The Single Talking Point Powerful Enough to Put Ron in the Presidency

+1 for OP

It's not that Ron doesn't talk about interests on savings, he does but he does so passingly so may be he needs to expand on it & spend more time on it to reach out to the masses who probably can't keep up with him.

I still think a simple approach to explain what the fed reserve does to undermind every American incl a powerful senior voter group would result in a tea party sweep ... Consider explaining it like this ( but with American context ) ~ http://www.youtube.com/v/WPSoQfumzQ0&hl=en&fs=1

if our ads hit this home ~ we win imo

scroll down for additional video

'time for constitutional credit & dividends'... we won the war and lost the peace in free enterprise ... stifling socialist welfare system could be replaced by making each person a plough share holder of USA and with a dividend ... the banksters use compounding interest against you ... This would allow it to work for you ... then like a trust company or ma bell , you are a shareholder in America !
(look at ND and it's approach with it's own bank = prosperity )

PLEASE, I beg of you, DON'T spread such videos, it's like those "money masters" videos that fools people into thinking that govt (which is just politicians & bureaucrats) controlling the money will be any better than banks controlling it. The idea of "govt-issued-money" fools people into believing that everybody will be well-off if govt created money & used it for "social good"; this is like pushing them towards communism & socialism; we DON'T need that. We should try to let people know about banking but then push them in the direction of sound commodity-money like gold, silver & such.

Point taken, guess I meant just trying to steer clear of non-starter issues that create huge negatives.

How should he "steer clear"? If they ask him about those issues then he MUST defend his position & explain why he believes it should be that way, he can't just avoid the topic or curtail it too much, that'd just make people think that Ron is just another politician who dodges uncomfortable questions without offering sufficient explanation for his positions.

As I've said, may be he should spend more time on interest rates on savings if possible but I'm tired of hearing that he shouldn't dwell on drugs, prostitution, etc as if he has any choice but to defend his position when interviewers ask him about it.
 
Last edited:
In a short visit with my grandpa, I realized what it is exactly that is on the mind of every senior. It isn't the debt, nor is it the job market--the issue is interest rates.

Gee, you're smart, mister! One visit with your grandpa, and you know what ALL old people are interested in <---get it? But in all seriousness, you may be right. I just don't see a lot of supporting evidence.
 
How should he "steer clear"? If they ask him about those issues then he MUST defend his position & explain why he believes it should be that way, he can't just avoid the topic or curtail it too much, that'd just make people think that Ron is just another politician who dodges uncomfortable questions without offering sufficient explanation for his positions.

As I've said, may be he should spend more time on interest rates on savings if possible but I'm tired of hearing that he shouldn't dwell on drugs, prostitution, etc as if he has any choice but to defend his position when interviewers ask him about it.
For the third time, clearly you can't dodge a question but focusing as much as possible on fiscal concepts over the hot button issues that go absolutely no where with the demographic we're discussing is my main point. Other than liberty, I have no interest in drugs or hookers nor do most of the primary voters we're trying to reach.
 
Gee, you're smart, mister! One visit with your grandpa, and you know what ALL old people are interested in <---get it? But in all seriousness, you may be right. I just don't see a lot of supporting evidence.

You're not making many friends here noob. But then again, I'm beginning to think that making friends here isn't your agenda.
 
He had the perfect opportunity to bring this up on CNN today, when asked about interest rates and the debt ceiling and default. I was hoping to hear something like this:

If you're deep in debt, you want low interest rates, but people who have worked hard all their lives and saved some money wouldn't mind if interest rates on their CDs went up a little bit. The Fed trying to keep interest rates artificially low not only created the last bubble, but it produces real pain for retirees trying to live off their savings.
 
Focusing on the Federal Reserve is obviously key - it is the root cause of our financial problems - but interest rates cannot be raised. The reasons are listed in this excellent article:

The Real Reason Paul Volker Wants Out

"Ben Bernanke must somehow keep interest rates below 11.1% or 100% of the US Government's income will be paid solely to interest costs rendering the Government insolvent.

The problem is if he holds interest rates at artificially low levels much longer the US dollar will go into hyperinflation."
 
Senior Citizens, and everyone for that matter, must invest in gold and silver if they want to see a good rate of return on their money, and if they want to protect themselves from the eventual collapse of the dollar.
 
Would you guys please go test this out with some seniors you're comfortable with and see if it has sticking power? Would be nice to gather more anecdotal responses to bolster the position.
 
Great article about retiree fears. Article is entirely about interest rates:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703410604576216830941163492.html

Summary of actuarial study: http://www.benefitspro.com/2011/05/16/inflation-interest-rates-and-home-values-top-conce

"Both retirees and pre-retirees expressed concern about maintaining the value of their savings and investments with inflation (58 percent of retirees very or somewhat concerned, versus 71 percent of pre-retirees)."

"Half of retirees and more than six in 10 pre-retirees expressed concern about having enough money to pay for adequate health care (49 percent of retirees, 67 percent of pre-retirees), and their income varying from changes in interest rates (52 percent of retirees, 62 percent of pre-retirees)."

Responses to a NY Times article about low interest rates. Seniors saying thank you for bringing it to the attention of everyone else: http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9F01E1DB1F3EF936A15752C0A9669D8B63

This issue is only going to get bigger as time goes on. There are many millions of seniors who, this year, will be shocked into horror when they roll 5-year CDs from 2006-2007 that yielded 4-6% into new CDs paying 2%.

For example, anyone keeping $500,000 in a 12-month certificate of deposit earning a rate of 1.5 percent annually — one of the best savings rates available nationally these days — would earn $7,500 a year, hardly enough to live on. Just three years ago, that same investment would have generated $26,250.

Now, savers are searching desperately for a better return on their money.

“All of our clients are struggling with this,” said Cary Carbonaro, a financial planner who works in New York City and Long Island. “It has never been as bad.”

http://www.omaha.com/article/20100913/MONEY/709139955

-----

Sorry, I don't have easy access to a bunch of retirees. However, I'll get on the phone for 10 minutes tomorrow, call a few brokers, and ask them about their older clients. Might be interesting to hear. I'll call the credit union, too, just for fun.
 
I think a one page document with the best points of this thread should be made and given to Ron, if anyone have good contacts.
 
52% of retirees worry about their income changing from interest rates. A full 26% rely on social security as their only income. Hmm...so that's 52% who are scared, 26% who can't possibly care, and 22% who have enough money that it doesn't even matter.
 
"PLEASE, I beg of you, DON'T spread such videos, it's like those "money masters" videos that fools people into thinking that govt (which is just politicians & bureaucrats) controlling the money will be any better than banks controlling it. The idea of "govt-issued-money" fools people into believing that everybody will be well-off if govt created money & used it for "social good"; this is like pushing them towards communism & socialism; we DON'T need that. We should try to let people know about banking but then push them in the direction of sound commodity-money like gold, silver & such."

the point of video is the central bank / fed is stealing their money ! and to end it

the second point is optional constitutional credit of slowing getting out of present system of fed fiat dollars to transition into full silver or gold [commodity] backed ... allowing time to get there as it won't be an easy switch imo
 
to set record correctly i too want gold backed credit notes ... however i do not want to live with huge consolidation of my wealth to do it .... if ron paul says we can do it i'm with him ... one question for the genius of libertarian thought ~ how would libertarians create a bank of the USA as a temporary takeover of the occult fed to create money ? and bring a real gold backed dollar into the system slowly as we can afford it

again a starting point is look at ND and the increased prosperity without huge illegal interest like the bankster fed and improve on it ... thx [ i looked at indexing to commodities but it's still paper backing paper and no real control of money creation ]
 
Back
Top