JD Vance agrees with Ron Paul on the Federal Reserve:

[fisharmor]

Is the transition team realizing that the Fed is the fountain that feeds the swamp? Is Massie's endorsement for Trump a potential sign of quid pro quo support for the End the Fed bill?

Trump said on Rogan he doesn't like excuses. But he keeps offering excuses. Especially about how he started his administration by refilling the swamp.

The people who envisioned Solar Roadways will never get another opportunity to hoodwink people. Neither will the inventors of the Waterseer.
We're regularly given examples of people promising something that sounds far-fetched and for which they have obviously not done all the homework. These people almost never get a second chance. They fade into obscurity, and rightly so - that is how the market deals with fraud, even if it is well meaning and not really intentional fraud.

The only example that comes to mind of someone getting a second chance is Elon with the hyperloop. It's a bit different - because the hyperloop was an impossible idea that he came up with well after having proved himself with other ideas. It's true he's best known for Tesla and that idea is controversial (even though he did deliver what he promised), but his other exploits have cemented him in a place where if he comes knocking for investment capital it's right there waiting for him.

Because I don't treat politicians different from market actors, I'm forced to ask, ok Trump, why should I trust you after you failed the first time?

If I was one of these interviewers talking to Trump and receiving this bullshit excuse about refilling the swamp, I'd immediately ask "ok but if it's essentially their fault the swamp got refilled, when did you realize they played you?" If the answer is "about year 2 of my administration" the follow up question is "ok then how come you didn't fix it" -
and if the answer is "during this campaign trail" the follow up question is "ok so how many new promises are you making where you're going to utterly fail and use the existence of the deep state as your excuse but not until you've been out of office for nearly 4 years?"

And if he replies with "well it wasn't a priorty then like it is now" then the follow up question is "ok so what new promises are you making that aren't really a priority?"

If this was a 17 year old boy trying to borrow the family car with this type of rhetoric, there's no responsible parent in the world who wouldn't be collecting all the keys and padlocking them tight around his neck with welded chain.

What are this man's wins that are making everyone ignore his losses and give him a second chance? I can only think of one thing he gave us that nobody else has been able to deliver - peace. I admit that's a big one, but it also turned out that his peace was more expensive and totalitarian than everyone else's war.

This isn't even getting to the topic of the Fed! People who are serious about doing something about the fed don't "warm up" to the idea. They are committed because they recognize what Clayton said - "The Federal Reserve is the most evil human institution in existence". It's not even a belief - it's a recognition. I haven't heard Trump say anything about the Fed, and when his running mate talks about how they're directly responsible for destroying liberty, they're yuk yuk yuking about it.
I don't trust Trump to do a damned thing about promises he has already failed at after he spent so much time in 2016 talking about it with much seriousness.
How am I supposed to feel about a topic they're NOT treating seriously?

This is hella depressing - every time something like this comes up my INTJ kicks in and I think "how the hell are there only like 8 people in existence I know who see this blantantly obvious thing and why are 5 of them on RPF".

 

[fisharmor]

Libertarians never unite around anything. They argue about everything. There is never a Consensus.

And here's another blatantly obvious "why the hell don't more people see this" topic. One I've mentioned a few times before here, always to yawns.

Where are you posting this? What's the name of the site?

How did you get here?

How did I get here?

How did acptulsa and PAF and Snowball get here? Did we all get here by arguing and not agreeing on anything?

What keeps us here? Most people have left and this movement officially died in June 2012, and efforts to relight it in the LP are being actively sabotaged. It's dead and over, so why do we bother?

It's because we DID all agree on something.

And in case it's not blatantly obvious, the reason some of us are pretty pissed about Trump is because of the number of times we're having to say no, we didn't agree on any of that and are frankly shocked you do now.

 

[pmbug]

... This isn't even getting to the topic of the Fed! People who are serious about doing something about the fed don't "warm up" to the idea. ...

Credit where it is due - Trump did nominate Judy Shelton to the Fed board during his first term. The Senate blocked her.

 

[wizardwatson]

[twitter link from Matt C.]

... is the argument that he lays out actually the Ron Paul argument?

JD seems very generic. Good diction and just smart enough to B.S. his way through tough topics. I think the main argument from Ron is audit the Fed (with an eye to abolishing) and legalize competition with it. The former is an act of lobbying, the latter is more nuanced, because many people understand this as simply "use gold" and they do not understand the banking component or how this could be implemented on a localized level. Like starting your own hospital, there's a lot of red tape to starting a "bank". However, here too, there's a misunderstanding with what a bank "is". The red tape protected system is for operating "savings and loan" type banks. Anyone could open a 100% reserve bank with minimal red tape. There is a bit of red tape for becoming a "payment processor" but this is a lower bar than a bank.

Many people on this site scoff at reserve banking, "Just carry around coins in your pocket, it ain't hard". Well, sure, but if you want to compete in the market of banking, you've got to go further than selling people gold and silver coins. First layer is a depository institution to insulate against inflationary currencies. But then you do need the "savings and loan" layer. There has to be some way for participants in this system to have a loan market that's backed by this sound money bank. There are off-the-shelf tools for both of these layers, but it does require education about the Fed to understand why it is useful and needed.

So there's "coming around to why the Federal Reserve is bad", then there's raising education level enough amongst activists to understand how the competitive entity could exist in reality so that it can be built and marketed.

One thing seems evident to me is that there is no such thing as "the libertarian vote." Libertarians cannot agree on anything.

It is by design that Huge disagreements between Republicans and Democrats exist. Guns, Abortion, whatever. That is a planned strategy because it rally's the base and actually unites them. If there were not specific well planned out things to rally and unite the tribes, the citizen would complain about everything including what their tribe does.

Libertarians never unite around anything. They argue about everything. There is never a Consensus.

And here's another blatantly obvious "why the hell don't more people see this" topic. One I've mentioned a few times before here, always to yawns.

Where are you posting this? What's the name of the site?

How did you get here?

How did I get here?

How did acptulsa and PAF and Snowball get here? Did we all get here by arguing and not agreeing on anything?

What keeps us here? Most people have left and this movement officially died in June 2012, and efforts to relight it in the LP are being actively sabotaged. It's dead and over, so why do we bother?

It's because we DID all agree on something.

And in case it's not blatantly obvious, the reason some of us are pretty pissed about Trump is because of the number of times we're having to say no, we didn't agree on any of that and are frankly shocked you do now.

Ah, the old "who is we?" dilemma.

The bad news is that "we" seems to be a bunch of lost sheep floating around the internets, Daniel McAdams, and John McCardell.

The good news is that the liberty movement as an organization is so small and weak, people could jump into it at any moment and start something.

RPI is the press wing, marketing, vision. CFL is supposed to be the grassroots. RPI is at least functioning and creating content. CFL is a zombie non-profit. The website ought to just be taken down because it's embarrassing, and just redone.

I've always said, SCREW electoral politics as the main vision. Sure, do it on the side, encourage people to engage, but don't make it the main focus of the grassroots organization. Lobbying is a better concept (CFL model), but even there you have a high-risk of repeated failure and volunteer fatigue.

Do thinks that matter:
1. community banking
2. homeschool networks
3. real food network coordination
4. local journalism
5. candidate surveys (the one good thing CFL started doing, that could be improved...much more useful holding CURRENT LEADERS feet to the fire, rather than pushing liberty candidates)

Step one would be organizing to establish a vision. If such a step were taken I would want to be there, because I would want an agenda like this, that puts lobbying and electoral politics in the back seat. We should spend our efforts BUILDING the good things, not patting ourselves on the back because we're so good at pointing out why evil is evil.

 

[PAF]

JD seems very generic. Good diction and just smart enough to B.S. his way through tough topics. I think the main argument from Ron is audit the Fed (with an eye to abolishing) and legalize competition with it. The former is an act of lobbying, the latter is more nuanced, because many people understand this as simply "use gold" and they do not understand the banking component or how this could be implemented on a localized level. Like starting your own hospital, there's a lot of red tape to starting a "bank". However, here too, there's a misunderstanding with what a bank "is". The red tape protected system is for operating "savings and loan" type banks. Anyone could open a 100% reserve bank with minimal red tape. There is a bit of red tape for becoming a "payment processor" but this is a lower bar than a bank.

Many people on this site scoff at reserve banking, "Just carry around coins in your pocket, it ain't hard". Well, sure, but if you want to compete in the market of banking, you've got to go further than selling people gold and silver coins. First layer is a depository institution to insulate against inflationary currencies. But then you do need the "savings and loan" layer. There has to be some way for participants in this system to have a loan market that's backed by this sound money bank. There are off-the-shelf tools for both of these layers, but it does require education about the Fed to understand why it is useful and needed.

So there's "coming around to why the Federal Reserve is bad", then there's raising education level enough amongst activists to understand how the competitive entity could exist in reality so that it can be built and marketed.


Ah, the old "who is we?" dilemma.

The bad news is that "we" seems to be a bunch of lost sheep floating around the internets, Daniel McAdams, and John McCardell.

The good news is that the liberty movement as an organization is so small and weak, people could jump into it at any moment and start something.

RPI is the press wing, marketing, vision. CFL is supposed to be the grassroots. RPI is at least functioning and creating content. CFL is a zombie non-profit. The website ought to just be taken down because it's embarrassing, and just redone.

I've always said, SCREW electoral politics as the main vision. Sure, do it on the side, encourage people to engage, but don't make it the main focus of the grassroots organization. Lobbying is a better concept (CFL model), but even there you have a high-risk of repeated failure and volunteer fatigue.

Do thinks that matter:
1. community banking
2. homeschool networks
3. real food network coordination
4. local journalism
5. candidate surveys (the one good thing CFL started doing, that could be improved...much more useful holding CURRENT LEADERS feet to the fire, rather than pushing liberty candidates)

Step one would be organizing to establish a vision. If such a step were taken I would want to be there, because I would want an agenda like this, that puts lobbying and electoral politics in the back seat. We should spend our efforts BUILDING the good things, not patting ourselves on the back because we're so good at pointing out why evil is evil.

I can agree to much of this, but there is a flaw in part of your logic.

Pointing out why evil is evil is in fact educational, required to holding said "current leaders" feet to the fire, and necessary to establish a vision. Otherwise, as history tends to repeat, we continue to support the likes of Trump/Harris and slide further into tyranny from the top down to the local level.

 

[pmbug]

... I think the main argument from Ron is audit the Fed (with an eye to abolishing) and legalize competition with it. ...

Ron promoted many legislative bills when he was in Congress and he wrote a few books too. "Audit the Fed" was always intended as a first step to "End the Fed". Ron wanted to allow competing currencies (ie. gold and silver), not competing <central> banks. Allowing gold and silver to compete with the Fed's dollar on an even legal tender playing field would be sufficient to apply a practical constraint on the Fed and provide a non-disruptive gradual path for dissolving it. See the GAULT link in my signature for more.

 

[fisharmor]

Ah, the old "who is we?" dilemma.

What's the dilemma?

I'm talking about the objective fact that everyone here - at least the class of 08-12 - all agreed on what we were doing here.
We have always had the arguments, but everyone here showed up because we were convinced to form a coalition around an idea that was championed by Ron Paul.
It was an idea that we all subscribed to. There were plenty of leftists back then who gave up on their socialism garbage and plenty of neocons who gave up on their war garbage to become something else.
And some of us even went farther in our changes and started to develop problems with the core RP message early on, such as with the border. But we still supported RP after that (and would still vote for him in a heartbeat) because even though there's as much as 40% discrepancy between RP's positions and mine now, that's still at least six times more in common with him than I have with Trump.
Hell, RFK only got to like 30% and I was still willing to vote for him.
Again: I don't know why this isn't obvious, and I don't know why it's so difficult to communicate. A lot of us feel like the leftists who are leaving the Democrat party because they didn't change, the whole movement changed around them.

Trump didn't increase the national debt by whatever 8trillion in a vacuum. He needed the federal reserve system in place in order to be able to do that. It was the biggest and most abusive use of the federal reserve system in its entire existence and Trump was the man who signed on the line. He had the power to stop it but chose to try to bully Massie into letting everyone not even convene in congress to pass it.

That is the 180 degree polar black-and-white opposite of one of the top 4 reasons we all got turned onto RP to begin with - ending the Fed. The other reasons I would name as constitutionalism, Austrian economics, and liberty - and Trump is absolutely not on board with any of the other three either. None of this is my opinion. It's all verifiable and if anyone here doesn't have the basic memory capacity required to recall that then I submit you shouldn't be voting at all.

I've always said, SCREW electoral politics as the main vision. Sure, do it on the side, encourage people to engage, but don't make it the main focus of the grassroots organization.

Angela McArdle is currently being personally sued for doing exactly this and trying to set up a place for others to do likewise.

 

[sparebulb]

Credit where it is due - Trump did nominate Judy Shelton to the Fed board during his first term. The Senate blocked her.

Same here.

I will complement Trump when credit is due.

This was one of his few attempts to do the right thing.

 

[PAF]

What's the dilemma?

I'm talking about the objective fact that everyone here - at least the class of 08-12 - all agreed on what we were doing here.
We have always had the arguments, but everyone here showed up because we were convinced to form a coalition around an idea that was championed by Ron Paul.
It was an idea that we all subscribed to. There were plenty of leftists back then who gave up on their socialism garbage and plenty of neocons who gave up on their war garbage to become something else.
And some of us even went farther in our changes and started to develop problems with the core RP message early on, such as with the border. But we still supported RP after that (and would still vote for him in a heartbeat) because even though there's as much as 40% discrepancy between RP's positions and mine now, that's still at least six times more in common with him than I have with Trump.
Hell, RFK only got to like 30% and I was still willing to vote for him.
Again: I don't know why this isn't obvious, and I don't know why it's so difficult to communicate. A lot of us feel like the leftists who are leaving the Democrat party because they didn't change, the whole movement changed around them.

Trump didn't increase the national debt by whatever 8trillion in a vacuum. He needed the federal reserve system in place in order to be able to do that. It was the biggest and most abusive use of the federal reserve system in its entire existence and Trump was the man who signed on the line. He had the power to stop it but chose to try to bully Massie into letting everyone not even convene in congress to pass it.

That is the 180 degree polar black-and-white opposite of one of the top 4 reasons we all got turned onto RP to begin with - ending the Fed. The other reasons I would name as constitutionalism, Austrian economics, and liberty - and Trump is absolutely not on board with any of the other three either. None of this is my opinion. It's all verifiable and if anyone here doesn't have the basic memory capacity required to recall that then I submit you shouldn't be voting at all.


Angela McArdle is currently being personally sued for doing exactly this and trying to set up a place for others to do likewise.

I'm way out + REP for you.

 

[fisharmor]

I'm way out + REP for you.

Ditto.

 

[wizardwatson]

https://twitter.com/beinlibertarian/status/1850328194475303377​

Yah ok.

Mr. Deep State Establishment Izraeli Firster Never Trumper.

... is the argument that he lays out actually the Ron Paul argument?

One thing seems evident to me is that there is no such thing as "the libertarian vote." Libertarians cannot agree on anything.

It is by design that Huge disagreements between Republicans and Democrats exist. Guns, Abortion, whatever. That is a planned strategy because it rally's the base and actually unites them. If there were not specific well planned out things to rally and unite the tribes, the citizen would complain about everything including what their tribe does.

Libertarians never unite around anything. They argue about everything. There is never a Consensus.

I can agree to much of this, but there is a flaw in part of your logic.

Pointing out why evil is evil is in fact educational, required to holding said "current leaders" feet to the fire, and necessary to establish a vision. Otherwise, as history tends to repeat, we continue to support the likes of Trump/Harris and slide further into tyranny from the top down to the local level.

Agreed, but we do that all day every day.

Education is a tactic, it isn't a strategy. It's part of a strategy. We need a strategy that has enough meat on it, that people are willing to actually organize around.

With regards to establishing a "vision", I'm talking specifically about an organizational vision and mission. There is no need for an exercise in public education for that. It just requires a small group of people to come up with something solid. This is why I mention RPI, and CFL. They are the ones who currently carry the flag for the 2008-2012 movement. Have a meeting, form a working group. What is the harm?

Right now RPI's budget is like a quarter million a year, and half that goes to Daniel directly, the rest I assume is expenses (travel marketing). CFL is similar with all the leftover money probably just paying McCardell to keep the lights on.

They aren't big enough that they can't pivot or listen to ideas, is my point.

 

[wizardwatson]

Ron promoted many legislative bills when he was in Congress and he wrote a few books too. "Audit the Fed" was always intended as a first step to "End the Fed". Ron wanted to allow competing currencies (ie. gold and silver), not competing <central> banks. Allowing gold and silver to compete with the Fed's dollar on an even legal tender playing field would be sufficient to apply a practical constraint on the Fed and provide a non-disruptive gradual path for dissolving it. See the GAULT link in my signature for more.

I'm not advocating competing "central" banks. I don't think a central bank is necessary. But competing banks, for sure. If you simply implement GAULT but let the same banking model function with the caveat that gold is competing with FRN's, I don't think that is what I'm saying (not sure that's what you are saying either).

People now, do not understand the difference between a depository institution and a savings and loan credit institution. What we have now is a savings and loan system with the risk being assumed by the central bank. People aren't even given the option of a deposit only type bank.

Banks already compete. I agree that gold and silver should be money (you can buy/sell gold silver tax free in many states, including here in KS). It follows that you'd see banks pop up that allowed accounts in gold/silver. It would also follow that these type of accounts would actually KEEP THE GOLD and not simply be an FRN bank, that converts it to cash and vice-versa, and is really just a FRN bank.

 

[jct74]

Ron Paul extends the invite.

https://x.com/RonPaul/status/1850579645667606544

 

[oyarde]

One thing seems evident to me is that there is no such thing as "the libertarian vote." Libertarians cannot agree on anything.

It is by design that Huge disagreements between Republicans and Democrats exist. Guns, Abortion, whatever. That is a planned strategy because it rally's the base and actually unites them. If there were not specific well planned out things to rally and unite the tribes, the citizen would complain about everything including what their tribe does.

Libertarians never unite around anything. They argue about everything. There is never a Consensus.

It also is by design as it is infiltrated deeply by dems , so no agreement on conservative items. More dems in libertarian circles tan commie infiltrators in ARVN in 1960s. From 1955 - 75 1 in 9 S Vietnam citizens served and took about 1.4 million casualties.

 

[wizardwatson]

What's the dilemma?

The dilemma isn't "can we define the ideology". The dilemma is having some organizational vehicle that contains people who follow that ideology, and has an operational vision that supports that ideology.

'Who is "we"?' is certainly a dilemma. As you point out, even here where the name of the site makes it pretty clear, we're still not united. CFL is a ghost-town, and RPI is a two-man operation.

The OP's point is that now Vance is conflating himself with "I align with Ron on Federal Reserve". Trump/Vance team is a bunch of libertarian Ron Paul supporters, don't ya know?

Who "we" are was easy when it was Ron running for Prez. It's not so easy when the onus is on us to carry the flag.

Until we have an organization of some sort that isn't spinning it's wheels "educating", and burning cash financing liberty candidates and referendums doomed to fail, and that is MODERATED (bylaws, etc.) to keep out the fakers and the subverters, the "we" will remain a scattered remnant that will be more and more profiled by the beast until we are systematically outlawed, bullied, and social credited to our death.

Decentralized education isn't going to work in this cyberwarfare culture. Simple as that. Meme all you want, you are vastly outnumbered.

 

[Brian4Liberty]

https://x.com/mkibbe/status/1850960117120057658

 

[oyarde]

Kind of nice to find out Vance as at least one friend , I wasnt certain

 

[pmbug]

... In 2012, Dr. Paul’s last term in Congress, his End the Fed bill didn’t have a single co-sponsor. In 2024, introduced by Thomas Massie, has 23 co-sponsors, including representatives: Biggs, Boebert, Brecheen, Burchett, Burlison, Cammack, Cloud, Crane, Duncan, Gaetz, Good, Gosar, Greene, Hageman, Norman, Perry, Roy, Self, Spartz, Tiffany, Rosendale, Mills, and Reschenthaler.

This past year, another new precedent was set with Mike Lee being the first senator to introduce the bill in the upper chamber.

Also encouraging still is that members of Congress have actively used their platforms to promote the idea into the political discourse.
...

More:

https://mises.org/mises-wire/revolution-continues-ranks-anti-fed-republicans-grow

 

[devil21]

I told you Trump will go after the Fed.

It's better late than never but it's happening on the banker's schedule, not ours. Always has been. The Hegelian solution? Why gold backed digital non-money cbdc (or similar), of course. But the bankers have the gold and we have digits on a smartphone screen.....

Clearly this is all on the A2030/Great Reset schedule and the solutions are being sold by the faces on the screens in a planned and coordinated fashion. Anyone who doesn't realize/understand this yet is pretty slow.

 

[Anti Globalist]

I'm curious who this friend of his is. Doubt its somebody that's close to the Trump campaign.