government operate." I think we both know now that you've learned a few things here.

Don't worry about reading about how the economic collapse of those empires caused their demise. You're already a damn genius and going out of you way to learn something else would just be a complete waste of time. Ha I just think it's funny you make the claim that history is on your side when you said you weren't interested in reading any of it. If you have stagflation, you must first have inflation.

You're all over the map, and you want me to spoon feed you everything, so I think I'm all done here.

Too bad, I really was looking forward to learning how inflation is the CAUSE of collapsing societies.

Sure, you know your stuff, and I have a lot more respect for you now than I did when you left your initial short-witted comment.

It's unfortunate that you get sarcastic and effrontery whenever I ask you to explain yourself and we finally get to the bottom of the discussion.

Sounds like a cop out.

It's as easy as www.wikipedia.org.

@ Credit Figaro and BBar. I've been following your discussion, but you've stopped short of taking Ron Paul's aim: to expose the FRS before the American people so that we can prevent the inevitable effects of their evil from inalterably changing the American way of life and destroying us. That's what parasitical institutions do. In 2004 the legitimate news stated that the buying power of the FRS' funny money was 10% of what it was in 1941, and 3 % of what it was in 1907 when Theodore Roosevelt's St.Gauden's commissioned double eagles were produced, redeemable for U.S. Treasury Gold Notes. That same year saw the Bank Panic which precipitated the 1913 Federal Reserve Act. It's not so much the creation of a central bank & its system instead of the creation of an FDIC and an SEC, FIRST, which was direly needed even more than a central banking system that I refer to. Rather that a central bank managed by a foreign cartel of Banksters(Banker + Gangster = Banksters) that was a Trojan Horse foreign subversion of the USA. How does a non military entity seize control of a nation using economic means ? It infiltrates it, imposing its own Monopoly on its money supply, economy, businesses, Government & people, all the while feeding off its host. As this financial institutionalized parasite grows stronger, its host grows weaker by siphoning off 10 % of its annual GDP like a church levies a tithe. The Banksters may have gotten their idea from the free mason's credo on the back of our dollar bill: Annuit Coeptis. As this subversive pattern of economic sabotage proceeds, financing the USA's passage through 2 World Wars, Korea, Vietnam, Kuwait, Iraq, Afghanistan. All the while the Rothschilds, Buiderbergs, Rockefellers, Morgans banking family dynasties which own the FRS as THEIR peoperty grow from mere Billionaires to Trillionaires. And their money- is- our- God domestic followers here in the USA, the 1% who in 1980 only owned 33% of the wealth then now own 75% of the wealth useing puppets like Ronald Reagan to push the inflation tax. They own a controling interest in the stock market. And can manipulate markets using the FRS as their tool. The Banksters & their American uberrich greedos are like the 4 Horsemen of the Apocalypse. They want a USA which spends as much of 50% of all the world's countries combined military spending. They get richer by financing all the corruption practiced by military contractors since the USA began, richer still by using the military to invade foreign countries, at public money expense, so that Haliburton, Monsanto, Dupont, Blackwater can rebuild the wasted foreign property wasted by more wasted military spending madness, until the inflation devalues OUR money like an old timer sitting on his back porch in his rocking chair whittling down a stick. When the fiat counterfeit FRS Monopoly money collapses, martial law, rationing, 1984 style repression will take the place. Things are already moving into place. All it takes is some world wide natural disaster like 12/21/2012 to precipitate it. The result is what was once a strong producing nation with a sound Constitutional money backed economy,has now become the consumer driven economy of a Bankster subverted USA Company the Banksters control like their domestic uberrich patrons control our stock market. The Banksters are converting our wealth into their wealth, which is Gold whose world price they're manipulating. All the 96 years of 10% American GDP which they've siphoned off the top, while they've devalued our dollar into nearing collapse, has left them in a supremely powerful position at our expense. It's the story of a servant addicting the master to depend on him so badly that the master is nearly at the servant's mercy.The Rothschilds made their wealth as a "business development company", not their sideline vineyards. "He who owns all the Gold makes all the rules" is their Golden Rule. As money is their God, their dominance & Slavery is imminent.

Hey, I'm not arguing that the rich aren't getting richer, and I have seen Zeitgeist and that other movie where the guy talks about the fed and makes this case that you all are making.

Neither you nor those filmmakers have demonstrated how inflation is the CAUSE of a downfall. I am starting to believe that it doesn't have anything to do with it at all.

Moreover, your numbers don't add up, either. Over 3400 separate banking institutions are members (owners) of the federal reserve with a very intricate system for internal controls and are subject to congressional oversight.

You say that we expend 10% of our tax revenue on debt payments, but in 2008 it was closer to 5%. In addition anyone can buy and own treasury bills, and many do... so a LOT of people receive that money. Besides, T-bills have a crappy return and most big money people are somewhere else.

Here is where I really lose you:

"When the fiat counterfeit FRS Monopoly money collapses, martial law, rationing, 1984 style repression will take the place. Things are already moving into place. All it takes is some world wide natural disaster like 12/21/2012 to precipitate it."

You still haven't explained HOW fiat currency is doomed to collapse.

As an aside: War has always been an extremely bad investment for the society. I would wonder what our debt would look like now if community infrastructure projects were organized rather than war... I digress.

All I keep hearing from you guys is conspiracy theory without solid evidence. Please, show me a Trillionaire.

PC: Please use paragraphs. Reading one big paragraph is a HUGE chore.

@CreditFigaro

Can you show me CAUSE between any two events? If you can, I will gladly point you in the direction of David Hume. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Problem_of_induction I just want you to realize that what you are asking for is impossible (insofar as I understand).

Can you tell me who the shareholders of the Fed are, and also, what percent they own? ("Try" answering that question and you'll learn a lot.)

And lastly, I guess if you pushed someone far enough, they would admit that a fiat currency doesn't necessarily have to collapse (just like I'll push you far enough that no identifiable cause exists for any two events if you answer my David Hume question above), but it's constant conjunction. Fiat currency, collapse. Fiat currency, collapse. Fiat currency, collapse. Fiat...well, you get the idea. How many times can we ignore the past?

And don't make the claim that we're doing anything different. Here's M0: http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/BASE

In regards to M0: It's a paltry proportion of our currency and doesn't encompass the portion of the currency that the uber-rich carry the most. The Fed can soak dollars up to easily control M0.

"Can you tell me who the shareholders of the Fed are, and also, what percent they own?"

You still haven't shown me a Trillionaire, which, by your logic, ought to exist in this conspiracy theory of yours. Besides, that's not my job as the skeptic, it's yours, remember?

Your other argument about inductive reasoning is very cool.

My response would be:

Costa Rica

They are well known for their successful and stable government which humbles other latin american countries with their low rates of poverty, high levels of education and relatively high GDP per capita.

All of this with more than 3x the inflation rate of the US and a recently established central bank. Instead of losing because of the drop in the value of their currency, they are kicking ass by taking advantage of the fat dollars they are soaking out of the US through IT outsourcing and other industries.

Their economy continued to grow throughout the recession and their parasitic effect on the US is only catalyzed by their high inflation rates.

What about Brazil?

Brazil has had huge inflation rates which didn't destroy the country... in fact, the high rates of inflation caused the banks, there, to implement online real time processing of withdrawals and deposits which now protect consumers against the heinous act of unfair overdraft charging that the banks, here, exploit people with through creative batch processing.

Inflation can, in fact, facilitate growth and health in an economy.

A constant conjunction? I don't think so.

That sounds like the black swan of your research, to me.

Now, with your inductive reasoning falling flat on its face, are you willing to change your mind?

M0 is our monetary base -- the foundation for all other measures of money. It's concerning that you don't think that graph is concerning.

How do I necessarily imply that a millionaire must exist? And that question about the shareholders and their percentages...I'm guessing you looked, couldn't find anything and gave up. That's what was supposed to happen. We don't know the answer either.

There are plenty more examples of countries who suffered stagflation, but didn't collapse. What's the point? They all ended up combating it to prevent economic collapse. They knew their inflation path was unsustainable.

Um...Brazil: Can you read this so I don't have to copy and paste? (Start in section 7 and read to the end. How good was inflation for Brazil. How many families were destroyed because of it?) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_history_of_Brazil
Do you think Costa Rica can sustain a 10% inflation rate forever? No. They know that too.

What I don't get is this: how do you not understand that increasing the money supply without increasing resources can only devalue a currency? (There are absolutely no other options.) Moreover, how do you think that is okay after learning about the inflation tax? Because it helps you pay off your bills by stealing from anyone who has actually saved? Moral America, I guess. Your cost of living will only increase and your standard of living will only decrease. There's a reason most households need two incomes today.

This is a problem:

You think I am a moron.

Of course I know that increasing the money supply devalues the currency. That's among the most basic of basic economic concepts.

I already knew about the inflation tax... I am an accountant, remember? Some of its effects that you pointed out were insightful, I'll give you that.

I agree with you that people's standard of living is falling... but it isn't inflation that is causing it which may be the essence of this discussion.

Yes, Costa Rica CAN indeed maintain an inflation rate of 10% just like we maintain an inflation rate of 5%. What says they can't? [?]

I never said stagflation was good. Inflation can be, stagflation... no way. But it doesn't matter, they are both the result of the decisions made by government. They aren't the problem... they are indicators/results of decision making. The problem is the decisions made by government in the first place.

Besides, Stagflation isn't what we are discussing, neither is hyper-inflation. We are talking about inflation.

No, I didn't search for these secret banking dynasties... know why? Because I'm not interested in finding stuff to support your case. I'll repeat: that's your job.

You've already told me that you can't find them... could it be possible that they don't exist? Maybe. Regardless, without them it's hard for you to make a case that they are taking over the world, especially when your inflation argument doesn't make pass the logic test.

We already have billionaires, you know... there are at least 10 people on the planet who have enough wealth to end thirst in this world as we know it... that's pretty powerful. They only have tens of billions.

Where the heck are the Trillionaires? [?]

Your argument:

Inflation ---> [?] ---> End of society as we know it

I keep asking you to fill in the middle box [?] to no avail. You keep trying to go around the box, but with arguments that are inconsistent in reality and history.

That's because the answer really is:

Print money ---> Inflation ---> same dollar is worth less, and society foots the bill for the investments of the government, good or bad.

In the end, it results in the ability for the government to make investments and you don't like what they've invested in... given the results, I would agree, but that doesn't make the tool the problem.

Every time I ask you to fill in the middle box [?], you get mad at me and accuse me of not understanding. The truth is, you have yet to find a cause for the collapse of society or the currency due to inflation. All you have produced is inconsistent correlation. What does that prove? (refer to your induction problem)

Get mad at me if you want, but being mad doesn't make you accurate or correct.

Trust me, though I'm new at typing at a computer keyboard, English Composition was one of my forte's. If I knew how to arrange my thoughts into paragraphs in this format, I would have 15 months ago. As for showing you a Trillionaire, please think of all the consequences that would follow if one were to surface where they'd be visible to ordinary people. Kidnapping and ransoming one valued at $500 Million a pound would make pricing lobster at the supermarket tame by comparison. Owning enough money to make one financialy secure is the goal for normal, well adjusted middle class folks. But the more surplus means a person has makes one conspicuous and a target for hard core criminals and Capital crimes
considering the penalties for Kidnapping. When I claimed the Rothschilds' banking family dynasty were Trillionaires I was making a logical deduction, (not giving Moses the 10 Commandments on Mt.Sinai by burning directions into stone tablets.) If you add up 1 months' GDP for the USA X 96 years of the FRS siphoning off that 1 months' GDP as it's fee for managing our economy with their fiat currency NOT money...Then subtract their operating expenses, by now I estimate the Rothschilds must be Trillionaires.
Picture an entity sitting as the top block of the top pyramid, the eye in between, and the foundation pyramid supporting all that, which is the patttern you see on the back of your dollar bill. Then picture that top block entity as the Rothschilds. If 300 Million souls were working to support your net wealth, would you want your picture taken ? Or your address published for sightseers ? Especialy if you were so plugged into the NWO that you could manipulate such huge blocks of wealth transfers as to manipulate markets and materialy affect the fortunes of Millions of people like pawns on a chessboard ? Fiat currency per se may or may not be doomed to collapse. I could not say. I was referring to the FRS fiat currency. That is a known quantity, and I can explain that prediction. Though I don't have the precise article I read at hand upon which I based my statement, I did read economists predict that the sheer gravity of the true national debt reported at $64 Trillion( 5 yrs. GDP for the USA) will eventual grow to overwhelm the actual value of our money. The devaluation of our money by issuance of fiat currency has already reduced the buying power of our dollars to 10 % of it's 1941 value when the USA was still on the Silver standard to back up FRS notes, and only 3% of what our 1907 dollars bought under the Gold & Silver standards. I sense from the price that Gold has reached, that our FRS funny money now only buys us 2% of what it did in 1907. What will happen when it's devalued to 1% then 0% ? I once saw a celluloid newsreel from the 1920s when during the Weimar Republic, Germans rolled wheelbarrows full of their hyperinflated currency around and couldn't buy 1 loaf of bread with it. Hunger & fear of where their next meal is coming from if at all will make people desperate enough to revolt. Whether it will signal the end of their civilization or not, I can't tell. But it's a good bet it could. Your being an accountant makes you an expert in Economics 101. My expertise comes from being a History buff all my life, and a coin collector for 50 years. Trust me, paper is not,nor could ever be, rightfuly valued as "money" no matter whether foreigners manage it's printing for the best interests of said foreigners or Americans for Americans. We may have given up our Gold Standard &Silver Standard, but if we did not have at least a Copper Standard, the FRS paper you have in your pocket is only fancy toilet paper. I've lived in Switzerland where they still used what we abandoned as a Constitutional standard of money. They have faith in their currency because it's as extremely stable as Gold per se. Ours is anything but. Our cents are now coper coated aluminum. What happens when they're made of cardboard, since we have "money to burn" ???

Interesting... but still conspiracy laden.

First of all... why won't anyone kidnap Bill Gates? Is it because he won't make them rich, or because he isn't rich ENOUGH. Something doesn't make sense, there.

The Rothschilds are a banking dynasty, but it's a HUGE organization with many many members and I doubt many of them are richer than Bill Gates. Besides, their existence isn't a secret, neither is their wealth.

In regards to the real debt of the US and the collapse of the currency, the conclusions you draw are unrelated. People have debt, but the debt is, usually, balanced by assets. I am guessing a huge proportion of the debt is in buildings and infrastructures that have value to the public. One reason that the net of these values may be negative would be wasteful spending on war, $2 trillion or so over the last decade would be a good example.

Besides, you aren't going to devalue a currency to zero due to inflation. Do you have any idea how much money you would have to print to achieve those figures you quoted? to go from 4% of original value to 2% of original value you would have to double the size of the money supply (no bbar, not M0) It would have to be M0, 1,2 and 3. You would have to create 30 trillion dollars. From 2% to 1% you would have to create 60 trillion dollars. from 1% to .5% 120 trillion dollars, and so on.

The USD collapsing has nothing to do with inflation. Our country could become insolvent due to poor investment choices, that I agree with. But inflation doesn't equal collapse.

In any case, money is only a medium of exchange. Attaching it to a commodity, like a precious metal, stabilizes it's value, and keeps the government from investing more than it has but then the government has to stockpile that commodity, which is the source of all sorts of waste and exposure to risk. Here is the trick, when money doesn't fluctuate, the value of the goods around it fluctuate.

With the rush to purchase gold and its soaring price that we have recently experienced, we would have had the same effect of wild deflation in the value of goods, under a gold standard. If that isn't destabilizing and damaging to the little guy, I don't know what is.

A recession is a recession, no matter what exchange system you have.

@Credit

Please read this: http://www.weberglobal.net/Historyofmoneycompleter.pdf

Get back to us.

And here's a short one that came out today if you get bored: http://www.marketwatch.com/story/gold-readies-for-fifth-straight-winning-session...

Well, I finally got around to reading all of the stuff you dispensed for me.

I found Christopher's article interesting... but definitely in need of some further discussion.

I find it interesting that the fall of these empires were absolutely soaked in the problems of:

Wide spread xenophobia
Attachment to religion
Waste on symbolistic projects
War (among the most significant)
Lack of a middle class
Price controls (that is a good find by the author, btw)
Authoritarianism
Attitudes towards debt
Lack of respect for the working class
Excessive extravagance that relied on other countries... namely the relationship with Asia
and
Poor international policy

Yet, despite all of these issues, the author decides that the depreciation of the currency is the CAUSE of the fall of these empires. His first point is absolutely ludicrous when he draws the value of the currency as it relates to the fact that the metal didn't deteriorate in the coins... epic face palm.

Instead of refuting point by point each thing he brought up, I am going to ask you a question.

What do you think backs the US dollar, since it isn't gold?

Though you didn't ask me directly, if you might tolerate my answer anyway: 1. All the quarters, dimes, nickles, and cents in circulation & held by banks. 2. the national forrests. 3. spit & bailing wire(optional)

Epistemology, along with logic, are just about the only branches of philosophy I find interesting. I also think that if you're looking for a cause between any two events, you will never please the persistent skeptic. The very foundation of Descartes' Meditations would be rejected by a Hume-like argument, and ANY mathematical/logical argument can be rejected by Gödel's incompleteness theorems. So if you're asking me to prove that a cause exists between any two events, I cannot. I would argue that no one can.

I think, though, that we should be more pragmatic about things. We should be mindful of what happened in the past and be able to say, "Yeah, maybe since a certain coin was shaved (or minted with more base metal in it) to fund some war (by definition, debasing of the currency) might have had something to do with inflation, and that might have had something to do with other empires/societies/people/whatever not accepting the currency anymore. And once that happened, government tried to fix prices to combat inflation, but as a result a black-market forms." And when exactly does a society lose faith in their government? Is it at this time? When do they realize that no one wants their money (making it impossible for them to use the money their government says is worth something to buy something) because their government has debased the currency?

So I guess I'm really just trying to say that we ought to be mindful of what has happened in the past. History might never be exactly the same, but I think our current path resembles some of those we don't want to go down again.

And what backs the dollar? Literally, according to the market, the paper or metal it's printed on and speculation. Though, what really backs the dollar right now is the government. We've seen what happens when it comes down to the market vs the government though. The market wins.

Aaalrighty, PC.

I'll tell you what backs the USD and why it's value has fallen in global markets.

It's backed by all of the things that are made and traded in and out of the US. Our goods, and services. All of them, not just gold, or some other commodity.

Why, then has the value of the dollar collapsed internationally? Because we have not produced things of value and have nothing to offer the international community. Our standard of living and the health of our middle class are intricately related to the value of the dollar internationally and domestically. The value of the dollar internationally does not necessarily coincide with the level of inflation domestically, or the amount of money the Fed creates.

Many people making the "Kill the Fed!" argument seem to not understand this nuance.

We could print off 2x the amount of money we have, and its value would remain stationary if we produced 2x the "stuff" as a result.

What really matters is what we do with the money we print and what value it adds to our society.

Internationally, the value of the dollar is based on the strength of the country relative to the rest of the world.

Now, we wasted all of our money on tax cuts for rich fucks and war profiteering. Both items reduce the value of the US internationally. We produce nothing of value.

War profiteering produces nothing of value to the society other than security which it doesn't in the wars we are engaged in, now. It's a waste of productivity. Net value goes down.

Tax cuts are nothing more than welfare for those who don't need it. It gives away money and we get nothing in return. Net value goes down.

Our influence, internationally, is failing because of our policies of producing less and philosophies towards debt where we use more. We have nothing to offer the international community.

As a result people don't want dollars and dump them. Our value goes down, and a tremendous blow to our economy results.

It's not because we printed more money, it's because we printed more money and produced absolutely NOTHING with it. This results in an overinflated dollar domestically and internationally.

There is only one way out of this. MASSIVE employment, infrastructure spending, elimination of outsourcing for production, and dramatically hiking taxes on the wealthy.

Unfortunately, we won't do that, so we are fucked.

Finally ! Your response is direct, simple, comprehensive. I accept what you've said as the unvarnished truth. The USA was specifically designed to be a country which would continuously renew itself. As hokey as it might sound to non believers, it's literally in our stars to be destined to constantly regenerate ourselves. So that each new generation would carry forth the spirit of America. I really think what killed that active positive spirit, and replaced it with a passive negative one is commercial TV. Radio adverts never had the effect of mind controlling consumers to make them hypnotized zombies wanting everything the Corporations tell them to buy. Their subverted minds have bought into passivity itself. It should alarm the hell out of everyone that the USA has a 70 % consumer driven economy, not a product driven one...But that's yet another sore point of the bullshit curriculums in schools. Imho, they should replace the drivel they teach elementary school kids with practical courses on economics, natural health science etc. so that when they get to high school and college they'll really be savvy young adults ready to perform jobs that produce something valuable
that can be exported. France flies the red, white and blue. They are determined to be the # 1 producer of electric cars as the Chinese have stated their goal is to be. There's the basis of real competition. They know that, as you've said, their money is only as good as the products they make which are in demand. GM
produced 500 EV1 all electric car for Californians in 1997, then destroyed them though all their leasers demonstrated they wanted to buy them. The country that produces the first inexpensive all electric car with a 1300 mile range, could have the most valuable currency in the world. Nicola Tesla wrote that the nations of the Earth would bankrupt themselves eventualy if they wasted all their Capital on fossil fuels. Tesla wrote that in 1900, and people ignored him then too. Al Gore delivered an adress in D.C. in June 2008 stating that the world economic,military,and climate crisis all intersected at that point. Yet though most people wanted Bush out of office, they conveniently ignored it. Over 150 years of stifling progress, the World Big Oil Monopoly has spun off into many parasitical institutions that have, like TV, compromised and degenerated the future of the USA. Yet people blindly accept them. I learned more valuable
things after schooling than I ever learned in school with the exception of 2 college courses that I never should have had to wait until my 20s to be taught. So long as we have a culture that yawns at people being ignorant, wasteful, and greedy we will have a society that's broken, where nothing will fix a broken economy. And it will continue with its boom & bust cycles going nowhere but down, fast. Humans invented money. It's people that make money what it is. Unless we stop ignoring those vices and stop being too timid to correct them claiming it wouldn't be tactful we will blindly stumble. We need to correct the vices inherent with the present bad attitudes before American children
can inherit a place that will not mortgage their future like they did in 1980.

I'll 2nd that emotion. It says a lot about the integrity of
any man,regardless of his political views,when his own
party won't let him speak at their presidential election convention in Minnesota. If Theodore Roosevelt were alive today, I'm absolutely certain he would agree with
Mr.Paul. To quote a quite telling phrase from George Orwell: " During any real life scenario in which deception is so extremely pervasive that it is taken for the truth, simply speaking the Truth itself will always be regarded as a Revolutionary act". Since even the name "the Fed" is ,per se, a diabolical lie because it is the property of foreigners, and not Americans acting
in the sole interests of Americans, I think you see what
I mean.

current should do something about Mike and his aliases - it is simply ridiculous the way he rigs the system.

Unimatrix, how did I rig this system?!?

YOU LIE! Just because a lot of people come vote up the article does not mean I am cheating! You should be ashamed of yourself! Everything is legal, you are a liar!

I posted a comment in unimatrix's thread below which responds to this in some ways.

Keep up the good work, please. This news article has to be one of the top 10 news stories in all of American History. Ignore those who attempt to detract from the grave importance of exposing the FRS as the Ponzi scheme which Eliot Spitzer claims it is. If you analyse their words carefuly, they are unsupported allegations at best. Always remember the proverb: "Everything you say and do always reflects the inner you" When you sort their lame attempts to discredit the bona fide purpose of 3 H.R. Reps leading the 290 H.R. Reps. in carrying out the most important function of the House itself by attacking Mr.Paul per se, you must realize they've already discredited themselves. Daniel Webster once said (paraphrased): " We the People can forgive any Government people their personal scandles, because we're all human, and noone is so clean they can throw the 1st stone. We can forgive them their crimes because we're all tempted, and not all of us can be in control in the most extreme circumstances. But when the Government embezzels
the value of our money itself, or allows others to
subvert us, puting us at grave risk to survive at all, that is treasonous, and should not, could not ever be forgiven." I've been a victim of the crime of Slavery
for longer than your detractors have been alive, Mike. If they could experience what I have, it would silence them forever. I operate by the principle that the great Indian leader Geronimo held to: " It is always better to
seek the Truth, even if you have to sacrifice a false Peace to honor it, because you will never know Peace
any other way until you seek the Justice only the Truth will bring"