Yeah illegals are some hard workers, in a lot of cities they have the drug trade locked down, like in the mission district of san francisco, they have taken over all the heroin and crack dealing jobs from local americans. in California they have almost half the prison population locked down too
Could easily be the area where we lived Perhaps state law even, one state might be easier for those to abuse a system more widely than a different state. Could also be that I somehow got unlucky and only dealt with the lazy side of them I'm willing to admit that it's entirely possible. Around by me there are canning factories where some of them do work at. Even with working though they make at tops $5 an hour. Even those working for $5 an hour drive very nice custom vehicles, plus send $ back to mexico. Damn I want to know how to make $5 an hour, drive a nice vehicle and have enough left over to send back to my family!
The dollar has lost 50% of it's value on the international currency market in 5 years. The extra money in circulation is debt. I don't know about you, but debt without tangible collateral rarely has confidence. A planned economy is a failed notion. throughout history, planned economies fail over and over again. Even the Federal Reserve, with all of it's powers can only hope to influence, not to plan the economy by manipulation of the monetary supply and interest rates. This goes to the root of the government interventionism problem. This is incorrect. Banks do not go into debt, they create deposits on their books by depositing reserves in the Fed. This is fractional reserve banking. If they deposit $1 million, they can create $10 million in new deposits on their books. This is all "new" money. They then lend out this money at interest for profit. Are bullets and bombs providing a return on the debt? Is paying government pensions a good return on the debt? Is building a $750 billion US embassy in Iraq a good return? The only people who profit off of debt, are the bankers. They collect interest, and taxation is the collateral. We pay taxes, we service the debt. They aren't concerned with the principal, because fractional reserve banking allowed them to create that money from nothing. This is the transfer of wealth. One day people will wake up, or maybe not with a public education system that obsesses over sex education, instead of teaching economics and the Constitution. It's a simple cycle really. We work, pay taxes. The government takes taxes, uses it to service the debt. Our money is directly transferred to the banks, and then to Wall Street (the corporations that own the banks).
I meant plan economy as in an overview of how things should run not hands on from the gov't that has been proven to slow down the economy and only needed if things get out of hand. Loans and debts are based on confidence in a situation or person, they believe you will pay it back that is why they give you money. The reason the fed. puts more money in circulation is because of banks in relation to their needs and the confidence that they know how use it. The reason the American economy is the strongest in the world is because of the commodities we have and the confidence that the world (including the U.S.) has about it holding up. Well the dollar is at all time lows in years with lots of bad news of the economy still to come. We need an overview on how to correct the factors that build up confidence (in micro situations instead of the general aspect of the economy in comparision) like the numbers coming from our commodities and the economic conditions so that the dollar can make a comeback.
It's hard to believe but this admin. actually got us into a surplus instead of debt for a little while. Lets just hope that the all the major spending is done for Iraq and hope that can finish up the major things that are needed to be done there correctly and then get out of there.
Every war beats the crap out of the economy. The problem is, through waste and inefficiency, we're leaving a $60 trillion dollar obligation to the next generation. There is no money in medicare or social security, the government borrows it and includes it against the deficit. The government was never intended to run the economy, legislate morality or promote corporate interests. It's only job is to protect liberty and maintain the rule of law.
This is the absolute truth. Americans don't read most of the time, so they don't know how the economy is supposed to be. The government is not supposed to be getting involved in the affairs of global corporations. There are lots of people in this country right now who believe we live in a "free market." This is a load of Bull. We live in a neofeudalistic, plutocratic, mercantilistic economy. The rich basically control the government. Powerful old line families with deep pockets have control over much of the Congress, and the American citizens have lost a say in what goes on. Instead of being public servants, Congress and the president are now referred to as "leaders." The founding fathers made it clear that gold/silver was to be legal tender, and the government, not the Fed, was supposed to have the power to coin money. Man, we've come so far away from what the country is "supposed" to be. We have presidential candidates like Mitt Romney who need to "consult their attorney" before deciding what to do about Iran. Absolutely ridiculous. Then when an old line Republican, a Robert Taft Republican like Ron Paul comes on the scene, people want to act like he is an alien from the Andromeda galaxy. I mean, you've got people in this forum supporting cross dressers like Giuliani, who have mafia ties, I mean, its like I've woke up in the twilight zone.......
I keep hearing Paulites (Plones?) say that only gold and silver currency are allowed in the Constitution. I'm looking at the Constitution now, but I can't see what section they are referring to. Do you have any idea?
Hyperinflation has happened once in this country(so far), and that was during the Revolutionary War. During the time, the 13 colonies were using Colonial Scrip, and because of the hyperinflation caused during the war with the British, the founding fathers had a negative view towards paper money. I never said the Constitution specifically stated that gold and silver should be legal tender. But, at one time, the U.S. was on the silver standard. My grandmother remembers when you could exchange dollars directly into silver. There is a reason why the U.S. was on the silver standard. Now, the $64,000 question is why did we get off the silver standard. Check out this article from Wiki:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silver_standard Here are some interesting quotes from the article: The US Treasury was put on a strict hard money standard, doing business only in gold or silver coin as part of the Independent Treasury Act of 1848, which legally separated the accounts of the Federal Government from the banking system. However the fixed rate of gold to silver overvalued silver in relation to the demand for gold to trade or borrow from England. The drain of gold in favor of silver led to the search for gold, including the "California Gold Rush" of 1849. Following Gresham's law, silver poured into the US, which traded with other silver nations, and gold moved out. In 1853 the US reduced the silver weight of coins, to keep them in circulation, and in 1857 removed legal tender status from foreign coinage. The reason why you won't find it in the Constitution is because it isn't there. You can find it under The Coinage Act of 1792:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coinage_Act_(1792) By their actions, the founding fathers made it clear that the country should not use a paper currency not backed by precious metals. Unfortunately, like much of what the founding fathers stated, the U.S. government today does not follow their wisdom, and look at the mess we're in, 41 million can't afford the basics.......a large part of this has to do with our economic system.
I'll change your dollars into silver right now! Any kind of a single-commodity based currency is doomed to unpleasant fluctuations. Imagine if tomorrow scientists find a way to manufacture silver inexpensively? Imagine if geologists find a huge cache of silver 100 feet under Kansas? Ron Paul is a kindly old man, he doesn't think in terms of change and technology. You're a young man -- you should.
And a paper currency, unbacked by hard goods, but only "confidence", and manipulated by interest rates set by a secretive group is more secure? Gold is a safer standard. I'm not worried that Alchemy is suddenly going to come back as a legitimate science.
Money is just a "representation" of gold, silver, and other products of value. We can't carry bricks of gold with us wherever we go. The way that "representation" is being invested and used are the issues not the actual "representation". The gov't should step into the economy during times of crisis: black monday for instance but yes the markets should just be monitored by the gov't. The state of the dollar looks realy bad, undervalued by many critics and could be at that type of senario (nothing to that magnitude). Something needs to be done to get the ball rolling the other way. Some say the holiday season but will go back down after it because the numbers looks bleak for a while. Bonds are really bad right now too and that goes alot to debts.
The difference between silver, gold, and paper, and Will I think you already know this, is the labor theory of value in economics. Gold and silver has to be mined, people have to labor to bring it out of the ground. With the dollar, you just push a button to print it out. An ounce of gold today can buy you 350 loaves of bread, which is exactly what it could buy you in the 15th century. It is essentially inflation proof, maintaining its value over long periods of time. The chances of a sudden cache of silver being found is unlikely, because experts have said that the world supply of silver is dropping, there is only about $4.3 billion dollars left. Much of the silver mined comes from as by products from gold and other metals. It is becoming harder to even find pure silver that is not a by product. As far as creating silver in the lab, who knows? Maybe with advances in nanotech, but that is so far in the future that it means little today. In any event, anything that you have to labor for has a certain value, much more than paper. If silver can be cheaply produced in the lab, then so can uranium, aluminum, copper, and other things, but the technology isn't hear, and Guerilla summed it up well by saying its basically alchemy. The idea of creating something in a lab probably wouldn't even make it cheaper, because the cost, time, and sophistication of the tools necessary to produce any hypothetical synthetic material would require just as much if not more time and money than just doing it the old fashioned way...........by mining it.
The war would have wiped out a lot of our gold and silver by now and like Tesla said the supply is runing out. It kind of hard to be on a rigid economic standard when a crisis like that hits.
You have to be careful when saying this. To imply that Ron Paul's ideas are outdated could be dangerous, similar to a failure to listen to the wisdom of your grandparents. There are certain parties and groups right now in this country who think Ron Paul's ideas, and those of the founding fathers, are "out dating." The only thing that is outdated in regards to the view of the founding fathers is their thoughts on slavery and genocide of Native Americans. I think we should all agree that change in these areas was necessary. However, the founding fathers knew technology would advance. Ron Paul, despite being 72 years old, is using the Internet as his primary promotional tool. This is pretty remarkable, because my grandfather, who is only a few years older than Ron Paul, doesn't even own a computer!
Do you trust the government not to do anything corrupt in how it monitors the markets? Black Monday is a perfect example of what happens when the dollar is completely tied to confidence. The purpose of a gold standard isn't to carry bricks around, it's to combat fractional reserve banking. You can go to the bank, and if your dollar is worth so much gold, you can trade the paper money for the hard good. The Depression happened because people went to the banks in a period of low confidence, demanded their gold, and the fractional system had allowed more cash to be issued than there was gold on hand. That's what happens when you have inflation in the supply of money, and not enough assets to back the reserve notes. Until the government stops spending, more money will be created. More money in the system deflates the value of the dollars you have in the bank, and in your wallet. World markets have devalued our currency because they understand we are printing endless dollars, without the tangible backing to do so, and now it is catching up to us. The Fed estimates CPI around 2%. But that is under the new CPI which does not include M3 and leaves out food and energy costs. Under traditional CPI measures, I have heard that inflation right now is as high as 10%. Every day consumers will agree with this, because they seem all of their costs rising in the marketplace, not going down.
Well, you're right in a sense............but it is a bit complicated. When you talk about the war wiping out our gold and silver, you are looking at the war from the cost in terms of the dollar, which is an heavily inflated currency. If we had a currency backed by gold and silver, the government would be held in check, and they wouldn't be able to borrow money from the fed to go to war. Think about this...... When the government needs money for war, they have two choices: borrow money from the fed at a certain interest rate, or tax the people. The government has taxed the people as much as it can, so raising taxes won't help. Therefore, since we don't have a currency that is backed by gold or silver, the government can essentially borrow money from the fed, as much as they won't even it causes a lot of inflation. They can get away with this, because we're not on a silver or gold standard. But if we had a dollar backed by precious metals, the government could not borrow more money then they had in reserves, because this would cause inflation. It is complicated, but basically, the governments borrowing and wasteful use of money has put us in a bad economic position.
The Labor Theory of Value? That was replace long ago. It was replaced by the theory of marginal utility over one hundred years ago. The last great proponent of the labor theory of value was Karl Marx. He's been dead a long time! Critically, it is not reflective of economic reality. Any decent business person know that you set prices based upon the load that the market will bear. Here's a question: Q. If a widget costs you 5 cents to make, how much do you charge for it? The labor theory of value answer is "5 cents plus a reasonable profit." The real answer, to any decent business person, is "What can I get for it?"
But we got out of the depression because of the war, The New Deal, better bank rules and regulations all leads to confidence.