Ron Paul’s Amendment To Audit The Federal Reserve Approved
-
josda1000 wrote:
Gold and/or silver coins, maintained by the People under Congress and held by the Treasury. Not maintained AND held by a "central" private bank. Quote Selected Text
Gold and silver would be fantastic. However the central bankers have large stocks of it. They own and control most of the world's wealth. They really got us by the balls. So I think the first step would be to use United States Notes to replace the federal reserve notes. There are a lot of details and steps to liberate ourselves from the grip of the corruptoids but it must be done. No excuses, no bullshit, just do it...the sooner the better.
Gold is impossible for reasons already stated. Why would you care ? You'd be poor no matter what we accepted as money.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
-
so you guys actually support the idea of inflation, even if all of this turns out to be even? you do realize that the audit isn't just to figure out which banks got what amount of money, right? don't you realize that the idea of inflation is just to grow government and allow corporate powers to take free vacations? or is all of my rambling in vain?
josda1000 wrote:
don't you realize that the idea of inflation is just to grow government and allow corporate powers to take free vacations?
BS. Do you know ANYHING about economics ?
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
-
Why you referring to inflation as if someone sat down and said "Hey, let's make the money less valuable each year!" It's a side effect of a free market, not an intentional addition. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inflation#Causes[^] That said, the general consensus among economists is that a low but non-zero inflation rate is a good thing, and one of the purposes of the Fed is to keep the inflation rate from getting out of hand.
Proud to have finally moved to the A-Ark. Which one are you in? Developer, Author (Guardians of Xen)
Ian Shlasko wrote:
Why you referring to inflation as if someone sat down and said "Hey, let's make the money less valuable each year!"
Conspiracy theorists tend to act out of insecurity. A world where everything is controlled by evil bogey men, is more predictable than one where stuff just happens.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
-
josda1000 wrote:
Though that wouldn't stop them from creating bubbles; as seen in the great depression, the housing, the automotive sector, etc.
This is pretty ignorant. Are you CSS posting on another account, or just someone like minded ? The market creates bubbles, not any secret cabal. government policy can affect how things play out, but they can't FORCE a bubble to form.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
no, i'm not css. notice i only post about the fed basically lol and no, that isn't ignorant. it's called the austrian theory of economics. look up thomas woods, peter schiff, ron paul... of course you despise talking about ron paul, i remember that. the way they create the bubbles is by lowering interest rates. of course everyone loves lower interest rates though, because that's the start of the boom. when they necessarily, and eventually, have to bring them back to nominal levels, the bust phase is created. bubbles are started by lowering interest rates, say for housing. then people flock to that market, saying "hey, this is awesome, i can take out a loan with little to nothing on this mortgage!" then eventually, the party ends because the market value is nowhere near what the mortgages are going for. so people start having to pay more on the loans, people don't buy into the market any longer, and you see a dramatic drop in stock price. that's precisely what happened in the housing bubble last year. prove me wrong. this is the austrian theory.
-
Gold is impossible for reasons already stated. Why would you care ? You'd be poor no matter what we accepted as money.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
that reason already stated is completely bunk. you can set the dollar to whatever level, and the standard is set. you could also use two types of metal at the same time, say gold and silver. which is what's in the constitution... no coincidence or anything. let's say we take a few dollars out of circulation, right now. we could set silver at $15/oz, and gold at $1000/oz. eventually we'd, instead of passing around federal reserve notes, certificates. these certificates could be refundable at any bank, any time, for whatever value printed on the certificate. crisis solved. not hard.
-
Ian Shlasko wrote:
Why you referring to inflation as if someone sat down and said "Hey, let's make the money less valuable each year!"
Conspiracy theorists tend to act out of insecurity. A world where everything is controlled by evil bogey men, is more predictable than one where stuff just happens.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
lol boogey men... look, the numbers speak for themselves. go look up the gold prices and silver prices. silver is double what it was six months ago. get a fuckin clue... protect yourself and buy some silver, if you can't afford gold(notice that most people in the 1800s could at least afford gold; it was our currency). don't do it for me, do it for yourself. the dollar has lost 95% of its value since the fed was created. coincidence? or conspiracy theory? whatever you call it, i call it fact.
-
josda1000 wrote:
don't you realize that the idea of inflation is just to grow government and allow corporate powers to take free vacations?
BS. Do you know ANYHING about economics ?
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
keep on pickin out the sentences you like; i'll keep on talking about my point of view. of course that's what the media does as well, but you seem to buy into that pretty well. why is there an end the fed protest this weekend in 38 cities? i don't know, i guess there's just a lot of conspiracy theorists out there.
-
josda1000 wrote:
don't you realize that the idea of inflation is just to grow government and allow corporate powers to take free vacations?
BS. Do you know ANYHING about economics ?
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
By the way, one other thing. To give you an idea of how "the boogey man", as you call them, does kind of exist... take a look at recent Argentina history. Argentina got scammed by the same banks we're getting scammed by now. And this was only in December of 2001.
-
dude, that's called propaganda. if you really understood basic, common sense economics, you wouldn't be listening to idiots. check this youtube video out, an investor named peter schiff, running for united states senate from connecticut. Gold, Geithner, Roubini, the Fed, Housing[^] start using your brain, make judgements for yourself. this is basic economics, and i don't know how anyone can buy the crap that mainstream economists say.
-
By the way, one other thing. To give you an idea of how "the boogey man", as you call them, does kind of exist... take a look at recent Argentina history. Argentina got scammed by the same banks we're getting scammed by now. And this was only in December of 2001.
-
no, i'm not css. notice i only post about the fed basically lol and no, that isn't ignorant. it's called the austrian theory of economics. look up thomas woods, peter schiff, ron paul... of course you despise talking about ron paul, i remember that. the way they create the bubbles is by lowering interest rates. of course everyone loves lower interest rates though, because that's the start of the boom. when they necessarily, and eventually, have to bring them back to nominal levels, the bust phase is created. bubbles are started by lowering interest rates, say for housing. then people flock to that market, saying "hey, this is awesome, i can take out a loan with little to nothing on this mortgage!" then eventually, the party ends because the market value is nowhere near what the mortgages are going for. so people start having to pay more on the loans, people don't buy into the market any longer, and you see a dramatic drop in stock price. that's precisely what happened in the housing bubble last year. prove me wrong. this is the austrian theory.
Funny how with you guys, it's always a "they"... Do you know what bubbles and busts are? Human nature. "Well, the economy seems to be improving... I better invest while I still can!" That's all the bubbles are. People see things going well, and so they decide to join in. The better things go, the more people join in, and so it keeps going up. It's a self-fulfilling prophecy... Except eventually, things will get so expensive that people start to think... "Hmm, well, maybe that's as high as it's going to go. I better sell now before it goes back down!" And that's when the bubble bursts. People take their profits and sell, and that drops the price. When the price drops, more people sell, which drops the price more. And it starts spiraling down and down and down and down... And that's the bust. Eventually, it gets low enough that people start to think... "Well, can't get much worse than this, huh? Maybe this is the bottom... I better buy in!" And it starts all over again. It has nothing to do with interest rates. There's one principle you and CSS need to understand... And this applies to everything from business to politics... Here it is in big letters... Perception is Reality If people think the market is going up, it goes up. If people think it's going down, it goes down. If the Fed can convince people that it'll get better, say by lowering interest rates, it WILL get better. The problem with this past recession was that the Fed couldn't convince people that it would get better... That's what the stimulus package was for. It was to show people "Hey, look, the government is going to fix everything!" Enough people believed that, so the market started to go back up. Perception is reality. Lesson over. Class dismissed.
Proud to have finally moved to the A-Ark. Which one are you in? Developer, Author (Guardians of Xen)
-
no, i'm not css. notice i only post about the fed basically lol and no, that isn't ignorant. it's called the austrian theory of economics. look up thomas woods, peter schiff, ron paul... of course you despise talking about ron paul, i remember that. the way they create the bubbles is by lowering interest rates. of course everyone loves lower interest rates though, because that's the start of the boom. when they necessarily, and eventually, have to bring them back to nominal levels, the bust phase is created. bubbles are started by lowering interest rates, say for housing. then people flock to that market, saying "hey, this is awesome, i can take out a loan with little to nothing on this mortgage!" then eventually, the party ends because the market value is nowhere near what the mortgages are going for. so people start having to pay more on the loans, people don't buy into the market any longer, and you see a dramatic drop in stock price. that's precisely what happened in the housing bubble last year. prove me wrong. this is the austrian theory.
-
Funny how with you guys, it's always a "they"... Do you know what bubbles and busts are? Human nature. "Well, the economy seems to be improving... I better invest while I still can!" That's all the bubbles are. People see things going well, and so they decide to join in. The better things go, the more people join in, and so it keeps going up. It's a self-fulfilling prophecy... Except eventually, things will get so expensive that people start to think... "Hmm, well, maybe that's as high as it's going to go. I better sell now before it goes back down!" And that's when the bubble bursts. People take their profits and sell, and that drops the price. When the price drops, more people sell, which drops the price more. And it starts spiraling down and down and down and down... And that's the bust. Eventually, it gets low enough that people start to think... "Well, can't get much worse than this, huh? Maybe this is the bottom... I better buy in!" And it starts all over again. It has nothing to do with interest rates. There's one principle you and CSS need to understand... And this applies to everything from business to politics... Here it is in big letters... Perception is Reality If people think the market is going up, it goes up. If people think it's going down, it goes down. If the Fed can convince people that it'll get better, say by lowering interest rates, it WILL get better. The problem with this past recession was that the Fed couldn't convince people that it would get better... That's what the stimulus package was for. It was to show people "Hey, look, the government is going to fix everything!" Enough people believed that, so the market started to go back up. Perception is reality. Lesson over. Class dismissed.
Proud to have finally moved to the A-Ark. Which one are you in? Developer, Author (Guardians of Xen)
Yes you're absolutely right. That's market theory in general, not Keynesian or Austrian. You're absolutely right. And that's exactly what I'm trying to tell you. The Fed can manipulate the markets by lowering interest rates. The bust will come when they take the interest rate and set it to a normal value. The boom comes when the Fed, aka "they", lowers it. Just think of it like that. Because you gave me half of the argument in your long speech there, just extend the logic a bit.
-
Austrian School is just one body that forwards a theory. The Chicago School also forwards a theory. But those theories are each different in both tone and content. Read this PDF [^] and give us your considered opinion.
I agree with it 100%. We need to base our dollar on something hard, such as gold, silver, platinum, etc. It doesn't matter if it's a mix of these hard assets either, just as long as it's backed by, or actually is, commodity/commodities. They blamed the problem on the banks. Agreed. They think that the only way that the federal government would be able to solve it is by inflating. Agreed. So basically, I agree with it, 100%.
-
josda1000 wrote:
dude
You shot the credibility of your argument right there. :laugh:
You measure democracy by the freedom it gives its dissidents, not the freedom it gives its assimilated conformists.
-
-
Yes you're absolutely right. That's market theory in general, not Keynesian or Austrian. You're absolutely right. And that's exactly what I'm trying to tell you. The Fed can manipulate the markets by lowering interest rates. The bust will come when they take the interest rate and set it to a normal value. The boom comes when the Fed, aka "they", lowers it. Just think of it like that. Because you gave me half of the argument in your long speech there, just extend the logic a bit.
The point is that they aren't CAUSING the booms and busts. They're countering them. When the bust happens (And it will, with or without the Fed), they lower interest rates in order to COUNTERACT that, and end the bust before it gets too bad. Of course, those interest rates have to have somewhere to go... So when things get near the top, they gradually raise interest rates so they'll have some breathing room for the next bust.
Proud to have finally moved to the A-Ark. Which one are you in? Developer, Author (Guardians of Xen)
-
The point is that they aren't CAUSING the booms and busts. They're countering them. When the bust happens (And it will, with or without the Fed), they lower interest rates in order to COUNTERACT that, and end the bust before it gets too bad. Of course, those interest rates have to have somewhere to go... So when things get near the top, they gradually raise interest rates so they'll have some breathing room for the next bust.
Proud to have finally moved to the A-Ark. Which one are you in? Developer, Author (Guardians of Xen)
A) give me an example of when booms and busts, like what you see now since the fed has been in force since 1913, happened so rashly in america. or even still, give me an example of when the market wouldn't correct itself when a central bank was in place around the world. B) before the great depression, there was another minor depression, around 1920 or 1919 or something, and it only lasted a year or two. does anyone know about it? no, not as greatly as the great depression, which lasted for about a decade. this is because FDR was known to "solve the great depression". he and the fed actually exaggerated the problem, by trying to correct it. now about the smaller, lesser known depression, that lasted for a short time because nobody even TRIED to correct it, at all. the fed was just enacted only a few years prior, and the market corrected itself. C) if the fed tries to correct it with changing the interest rates, then the market becomes skewed. soon, the fed will have to necessarily bring the interest rates back up to nominal conditions, in which time the bust will come BECAUSE OF THAT, and we will have a depression. mark my words. when you see this happen, you will really wake up. the bust will come because people will get out of that sector of the market (housing AND education), and people will be really hurting. badly. people will leave the sector because interest rates are not what they were (which is actually now), and the bubble will have popped. So what i'm getting at is that this is all started with the fed. when the fed counteracts, it acts against the will of the market, causing confusion in the market, and causing a bubble in the sector.
-
A) give me an example of when booms and busts, like what you see now since the fed has been in force since 1913, happened so rashly in america. or even still, give me an example of when the market wouldn't correct itself when a central bank was in place around the world. B) before the great depression, there was another minor depression, around 1920 or 1919 or something, and it only lasted a year or two. does anyone know about it? no, not as greatly as the great depression, which lasted for about a decade. this is because FDR was known to "solve the great depression". he and the fed actually exaggerated the problem, by trying to correct it. now about the smaller, lesser known depression, that lasted for a short time because nobody even TRIED to correct it, at all. the fed was just enacted only a few years prior, and the market corrected itself. C) if the fed tries to correct it with changing the interest rates, then the market becomes skewed. soon, the fed will have to necessarily bring the interest rates back up to nominal conditions, in which time the bust will come BECAUSE OF THAT, and we will have a depression. mark my words. when you see this happen, you will really wake up. the bust will come because people will get out of that sector of the market (housing AND education), and people will be really hurting. badly. people will leave the sector because interest rates are not what they were (which is actually now), and the bubble will have popped. So what i'm getting at is that this is all started with the fed. when the fed counteracts, it acts against the will of the market, causing confusion in the market, and causing a bubble in the sector.
I could have sworn I had just explained how the boom/bust cycle is unrelated to the Fed... And you seemed to agree with that until you realized the point I was making.
josda1000 wrote:
A) give me an example of when booms and busts, like what you see now since the fed has been in force since 1913, happened so rashly in america. or even still, give me an example of when the market wouldn't correct itself when a central bank was in place around the world.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panic_of_1796%E2%80%931797[^] - Fixed by the Bankruptcy Act of 1800 after 4 years http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panic_of_1819[^] - Recovered naturally after 4 years http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panic_of_1837[^] - Recovered naturally after 5 years http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panic_of_1857[^] - Fixed the same year by drastically reducing tariffs http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panic_of_1873[^] - Recovered naturally after 6 years http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panic_of_1884[^] - Part of a larger recession - Was stopped from getting MUCH worse by a bank bailout http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panic_of_1893[^] - Recovered after 3 years because of the Gold Rush Here's the list: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_stock_market_crashes[^] All of these i
-
I agree with it 100%. We need to base our dollar on something hard, such as gold, silver, platinum, etc. It doesn't matter if it's a mix of these hard assets either, just as long as it's backed by, or actually is, commodity/commodities. They blamed the problem on the banks. Agreed. They think that the only way that the federal government would be able to solve it is by inflating. Agreed. So basically, I agree with it, 100%.
Do I take from your postings that you fully agree with the Austrian School of Economics as well as fully agree with the Chicago School of Economics? Frankly, they are competing theories not complementary. It is impossible to fully accept both. So, would you like to clarify your position, it is a little confused from where I stand.