(h/t Daily Bail)
Ron Paul on CNN Oct. 20
On bailouts (from 0:58):
“Well, they take care of their own. There’s a great deal of influence in Washington from Wall Street. And I think most people have known about it but they’re really coming to the understanding [of] how it really works. If things are going well when the bubble is being formed and the Fed makes easy credit [then] a lot of people make a lot of money. But that’s doomed to fail. The bubble bursts and rightfully the thing to do then is to put people in jail if they committed fraud and the people who are bankrupt, let them go bankrupt. Well, we didn’t do that. Very little fraud was prosecuted and the people who were supposed to go bankrupt got bailed out. Some went bankrupt. If they didn’t have enough influence like Lehman Brothers, they went bankrupt, but somebody like Goldman Sachs, they’re in a much better position so they really got the bailout and they’re making tons of money. So it’s the system that is so bad.”
On regulating (from 3:48):
“Well the regulation has to be on the cause of the problem. The cause of the problem is easy credit, so the regulation has to be on the Federal Reserve. Then if things get out of whack, there are still regulations, it’s not like there wouldn’t be any regulation, but the regulations come in a different manner, they come through bankruptcy. We didn’t permit the bankruptcies. We did the bailing out. We perpetuated the problem by inflating the currency and bailing out the people that were benefiting, so fraud is a very significant problem that government should be involved in, you should deal with that, but the government is committing the fraud when they create this money and deal with their special interests. It’s a fraudulent monetary system. They run a counterfeiting operation, so yes, the regulations have to be there, but we can’t allow the central bank to create the bubble and say that it is unstable and we can prevent the problems by regulations. I think it’s all twisted around. The regulations have to come first….”
Easy credit + supporting fraudulent practices + printing money out of thin air = one big mess
4 Comments
Comments RSS TrackBack Identifier URI
Leave a comment
There is so much I admire about Ron Paul but I cannot get over his isolationism in foreign policy. Not that I’m that informed about it, though – was it overblown by the press at all or is he really quite a firm isolationist?
Dear Track,
What do you mean by “isolationist”? Ron Paul firmly believes in free trade across the board–any parties who wish to create a mutually agreed upon contract have the right to do so. It is governments who intervene with all kinds of restrictions/regulations, and these are what Paul objects to. When you think about it, the only reason a government intervenes is to ultimately increase its own power in some situation (i.e., the power of it’s selected corporate cronies. Oligarchy. Corporate communism. Whatever you’d like to call it.) It’s never in the interest of any independent parties when governments lay their heavy hands (and sticky fingers) on their deal. In the US, the oil industry and military/industrial complex are the cronies and main beneficiaries of our present military operations.
In the case of defense, Paul’s position is one of questioning unprovoked aggression. He also advocates closing many American bases in foreign countries. This is obviously a grossly simplified summary. I guess I would ask you “What is defense?” Does it include aggression and offensive tactics? Those things don’t fit in with the libertarian model, which is non-interventionist in the foreign policy area. But non-interventionism is different from isolationism.
Most everything in the libertarian model revolves around 1) the free exchange of ideas and products, 2) not giving special benefits to select groups, 3) not granting power to unelected world governing bodies, 4) minimizing the power plays of our own ruling overlords which divert the productive capacities of the people and impinge on their liberties, and 5) focusing on true national defense rather than inefficiently overstretching our military and allowing it to be utilized in lieu of contractual agreements.
That’s just a little nutshell of info from my perspective. Anyone who wishes to learn more can spends weeks on the internet reading. It’s an interesting movement.
Great video from Ron Paul. And good blogsite – haven’t been here before, but am enjoying your posts.
I concur with Ron Paul here, I have come increasingly to believe the Federal Reserve has set a dangerous course inflating the currency this time around. Clearly, they set a dangerous course when they did so in the early part of this decade. The bear trap from 2002 – 2007 has proved disastrous.
I still believe we may face a day in our lifetime when we will witness the global collapse of unbacked, paper currencies. That day may come sooner than we realize. The ultimate long-term value of any nation’s paper currency is historically a big fat “zero.” Yet gold and other commodities have withstood the test of time as legitimate stores of value.
Anyway – kind of a rant, but paper currency is a dangerous thing. I think we are witnessing a charade here.
Welcome! I love the rant!