25 votes

Video: Peter Schiff on MSNBC w/ Dylan Ratigan

Peter, once again, rightly defends free-market capitalism in this clip.

Link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6XnDzsyo3yY&feature=player_em...!

Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

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

Dylan's finally living up to his surname: RATigan.

Probably derived from RAT-AGAIN.

After doing a brilliant job of actually discussing issues graciously with Dr. Paul for a full half hour on July 13th, 2011, be it out pressure from upper management at the WarProfiteering Mil.Ind.Complex 51% MSDNC owning parent GE, or what, but he NEVER had Doc on during the entire Pres. race since that interview (though Dr. Paul was interviewed on his TV show the same night to merely allude to what was said on his radio show that day. But, let's face it: having someone on radio vs. TV is wholly different matter in terms of free publicity and visibility), other than once or twice for a very short 3-5min blurb, he NEVER brought him back on to truly discuss financial reform after promising to do so. And, NEVER mentioned Dr. Paul's name, TWICE he was on HBO's Real Time with Bill Maher when the topic of the night were financial reform, economy, jobs and the Federal Reserve!

Would you believe that briefly after that 30min radio interview, for like a nanosecond, I actually thought that MSDNC, because of Dylan's somewhat rising gravitas and fanbase there, would actually be slightly fairer to Dr. Paul and not even take up the newsletter smear for the 2012 election cycle? LOL. silly me.

So frankly after being betrayed by MADcow on Rand and later her time spent BS propagandizing newsletters and the Civil Rights Act vote without ever fully parsing the content of Dr.Paul's own explanation for the vote, for me, it's F' RATigan, too, now.

NOT citing "Ron Paul" whenever the topic of the Fed. Reserve comes up, is like talking about greatest Formula One drivers of all time without ever invoking the name "Juan Manuel Fangio"!!!

Blasphemy! [Of course I'm biased!]

The entire time, while RATigan pretended to have an open dialog by inviting Peter on to actually discuss the issues, Schiff was allotted no more than 2minutes, if that, amongst a bunch of econ imbeciles who know nothing about the market, know nothing about actually running a company with more than two persons, and those who never predicted anything that Dr. Paul and Peter got right about the economy.

Yet, as to be expected of a typical pressitute whore, whenever Peter tried to lay historically factual cause and effect, first Dylan (who as a former Wall St. guys himself actually knows a thing or two about the reality of the Fed.Reserve) would interrupt constantly accusing Peter of basically evading the question even though clearly he wasn't, then proceeded to ask the 'wisdom' of other morons on the panel, who have the nerve to simply yammer on without providing any historical context nor providing any economic credibility as to the basis of their rebuttal mindless imbecilic yapping not worthy of a five year old.

It literally felt like watching a MSDNC version of a typical FakeNews 'panel': never let the smartest guest finish, start a topic, then declare real answer irrelevant while feigning, incredulously 'demanding' indignantly AS IF no one at the panel has said anything meaningful or offered a real explanation for the cause of the problem they're pretending to discuss, even though the smartest guy on the panel they invited for the precise reason of making him/her ridiculous, is frustratingly continuing to offer answers, even as they pretend to not hear his explanations with multiple sustained interruptions, overtalking, and abrupt cut offs.

Frankly RATigan wasted more time yapping away on how he's not hearing any solutions from anyone on the panel, than actually listening to anyone else, just as Sean'Snowballed'Insanity or Brillo Pad O'Really would.

And he feigned indignance on that biatch huffing and puffing away as if Peter's trying to evade something even though he was the ONLY one on the 'panel' that wanted to discuss anything in real depth.

While Peter may come off kinda brisk in person, he's actually a pretty tame personality, as IF he really wanted to with all he knows, and all that he has predicted ON VIDEO record, he could utterly demolish these fools simply by asking them:

1. so how many of you bozos actually predicted the real estate collapse years prior ON TV?

2. so how many of you actually run or ran a business successfully?
One that involves more than two people? You know, ACTUALLY being personally liable and responsible for the livelihood of someone else, in effect willfully taking up the awesome responsibility of holding their entire life and of their family/loved ones in your hands?? And did it graciously??

3. so how many of you bozos actually made ANY money in the market Heck, how about doing any real voluntary commercial venture that doesn't require Wall St. papershuffling, or selling books, or policy consultancy? You know like businesses that DON'T exclusively cater require kissing asses of MSM or DC 'elites'?? You know, like a business where you actually need to engage your customers' trust based on a direct measurable metric like rate of return on their investments or price discovery loop?

yet every single one of those a-holes on the panel would have no qualms about demanding legislating against fields that they know absolutely nothing about??

Sometimes I truly wonder if only a few people are born with a personal arrogance threshold meter. What is it just the whole $100,000+ TV studio camera that makes you do the crazy??

Predictions in due Time...

"Let it not be said that no one cared, that no one objected once it's realized that our liberties and wealth are in jeopardy." - Dr. Ronald Ernest Paul

What is it?

The question was what is it? The situation is no one has clearly defined the problem we are having and finding a systemic label for it won't help because a systemic label very quickly becomes a cover and the same practices are carried on under the cover of the new systemic label. Debating on which system is best postpones the day of reckoning and provides us with unlimited excuses for avoiding the issue.

The core condition of human nature from babyhood is selfishness. Any culture worth its salt endeavours to correct this core condition to, AT THE VERY LEAST, perceive that one's best interests are served by cooperation as opposed to naked competition based upon the dog-eat-dog rule of the jungle. This is the meaning of the Golden Rule.

Unfortunately what has happened is the opposite. Our societies now are almost entirely given over to self indulgence due to a serious personal affliction, arrested development. We now have communities that consist almost entirely of immature selfish individuals intent on self seeking and self satisfaction and self realisation and self esteem in every field of human action. It is the ME society. This condition is fully supported by the pseudo sciences of psychology and sociology which are little more than superstitious mumbo-jumbo in modern garb.

Until we recognise this fact and attend to its remediation no amount of theorising about which economic system or which philosophy or which religion is better will advance us one inch in the direction of freedom, peace and prosperity.

Once that condition is recognised IN OURSELVES then we MUST as individuals begin the process that will change us into the opposite of what we are. We must embrace SELF sacrifice. This is the meaning of the Cross of Christ. Jesus Christ was the only perfect man who sacrificed His life not only in His death but also in his life of service to humanity and obedience to His Father who had sent Him. We begin the journey into perfection ourselves by accepting the truth of who Jesus Christ is, the Son of God, and identify with Him in His Death so that He might identify with us in His resurrection Life, that we also may become sons of God.

Once we have begun this process then every day provides us with opportunities to witness His work in us as He transforms us and moulds our character and nature to conform to His. It is only then that we can truly be the light of the World and the salt of the Earth and He will impart His Life and Light and Love into every aspect of our lives. Then we shall be in reality a member of the New Man who is being created out of the Old Creation in the image of God who is Light and Life and Love. It is the New Man everywhere and in every time who is the meaning of our existence here on this Earth. This is the message that Jesus Christ came to teach us and to demonstrate for us what the New Man is like, what our future is as a member of the Old Man who must die in order that the New Man might come to birth in each one of us.

"Jesus answered them: 'Truly, truly, I say to you, everyone who commits sin is a slave to sin. The slave does not remain in the house forever; the son remains forever. So if the Son sets you free, you will be free indeed.'" (John 8:34-36)

Not really

The government created the Central Bank, then created the incentives and conditions for the private wall street firms to become what they are. It is not the private institutions fault for using the system to their advantage.

Peter Schiff is correct

Dylan Ratigan acknowledges that there is a problem, but is unwilling to accept the solution. The free market system must allow not only success but be allowed to fail too. When the well intended hand of government steps in and bails out corporations, it encourages the moral hazard. Profits are privatized and losses socialized, that's the fatal flaw in the system.



-LibertyG ... 2 Corinthians 2:16-17 "To some we are a scent of death leading to death, but to others, a scent of life leading to life. And who is competent for this? For we are not like the many who make a trade(for profit) but as those with sincerity...

The mistake Peter Schiff always makes....

Peter Schiff would serve himself better if he wasn't always trying to lay the blame of everything on "the government".

It wasn't "the government" that set interest rates too low.
It wasn't "the government" that invented derivative swap schemes.

It was the privately controlled Central Bank, and private Wall Street firms that created this financial corruption. And it is them who benefit.

Now why is this distinction important?

Because it is private profiteers who invent and who profit from these schemes. The public sphere has almost nothing to do with it, aside from many politicians (through bribery) falling in line with the wishes and directives of corrupt Big Business.

So hurting poor people with "austerity" madness ain't going to ever fix that problem. That isn't the cure. It will just make everyone poorer -- and as Henry Ford admitted: I can sell more cars if ordinary people can afford them, similarly the whole of society benefits (and profits) if the few social programs that actually help poor people continue, and are left alone (as poor people can't buy anything).

So how come Peter Schiff never attacks the Rothschilds, the Rockefellers, the Morgans, and Wall Street private criminal "entrepreneurs" out by name? They are the makers of the policy. They are the profiteers. Why is he always protecting the operators of Big Corrupt Business and the CEOs who profit from these crimes -- and just dismissing this all away as "the government"?

The real problem is that our public representation is weak and works on behalf of private profiteers and criminals (through bribery), and not on behalf of the ordinary people.

It would seem that this just illustrates the danger of private power becoming greater than the State itself (Fascism), rather than untrue claim of the State being greater than private power (Communism).

The fact that we live in a Fasicst/Corporatist/Totalitarian society is the evidence here of the danger of unchecked private power, that with their wealth can overwhelm and buy-out the government from top-to-bottom, and use it for its own evil purposes (private Central Bank, Wall Street, War Industry, Big Pharma, etc.).

The fact that this private power is also international in scope, means that we suffer under a weak, pathetic government (unable to even defend its own Constitution and self-interest), rather than under a strong government.

Peter Schiff should be attacking this evil Corporate Dictatorship that we live under, and not "government". And we will never stop predatory Corporate behavior from taking place, or restore "free markets" .... by austerity.

We need a level playing field, NOT AUSTERITY.


... those "watching" need to realize that Occupy is a hired charade of the professionally unemployed to give the appearance that the public is upset with the cronyism; when in reality, they have been conditioned to be dependents of socialism...unable to understand that what is given to them, MUST BE taken from someone else ...

There is NOTHING free in this world ... those who tacitly accept their role as controlled/followers/dependents of anything "bigger" than themselves are those who have sold their birthright for a pot of porridge ... BIG MISTAKE!

If it's too good to be true; a "free ride" in this case ... it probably is. The clock is ticking, the infinite credit system is bleeding dry; and these people will be in no position to to ever enjoy freedom if they do not take this opportunity to claim their God-given rights NOW!

Government, the FED and Wall Street

are all run and/or owned by the same elite.

The whole discussion is a distortion designed to divide us. The elite is ripping off the 99.99999%. That is all there is to it.

Peter Schiff is right about the solution which is always less government no matter what the question is. Government is an inherently evil institution and it needs to be cut down to size. If government was much much smaller it would be impossible for the elite to control the world the way they do.

Not true

We are currently controlled by a private global Banking system (which is corrupt), and by the Corporations (Wall Street, etc.) that it owns and operates.

The problem is that government was too weak (and failed to protect us from this massive private power), not that government was too strong.

The concept of Government is no more evil than the concept of a Town-Hall meeting, or the Fire Department.

It is money....and private money that hollowed-out, bribed, and corrupted Government -- not because the government was "strong", but because it was too weak, and easily overwhelmed by private money.

The New World order is a Corporate-controlled Empire which is run by private power, and where they profit. Any strong government -- such as one that attempts to Nationalize Oil or develop its own Independent National Bank -- is then Militarily assaulted and overthrown by The Rothschilds U.S.-British Empire to protect their control over resources.

They own the whole chess board today, because governments were too weak, and had no means to fight them and their money.

Peter Schiff is quite wrong therefore to go around letting Wall Street and these private malafactors of wealth go blameless, unnamed and undealt with, while wanting to impoverish poor people.

No! Poor people paid into social security all their lives for chrissakes. They should get their checks. It the ROTHSCHILDS, and the ROCKEFELLERS, and the MORGANS that need to be dealt with here.

You go after them!!

but government weakness is always built into the system

Unless you confine the role of government by strict guidelines there will always be 'weak' government because it there are always weak people. How are you ever going to get the strong government you want? It is systemic! It is government by whim. There needs to be a new structure that defines the parameters of government influence and forbids entering into certain areas of life that are easily susceptible to manipulation. I suggest you read Rudolf Steiner's ideas around the Threefold principle of governing which keeps the political, socio and economic spheres of society more independent from each other.

I agree with you for the most part

Government does indeed need to be strong, or at least strong enough to follow the constitution.

But it should never do more than that.

You can blame rich people, wall street, the military industrial complex, big pharma or anybody else you want and that would be correct. They are greedy, heartless people exploiting the poor and the middle class. But that is human nature and no government can change that or indeed should try to. The role of Government should be to enforce the constitution and defend the liberty of every individual, nothing more nothing less.

Your post seems to indicate that we should go after the bankers which is misguided advice that will only make them stronger. Yes we should inform people about how the bankers run the world - because they do - but they not only use money but also Government to do it. In theory you are correct that Government does not have to be evil, but in reality Government always turn evil because it has tremendous power and therefore attracts the most greedy, selfish and power hungry people.

So I think we can agree that we need a strong Government that will follow the constitution.

Yes, Go After The Banksters!

Never has anyone really done that before.

And this is really what the whole "End the Fed" movement is really all about anyway (taking away their power). But I think just that is not enough.

We need to also call out The Rothschilds, The Rockefellers, The Morgans, etc. by name, identify them as the outlaws, and seek to criminalize them in the same way that "Bernie Madoff" was.

JAIL TO WALL STREET. Imagine a Rockefeller in Jail?

Great things would be possible again in this Country, if people made that our National focus and mission. The great corruption would then be rooted out.

Again I agree

Go after the banking families who control the central banks and the largest international banks.

Just don't get it confused with Wall Street which for the most part is just ordinary greedy people like everyone else (for the most part). It is the few owners who control everything behind the scene we need to expose - those who control the central banks, the international banks, governments, industry, "education", "science", political parties, UN, IMF, EU, Nato and everything else in power.

Not really, you put the cart before the horse

The government created the Central Bank, then created the incentives and conditions for the private wall street firms to become what they are. It is not the private institutions fault for using the system to their advantage.

The Market is the check on private power, the government is manipulating the market.

Not accurate

The Central Bank (Rothschilds, Rockefellers, Morgans, Warburgs, et al) overwhlemed and overthrew the U.S. Government, using their private wealth through the tactics of bribery, infiltration, corruption, and also assisted by the ignorance and cowardice of elected officials.

This is like a cancerous tumor invading your body. A healthy body (public representation, i.e. "government") is not the problem here.

The problem, of course, is the cancer itself. The active role here is played by the benefactors: Rothschilds, Rockefellers, Morgans, Warburgs, etc., while the victim is the Institution that was intended to serve the common people (along with the people themselves, who were then left with a hollowed-out, criminal enterprise -- instead of proper and honest public representation).

But The Market cannot check private power. Capitalism is a system where maximizing profits and minimizing costs are the primary goal (if not the only goal). And simply put, the pursuit of money is valued over and above all human interests, environmental interests, health interests, equal access, etc.

So the natural course of events then is social stratification, and also the consolidation of markets, and pursuit of Monopolies and Cartels -- because that is consistent with the shareholders goal of maximizing profits.

Now, government has indeed served these corrupt interests -- but not because that what it was intended to do from the outset -- but only because private wealth (Rothschilds, etc.) became much stronger than the Law, and our Constitution, and the enforcement of those things which had been conceived to protect the public.

But the Corporations did intend and schemed to do this -- because that's what a money-based value system produces. Run over people because .... you make more money that way.

As a consequence corruption has reigned.

You have to cut off the head of snake, if you want to ever kill it. So all this misdirected focus on "the government" is both inaccurate, and also a smoke-screen that is just letting the real perpetrators: THE ROTHSCHILDS, ROCKEFELLERS, MORGANS, etc., and their private wealth and crooked Corporations continue to get away with murder, corruption, and dominate our entire culture from top-to-bottom.

If this were an Action-Adventure Movie, the "hero" would be going after them right now. The perpetrators of the whole system.

But people like Peter Schiff want to protect the profiteers (Wall Street) from blame, and then impoverish the poor people? That ain't the answer folks....

"... misdirected focus..." "...stronger than the Law..."

The weakness is neither government, nor private capitalists particularly. The crux is a moral weakness and a general pudginess of intellect, understanding and resolve.

Frederic Bastiat, 'The Law':

"The state tends to expand in proportion to its means of existence and to live beyond its means, and these are, in the last analysis, nothing but the substance of the people. Woe to the people that cannot limit the sphere of action of the state! Freedom, private enterprise, wealth, happiness, independence, personal dignity, all vanish."


"The mission of the law is not to oppress persons and plunder them of their property, even though the law may be acting in a philanthropic spirit. Its purpose is to protect persons and property.... If you exceed this proper limit -- if you attempt to make the law religious, fraternal, equalizing, philanthropic, industrial, or artistic -- you will then be lost in uncharted territory, in vagueness and uncertainty, in a forced utopia or, even worse, in a multitude of utopias, each striving to seize the law and impose it on you."


"What, then, is the law? It is the collective organization of the individual right to lawful defense. ... since an individual cannot lawfully use force against the person, liberty, or property of another individual, then the common force -- for the same reason -- cannot lawfully be used to destroy the person, liberty, or property of individual groups. ... But, unfortunately, law by no means confines itself to its proper functions. And when it has exceeded its proper functions, it has not done so merely in some inconsequential and debatable matters. The law has gone further than this; it has acted in direct opposition to its own purpose. The law has been used to destroy its own objective: It has been applied to annihilating the justice that it was supposed to maintain; to limiting and destroying rights which its real purpose was to respect. The law has placed the collective force at the disposal of the unscrupulous who wish, without risk, to exploit the person, liberty, and property of others. It has converted plunder into a right, in order to protect plunder. And it has converted lawful defense into a crime, in order to punish lawful defense."

"A fatal tendency of mankind. Self-preservation and self-development are common aspirations among all people. And if everyone enjoyed the unrestricted use of his faculties and the free disposition of the fruits of his labor, social progress would be ceaseless, uninterrupted, and unfailing. But there is also another tendency that is common among people. When they can, they wish to live and prosper at the expense of others. This is no rash accusation. Nor does it come from a gloomy and uncharitable spirit. The annals of history bear witness to the truth of it: the incessant wars, mass migrations, religious persecutions, universal slavery, dishonesty in commerce, and monopolies. This fatal desire has its origin in the very nature of man -- in that primitive, universal, and insuppressible instinct that impels him to satisfy his desires with the least possible pain."


"The war against illegal plunder has been fought since the beginning of the world. But how is... legal plunder to be identified? Quite simply. See if the law takes from some persons what belongs to them, and gives it to other persons to whom it does not belong. See if the law benefits one citizen at the expense of another by doing what the citizen himself cannot do without committing a crime. Then abolish this law without delay ... If such a law is not abolished immediately it will spread, multiply and develop into a system."


"Pudginess of intellect"

"The Law" proves to be a useful treadmill of rationale when one seeks to work of those extra pounds of apathetic indulgence.

It would be impossible, therefore, to introduce into society a greater change and a greater evil than this—the conversion of the law into an instrument of plunder. (pg. 7)

The delusion of the day is to enrich all classes at the expense of each other; it is to generalize plunder under pretense of organizing it. (pg. 14)

Can the law, whose necessary sanction is force, be reasonably employed upon anything beyond securing to every one his right? I defy anyone to remove it from this circle without perverting it, and con- sequently turning force against right. And as this is the most fatal, the most illogical social perversion that can possibly be imagined, it must be admitted that the true solution, so much sought after, of the social problem, is contained in these simple words—LAW IS ORGANIZED JUSTICE. (pg.15)

"Only a virtuous people are capable of freedom. As nations become corrupt and vicious, they have more need of masters." Benjamin Franklin

IMHO...You nailed it!

Is what you portray the politcal and philosophical intersection of the rEVOLution and OWS?




Envy 'em?

The so-called "private" Fe'ral Reserve could not exist without the violence of government backing up its faith-based currency. Peter may be impolitic at times, but he is nevertheless correct. Our troubles are NOT delivered by (evil, greedy) capitalists, they are brought to us directly by our (selfless, compassionate) Fe'ral Government.

dynamite anthrax supreme court white house tea party jihad
West of 89
a novel of another america


The Bankers used violence to hollow-out our Country.

They tried to kill anyone who resisted them: including Andrew Jackson (shot twice but survived), Lincoln, Garfield, Kennedy, etc. The War of 1812 was started when Thomas Jefferson had ended the First (privately owned) United States Bank, (British attack on America).

The whole problem is that when our Government stood up and resisted the private Bank Cartel, they were then shot or War ensued. The private capitalists did indeed prey upon our Country, and they won using violence.

What we today call "government" is not public representation. It is just a club of hand-picked lawyers that are advancing the global agenda of this private power, and their designs of global violence.

Watch this movie and learn something: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=USGSOViaulc

The enemy is clearly identified here!

Capitalism Red Handed

I don't know what 'nvm' means, but LibertyBaby's point was very cogently stated. This viewpoint acknowledged by those in our camp goes a long way towards maintaining constructive dialog with our potential allies in the progressive/occupy crowd. You can defend free markets best by admitting fascism prevails today. Max Kaiser does it over the top, in the tradition of the French Revolution. Damen Vrabel has stated the same critique of Peter Schiff with less emotional pandering. We do need to acknowledge the legitimacy of these occupier objections to the invisible hand with the heavy thumb grasping with it's strong arm, closed fist and raised middle finger.


Acknowledge the full problem (public/private syndicate of crime), then we can begin to demonstrate that more government is never the solution.

It was quite comical

when Dylan tried to woo the Occupiers last year. Can't blame him,though. Everyone wanted a soap box there. Free nationwide exposure. Maybe RP should have stepped up too to give them something to think about? Oh well.

All TV/radio personalities love hearing themselves talk.

well he did kind of...

he stepped up to give *everyone* something to think about. 'We', 'them', 'they'..... all. =)

Im kind of glad Ron isn't

Im kind of glad Ron isn't associated with that group


The Host

or interviewer needs to shut his mouth and let Schiff and the others get a word out. Your question should not be 3 mins long and let the person only reply for 5 seconds! I hate MSM they are horrible at every part of their job!

Unfortunately Dylan is doing his job

Not letting word out that Govt controls what reigns are on free market principles. I was a fan of Ratigan when i watched MSM but have come to the realization that he cowers to a MSNBC paycheck rather than standing for true capitalistic values.

While he may be leading in truth among most MSM hosts/analysts he still falls short as a viable person in a movement for true liberty and all things Constitutional.

Anyone else getting bored and

Anyone else getting bored and or annoyed with the doctor patient analogies?


I watched it on TV and Rat Boy wouldn't even let him talk

or promote his book.