10 reasons why you should vote for Ron Paul in 2008.

America is no longer america, america has been, ever since the federal reserves completion, a nation run secretly by people very similar in objectives to the nazis...

don't believe me? Why did they bring all the nazi scientists over here and start funding mind control experiments... if mtv isn't proof enough what IS!?!

 

Ron Paul is well aware of these things, but there is something very important that you must understand: If he goes public talking about this stuff while he is running for president, he will lose the race, because the mass media will automatically try to paint him to be a "Conspiracy Nut."

When you're running for president, you have to be careful with what you say, because the media and your opponents will use it against you. Once you get in the White House, you can be more open about your beliefs, because you're already president.

 

This is actually why I think RP (or some other Independent) will win by a landslide... the two parties are in denial about him being a credible threat, so they aren't even worried about him and are fighting amongst themselves... looking like politicians.

 

They've lied and manipulated you so far... what stops them from rigging the vote? what stops them? hm?

ron paul??? come on now. Your all weighing in on one man, because as americans, you've been comfortable not doing anything and letting them run it all for so long that you assume you can continue to do the same! its just not the case.

 

Who cares what the mass media paints you as?

If its the truth its the truth, and no matter how much we don't like it someday we must all confront it. I could give a F*** what they do, I just don't like the feeling they're planning on herding us all into camps like they did the jews.

 

Tesla,

The government cannot go to the Fed and request money. That's not how the open market operation works. The majority of the Federal debt is held by the government itself, the public sector, and foreigners (refer to the current issue of the Treasury Bulletin). The Fed buys securities from these people and organizations in the secondary market; they are not allowed to buy government securities directly from the Treasury. Therefore, the war is not funded by the Federal Reserve. If you cannot accept this as a fact, there is no reason to discuss this issue any further because your assumptions are incorrect.
Prior to 1913, wealth disparity in the US was not as conspicuous as it is today. However, the poor of that time were extremely poor. Today, nearly half of the population who are classified as "poor" by the Census Bureau own their own homes, and they have more living space than an average person who lives in Paris. In addition, most of them own at least one car and have air conditioning.

 

I have more faith in America than that. I'm not worried about it in the least bit, but it is fun to watch all the "loonies" bond together under a common cause.

ron paul supporters will ensure their candidate will not win. They are their own demise. Just look at some of the posts, directly above. All I can do is smile and shake my head

What I'm *really* looking forward to, is all the "conspiracy theories" that alex jones and other nuts like him will generate, when RP doesn't even come close to winning the nomination, to line their pockets from the gullible suckers that make them rich. I'm going to have a field day when that time comes around

If I have enough time, I may even start my own RP conspiracy site, just to cash in on the lucrative market!

 

Umm, the voters care what the media paints you as. If you're made to look like a Conspiracy Nut, you will lose the election. Unfortunately, we live in a world where people judge you based on your appearance. I didn't make it that way, its just the way things are.

You have to use strategy, it is all about thinking strategically. Do you think Otto Von Bismarck unified Germany by being opened with his plans. No, you're supposed to conceal your intentions. In the game of power, putting all your cards on the table where everyone can see them is foolish.

When you say "own their own homes" I sure hope you're not talking about people with mortgages. You do not own anything when you have a mortgage. You're in debt. You owe the bank money, you're renting to own the house. The house is not yours until it is paid off. Please clarify this.

I don't consider you to be a "homeowner" if you're paying a mortgage each month. The bank is the "homeowner," and if you don't believe me just stop paying your mortgage and see what happens.

Good Lord. The Fed is a bank, what do all banks do? They all loan out money. Where the money comes from is irrelevant. Whether or not the U.S. government borrows money "directly" from the Fed is irrelevant. The Central Bank is the master, and if we're in debt to foreigners, that is just as bad. Sitting here talking about whether or not the Government gets its money directly from the fed is arguing over a technicality.

It doesn't matter. Debt is debt. When you owe money to someone, and you can only make the interest payments on it, you're a slave. The U.S. government can only pay the interest on the national debt, that is what our income taxes go towards.

Again, you've showed no evidence for why the Gold/Silver standard is weak in comparison to fiat money. History proves you incorrect. There are so many countries that have collapsed due to paper money, and over printing, and the U.S. may be next.

Also, please clarify this: are you saying the Fed prints money, but doesn't loan it to the U.S. government? That doesn't make any sense.

Again, are these cars of which you speak cars which are owned by the people, as in paid off, or do they have car loans? A brand new car takes up a sizeable percentage of the average American's income.

Also, 1.3 million in New York go without food on a regular basis, and rely on government programs, and 10% of the U.S. population goes hungry on a consistent basis. I find it hard to believe we are richer today than we were before 1913. Even the IRS data shows this not to be correct.

The wealth gap in this country right now is at the highest point in history. But don't believe me, believe the IRS:http://forums.digitalpoint.com/showthread.php?t=512273&highlight=IRS

The link above shows that the income inequality in America today is the worst since the 1920s. This is just a few years after the Fed was established. And keep in mind the 1920s was right before we had the Great Depression in the 30s. Now fast forward to today. You've got the income inequality, which the IRS says is the highest since the 1920s, and we're moving deeper into a recession. It is pretty obvious that history is about to repeat itself yet again.

Here is another thread I started which again refutes your claims. It says that 41 million Americans can't even afford the basics:http://forums.digitalpoint.com/showthread.php?t=509691&highlight=IRS

 

I've always wanted to do an experiment with an online MMORPG, with an advanced economy, and see how well it does with a federal reserve vs. the usual gold standard economy they use. Is it possibly why MMORPG's are so easy to make money in? I only took one macroeconomics class in my semester of college, so I'm no expert, but there is something simple and inspiring about a thriving MMO economy. Maybe it's just too late at night here lol.

 

The Fed is a bank that loans money to banks, not the government. The fact that they operates in the open market is a crucial point and not an irrelevant technicality. It means that the government is able to fund itself without the Fed. This is a fact that speaks against your argument. Whether a person "owns" the house or not if he/she is paying mortgage on it is technicality. Are you challenging the fact that the poor today is worse off than the poor 100 years ago? Wealth disparity does not mean that the poor are getting poorer.
Look at all of the countries that are under the fiat currency system today. Are they all failures? The gold standard is less efficient because it limits the government's ability to utilize fiscal stimulus when its needed.

 

LOL, how is this a technicality? When you own something, it is yours. You don't own something when you're making payments on it, and this is exactly what a mortgage is. The true owner is the lender. When the bank uses the term "homeowner" when referring to a mortgage, they are manipulating you.

They are making you think you own something, when you own nothing. Ownership in my book is having something that is 100% paid for, whether it house, boat, car, whatever.

And how does the U.S. government fund itself without the Fed? Where do they get the money? I already know through income taxes, and the other taxes, but again, these are not enough to pay off the national debt.

Just as calling someone with a mortgage a "homeowner," the word "Federal Reserve" is also manipulative, and designed to fool the American public. The Fed is not federal, it is a private bank, it is about as Federal as Federal Express or Pizza Hut.

The Fed was not created by the American public, it was not created by the founding fathers. It was created by a powerful group of wealthy American families that have used the Fed for their own selfish gains. I'll tell you what the Fed is, it is a virus, a financial virus.

Please explain why you say this. When your country has huge wealth gap between the rich and the poor, correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't that mean your Middle Class is shrinking? The Middle Class is the bridge between the poor and the rich. Third world countries don't have a Middle Class, I think that speaks for itself.

Please explain fiscal stimulus to me. Yes, fiat money works when the government manages the money properly. Unfortunately, history shows us that people in power don't tend to do things for the common good of the people.

In other words, when you have a powerful group of people who control the printing press which prints out the dollars, don't be surprised when your cost of living goes through the roof, and your currency becomes devalued, because as the Oracle told Neo in the Matrix Reloaded, powerful men always want more power.

Gold and Silver, on the other hand, can't be printed into unlimited quantities, or keyed into a computer, because gold and silver is scare, and very hard to get. They are both fair metals. Paper isn't fair, it is only fair for the people who control the printing press, and those who get to use the newly created paper money first. The rest of us lose.

 

Dude, a mortgage is just about as close to real ownership as you can get now days. Even if you paid for a house in cash (which would probably be the reason you get it taken away lol), you can get it taken away for any number of things by the government, including not paying unfair taxes, or if they decide imminent domain.

Show me one example of true ownership immune from government seizure, and then I'll agree that a mortgage is any different. In some ways, it's less risky, cause at least you didn't save all that hard earned cash just to have it stolen. Kind of like insurance.

 

So you agree with me that the United States is no longer a free country? You've implied as much, and I agree. Eminent domain is in violation of the Constitution. The Constitution protects private property from from being confiscated without just compensation, and private property can only be taken when it is being used for the public. By your post, you agree with me then that the government today blatantly disregards the Constitution and Bill of Rights?

This is precisely why I started this thread, to show why we should all vote for Ron Paul. By your post SolutionX, you've brought everything full circle. It all goes back to why we need to get Ron Paul in office, because he follows the Constitution, and none of the other candidates will.

If a mortgage is the closest thing we have to ownership today, then this country is just as bad I belief it is. And I agree with you about paying for it in cash. Since the bank and government expects us to borrow money like good little slaves, if we suddenly pay for a house in cash, we must be "drug dealers" are "terrorists." The FBI would probably start watching us.

I read a book earlier this year about asset forfeiture laws here in the U.S., and you are absolutely right. A business man in Nashville went to pay for his ticket, and he had $9,000 on him, and because he paid for his ticket in cash, he was reported to the police, and his money was confiscated. It took him three years to get it back, and he almost lost his business. So much for a free country....

 

It's a technicality because it doesn't change the fact that the poor today is better off than the poor 100 years ago.

When the Treasury initially issues government securities, all of them are purchased by the citizens & organizations in the US, foreigners, and the government itself. The auction is held by the Treasury on weekly basis. The Fed cannot take part in this.

The Fed is federal in that the Federal Reserve Board is a Federal Government Agency.

The Fed was not started by wealthy families. No one can benefit financially from the Federal Reserve, not even its stockholders which are the member banks.

Wealth disparity does not imply that the poor are getting poorer. I have stated myself that the gap is widening. We do not live in a zero-sum economy. Money can be created and is being created and destroyed everyday. It doesn't just change hands or "transfer." The rich spend the majority of their income on investments and luxury goods. Necessities are not induced consumption, but autonomous consumption for them; they do not greatly impact the prices of goods that the the middle class and the poor consume. Therefore, the rich getting richer does not imply that the poor are getting poorer. Wealth disparity will still increase even if the poor get wealthier if the rich get wealthier at a faster rate.

The gold standard is not going to correct the behavior of people in power. Fiscal stimulus is the government spending that occurs when unemployment is high and the economy is contracting.

 

If we have a treasury, then why do we need a Fed? The Fed is a government institution, according to you. Why is a government institution getting involved in the Free market by loaning money to private banks? This is alien to what this country stands for. It also implies that the government is managing the economy, which it isn't supposed to be doing.

I challenge you to look up information on the Fed in your phone book. You will not find it in the government section. It is listed under private businesses. I just checked my own phone book, and I see the FBI, but I don't see anything about the Fed.

This excellent four and a half star rated book on Amazon, written by G. Edward Griffin, doesn't agree with you:http://www.amazon.com/Creature-Jeky...bs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1195893673&sr=8-1

You never addressed what happens to the Middle Class in this scenario.

So fiscal stimulus involves government spending. This is what I thought. Limiting government spending sounds like a great idea. If the Gold Standard would weaken their ability to spend, I'd imagine we would be in great shape. They also wouldn't be able to print money out of thin air to go to war.

 

The Fed is not a government institution. It is an independent institution with a government agency at the top.

Do you think that the people who make those phone books know a damn thing about the Fed? Just because they categorize it as a business, it doesn't mean that it is. A phone book is a poor source.

I know about the book and I've read it. I found it humorous.

The term "middle class" is applied relative to the wealth of the economy. Ceteris paribus, if the rich get richer, the middle class will be placed lower on the scale. It doesn't mean that they become poor; they only become poor relative to the rich.

Limiting government spending is indeed a good idea when the economy is expanding. However, when the economy is struggling, government spending helps immensely.

 

ReadyToGo, back to your shenanigans again. I notice you skipped the thread where Helicopter Bernanke got called out by Ron Paul on devaluing the dollar, and Bernanke replied that an undervalued currency doesn't affect Americans buying goods in America, which we all know to be blatantly false, because as the dollar falls, commodities rise, and so do prices.

The poor do not actually own anything. The country has a negative savings rate for the first time in history. How long can a system of unlimited credit to the government, unlimited printed dollars, and unlimited spending continue?

If you have researched fiat currencies, you would know this is a prelude to the final stages

Owning the house is not a technicality. You don't own your debts. Your creditor does. Puleeze.

I've already got you to admit that fractional reserve banking massively inflates the money supply. And you also know damn well, (because you're smart, obstinate, but smart) that lowering interest rates hurts the bond markets (savings) and increases velocity, which can cause inflation. And that the aforementioned monetary inflation also causes inflation by increasing the cost of commodities.

How does the government fund itself without the FED? They do not increase or contract the money supply, the FED does. They can only tax, and borrow, and loans must be repaid with interest, from taxes. So how is it that we can continue to deficit spend indefinitely without raising taxes and cutting services?

The gold standard doesn't limit the government's ability to stimulate the economy. Are you honestly trying to tell me that the government couldn't stimulate the economy between 1776 and 1971?

The FED sets targets for open market operations. You should know this. Under a gold standard, an open market operation would target a specific gold price.

I think you're back into thinking like a Keynesian, where government debt is used to stimulate the economy. The reality is that the free market is self correcting, when it inflates, it deflates back to a safe level. Recessions occur, mal-investment is purged from the system, and the cycle begins anew. When the FED rate cuts, it destroys people's savings in order to save the mal-investors. Wall Street and the recent idiots who gave home loans to people who would not have received credit before. Those same idiots like the guy from Merrill Lynch who just ended his employment.

But the 12 Member Banks and their subsidiaries can. And then they reserve the securities, claim a fractional bonus in deposit, reserve some of the deposit, claim another fractional deposit, etc. And it continues to inflate the monetary supply. $1 in, $10 out, $1 in, now the bank has $19 from it's initial $1 reserve.

We've also covered this. The courts have already ruled that the reserve banks are corporations and subject to tort law. The member banks, which own the reserve banks are privately owned in some cases, and publicly traded in others.

There is no other government agency that has stock on the market through it's ownership tree. There is no other government agency which pays dividends to it's sub branches.

The Reserve banks are owned by member banks, and again, you know this, we have covered it before.

Who ponied up the initial deposits to purchase the 12 reserve banks? What about the 6% guaranteed return?

This is a fallacy. Who collects the interest off of the fractionally factored FED deposits? If you gave me $1 million, and I gave you back $10 million, and you released it into the system as credit, and would be collecting interest on $10 million, first, before the market prices could adjust to the increase in money supply. Not to mention that I have magically increased my capital lending base by a factor of 10, all because I am plugged into the system.

The gold standard will correct the behavior of the people in power. They will not be able to deficit spend without taxing or directing devaluing the currency by pegging the dollar to gold at a new rate.

Look at the states. The Constitution forbids them from issuing bills of credit, or producing money. They must carry and service their debt with taxes. This tax pressure upon the citizens of a state influences the government each election cycle.

Your version of fiscal stimulus is Keynesian. The problem is, when the government controls the economy, the special interests control the government for their own benefit. In a free market, each consumer makes the decisions on goods and services, and decentralizes any attempts for special interests to influence through central economic planning.

 

You find the Congressional records humorous too? What about the memoirs of the Jekyll island group? Are those pretty damn funny to you?

You conveniently never mention when you talk about fiat money, like it is this amazing system that is infallible, that we had two 20 year chartered central banks prior to the Federal Reserve Act. Both were dissolved by the government because they caused runaway inflation.

That's also why the Constitution forbids the states to create their own money. Because prior to the Constitution, some states would inflate their money supply and cause trade imbalances and inflation between the colonies.

The Founders knew more about inflation than people do today. They had to fight it in the colonies, against the mercantile interests, and it the revolution was triggered by the King demanding payment of taxes in Gold, to satisfy the Bank of England, for debts incurred fighting the French. This bled the colonies dry of any hard money currency with which to conduct trade.

And the rich set the price levels for the more expensive things like property, education, big ticket consumer goods, jewelry etc.

When you become poorER relative to the rich, upward mobility is severely compromised. Or in simpler terms, the American Dream starts to become elusive.

I'm against abortion, but in Keynes case, an exception could have been made. The entire theory of government deficit spending driving the economy is exactly what has destroyed every economy where the government went bankrupt. When you couple this with an infinite supply of worthless paper money, the government never corrects itself, devaluing the currency, and spending until the economy collapses. See, USSR, Rome, England, Song Dynasty etc.

 

Well, if I was a european super power infiltrating america,
I'd be smiling like Gtech over how much time you guys spend whining over gold and paper....

Call me a looney gtech but I don't trust those stinky brits!

 

So I've gotten you to admit that a large wealth gap in society does place the Middle Class "lower on the scale," which means their standard of living goes down, right?

Now, I think we can all agree that the Middle Class is what keeps a first world country afloat. Third world countries don't have them, so I think we have a correlation here. Now, if the wealth disparity is causing the Middle Class to be placed lower on the scale, does this not mean that your country is on the path of becoming second or third world, because your Middle Class is weaker?