26 votes

Peter Schiff educates MSNBC Keynesians from June, 2012: "Ron Paul is not the typical Republican"

Although this is an old clip, nothing has changed with Keynesian thinking. Four against one is still not fair for the others. Ron Paul's influence in the mainstream mentioned at 8:15.

Peter Schiff tries to educate Keynesians.

http://youtu.be/_oxcM7THoro



Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

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

Notice how the crazy wench

can't even look at Peter Schiff. She knows she full of sh** and her subconcious gives it away.

Lying...

Ignorant hypocrites. Everyone predicted the 2008 crises after it happened, right? Meanwhile Peter stood alone being laughed at in his pre-2008 warnings and stands alone being laughed at again.

Peter Schiff's likability problem

Let me preface this by saying I rooted for Schiff in his Senate bid, and I like his politics. And, honestly, I can imagine him being a pleasant, funny guy in interpersonal situations.

But he is NOT LIKABLE. His style in these situations rubs people the wrong way and turns off voters. Want to know why Peter wasn't the GOP Senate nominee in 2010? Watch this video, and how often 15 seconds go by without Peter chirping in and interrupting someone.

I hope Peter reads this. I want him to succeed. But he has to realize that image matters in politics. If you're one of FIVE people in a discussion, you can't interrupt all the time. Occasional interruptions are fine, but not every interjection that pops up in your head should come out of your mouth.

Peter: you need to reduce interruptions by 75%, at minimum. Store up all those comments you'd like to make until you get your chance to talk, and list some of them. Or, say "there are a lot of things you said there that I disagree with, but here are the two most important ones for this discussion."

I like his interruptions

Sometimes these people need to get smacked down dumb point by dumb point that they make. If nothing you say makes sense and we continue to let you talk it gives credibility to your nonsense. I actually wish Dr. Paul was a little more argumentative and interruptive in his style. I know I'm going to get some flack about how that's not his personality yada yada yada but I think in these sound byte discourses when you only have 15 minutes to talk about deep issues that requires whole texts to be read to comprehend you have to be a little interruptive and speak with authority so people know what you are saying. And Peter is right I don't see any videos of that other guy making any predictions. Sometimes people need to put their money where their mouths are and Peter does that all the time.

  • New Jersey's Premier Junk Removal Junk Service!
  • Accepts Bitcoin
    www.powercleanouts.com
    Check out my blog:
    www.yoanante.com

    SteveMT's picture

    Hammering hypocrisy immediately is Schiff's rule.

    It's a good one, IMO.

    Completely agree!

    I personally think Milton Friedman was the master at delivering the message. He always was jovial and non-confrontational, and his style fostered real engagement, even from people who might initially disagree. He could clearly expose a bad argument, and do so without personally alienating anyone.

    Me too

    It definitely is something that annoys me about Schiff. Friedman was the master and I think Thomas Sowell is one of the best as well.

    SteveMT's picture

    I can't imagine a quiet, pleasant Peter Schiff in this situation

    He can easily be that way. He is respectful and polite everyday on his radio show. But here he is in with a den of wolves, 4 against 1 who all want to make him look bad, like they do with Ron Paul or Jesse Ventura. The best offense is a good defense, and this is Peter's defense, IMO.

    He can easily be that way?

    Perhaps he CAN be, I never see him that way.

    Your analysis doesn't make a lot of sense. He's in a "den of wolves" so he should behave in such a way that he automatically makes himself look like a jerk? No. He should be the contrarian, but be respectful doing it. Interrupt OCCASIONALLY, when absolutely necessary and when done for effect.

    He's not being defensive, he's being offensive.

    I think I know what I'm talking about. I do this stuff for a living, and I can tell you that Schiff's style doesn't persuade. Maybe it makes the true believers like you happy, but that shouldn't be the goal.

    SteveMT's picture

    Listen to his radio show.

    Here is the link. He is usually very polite.
    http://www.schiffradio.com/site

    However, this is as close to respectful as it gets with these trash economists. This was a confrontational interview from the beginning. Try being on your best behavior in a situation like that. Outnumbering someone 4 against 1 is called bullying and was not fair at the outset. They attempted to stack the deck against Schiff. They got what they deserved and as respectfully as possible by Schiff. These are the same type of people who laughed at what Schiff had to say in 2006-2007. They treat Schiff like they treat Ron Paul, badly.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2I0QN-FYkpw&feature=related

    Schiff also has to deal with the corrupt system that has incarcerated his 84 year old father who was just sent to Texas, even further away from his home in Connecticut. Schiff has a lot on his plate, and I believe he deals with it all very well.

    lol Peter Schiff's comments crack me up

    They ARE wrong.

    What a bunch of idiots.

    .

    Patriot Cell #345,168
    I don't respond to emails or pm's.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&feature=endscreen&v=qo8CmO...
    Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution, inevitable.

    Betsey

    When Betsey was talking about inflation, I was decidedly bothered. Firstly, ANY new money created by the Fed gets put into the hands of the banks and or other corporations first. This, in and of itself, is a truly unfair system. Leave out all of the calculations, leave out whether or not the 'injections of liquidity' are permanent or temporary (will be 'unprinted' later), it's a greatly flawed and unfair system to allow the privileged few to receive financial benefits that no individual can possibly receive. This distorts the markets, as Fed-Member banks, as well as other privileged corporations receive financial security/stability without having to earn it via competition in the marketplace like non-connected corporations and individuals have to. We need not involve even one calculation to show this practice to be unfair, immoral, and having a greatly diminutive effect on real prosperity in the free market.

    SteveMT's picture

    I was bothered also by Betsey.

    She is from the Wharton School of Keynesian Economics.

    These people had an agenda

    These people had an agenda and it was to persuade people that Ron Paul's policies would be a disaster and that his ideas are starting to spread among the gop. Schiff held his own but it was five against one and they were determined to spread their lies.

    Exactly

    These are brainwashed statists/communists who are employing the usual bogeyman tactic - that beat back the Tea Party Movement in 2010. Average people are easily scared and not very courageous when it comes to doing the right thing. Just keep the trains running and give me my Medicaid.

    Schiff was fantastic in that interview.

    Kevin

    ARE THESE

    the standards of GRADUATES their Schools ( WHARTON and what was the other school?) can produce? OMG!

    Ez

    They aren't graduates of the schools listed by their names...

    they are PROFESSORS!

    Is it any wonder we are so screwed up?

    FYI - this is from

    June 9, 2012

    SteveMT's picture

    Thanks for making me aware of this.

    The interview looked like it had just been posted today. I changed the date to show that this is old.

    Appreciated.

    Betsy Stevenson

    Betsey Stevenson is Chief Economist to Secretary Hilda L. Solis. Dr Stevenson is also a Research Associate with the National Bureau of Economic Research, affiliated with both the Labor Studies and Law and Economics programs. She is also a Fellow of the Ifo Institute for Economic Research in Munich and, a visiting scholar at the San Francisco Federal Reserve.

    SHE WORKS FOR THE FED!!!

    Good God

    These Keynesians are revoltingly stupid and arrogant.

    wow, this is going to make a

    wow, this is going to make a great "peter schiff was right" video some day. Those keynesian economists don't know it yet, but they are gonna be famous on the internet someday... or I should say infamous.

    WOW

    These neo-Keynesians have their head stuck WAY up their asses. Should ask them if they counterfeited billions of dollars in their basement and handed it out to people, would that help the economy??

    The idea that you can print money and help the economy has been tried and failed and thoroughly discredited so many times in history it not even funny. That anyone can advocate this with a straight face is ludicrous.

    SteveMT's picture

    A wall would be easier getting through than these people.

    Dyed-in-the-wool Keynesians are printing-press aficionados.

    I just sent emails and

    I just sent emails and tweeted Karl Smith and Betsey Stevenson ridiculing them for their total ignorance of history, economics, psychology, and philosophy.

    Simple Facts and Plain Arguments
    A common sense take on politics and current events.

    www.simplefactsplainarguments.com

    SteveMT's picture

    Great effort, but these people seem bought and paid for.

    Either it's that alternative, or they are totally ignorant of Austrian economics. I vote for the former, bought and paid for to lie.

    Thanks for the bump.

    THEY

    need the FIAT to pay for their school LOANS!

    Ez

    Exactly how it works:

    These "expert panels" are stacked by the corporate owners of the networks they are presented on.

    Either:

    A) They are funded and backed somewhere along the line by those interests (oligarchy) that are massively benefiting from the current status quo, and or

    B) They were educated by those same interests, and do not have the intellectual flexibility and depth to understand how they were being duped, and therefore unwittingly back their own destruction

    Either way / both -- this is WHY they are chosen to be on TV for the panel.

    Opposing points of view (like Schiff) are only "allowed" to be on the panel to give some illusion of "fairness"

    But the true purpose of "allowing" the minority view - is so that view can be outnumbered by the status quo representatives - and the entire segement is framed "discredit" the opposing minority in the minds of the uninformed viewer ...

    ... who - by virtue of the fact that they are watching an ideologically biased network in the first place - is statistically likely to be leaning toward the direction of the presented majority (3 vs 1) in the first place.

    The risk they take with this approach:

    That opposition - Schiff in this case - will be so clear in their arguments, and capable of simply and logically presenting their case in a compelling way to a reasonably intelligent, unbiased viewer ... that they will overwhelm the majority and bring them over to the minority view.

    This is why these segments are carefully planned and stacked. They want to ride the fine line of appearing "fair" - while not running the risk that it will get out of control and work against them.

    In this case (imo): they failed :) Schiff is getting too good at this.

    Very Well Said

    And Spot On Brother!

    "You Cannot Stop An Idea Whose Time Has Come"