More on Ron Paul and the Gold Standard; Is RP For a One-World Currency?
By Maurice Pinay
http://www.mauricepinay.blogspot.com/
Tuesday, January 1, 2008
More on Ron Paul and the Gold Standard
It is good that people are becoming more aware of the "Federal" "Reserve" racket and that there is a movement forming around the idea of abolishing it. But the timing is conspicuous. The "Fed" racket, which cannot be sustained forever, may very well be near collapse anyway. What I am attempting to do is anticipate the revolution-makers' next move. These are people who use the Kabbalistic/Hegelian dialectic against opponents who never seem to identify it, much less understand it. It's as if a child was playing chess against a master. The chess master has a large bag of gambits to draw from, the best of which feign a weak move which entices an anticipated reaction from the child opponent which results in disaster a few exchanges later. The child opponent is not only tricked into losing the game, he is tricked into participating in his own defeat.
We are fighting an enemy that thinks and we don't think. This is the "horrible anti-semitic canard" stated so well by the Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad in 2003. This is great wisdom that he tried to impart to others which was drowned out by the screeching and howling of the Zionists of the U.S. media as is so often the case.
The bankers are not just watching the collapse of the "Fed" racket figuring they had a good thing going for a while and that the party will soon be over. They intend to maintain control and further consolidate it. They have contingency plans. The debt-based "Fed" central banking racket is not the only system in their bag of tricks. The gold standard is another system that they have mastered and thrived under in the past. Supporters of Ron Paul must take note of this fact.
St. Thomas explained the role of money for Christians: it is an exchange medium for the good of the people which should serve the people, not bankers. As an exchange medium, money should not fluctuate in value as we are so accustomed. St. Thomas wrote that: "Money must keep the same value, since the value of all things must be expressed in terms of money."
Gold is a commodity with an arbitrary value which is subject to manipulation as is any commodity. The price of gold rises and falls as it becomes dear or common; as it is hoarded or circulated. Chaining a nation's money to gold is to chain it also to the fluctuations in volume and price of gold. This is a poor means of reaching the ideal objective of an exchange medium which has a stable value. Look at a price chart for gold over the past 2 years if you need confirmation of this fact.
Ideally, the exchange medium would be issued by the nation's government, as the U.S. founders provided, but it is not possible for a government to completely control all gold. If the exchange medium was backed by gold it would be subject to manipulation by forces outside the body issuing it. The economy of the nation could be manipulated by manipulating the gold market.
The problem also arises: if specie currency is redeemable in gold, it would be possible for the gold to be drained from reserve by demanding exchange of currency for gold as the Rothschilds did in England. If the currency is not redeemable for gold, then the system is a farce. Why bring gold into the equation at all?
The U.S. Constitution allows the government to issue currency by fiat. This is a sound system as long as the volume of currency issued is carefully controlled to be directly proportionate to the nation's production. The hucksters who attack the "Federal" "Reserve" in favor of the gold standard generally focus their rhetoric on the fact that the "Fed" issues paper money. This itself is not the problem however. The problems with the "Fed" system are that it is a debt-based, fractional reserve racket controlled by private individuals whose interests are their own, not the interests of the nation; that it is unsound and inevitably results in debt that cannot be paid; that it enslaves the people rather than serving them.
The argument generally is, "well I don't want those corrupt politicians in charge of issuing currency." But the fact is that any system no matter how perfectly laid out cannot function well if it is peopled by corrupt individuals. It's the responsibility of the people to monitor the performance of politicians and hold them responsible for their performance. Better to have the issue of currency handled by politicians who the people have recourse to, as the system was intended, than some untouchable private organization.
The answer to the debt-based federal reserve system is not backing the currency with a commodity. This is a non-sequitur. Fiat currency is not debt-based by nature. The government can issue currency without incurring any debt, for no more cost than the price of printing or stamping the currency. This is the answer to the "Fed": U.S. government-issued fiat currency.
If fiat currency is handled correctly it's not subject to the fluctuations of value of any other commodity, it is a stable exchange medium, and there's no debt incurred in issuing it other than the cost of printing/stamping it. Further, the volume of government-issued fiat currency can be increased as productivity of the nation increases thereby maintaining price stability and assuring sufficient currency to facilitate exchange as the economy grows. In the gold standard system the volume of currency is dictated by the amount of gold in reserve. I leave it to the reader to decide which system is more natural to a healthy economy.
Many of you may be aware that the gold that's supposed to be in Fort Knox is not there. You may also be aware that whatever gold the nation does have possession of would only back a tiny fraction of the value of our present economy. Even if it were possible to acquire enough gold to back an economy measured in trillions of dollars, as it is today, where do you think that gold is going to come from? How much debt are you willing to put the nation into in order to "return to the gold standard"?
Talk about a debt-based system! Just obtaining the gold would put the nation into crushing debt. The gold would have to be acquired through loan at interest. If our currency must be backed by gold and the gold must be acquired by loan at interest, there would be no way to pay even the principle of the loan without giving the gold back, but even then there would still be debt left based on the interest. Who would be served by this arrangement? The people?
Ron Paul supporters are on notice. Ron Paul is an energetic promoter of the gold standard. If you're fighting to put Ron Paul in office, you are responsible to understand the effect his policies would have if they're put into practice. If you're not dissuaded by this aspect of Paul's ideology, then I challenge you to make this an issue that Ron Paul and his supporters must address. Let the facts come out in a healthy debate on the matter. When the time comes to deal with the collapse of the Federal Reserve, let people be educated on this issue so they don't play into the Kabbalistic gambit prepared for them.
____________________________________________________________________________________
Wednesday, January 2, 2008
Ron Paul: For a One-World Currency?
In this informal interview Ron Paul seems to promote not only adoption of a gold-backed currency for the U.S., but a one-world gold-backed currency (at approximately 3:08 in the video). I wonder who he figures will issue this one-world currency, if I understand him correctly:
I remember watching the "Money Masters" video and they made a similar point about a gold standard. Another suggestion that was put forward was a currency that was backed by a wide variety of commodities. That would make it impossible to manipulate because that would involve cornering the market on everything.
The job of the government in such a system would be to control inflation and promote steady growth. During elections the various candidates could show how the persons in charge failed or succeeded in checking inflation.
There doesn't seem to be much of a difference between a "multi-commodity" system and one of pure fiat. In either system the government would issue money in proportion to goods produced and hours worked. Unless an item should become scarce, there is no reason for it to become more dear. In a "multi-commodity" system, I imagine that if one or two the valuing commodities were to become scarce, there would not be any great change in the system. The commodities really seem to serve as a method of discerning whether there has been inflation or deflation.
As you point out, this debt based system is crazy. The Fed is like a giant leach. We are taxed merely for the privilege of possessing our own currency.
Libertarians like RP don't trust the government to do anything. But as you say, this system of private banks has inflated our currency beyond anything our government could have done, and they are not accountable to the people.
Gold appeals to Libertarians because they feel that the government could not produce money at their whim, and spend us into the poor house. But as you say, merely getting back into that standard would put us into the poor house. There are powerful interests that can control the gold market.
I my be one of many paranoid people on this site, but I find it highly suspicious that Presidents Lincoln and Kennedy used their executive power to print debt free money, and both were assassinated.
-----------------------
"Stop judging by appearances, but judge justly."
You're very kind, Christopher Marlowe-- but all of the credit for the wisdom and erudition displayed in the blog belongs to its author, Maurice Pinay. I could no more speak sensibly about economics than any other miasmic and insolvent mendicant.
Personally, the two most salient bones of contention I'd have to pick with RP are, of course, his 'return to the gold standard' and his publicly-attested support of the '19 Arabs/ Al-Qaeda/ 9-11' fiction, &c.
In truth, I hope that Claymoremind's "Please don't throw me in the Briar Patch' analogy might or would or will hold true, for (I dare say) I'm beginning to come around to COZ's way of thinking-- RP's call for our (U.S.) immediate withdrawal from Iraq and return to minimal/ constitutional govt. enough to warrant my full-fledged support-- even if he DOES sell us out FURTHER to the money-changers (after all-- how much further could we be sold out: and MAYBE he is playing possum, so to speak, somewhat on both these issues). I'm non-commital at present, in any event, until I can learn enough to make an informed decision.
, when you shill that many fake sheckels, you have to CASH THEM iN.
and don't think that the Yoikers are gonna take that!!
They'll just elect their own president!
heck if they can do it, then so can everyone else!
I agree with all of you, the only question is whether to waste_your_time voting!
you can vote for war, war or war.
You must be desperate for a reason to oppose Ron Paul and his stand for the Constitution.
Tell me this though - How would Ron Paul justify a stand of using the Constitution as his moral compass on all issue and then ignore it's instruction regarding gold and silver backed money?
Keep writing these diatribe about gold though. They serve as a very good screen so we can see who the flies are.
Ron Paul is not suicidal - he saw what happened to Cynthia McKinney and knows that would just be a tea party compared to the grassy knoll that would await any candidate who openly used the electoral process to vent 911 truth.
He's not perfect, but he's by far the best chance we'll get to restore some sanity to this country's government and economy.
As always, I welcome a good spirited discussion.
Pray, hope and work for the best, and prepare for the worst.
I think it's probable that you misunderstood my (admittedly convoluted) assertions Claymoremind. But, although it seems I have a tendency at times to babble, I think it's you who are doing all the buzzing..
The author wrote:
Indeed, the author didn't understand him. (Not to worry though; most of his critics don't either.)
Ron Paul was talking about the interstate and international "trade balance," per the reporter's question; he was saying that such statistics would be rendered negligible if we legalized the Constitution again by returning to a truly free market approach where only hard money was used.
Ron Paul is a staunch defender of individual liberty and US sovereignty, in all facets; any suggestion to the contrary thus far is either a misunderstanding or disinfo.
AIPAC = Apartheid Israel Placing America in the Crosshairs
–or–
American-Israeli Pimping-America Committee
sheesh.. better get ready for CW2 boys..
By Maurice Pinay
Is Ron Paul What They Say He Is?
Lately I'm witnessing fanatical support in the patriot movement for Representative Ron Paul and his campaign for U.S. presidency that is practically religious in nature. Ron Paul has many qualities which would seem to make him an attractive candidate, particularly relative to the scoundrels he's running against, but there are clearly some issues with Ron Paul that deserve closer attention, and the sooner the better, as it seems he's becoming godlike in his supporters' eyes.
Ron Paul is a very zealous promoter of the gold standard. In fact, he pimped the gold standard before the House of Representatives as recently as February 15, 2006:
http://www.house.gov/paul/congrec/congrec2006/cr021506.htm
Fr. Denis Fahey clearly explained that the gold standard is a trap which inevitably brings ruin to the nations that adopt it in his book, Money Manipulation and Social Order.
http://www.amazon.com/Money-manipulation-social-order-Denis/dp/B00071QXO...
I agree with others who have noted the conspicuous timing of the gold standard supporter, Ron Paul's rise to stardom at the very moment that the U.S. dollar seems near collapse. Is Ron Paul's job to make the gold standard seem like a patriotic thing to support as the Zionist huckster Aaron Russo preached in his movie Freedom to Fascism?
Supporters of Ron Paul need to take responsibility and understand the pitfalls of the gold standard because it has been a core principle of his for many years.
Wake up America! Educate yourself! If you want to know why Ron Paul wants to get rid of the Federal Reserve and the IRS, visit freedomtofascism.com and check out Aaron Russo's documentary, "America, From Freedom To Fascism" Bulk order it for $1.25 each and send it to your non-computer literate baby boomer friends, heck, all of your friends and relatives!
WE THE PEOPLE need to take back our Republic!
(BTW, I'm 62 years old)
.. was absolutely a zio-nazi ninnyhammer, beyond any doubt or question. OBVIOUSLY we need to abolish the FED and IRS, but following Russo's or RP's plan is stepping right into their trap. And senility is no excuse.
.. did not intend to sound insulting. 'WE THE PEOPLE is precisely right-- which 'WE' has nothing to do with mere numbers..