10 votes

Need help with a Gold Standard issue (UPDATED)

anyone with a little more experience care to comment on the condemnations of a gold standard in favor of greenbacks presented in the documentary "The Money Masters?"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_9wYu1SR1Wk&feature=related

This three and a half hour doc is too thorough for me to condense effectively here, if you haven't seen it, it is an excellent watch, but also presents compelling evidence for why a gold standard is a dangerous solution, thoughts?

UPDATE: Guys, this thread is almost 2 months old, it has died twice and been revived now a third time, if you're going to comment, please directly answer these questions, how is having the FED better than having greenbacks IN THE CASE where we have competing currencies. Also, how do you get out from under the debt when the US has no gold assets that havent been placed as collateral on the DEBT? How is the debt-based money preferable to greenbacks? Who is going to trade gold for FRNs when they are no longer the only legal tender(and as a result no long the world's reserve currency?) When the Petrodollar is dissolved(very soon) what will the severly devalued dollar do to the elderly and the poor who are unable to turn their subsistence living into gold? When you give answers to these questions we can consider this issue closed. I get tired of people railing aginst the greenback yet never once listing why they approve of continued FED action in its place.

For the record, at this point my belief is to print greenbacks to replace FRN's while simultaneously instituting competeing currencies, which will force greenbacks to be more stable long term or die, but we can close the FED very soon if we go this route, i see no end to the FED otherwise until we can pay the debt we owe them..




Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

There is one main requirement....

There is one main requirement that is essential for world government: centralized control of a "single" global currency…. meaning centralized control over who can “buy or sell.” So when Ron Paul says he’s for a “single worldwide currency” all those who have an “ear to hear” know exactly what that means.

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, the world will know peace."
Jimi Hendrix
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=odcGSi286a4&feature=plcp&cont...

Republicae's picture

Tell us, in all your apparent

Tell us, in all your apparent wisdom, exactly what Dr. Paul means? What you are inferring is that Dr. Paul is a fraud, a scammer, a deceiver, is it not? I mean you are saying that Dr. Paul is a subversive, working to undermine the very heart of Liberty through a back-door process, hidden and manipulative...that is what you are saying!

Of course, to arrive at such an absolute idiotic conclusion, you actually have to completely ignore all the writings and the actions of Dr. Paul, not to mention the very character of the man who you now attempt to assassinate his character.

If you are so against Dr. Paul what on earth are you doing here? I mean disagreements are a natural part of any discourse, but you avoid any rebuttal to your comments, you don't give answer to the questions posed to you, you cannot give an adequate explanation to what you purpose, thus what are you doing here if you are so adamantly opposed to the stances that Dr. Paul has taken through the years? The ONLY EXPLANATION is that you are here seeking to proselytize and disseminate a message very far removed from the message being promoted here on the DP, and to subvert the cause of Liberty through that dissimilation.

I can come to no other conclusion, if you have another explanation that can adequately detail your purposes here, then by all means provide it to the good people here on the DP. For I find an unacceptable contrast between what you have purposed thus far throughout your comments and those that Dr. Paul supports and promotes...it is your night to his day!

For far too long we have given up our monetary freedom, allowing the usurpation of that freedom, particularly in the last hundred years, by this government. By doing so, this power over money has allowed this government to expand its size, its power and its ability to control every aspect of our lives, to write destructively innovative laws that benefit itself and its patronage system. It has reached a scope that would have been completely unimaginable only a few decades ago and it has reached that scope through the absolute monopoly powers of monetary production and manipulation. Throughout the entire process, with each step toward greater monetary control, the results have been far less that what could be considered satisfactory, in fact the degree of government control over this country's money supply has proven to be the impetus for economic stratification, destruction and chaos.

It is time to get the government out of the money business, by doing so the entire patronage system of corporatism can be broken, the political patronages will end and the real possibility of individual freedom and liberty will once again have the opportunity to flourish in this country.

http://militantjeffersonian.com

"We are not a nation, but a union, a confederacy of equal and sovereign States" John C. Calhoun

Ron Paul is all for a gold backed world currency

"There's nothing to fear from globalism, free trade and a single worldwide currency."

http://paul.house.gov/index.php?option=com_content&task=view...

Ron Paul would like to see a world with a single gold backed currency under a system of "free trade" and "free markets" with no government interference. No government interference means the control of money stays in the private hands of the elite few who control the money and the gold. In order for the bankers to get their one world government they first need a one world currency with no government intervention.

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, the world will know peace."
Jimi Hendrix
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=odcGSi286a4&feature=plcp&cont...

Republicae's picture

Soleprobe...let me ask you

Soleprobe...let me ask you this, be honest in your answer..have you actually ever read any of the works of Mises, Rothbard, Hoppe, deSoto, Say, Hume, Ricardo, Menger, Boehm-Bawerk, Hazlitt, Nock, Garrett, Chodorov...any of them? Have you even read the works of Ron Paul?

Be honest, because I must question your understanding of some of the most basic principles of economics, politics and monetary mechanics due to your comments and the manner in which you construct them.

http://militantjeffersonian.com

"We are not a nation, but a union, a confederacy of equal and sovereign States" John C. Calhoun

The only way a "single"

The only way a "single" worldwide currency can exist is if legal tender laws are used to force it on people. There is no such thing as a "single worldwide currency" without government interference, because there would be no laws binding people to it. People would be free to use whatever they like and could walk away from any resource/currency controlled by the "elite".

"they...could walk away from...currency controlled by the elite"

Everyone who's awake to some degree knows all western governments, including the US, are already "controlled by the elite" as evidenced by the excellent job they've done over the last 100 years controlling the US government to force their counterfeit FRNs down the throats of the American people.

This movement is really a re-indoctrination program to put people who are waking up back to sleep by believing the farce that no government interference means no private elite control. They're going to be in for one hell of a surprise.

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, the world will know peace."
Jimi Hendrix
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=odcGSi286a4&feature=plcp&cont...

Republicae's picture

It is obvious that you have

It is obvious that you have never read the Federal Reserve Act and seen through that Act the power of force used by this government to cartelize the entire banking industry in this country, with the first attempts being under the Lincoln Administration with the National Banking Acts. All of these legislative innovations stem from our government, not from banks, through there were definitely strong illegal influences from many of the major banking families to accomplish such legislation.

Your comments are filled with inferences, slanders, lies, deceptions, but mostly with pure ignorance. Your comments present you in a particular light that is not favorable at all, but makes you appear to be nothing more than one who is here for the specific reason to dissimulate your real agenda. It is strange, is it not, that you are the only one saying what you are saying, but of course, you have the excuse that we are being indoctrinated..that is convenient isn't it? Yet, you have always failed to make your case, you have used certain MEMEs in an attempt to persuade and yet you have not been successful in your effort to proselytize the good people of the DP to your Quasi-Greenbacker, Fascist ideologies.

Don't worry, you have made your reputation here as one who peddles half-truths, disinformation and a constant dribble of tripe. If anyone appears to have been indoctrinated it is you and you are clearly demonstrating that fact by your own words, the construction of your post and by your attempts to always avoid any questions that may challenge the positions you hold.

http://militantjeffersonian.com

"We are not a nation, but a union, a confederacy of equal and sovereign States" John C. Calhoun

Republicae's picture

Since you obviously don't

Since you obviously don't understand just how the fiat monetary system works in this country or just how this government controls the money system, then I will repost this from another thread. Let's see if you understand it or can grasp just how deeply this government controls the entire system, how it created this system for its own benefit...shall we?

Perhaps one of the greatest concealed crimes committed by this government is the manner in which it keeps it’s books, unlike any other entity, this government uses some of the most amazing tricks to cover its actions and the truth about real state of affairs in which this country finds itself today. There is no doubt that most, actually I think the vast majority of Americans would be absolutely floored if they really knew and understood the lengths to which this government goes in order to conceal the truth from the American People. It’s all done with a type of accounting that could hardly be considered standard and if it happened in the private business world, it would be considered criminal in the highest order.

How much money do you think the U.S. Government actually has on hand at any given time? Surely, the U.S. Treasury keeps it’s General Fund, the Social Security Trust Fund and others chocked full of cash, at least one would think given the fact that it is, after all, the Treasury. Perhaps, during Tax Season, the U.S. Treasury is overflowing with the tax payments of millions of American Taxpayers; surely that’s the case…isn’t it?

Unfortunately, this will not be the easiest subject to explain or, for many, to understand, but it is very important that we do understand this immense ongoing fraud, one that continually dupes people into believing that there is something that approaches reality within our government. Thanks to the wonders of the Fiat Paper Money Substitute system, the fact is that everything you think you know about the various “funds” held in some sort of “Trust” in this government is not as one would think.

The fact is that the U.S. Treasury’s General Fund, like the Social Security Trust Fund, is a complete and absolute accounting fraud, it is a façade that allows this government to convince the People of this country that there is indeed money on deposit in those funds, there is not, it is simply an accounting trick. When you and I pay our taxes, when we send a check to the IRS made payable to the U.S. Treasury, the taxes, all the taxes that are collected by this government, as with all the FICA withholdings are all canceled out by the liabilities that are notated on the Federal Reserve Balance Sheet. So, where do all those taxes, all your hard earned taxes go? Well, it is hard to conceive but the moment they clear your bank, they simply disappear. That’s the way this Fiat Monetary System works, the liabilities of the FED cancel out the assets of the Treasury and vice-versa.

Not a single tax dollar ever appears in an actual account at the U.S. Treasury or at an account it may have at the Federal Reserve, it simply disappears because of the way the fiat monetary system is created and how it functions. The fact is that there is never any money in the U.S. Treasury and no matter how many tax dollars you send to the Treasury there never will be any money at the Treasury as long as the Fiat Monetary System is allowed to continue. All taxes simply cease to exist when it hits the accounts of the U.S. Treasury.

Since the Fiat FRN is nothing more than a credit instrument, unlike physical gold and silver money, this is all possible. Since there is absolutely no link, no backing behind fiat FRNs or any type of fiat currency, they are all nothing but credit instruments that only exist as accounting entries, cash is only a convenience of exchange for the population. That is one reason why we hear so much talk about a cashless society, since fiat money is essentially nothing, it is certainly not just a piece of inked paper, the ability for this government to shift to a cashless society would be relatively easy, though probably not politically expedient or possible at this point, but that is the direction this government would like to head. Of course, the only way any of this is possible is because of the Fiat Monetary System, with a physical gold and silver monetary system none of this would be possible and the requirements of accountability would be imposed upon this government.

I realize that some will not believe this, but if you read the Federal Reserve Act, and in fact if you read any given annual Federal Reserve Balance Sheet you will see that every single Federal Reserve Note that has been issued into circulation is accounted for as a liability, nothing more than a credit instrument and thus an obligation of the United States government. Again, in the Federal Reserve Act, it is possible to learn a great deal about the mechanics of fiat currencies and the system that uses those currencies for a particular advantage and benefit to this government and, of course, its patronage system of corruption.

You will also notice on the Federal Reserve Balance Sheets that all reserve balances of all member banks in this country are also considered liabilities on the balance sheet, such reserve balances, or accounts can be accessed by member banks and can, upon request, be converted into fiat FRNs. Each FRN is a guaranteed credit instrument of the United States.

What the United States government does is simply a matter of trickery, a type of accounting that doesn’t make much sense in the real world, but in the world of fiat notes, it is the only sense available. The United States government, along with the FED does something that boggles the rational mind, it essentially owns the credit instruments called FRNs that are accounted as both assets and liabilities, it issues U.S. Treasuries, but pays those obligations with another obligation it has called Federal Reserve Notes. It essentially writes itself a check and accounts for that check as both a liability and an asset at the same time. So, what the U.S. Treasury accounts as an asset, the FED accounts as a liability, thus the offset.

Now, to make matters worse, coins are an asset on the Federal Reserve Balance Sheet but a direct obligation or liability on the Treasury’s. Both FRNs and coin are legal tender, but they are treated differently in terms of the way this government sets up its books. Basically, the government is keeping two sets of books, both of which appear to be “Cooked”.

When we tend to think of money we tend to think in terms of a reality that simply does not exist in the modern world, thanks to the mechanics of fiat currencies. Essentially, if you personally had a printing press and could print out a slip of paper to pay your bills with, would you want to give that up? Neither does this government and it has fought tooth and nail to retain the power to control and manipulate the fiat currency system in this country to its own advantage, part of that manipulation is the manner in which it accounts for its revenues and expenses. The entire system is very dependent upon the apparent separation, at least on the surface, of the U.S. Treasury and the Federal Reserve Banking System.

Through such appearances, the U.S. Treasury can and does cover the government deficit through the issuance of debt called U.S. Treasuries. Which is nothing more than a fiat instrument of a debt obligation. Since the government cannot simply have the FED order a mass printing of FRNs to cover the deficit, the trick is to use the accounting system to cover the deficit spending of Congress. Thus, when the U.S. Treasury issues its Bonds and TBills, it does so by selling those IOUs to all sorts of investors, including foreign governments, of course like any investor there is the hope that one day repayment will be made and a yield spread on those bonds will represent a profit for the risk associated with the purchase of such debt securities.

Now, as all those investors begin to conclude that perhaps U.S. debt is not as secure a risk as they were once lead to believe, there is another buyer of U.S. Treasuries, that is the Federal Reserve Bank, remember the books of the FED and the books of the U.S. Treasury act in concert with each other. Of late, the largest buyer of U.S. Treasuries has been the FED, this is known as Quantitative Easing, but that essentially hides the fact that the FED is monetizing U.S. Debt. One of the primary reasons why the FED is buying U.S. Treasuries is to pump up the price of those debt securities, which in the long run means that the U.S. government pays less for the money it borrows.

It must be remembered that U.S. Treasuries are essentially just another form of fiat money and it is completely under the control of the U.S. government, not the FED although the FED plays its role as a facilitator in several respects. In the most basic sense, the U.S. government issues and increases the supply of money through U.S. Treasuries and the FED takes it from there. Now, without doubt the U.S. government is extremely fond of the FED’s Quantitative Easing, after all, it is essentially borrowing its own money for little of nothing and in the end, the FED rebates just about all of the funds it takes in off those U.S. Treasuries back to the Treasury. What a deal, right? Oh yes, for the government it is a deal, but for the country, for the people of this country it is a criminal operation that drains the productivity from the economy, lowing the standard of living and will eventually create more poverty than this country has ever witness it’s history, perhaps in the history of the world. It is the closest thing to what many people advocate as “debt-free” fiat money. Thus, the FED, in concert with the U.S. Treasury, creates new fiat money that keeps the Treasury costs of borrowing down, props up the U.S. Treasuries market and allows for this government to keep spending without regard to actual debt accumulation. Is something wrong with this picture? You betcha, remember interest payments are paid to the holder of the U.S. Treasuries, the primary holder of those Treasuries are the FED, the FED then rebates the vast majority of that interest collected on those Treasuries back to the U.S. Treasury. Now remember look at the way the books are kept by the FED and the Treasury, remember they act in concert with each other for their accounting practices. Remember, the U.S. Treasury creates its Treasuries out of thin air, they are essentially fiat money in another form, but remember the FED, through the monetization of debt also creates money out of thin air, thus both systems are two sides of the same fiat coin, there is nothing, absolutely nothing behind either of them that can be considered concrete realities.

Now, if the FED is buying U.S. Treasuries, but it returns the vast majority of the interest collected on those Treasuries and there is the principle due on those Treasuries upon maturity, what do you think happens when those bonds mature? NOTHING, the debt is rolled over, maturing debt swapped for immature debt, the whole system is a shell game. In fact, the entire system of international debt markets is a shell game, one that is being played at the expense of the people. Thus, the government is essentially paying its bills buy running its own fiat money printing press, the common concepts of debt under a fiat monetary system is not what we would normally associate with actual debt and debt repayment. Every single government in the world is playing the very same game, they are all involved with a system that allows for unaccountability, slight of hand accounting, and ultimately a system of control that would not otherwise be possible under a sound money system.

All fiat monetary systems are fraudulent and must be fraudulent in order for them to function. None of this is possible under a gold and silver currency, there must be total accountability under gold and silver, it is indeed honest money and it keeps governments honest.

http://militantjeffersonian.com

"We are not a nation, but a union, a confederacy of equal and sovereign States" John C. Calhoun

You didn't address the point.

You didn't address the point. The elite can't force anybody to use a currency without the force of government. The only thing preventing us from using competing currencies is legal tender laws. Without using government, how would the elite ever hope to control anybody, exactly?

"how would the elite ever hope to control anybody, exactly?"

The same way they are controlling right now.... there will always be "government." Sure... they can create an illusion by transforming government into something that doesn't look like government… something that resembles "free market" anarchism but anyone who’s even still half awake midway through this re-indoctrination process knows that there has never been a time when there was no “government”…. that is unless you believe we evolved from apes clubbing weaker apes to steal all their food…. Now that’s a “free market”

This is the preparatory stage of the "strong delusion."… that the gods of the "free market" and "sound money" will magically bring freedom, security, peace and prosperity for all. People will be conned (not forced) into the New World Order… It has been granted by the highest power to come…. It will come.

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, the world will know peace."
Jimi Hendrix
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=odcGSi286a4&feature=plcp&cont...

Republicae's picture

Just how are they controlling

Just how are they controlling it right now, what is your concept of such control? I have read all of your comments on several threads and one of the overwhelming impressions you give is that you really don’t have much a clue about what you are talking about. There have been several occasions when you claimed that we (whoever "we" are) should use the very same techniques and tactics used by the FED and prosper off of those techniques, in other words you suggest the use of criminal fraud to further something that you have not really explained what it is that you are actually in favor of. Read your comments, do they make sense to you, I suppose they must, but from the reader's point of view they are a conglomeration of gibberish, non-sensical concoctions and seemingly aimless points that never really seem to have a point.

You have not been able to explain yourself adequately enough to really have other people reading your post understand just what you are trying to say or promote. Thus you must resort to deriding the people here on the DP rather than engaging them with answers to their questions about your posts. You have stooped down to the level of questioning the integrity of Dr. Paul on several occasions, calling this movement, among other things EVIL, now you make the claim that we are being re-indoctrinated, obviously by inference, by Dr. Paul himself. You have called into question everything about this movement to Restore the Constitutional Republic as it was based on the Constitution. I would only assume that you probably also believe that the Framers of the Constitution were a part of the overall NWO conspiracy, which would be typical of the type of mind you possess and have, through your comments, exposed for exactly what it is. Why can't you, for instance, give an answer, a proper rebuttal that actually supports your argument, to those of us who question you?

Let's face it, you don't really have a concept for any type of solution, you have bounced back and forth, spewed out vile innuendo and attempted to cover it with comments that make little sense to anyone but yourself. I find that utterly amazing that anyone would approach a subject in the manner that you have, it is certainly not the way to get your point across. You have never made even a remotely good argument against honest money, you can't make a case for your ideas about a "Greenback" system, thus you rely upon subterfuge to accomplish what you cannot construct through a proper argument in the case you present. There is, apparently, a deficiency within your abilities to make such an adequate construction, thus you must instead resort to the tactics you now employ, which I must say I find not only distasteful, but intellectually bankrupt.

Why can't you provide us with a point by point exposition of what you purpose, your solutions? But know this, you should give exact details of the mechanics of such a proposal, and provide the contrast of that proposal with the system that is now in existence, you will also need to give us exact advantages that you see in your proposals over a sound monetary system. Do that and then perhaps we will be able to have an actual exchange of ideas, but so far you have not done that, you have been incapable of providing any information that appears to be valid.

http://militantjeffersonian.com

"We are not a nation, but a union, a confederacy of equal and sovereign States" John C. Calhoun

Republicae's picture

He can't address that point,

He can't address that point, he can't because he completely ignores the history and actions this government has taken to create the FED, he doesn't understand your point that it takes the power of government to create and maintain its monopoly powers over fiat money creation.

http://militantjeffersonian.com

"We are not a nation, but a union, a confederacy of equal and sovereign States" John C. Calhoun

RP for globalism?

That statement of RP's makes me shiver. I didn't know he said such a thing and I had no idea he would lift it up.

His statement in mind, I wonder when he arrived at the idea market (individual person, according to Ron?) driven competing currencies and where he got it from. Hayek wrote about competing currencies. Perhaps Ron came across it in Hayek's writing or from Hayek himself. Also, David Rockefeller wrote well about Hayek in his book Memoirs. From what I've read about DR, I recollect he is responsible for bringing Hayek to the United States.

Market driven competing currencies is an uplifting idea, one on appearance I subscribe to because I think it's the (only) way out of the mess mankind is in. That mess, control of the individual through indenturing him to what's outside him. But I want to know what "market" means to Ron and his explanation of currency competition in freedom relative to tyranny.

Perhaps the statement you cited Ron saying was before he encountered the competing currencies notion. I hope so. Because a worldwide source addressing the medium of exchange an individual uses is the assigning value on that medium of exchange, whatever on Earth that medium is. Unasked-for guidance can lead to control, and the guidance that does so can be explicit or inconspicuous.

In order for the bankers to get their one world government they first need a one world currency with no government intervention. Correct.

School's fine. Just don't let it get in the way of thinking. -Me

Study nature, not books. -Walton F. Dutton

"But I want to know what "market" means to Ron..."

The term “market” or “free market” is cover for unrestrained private control of national currencies and credit. Ron Paul is for a global “free market”, meaning a global market that’s under the sole control of private interests with no government interference. “Competing currencies” will still be under the control of the private money powers in the same way competing political parties are under the control of the same. It will give the illusion of competition in the same way the political party system in politics do today but in reality it will be one currency. They alone will determine which currency will appear to dominate because they alone will have control over the levers that determine its supply. This teaching that there’s such a thing as perpetual competition in an unregulated global free-for-all that can naturally sustain itself indefinitely for the benefit of the majority is a farce.

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, the world will know peace."
Jimi Hendrix
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=odcGSi286a4&feature=plcp&cont...

Market Is A Place Where Buyers And Producers Meet.

Markets have been on earth for thousands of years. Most big cities started with central market places where producers exchange, barter, or buy and sell goods.

Your local super MARKET got it's name from this ancient activity that started with NO government interference at all. The early marketeers used Gold/Silver as money without banks or any middle men.

The founders for the most part were producers, just as the ancients mentioned in ancient religious writings were.

What can you produce that would have some value to me?

beesting

Thanks for the reply,

Thanks for the reply, soleprobe. I read some of your comments and posts, or threads, on this topic, currency. Your commentary uses record and abstract mental activity, both comprising thinking.

I'm happy to see someone else on this topic thinks. I wish I could say the same for our RPer below, a most disgruntled person, but it's clear he's wrapped up in record at the expense of thinking's other half. I wish him well but not at my expense, something I think he's comfortable doing especially when he avoids certain questions I raise, questions in multiple comments of mine. I think he and anyone he's poured his aggression onto are better off without one another. His debate repertoire is without respect and fairness.

soleprobe, if you'd like to, please read my comments in this thread. I'd like to know what you think about them. Even if you and I were to disagree, I feel we could do so amiably and continue a meaningful conversation. Again, thanks for your reply, soleprobe.

School's fine. Just don't let it get in the way of thinking. -Me

Study nature, not books. -Walton F. Dutton

Republicae's picture

What Soleprobe is doing, by

What Soleprobe is saying, by not so subtle inference, is that Dr. Paul is a liar, a deceiver, a tool and a sham. That Dr. Paul's agenda is something other than what Dr. Paul has proclaimed all these years, that he is, in fact, working for some hidden plan to create a global government through a global currency system. All one need do is look at what Soleprobe has written, he is not here for an intellectual discourse, he is here to dissimulate through certain inferences that promote something other than what we would commonly think of as valid information or discourse.

It is absolutely the most incredible proposition that you and soleprobe take, to read an article, like the one of Dr. Paul’s, and based upon what you have read you come up with something entirely different than any normal person would when reading it. The level of outright propaganda that is being promoted by Soleprobe leaves no other conclusion but to ask why is he even posting on the DP if, as he has said, doesn’t even believe in what Dr. Paul is advocating.

Soleprobe has already stated, in no uncertain terms, that he thinks this movement is evil and that Dr. Paul is corrupted. From such a point of view what do you think that anyone, including myself, could possible conclude from such statements. Do you actually think that anyone here on the DP would simply set by to allow such a person to continue without being confronted. As far as respect and fairness is concerning, where has been the respect shown by soleprobe concerning either the people here on the DP, or the message or even the person of Dr. Paul?

Again, you appear to have a very narrow view of exactly what is being propagated by soleprobe. My inclinations are that he is none other than the Greenbacker Troll with the screenname DrKrbyLuv, who trolled with the same tactics. If you haven’t noticed, please do, that Soleprobe will rarely rebut any of the comments directed toward his own comments, read the various explanations he has given on any subject over the last 17 weeks that his screenname has been active and you will see a pattern. He is completely incapable of providing any type of cogent argument for his position, at least I have yet to see such an argument. What I have seen is a mass of confusion, ideas that appear to have not been thought out completely, bits and pieces that taken together give a certain indication of his actually ideology, that ideology does not appear to have much in common with the ideals of Liberty and Freedom, certainly not economic freedom and without economic freedom there can be no individual freedom.

I have called him a fascist because, taken together, his comments leave no room for anything but fascism, he advocates a system where the government is the center of all powers over money and markets, thus, if the government is the center of all powers over money and the markets then the government is also the center over all powers of individuals. I am sure that Soleprobe would allow a degree of individual liberty, but it would be, it must be under the system he suggest, just a degree. You will also notice that while Soleprobe easily tosses out certain propositions, he can never explain those propositions to any degree of satisfaction. When asked to explain he avoids offering any answer, instead he simply post something else that is disconnected from the questions posed to him. That deflection is very telling as to the reasons he is here posting.

Now I have no problem with someone, anyone disagreeing with me or anything Dr. Paul says, but someone who does disagree should be able to give an ample answer for those disagreements, to provide proofs supporting the contention of disagreement, that is the nature of true discourse, but Soleprobe does not attend such matters, instead he avoids them or gives an answer that is so disconnected that it makes little logical sense. Don't believe it, then simply read his comments throughout this and other threads. Read and understand exactly what he is saying and what he is really accusing Dr. Paul of doing. He must, by what he is inferring, think that Dr. Paul is a plant, a secret subversive for some super covert conspiracy of the NWO, that is what he is inferring if you haven't noticed. Why would he seek to discredit Dr. Paul, what could possibly be the purpose behind such attempts?

There is no possible way for the suggestions of Soleprobe to be consistent with the ideals found within the Constitution, if you will notice he rarely speaks of that document, just as rarely does he speak of individual liberty and freedom, but he often speaks of government controls, the necessity of government power and force. If you can provide some other explanation then I am all ears. I mean have you actually read all his comments, it is apparent that he is not on the side of individual liberty, economic freedom, he believes in the power of the State, the complete protective and administrative powers of government in all matters pertaining to money and if money is controlled by the government as it is now, then there is no hope for the individual in his or her quest for liberty.

Disgruntled? NO, but passionate about the ideals of Liberty and Freedom? OH YES, for more than a few decades ago I took an Oath, I swore to support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies and will do so until my dying day.

http://militantjeffersonian.com

"We are not a nation, but a union, a confederacy of equal and sovereign States" John C. Calhoun

Republicae's picture

The only place that the term

The only place that the term “market” or “free market” is a cover is in your own mercenary mind. It is increasingly obvious that you have never read much on the subject. It is also increasingly obvious that your ideas more closely match that of a completely government controlled and managed economic system, where the government controls everything. What else is left, for you have condemned the present system and you condemn the ideals of free markets, sound money, individual liberty and freedom that are associated with those ideals and have always been associated with them.

In other words, your beliefs, based on all that you have posted thus far, are extremely close to the definition that none other than Mussolini provided:

The foundation of Fascism is the conception of the State, its character, its duty, and its aim. Fascism conceives of the State as an absolute, in comparison with which all individuals or groups are relative, only to be conceived of in their relation to the State. The conception of the Liberal State is not that of a directing force, guiding the play and development, both material and spiritual, of a collective body, but merely a force limited to the function of recording results: on the other hand, the Fascist State is itself conscious and has itself a will and a personality -- thus it may be called the "ethic" State...The Fascist State organizes the nation, but leaves a sufficient margin of liberty to the individual; the latter is deprived of all useless and possibly harmful freedom, but retains what is essential; the deciding power in this question cannot be the individual, but the State alone....

http://militantjeffersonian.com

"We are not a nation, but a union, a confederacy of equal and sovereign States" John C. Calhoun

Republicae's picture

OMG....Surely, you must have

OMG....Surely, you must have more reading comprehension skills than Soleprobe does, there is something called context in the meaning of words, if you do not read the construction of a sentence or a complete piece then you can, as others like Soleprobe have done, focus on a word like globalism and assume that just because the word is used then the writer takes the position that word is normally associated with...

Thus, it appears that the world of the use of politically correct words has come to the DP.

Didn't anyone get an education around here? Oh, that's right, most younger people have had the advantage of a modern government education program...that can be the only explanation for such undisguised obtuseness.

Here are some excerpts from the article, I find it amazing that there would be a need to actually do this, but apparently there is such a need.

There's nothing to fear from globalism, free trade and a single worldwide currency. But a globalism where free trade is competitively subsidized by each nation, a continuous trade war is dictated by the WTO, and the single currency is pure fiat, fear is justified. That type of globalism is destined to collapse into economic despair, inflationism and protectionism, and managed by resurgent militant nationalism.

In the above paragraph, Dr. Paul, is using words that can be understood by people, the word “globalism” which, has a negative connotation to be sure, but look at the context in which he is using it. The context determines the usage and definition of the word. Now, it should be obvious with anyone with at least a 9th grade education that the manner in which he is using the word suggest a different meaning than the connotation which we normally associate it with. Perhaps, things must be spelled out to some people, but it is truly shocking that someone can read such an article and simply because a certain word is used assume that the meaning normally associated with it is what is meant by the author. So, what is Dr. Paul saying, nothing different than he has been saying for decades. He is expressing that the current type of globalism is a failure, that it is based on something other than actual free trade between nations and is an artificial type of manufactured, manipulated, managed and corrupt system based on trade agreements that do nothing but empower those that manage and manipulate it.

The effort in recent decades to unify government surveillance over all world trade and international financial transactions through the UN, IMF, World Bank, WTO, ICC, the OECD, and the Bank of International Settlements can never substitute for a peaceful world based on true free trade, freedom of movement, a single but sound market currency, and voluntary contracts with private property rights.

It should be obvious from the above paragraph exactly what Dr. Paul is talking about and the meaning he is imparting by writing this piece. It is clear that Dr. Paul is condemning every single level of the current system that is normally associated with the word “globalism”. He is most definitely not saying what Soleprobe is trying so desperately to suggest he is, in some effort to discredit Dr. Paul. The “globalism” that Dr. Paul is talking about is not the “globalism” that we normally associate with the word, that is why the ability to read with the context of an article is always paramount to understanding it, when people, who obviously either have a particular agenda in mind, like Soleprobe, who use such a piece and take it out of context. It is obvious that either Soleprobe has no reading comprehension or he is here for a particular agenda that is not in the best interest of the people or their liberty.

But today's economy is unlike anything the world has ever known. The world economy is more integrated than ever before. Indeed, the effort by international agencies to expand world trade has had results- some good. Labor costs have been held in check, industrial producers have moved to less regulated, low cost, and low tax countries while world mobility has aided these trends with all being helped with advances in computer technology.
But the artificial nature of today's world trade and finance being systematically managed by the IMF, the World Bank and WTO, and driven by a worldwide fiat monetary system, has produced imbalances that have already prompted many sudden adjustments. There have been eight major crisis in the past six years requiring a worldwide effort, led by the Fed, to keep the system afloat, all being done with more monetary inflation and bailouts.

I see nothing that could be clearer about the stance that Dr. Paul is taking in the above paragraph. For Soleprobe to make the false accusations based on this article only shows the extent he is willing to go to propagandize for his own particular agenda. Dr. Paul is very clear and concise about what he is saying and the meaning behind his use of the word “globalism” is definitely not as is being implied by Soleprobe.

The rest of the article is in a similar vein and should, as all article should, be read in the context in which it is written.

http://militantjeffersonian.com

"We are not a nation, but a union, a confederacy of equal and sovereign States" John C. Calhoun

Republicae's picture

I cannot believe that you are

I cannot believe that you are so oblivious to what Dr. Paul is saying, it is absolutely amazing the mental hoops you must jump through to reach the conclusions that you do! The shackles of fiat currency has enslaved this world, it began here in 1971 with the pure fiat currency and it hopefully will once again end here.

You apparently read a word and think that just because Dr. Paul uses the same word that is used by the power-brokers, that Dr. Paul is using it in with the same definition, but apparently you don't have the ability to comprehend a word's meaning in the context in which it was written. Too bad for you, your world must be a very confusing place indeed if your comprehension is such.

At one time, this world did have a world currency, it was called gold and silver, it was difficult for either governments or bankers to manipulate, to control. It was ideal in that manner and in many others. Globalization, as Dr. Paul explains, is the natural extension of the ability to trade freely without intervention or manipulation from governments.

No government control does not mean that money stays in the hands of an elite few, on the contrary it has been government control that has placed money in the hand of an elite few. It is difficult for me to actually believe that you can look at the world today and not see that there is more government control and manipulation and regulation over money than at anytime in the history of the world, what has that control done, it has provided for monopoly power to concentrate wealth, it has, through the fiat monetary system, redistributed wealth from the people into the hands of the few elite. If anything, it would appear that you could open your eyes for once, take a good look at just what government control has done, what the fiat monetary system has done and understand that your ideas about government control has gotten us in the place today that you are complaining about.

You are barking, once again up the wrong tree. You apparently live in the World of Babel, for your ability to break down and understand the simplest concepts totally appears to escape your mind. The world must appear to be gibberish to you when you see or read something.

You cannot possibly be so utterly obtuse...your logic is absolutely on par with DrKrbyLuv's, that is the only person that has been on the DP that is capable of such mental buffooneries.

http://militantjeffersonian.com

"We are not a nation, but a union, a confederacy of equal and sovereign States" John C. Calhoun

Answers.

This question HAS been asked...but you know what - it HAS been answered too. Many times. By many people. So I'm not sure why you keep posting it as though nobody is responding.

I know everyone has a slightly different take, based on what they've read - and now I'll add my 2 cents:

Paul-Based Answers
1. How is having the FED better than congress-issued fiat money (i.e. "greenbacks")? The FED is NOT better because ALL fiat money is human-mandated currency. Any supporter of Ron Paul understands full-well that Ron Paul doesn't support ANY mandates. He believes in, and would rely on, the natural market forces to determine what should be money just as it should determine who should or should not be in business. No human hands "guiding" (i.e. controlling) any part of our economy.

Whether we have competing currencies or not is not the issue - mandates are the issue - and they are always BAD. There is no god-like human who knows all. The people collectively know - that's what the market is.

2. How is debt-based money better than greenbacks? Debt-based money is a form of human-controlled money. It's not better than human-controlled greenbacks. They are the same. You just asked the same question twice.

3. Who will trade gold for Federal Reserve Notes when there is competition? Who cares who will prefer Reserve Notes (fiat dollars)? The point is that competition and the market will decide what's best.

4. What will devalued dollars do to the elderly etc...? I don't know the best way to make the shift from fiat-based money to commodity-based money, but I know that right now devaluING dollars are robbing the middle class (not just an age group) of its wealth. That's why the middle class is shrinking: New dollars go to the people at the top so they get a boost and everyone else slips down a little bit. And as they plays out over time, the middle class is slowly wiped out.

Which is what happened in Rome and more recently in Myanmar and many other fiat-based economies.

Closer: FED vs Greebacks = BOTH ARE INCORRECT.

That Money Masters movie uses an example to highlight why government-controlled money CAN work - and the example comes from Henry VI or one of the kings in England who used Sticks with notches in it as currency. The narrator said it was one of the most successful currencies ever. But you know what I say to him?

IT WASN'T AS SUCCESSFUL AS GOLD. Just look throughout human civilization. Gold has been the most sought-after commodity over time - that's why Ron Paul makes "THE CASE FOR GOLD."

Today's Dollars are FED-mandated Fiat money.
Greenbacks are Congress-mandated Fiat money.

All fiat-money is ANTI-paul economics.

I'm with Ron Paul.
NEXT!

This Hard Assets, Currency System Has Been Working,,,

Since Feb. 2001.

Please research it completely before commenting.

http://www.goldmoney.com/index.html

beesting

Good Book

Miracle on Main Street. Read it years ago, back in the 80s.
http://www.amazon.com/Miracle-Main-Street-Yourself-Financial...

Gold Backing, US Notes and Competing Currencies

Hey, 2102lua, thanks for bringing up this topic.

For quite some time I've thought about it. I too think gold backing won't repair damage and will enable the Powers That Be to gain more control -- because they own and control it above ground and underground, that is, they run and operate most of the mines these metals are from.

Because anything can be a medium of exchange, which is what currency, or money, is, I think RP's call for competing currencies is the way to go. This competition should evolve into bartering on at least one level of life, the individual-to-individual level, where truth is least difficult to attain because fraud is least difficult to recall when it happens.

This dynamic, the individual to individual interaction in the competing currencies environment, runs simutaneously with the courts returning to their rightful positions, mediators of last resort adhereing to the Constitution and where local citizenry members are jury members whose decision is number one in importance and the judge's is number two in importance wherein his position is oversight of the trial, making sure the path to justice is fair.

Meanwhile, while competing currencies begins, I think Congress should regain control of issuing money federally, headed by its printing of US Notes, as opposed to FRNs. This issuance of money, however, isn't issuing it to merely replace the FRN in its relationship to the states and local government countrywide. Rather, this issuing would be a measurement to currencies worldwide then to currencies people choose to transact in. The "then" denotes an indirect, or hands-off, relationship. Keep in mind, currency in transaction isn't necessary: Bartering -- a trade of Product A for Product B -- can occur.

School's fine. Just don't let it get in the way of thinking. -Me

Study nature, not books. -Walton F. Dutton

Republicae's picture

Let me ask you something,

Let me ask you something, what do you think the issuance of U.S. Notes will accomplish, except a rate of runaway inflation that could possibly collapse the entire economy into a hyperinflationary depression? Besides, what's the difference in issuing such Notes and Quantitative Easing by the FED? I see no actual difference, thus if you support the issuance of US Notes, then you obviously would support the FED policy of Quantitative Easing.

Do you suppose that simply by printing notes that anything of substance will be accomplished or that it will significantly alter the problem of debt accumulation under the current system? What would be the mechanics behind the issuance of such Notes, how would value be imparted to them, would they be based on the value of the current FRN? If so, then you have done absolutely nothing whatsoever. If not, then you have a major problem of value impartation to the newly issued currency for it will have no basis for value unless, like other governments, you simply have the government declare its value and have it accepted by official decree. Are you going to back the new US Notes by US Treasuries, if so then you have not accomplished anything at all, if not then you still have the problem of acceptance and the impartation of value with the new Notes.

Additionally, since the government is the official issuer of FRNs, based on the sale of U.S. Treasuries, from the Bureau of Printing and Engraving, what difference would there be.

http://militantjeffersonian.com

"We are not a nation, but a union, a confederacy of equal and sovereign States" John C. Calhoun

Hello, Republicae,I was

Hello, Republicae,

I was adding more info to my post when after I clicked Save your message was posted, blocking my information from appearing. What I was going to add might answer your concern.

What I had written is that the US Note would be used in national affairs only, which I think would be sparse and small. One affair would be the military. Frankly, I can't think of another affair nationally.

What I described economically, that more transactions than not would be happening individually, would not because I or anyone says so but because, I think, the following factors would create that interaction:

1. US Notes -- backed by something
2. Competing currencies
3. Proper judicial system

Of course people could form groups called corporations, still. But they would differ to today's corporations because those corporations, the ones operating in the factors mentioned above, would be driven by the market (read: the individual) instead of the government -- its laws, therefore its management. Politicians couldn't even return to a centralized life if they wanted to because the use of the federal currency would be for only national affairs. This use leaves all other transactions to state, local and private currencies and bartering. Because their use would be prevalent and thick in society, where transactions would happen individually in more instances than not, centralization couldn't happen, centralization would be impossible.

My argument here consists of societal matters psychologically, too; problems in society, society the government's teethering of people, would evaporate in decentralized life. People's respect for each other would grow enormously from where we are now. Society would be bottom-up, thereby placing the individual above government in all facts of life and that the local government would rule state and the state rule federal. Defense of the self in this life would be commonplace, maybe expected. So, even the national issue military defense would have great difficulty in functioning if for no other reason than people saying no to federal military in favor of local defense, a defense that could react immediately on a foreign invader.

Again, the issuing of US Notes would have a backing and because its use would be nationalistic, all it would be is a barometer to foreign national currencies, whose influences are relative to what the individual would use in his transactions.

School's fine. Just don't let it get in the way of thinking. -Me

Study nature, not books. -Walton F. Dutton

Republicae's picture

I appreciate you response.

I appreciate you response.

While I can understand the position you are taking, nevertheless, I still find the suggestion questionable on many levels. The impartation of value would require a whole host of mechanisms that would have to function within the broader monetary regime, especially if FRNs continued to circulate. As far as that impartation, the backing of such Notes would definitely be helpful in the establishment of such a system, but if you are going to go that far then why not simply make those Notes warehouse receipts for gold, or redeemable paper receipts for a declared weight in gold and silver. You have your backing, but you also have the basis for an actual gold and silver monetary system. Essentially, it would be the overlay of the gold and silver substrate of the competitive currencies. Instead of actually creating a new Note system, simply allow the receipts to act within the parameters of a 100% reserve system of gold and silver.

Such a system could serve as a reversal of the way the Fiat Paper Money Substitute system was fostered upon the American People. The introduction of paper receipts with a defined measure of gold and silver as a means of exchange does not raise any red flags with me, if and only if there are strict guidelines as to the issuance of such receipts, we wouldn’t want to end up having more receipts floating in circulation than gold or silver in reserves. It is certain, that such a system would be far more readily accepted by the people than an all out assault with gold and silver coins.

Still, it is understandable that I have doubts when US Notes are mentioned, due to the rash of Greenbacker infiltrators present on the DP.

http://militantjeffersonian.com

"We are not a nation, but a union, a confederacy of equal and sovereign States" John C. Calhoun

I have a worry about gold and

I have a worry about gold and silver: Who owns it.

Based on my studying, the Powers That Be own it above ground and below ground, in the mines. If what I studied is accurate, that they control most or all gold and other metals (or other commidity) that would back our national currency, the prying of monetary control from them is a false act. This act, which is decentralization, would help everyone for a while, sure. But its use would cater to who owns it.

The PTB (read: the owners) or people who take orders from them would operate those commidities -- gold and silver in our argument -- putting everyone not them in their hands again, from where life would pick up where it left off before false decentralization. This "putting," however, isn't really putting, placing. Rather, it's repositioning.

One instance of this false decentralization is the break up of Standard Oil. From one, many, then consolidation.

THAT, the consolidation of control based on externalities to the individuals in their transactions with each other, is what should be avoided.

Therefore, answer is something other than X.

X: What TPTB control.

School's fine. Just don't let it get in the way of thinking. -Me

Study nature, not books. -Walton F. Dutton

Republicae's picture

Well, if you listen to the

Well, if you listen to the proponents of the modern Greenbackers, they would say that the Rothschilds own it all, but the reality is quite different. GATA, probably the most independent gold watchdog group around, states that the Rothschild family owns about 5%, Central Banks and governments own about 30%, with the remainder of all the world's reserves in the hands of private individuals. GATA is not the only group that confirms the fact that most of the gold in the world is owned by private individuals.

Also, if you know anything about the market mechanics of money, you will understand that once gold and silver are allowed to be money, there is very little that anyone can do to control it. The lack of ability to control gold and silver within a monetary system is one reason why governments, bankers and others sought and fought so hard to demonetize both commodity metals. Additionally, if you look at the "dollar" price of gold throughout the 1800s, with the exception of the 1860s, you will find something extraordinary, something the proponents of fiat money cannot explain away. The "dollar" price of gold only shifted a few cents between 1833 and 1920, in fact, the swing was no more than .02 Cents up or down, but most of the time it was extremely stable, also you will note that economic growth and productivity of this nation was substantially strong. That cannot be said for any fiat monetary system, usually the swings are massive, inflation is always a problem and the debasement of the currency will always lead to the eventual collapse of the fiat currency.

http://militantjeffersonian.com

"We are not a nation, but a union, a confederacy of equal and sovereign States" John C. Calhoun

Note: I should have said

Note: I should have said restructuring instead of repositioning.

Onward.

I acknowledge your argument about gold and silver in the periods you mentioned. I accept what you said happened, too. However, because of what I read, Naill Furgerson's The House of Rothschild vols. 1 and 2 and other material to compare to it, I'm left with believing the use of gold and silver in the United States then depended on the Rothschilds' use of those metals.

The Rothschild's history begins no later than the late 17th century (the 1600s), well before the 19th century (the 1800s). (Note: I believe their scheme started before the late 17th century.) The time before the 1800s laid the ground for the 1800s, fitting to a T what you said happened, when gold and silver were used as coins and currency backing and when Rs already owned a tremendous amount of those metals. Because of those functions and that R owned a tremendous amount of those metals, an amount I believe probably more than what United State's federal government owned, I question why the US federal government or any government in the US would use something that connects it/them to the Rs, an influence but not control. That is to say here, the use of something outside when its presense is larger than what belongs to the inside guides the inside's use of it. In time, the more commodities made dependent on the "something" shared between the inside and outside, the outside moves in to control the inside.

That last sentence is why I advocate one position: Our Congress creates and controls the federal currency, an exclusion of even influence from outside our government. Also, all financial happenings involving our country's governments at any level are to be open and public. As for your reference to R owning 5 percent, well, yes, perhaps on record. But can GATA, a cog in the globalized market whose cogs were R made I assume, be trusted? Really? Besides, who's to say the individuals owning the 30 percent of gold aren't positioned to reattach the economic bands worldwide?

That caution, connection, brings me to this thought:

Why use a currency or backing of it if its use is worldwide irrespective of R's minions trying to reconnect the world? Wouldn't this use continue interdependence among countries -- appropriately named globalization -- the very practice freedom and independence would stamp out?

And:

What is wrong about the Congress creating its currency attached to nothing outside the United States and that serves as a baromter to other national currencies and through it currency can be exchanged for the national currency of the country the individual would be going to without necessitating its acceptance among the members of a given locale? Here, getting in contact with the locals to ask monetary questions would be better than dealing with national currencies, a sign of respect and cordial, fair anticipatory relations with the locals.

School's fine. Just don't let it get in the way of thinking. -Me

Study nature, not books. -Walton F. Dutton