End The Fed - WHY?

[CogWheeler]

I hope somebody will stick with me on this.

The chant was clear, yet again, in Paul's speach last night. I want to ask which of the two options Ron Paul, or his supporters, approve of most.

1 - a fixed dollar peg to gold
2 - an adjustable dollar peg to gold

I don't know, but am curious, if Paul has ever said "end the fed", or been clear about the elimination of central banking in the United States? And if he won't freely say it, than why do his supporters chant it? The point I'm trying to make is whether its dangerous for the viability of his general message, to bellow something so ambitious and potentially unsettling to wouldbe RP supporters.

 

[harikaried]

Check out this interview with Larry Kudlow:

 

[Travlyr]

Neither 1 or 2.

3. An Eagle is 247.5 grains of pure gold. A Dollar is 371.25 grains of pure silver. Anybody can coin it freely without penalty.

 

[madcat033]

I hope somebody will stick with me on this.

The chant was clear, yet again, in Paul's speach last night. I want to ask which of the two options Ron Paul, or his supporters, approve of most.

1 - a fixed dollar peg to gold
2 - an adjustable dollar peg to gold

I don't know, but am curious, if Paul has ever said "end the fed", or been clear about the elimination of central banking in the United States? And if he won't freely say it, than why do his supporters chant it? The point I'm trying to make is whether its dangerous for the viability of his general message, to bellow something so ambitious and potentially unsettling to wouldbe RP supporters.

He wants to legalize competing currencies. And yes, Ron Paul wrote a book called "End the Fed."

 

[Brian4Liberty]

With the Fed, the government is intimately involved in a business, the business of banking, lending, debt, leveraging and gambling. The taxpayers are on the hook for all failures. Wall St. profits.

Should the government be involved in making donuts? Cars? Clothes? The government shouldn't be involved in business.

 

[Mises_to_Paul]

He wants to legalize competing currencies. A free market of currencies.

Over time, people would eventually stop dealing with devalued federal reserve notes altogether in the face of sound money, which would probably end up as gold (but people would still be able to deal in another currency if they wanted to).

You can't literally close the door/throw away the key to the Fed without some sort of transition. Doing so would be catastrophic.

 

[Darthbrooklyn]

I wish he would change the message to suit a broader audience. Instead of "end the Fed" he could campaign on "Fix the Economy" The general electorate dont care HOW it gets fixed as long as it gets fixed.. He can talk about ending the fed once hes in the WH. but he needs to get elected first.

 

[pipewerKz]

It's immoral.

 

[Feeding the Abscess]

Considering he joined in on the chant on live national TV during his post New Hampshire and South Carolina speeches......

 

[Endthefednow]

CogWheeler The FED is one of the major problems for our Economy please research on the Federal Reserve why is it a private company why do we tax payer have to pay the fed every time the US needs to print money? look up the money masters on UTube search for
Real History of Money parts 1 through 22

 

[rpwi]

Ending the Fed need not necessitate returning immediately to a gold standard.

The Fed has kind of the following functions:

1) It hoards and mismanages trillions of dollars worth of assets (mostly t-bills)
2) It determines how much and when money is created and destroyed
3) It determines largely where and how newly counterfeited money is spent
4) It constantly bails out the banking system
5) It acts as a bank for other bankers and for the Federal Government

1) Assets can be liquidated, given to the treasury to naturally mature (no market manipulation) or even largely canceled as much of the assets are government debt instruments
2) We could keep the MB as is...just not grow it. Makes things very simple. If we do grow it we could do so at a constant rate that is not prone to market manipulation (like what Friedman advocated with M1 in the early 80's).
3) Not needed...extra money should go straight to the budget to help pay down the debt...not mismanaged and given away to banking buddies.
4) Banks should not be bailed out because it creates a moral hazard and sever economic distortions.
5) MB could be largely kept intact and the treasury could take over the more 'book-keeping' aspects of maintaining a money supply.

Key points are that the Fed will get out of the corporate welfare game and the bare-bones functions of money maintenance could return to the treasury...whose budget IS accountable to congress.

Ron has not spelled this out...but I assume a transition period such as this would occur.

During a redditt interview he was asked about the specifics of returning to a gold standard and he talked about how they did this after the civil war...then said this wouldn't be like that today. So he has remained very vague on this issue.

A peg would be a VERY bad idea and would represent government tyranny because it would use the public's resources to buy overpriced gold so they have reserves to maintain a peg.

 

[gerryb]

Neither 1 or 2.

3. An Eagle is 247.5 grains of pure gold. A Dollar is 371.25 grains of pure silver. Anybody can coin it freely without penalty.

Why do we want this?

I would rather my coin say: 247.5 grains of pure gold... and make no reference to some other number or reference that isn't a weight.

If we go back to the system Ron Paul endorses... it will just start the cycle over again. The banks (who currently own the gold), will just devalue the value of the dollar, then unpeg it from gold, etc.

We should want only units of measurement, nothing else.

 

[flynn]

Why would you want socialism in credit and money?

 

[JJ2]

I don't know, but am curious, if Paul has ever said "end the fed", or been clear about the elimination of central banking in the United States?

Answer: YES. http://www.amazon.com/End-Fed-Ron-Paul/dp/0446549193

 

[Travlyr]

Why do we want this?

I would rather my coin say: 247.5 grains of pure gold... and make no reference to some other number or reference that isn't a weight.

If we go back to the system Ron Paul endorses... it will just start the cycle over again. The banks (who currently own the gold), will just devalue the value of the dollar, then unpeg it from gold, etc.

We should want only units of measurement, nothing else.

I agree that would be better, but people always like to name things.

 

[Schiff_FTW]

Half the people who hear it probably think the chant is about the federal government.

 

[Feeding the Abscess]

Half the people who hear it probably think the chant is about the federal government.

In that case, I hope the chants get even louder.

 

[Patrick Henry]

Ron literally wrote a book called "End the Fed". http://www.amazon.com/End-Fed-Ron-P...=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1328745651&sr=1-1

I don't know, but am curious, if Paul has ever said "end the fed", or been clear about the elimination of central banking in the United States?

 

[gte811i]

I hope somebody will stick with me on this.

The chant was clear, yet again, in Paul's speach last night. I want to ask which of the two options Ron Paul, or his supporters, approve of most.

1 - a fixed dollar peg to gold
2 - an adjustable dollar peg to gold

I don't know, but am curious, if Paul has ever said "end the fed", or been clear about the elimination of central banking in the United States? And if he won't freely say it, than why do his supporters chant it? The point I'm trying to make is whether its dangerous for the viability of his general message, to bellow something so ambitious and potentially unsettling to wouldbe RP supporters.

IMO, no question exists as to if Paul wants to end the fed. He reads economic books and is in the Austrian camp. Rothbard laid out several ways to eliminate the Fed. But let's also be clear, it's not just about a central bank. If you eliminate the central bank and have fractional reserve lending then you haven't really changed much. The Fed is a natural outgrowth fractional reserve lending (FRL). A "gold standard" does nothing to eliminate this, banks just pyramid on top of gold dollars.

If you understand the problem you know the Fed and FRL are the problem. Originally, the dollar was set at a specific weight of silver. The problem became that gold was set at a specific ratio of silver. Gold and silver were pegged. This is why there was a fierce battle between silver/gold camps in the late 1800s. If they hadn't been pegged it would have never happened.

If the dollar is defined as a metric, as in a mile is this long and will always be this long, then prices float around that. Say a dollar is defined as .1 oz of gold. 1oz would be 10 dollars. At current price of gold ($1700), $1 = .0058 new dollars. So a candy bar would be something like .0058 dollars. And if you defined a cent to be .01 dollar, then a candy bar would be five and a half cents which would be equivalent to .0058 oz of gold. This is at current prices. So then the question becomes not is a candy bar worth five and a half a cents, but is a candy bar worth .0058 oz of gold. My guess is that what would happen is gold would skyrocket b/c there isn't enough gold for every candy bar to be worth .0058 oz of gold. So maybe a candy bar then becomes worth something like .00058 oz of gold or half a cent.

And this is precisely why silver was used . . . for small transactions. So you would probably have 2 prices, one for oz. of gold and one for oz. of silver. You cannot define the dollar as x oz of gold AND y oz of silver . . . then you've just pegged the gold/silver ratio. And that pegging (which was done) was one of many factors that eventually led to the state we are in today

 

[robmpreston]

I hope somebody will stick with me on this.

The chant was clear, yet again, in Paul's speach last night. I want to ask which of the two options Ron Paul, or his supporters, approve of most.

1 - a fixed dollar peg to gold
2 - an adjustable dollar peg to gold

I don't know, but am curious, if Paul has ever said "end the fed", or been clear about the elimination of central banking in the United States? And if he won't freely say it, than why do his supporters chant it? The point I'm trying to make is whether its dangerous for the viability of his general message, to bellow something so ambitious and potentially unsettling to wouldbe RP supporters.

Well, seeing as he wrote a book called "End the Fed" - what do you think?