Archive for the ‘Federal Reserve’ Category

What Glenn Beck Left Out, and Why

April 19, 2011

Glenn Beck did a piece on Edward Bernays with conspicuous omissions typical to conservative commentary. He put great emphasis on Edward Bernays’ relation to Sigmund Freud because this plays to the left-right dichotomy very well. But Beck didn’t mention that Bernays is a descendant of the Orthodox Chief Rabbi of Hamburg, Isaac ben Jacob Bernays, because this would not serve the ‘conservative’ establishment promulgated delusion which bends reality to conform to a dialectic according to which ‘liberal’ ‘Jews’ wear the black hats while the Orthodox rabbis and their followers are pure light.

But if we’re to understand Edward Bernays’ extreme cynicism and contempt for common people and exploitation of them, this is best explained by the rabbinic teaching of his rabbinic ancestors according to which the common people (am haaretz) deserve no better than to be stabbed in the back “like a fish” (Babylonian Talmud, Pesachim 49b).

Another omission from Beck’s piece: Sigmund Freud was a member of B’nai B’rith which was very supportive of his psychoanalytic theories. And Chief Rabbi of Hamburg, Isaac ben Jacob Bernays was the grandfather of Freud’s wife, Martha Bernays. These are not inconsequential details that Beck left out.

Now that we’ve filled in some very large blanks we can begin to have a clearer vision of the matter. We’re looking at the evolution of Judaic tribalism from its fake ‘enlightenment’ (‘haskalah’) period to the present. Rabbi Isaac ben Jacob Bernays (1792–1849), was a ‘reformer’ but in a limited sense. Like so many Judaic ‘reformers’ of his time period (Moses Hess is the standout) the reforms were meant primarily to unburden Judaic people from some of the crippling mandates of Orthodox halakah to facilitate some participation in ‘Goy’ culture for the advancement of tribal interests in a rapidly modernizing world when eradicating tribalism itself was, and still remains, the reform most wanting.

But what we get from the rabbis’ porch ‘Goy’ Glenn Beck is a ridiculous conspiratorial worldview according to which ‘secular’ or ‘reform’ Jews’ ally with Nazis and send pious Orthodox ‘Jews’ to ‘death camps.’ He’s enforcing the foundational paranoia of the rabbinic racket which keeps ‘Jews’ in the ghetto under rabbinic tribal control. He’s coaching his ‘conservative’ ‘Goy’ viewers to believe that there’s great virtue in tribal Orthodox Judaism and that they should ally with it. This is why the wily Orthodox Rabbi Lapin happily joined Beck on his program and at his “Restoring Honor” rally.

Judaic tribalism is harmful to ‘Jews’ and non-‘Jews’ in both its ‘Reform’ and Orthodox mantles.

Advertisements

The Great Game of Greed

October 16, 2008

The Great Game of Greed

By Craig Heimbichner

As we wait for Obama and McCain to detail their plans to “fix” the economy, it would be a good time to turn off the propaganda feed into our brains via the media and do a macro-level review of the current economy as a whole.

That sounds daunting, but I don’t mean pulling out a textbook in economics from one of the standard perspectives, but rather taking a fresh look at the sordid show which passes for a financial system, but which is in reality a great gambling game based on usury, greed, exploitation and fraud. To get the proper perspective, imagine that you just landed on this planet and came from a place where benevolence and justice count, and a grounding in reality is considered important.

We are not supposed to think at that level, however, but instead take our thoughts from the headlines and talking media heads. We hear over and over that mortgages are at the bottom of the current crisis. We hear comparatively little of the role of derivatives–hedge funds, options, futures and the rest of it–which are pumped-up speculatives driving a fictitious gambling economy to expand to the greater glory of profit mega-margins: a sort of one-armed bandit that only initiated elites can pull and play with any hope of success. The derivatives game is set up to bounce out small-time players and the field remains open for the major hitters at higher levels—that is, for the feeders and front men for the economic wizards of the Cryptocracy itself.

Part of the roots of this illusory game are due to the surrender in the United States to banksters in 1913 with the creation of the Federal Reserve, which shifted power over money completely into the hands of a cabal of chortling millionaires. But the “creature of Jekyll Island” known as The Fed is not the originator of the exploitive basis of the economy, and we note that usury—loaning at interest—had been around a long time prior to that point. Usury is currently a given in the modern world, whereas several major civilizations of old had condemned and forbidden it as a form of injustice.

The economy in play is a gigantic bubble of fraud based on assigned numbers, not on real value tied to real goods and services. Prices are driven by speculators—gamblers—and the average hard-working man or woman has zero input into this monstrous and alien arena.

But gaming always has its risks. Insiders have long profited while most of the world plunges down the financial tubes of periodic “bad times,” and the attempt to pull off further profit and power is going on right now, including new twists of consolidation between The Fed, the U.S. government, and “United Europe.” Powerful gamblers are angling for greater control as they pose as the rescue crew; the masonic jest is worthy of a grand swindler like Horatio Bottomley.

But not to worry: Obama and McCain support the “bailout” (i.e, pending rape of the taxpayer) and even have other ideas! We can all relax, can’t we? After all, with a few tweaks, the economy might bounce back eventually, giving those on the lower tier a return to working themselves into the ground while the upper echelon runs its gambling and power plays, plundering and raping like the pirates in business suits that they are.

However, the risks inherent in the Great Game might spell blowback this time, and the entire fraudulent economy might tip the scales past the point of crypto control. Will it happen? Stay tuned—but not to the propaganda—and not to the “read my lips” statements of either would-be POTUS. Remember, it’s a magic show, and the rule is always simple: find the hand that is not moving. It’s usually the one inside the bloody glove.

Originally published here:

http://www.paranoidsonline.com/2008/10/great-game-of-greed.html

Craig Heimbichner is the author of Blood on the Altar

http://www.revisionisthistory.org/cgi-bin/store/agora.cgi?cart_id=6916854.20938*DY0ao1&p_id=10009&xm=on&ppinc=product

The Money Masters

September 26, 2008

http://video.google.com/googleplayer.swf?docid=-515319560256183936&hl=en&fs=true

http://www.themoneymasters.com/

The Money Masters

September 26, 2008

http://www.themoneymasters.com/

Mushroom Cloud over Wall Street as US Constitution Burns

September 23, 2008

from: http://www.marketoracle.co.uk/


Mushroom Cloud over Wall Street as US Constitution Burns

These are dark times. While you were sleeping the cockroaches were busy about their work, rummaging through the US Constitution, and putting the finishing touches on a scheme to assert absolute power over the nation’s financial markets and the country’s economic future. Industry representative Henry Paulson has submitted legislation to congress that will finally end the pretense that Bush controls anything more than reading the lines from a 4′ by 6′ teleprompter situated just inches from his lifeless pupils. Paulson is in charge now, and the coronation is set for sometime early next week. He rose to power in a stealthily-executed Bankster’s Coup in which he, and his coterie of dodgy friends, declared martial law on the US economy while elevating himself to supreme leader.

“All Hail Caesar!” The days of the republic are over.

Section 8 of the proposed legislation says it all:

“Decisions by the Secretary pursuant to the authority of this Act are non-reviewable and committed to agency discretion, and may not be reviewed by any court of law or any administrative agency.”

Right; “non-reviewable” supremacy.

Congress, of course, is more than eager to abdicate whatever little authority they have left. They’re infinitely grateful for their purely ceremonial role, the equivalent of Caligula’s horse, albeit, with considerably less dignity. Has even one senator spoken out against this madness, which–according to informal internet polls–is resoundingly rejected by the voters?

Full article:

http://www.marketoracle.co.uk/Article6399.html

Can You Trust a Wall Street Veteran with a Wall Street Bailout?

By Kevin G. Hall | McClatchy Newspapers

WASHINGTON — Making the rounds on the Sunday morning talk shows, Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson repeatedly said today’s financial problems were long in the making. He should know. He was part of the Gold Rush that has brought the global financial system to the brink of collapse.

Paulson presided over one of the most profitable runs on Wall Street as chairman and chief executive officer of investment banking titan Goldman Sachs & Co. from 1999 until President Bush nominated him on May 30, 2006 to take over the Treasury Department.

Back then, Bush saw Paulson’s Wall Street experience as a plus. “Hank will follow in the footsteps of Alexander Hamilton and other distinguished Treasury secretaries who used their talents and wisdom to strengthen our financial markets and expand the reach of the American Dream,” Bush said at the time.

But with Paulson now seeking virtually unfettered authority to administer the largest bailout of the financial industry in U.S. history, many are wondering whether Paulson also doesn’t come with enormous potential conflicts of interest.

That was one reason Democrats on Sunday expressed reluctance to approve the administration’s draft legislation that would leave to Paulson virtually all authority over the proposed $700 billion bailout. The legislation would allow him to decide which securities to buy, from whom to buy them, and which outside companies and people to hire to help him do so.

“If we grant the Treasury broad authority to address the immediate crisis, we must insist on independent accountability and oversight,” said Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Barrack Obama. “Given the breach of trust we have seen and the magnitude of the taxpayer money involved, there can be no blank check.”

In recent days, there’ve been few outward expressions of distrust of Paulson in particular. In fact, many said his long reign on Wall Street make him uniquely qualified to deal with today’s problems.

“Hank is the right guy,” New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who made his millions providing information to Wall Street traders, told NBC’s Meet the Press. “If I had to have one person at the helm today I would pick Hank Paulson.”

But the conflicts are also visible. Paulson has surrounded himself with former Goldman executives as he tries to navigate the domino-like collapse of several parts of the global financial market. And others have gone off to lead companies that could be among those that receive a bailout.

In late July, Paulson tapped Ken Wilson, one of Goldman’s most senior executives, to join him as an adviser on what to about problems in the U.S. and global banking sector.

Paulson’s former assistant secretary, Robert Steel, left in July to become head of Wachovia, the Charlotte-based bank that has hundreds of millions of troubled mortgage loans on its books.

The administration’s draft law also would preclude court review of steps Paulson might take, something Joshua Rosner, managing director of economic researcher Graham Fisher & Co. in New York, said could be used to mask previous illegal activity.

“The Treasury’s ability to, without oversight, determine (that) a financial institution (is) an agent of the government seems like it could be used to serve several purposes, including limiting the potential liabilities of an institution or its executives,” he wrote in a note to investors late Sunday.

The Treasury proposal sent to Congress also offers no process to hire asset managers in an open and competitive process. That’s particularly questionable given that Wall Street players are now hiring Wall Street players, Rosner said.

“This seems to invite a risk of collusion between sellers and buyers to the detriment of the taxpayer,” he wrote.

At a minimum, there’s irony in Paulson being in charge of so large a bailout.

In the last annual report at Goldman that Paulson signed off on in November 2005, a year in which he received $38 million in compensation, investors were clearly told that the federal government wouldn’t be there to save them from bad investments.

“Goldman Sachs, as a participant in the securities and commodities and futures and options industries, is subject to extensive regulation in the United States and elsewhere,” the report said.

But those regulations are designed to protect the interests of clients in the market, it said. “They are not … charged with protecting the interest of Goldman Sachs shareholders or creditors,” it said.

That’s a different tune from the one Paulson was singing Sunday.

“Last week there were times when the capital markets or credit markets were frozen,” Paulson said on NBC’s Meet the press. “American companies weren’t able to raise financing. That has very serious consequences. So what we need to do right now is stabilize the markets, and this is for the, for the benefit of the taxpayers we’re doing this, the American public. Then, once we get behind this and get this stabilized, there’s a lot we can talk about in terms of reform.”

What Paulson didn’t say is that the excesses that led to the frozen credit markets couldn’t have happened without Wall Street. Lenders weakened their standards because loans were sold to investment banks, which didn’t much care about the loan quality since they then pooled the loans with thousands of other loans and sold them as bonds to investors. If the whole thing collapsed, it would be the investors who lost out.

Those bonds, called mortgage-backed securities, are precisely the bad assets taxpayers will now be buying back from Paulson’s colleagues on Wall Street.

During Paulson’s tenure, Goldman was not as big a player in issuing mortgage bonds as two other investment banks that have gone under this year, Bear Stearns and Lehman Brothers.

But the 2005 annual report shows that Goldman was still a significant player. Its trading division, which included the mortgage bonds and complex financial instruments called derivatives, reported pre-tax earnings of more than $6.2 billion, up sharply from $3.5 billion in 2003.

The report also shows that Goldman benefited greatly from the wave that is now being deemed a wave of excess.

Goldman’s pre-tax earnings rose from $4.4 billion in 2003 to almost $8.3 billion in 2005. Similarly, its investment banking division had pre-tax earnings leap from $207 million to $413 million.

Paulson’s personal fortunes also zoomed in those years.

In 2002, Paulson received $12.1 million in compensation, including a $6.3 million bonus — an improvement over the previous three years when Wall Street accounting scandals unsettled investment banks, including a $1.5 billion settlement Goldman and other banks paid for issuing overly bullish research reports that promoted deals the banks themselves were involved in.

Published reports said Paulson received $30 million in compensation and salary in 2003.

After Paulson left Goldman and mortgage bonds began losing money, the investment bank erased those losses and then some by betting against the very products it had sold, Fortune magazine reported last year.

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/227/story/52856.html

Mushroom Cloud over Wall Street as US Constitution Burns

September 23, 2008

from: http://www.marketoracle.co.uk/


Mushroom Cloud over Wall Street as US Constitution Burns

These are dark times. While you were sleeping the cockroaches were busy about their work, rummaging through the US Constitution, and putting the finishing touches on a scheme to assert absolute power over the nation’s financial markets and the country’s economic future. Industry representative Henry Paulson has submitted legislation to congress that will finally end the pretense that Bush controls anything more than reading the lines from a 4′ by 6′ teleprompter situated just inches from his lifeless pupils. Paulson is in charge now, and the coronation is set for sometime early next week. He rose to power in a stealthily-executed Bankster’s Coup in which he, and his coterie of dodgy friends, declared martial law on the US economy while elevating himself to supreme leader.

“All Hail Caesar!” The days of the republic are over.

Section 8 of the proposed legislation says it all:

“Decisions by the Secretary pursuant to the authority of this Act are non-reviewable and committed to agency discretion, and may not be reviewed by any court of law or any administrative agency.”

Right; “non-reviewable” supremacy.

Congress, of course, is more than eager to abdicate whatever little authority they have left. They’re infinitely grateful for their purely ceremonial role, the equivalent of Caligula’s horse, albeit, with considerably less dignity. Has even one senator spoken out against this madness, which–according to informal internet polls–is resoundingly rejected by the voters?

Full article:

http://www.marketoracle.co.uk/Article6399.html

Can You Trust a Wall Street Veteran with a Wall Street Bailout?

By Kevin G. Hall | McClatchy Newspapers

WASHINGTON — Making the rounds on the Sunday morning talk shows, Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson repeatedly said today’s financial problems were long in the making. He should know. He was part of the Gold Rush that has brought the global financial system to the brink of collapse.

Paulson presided over one of the most profitable runs on Wall Street as chairman and chief executive officer of investment banking titan Goldman Sachs & Co. from 1999 until President Bush nominated him on May 30, 2006 to take over the Treasury Department.

Back then, Bush saw Paulson’s Wall Street experience as a plus. “Hank will follow in the footsteps of Alexander Hamilton and other distinguished Treasury secretaries who used their talents and wisdom to strengthen our financial markets and expand the reach of the American Dream,” Bush said at the time.

But with Paulson now seeking virtually unfettered authority to administer the largest bailout of the financial industry in U.S. history, many are wondering whether Paulson also doesn’t come with enormous potential conflicts of interest.

That was one reason Democrats on Sunday expressed reluctance to approve the administration’s draft legislation that would leave to Paulson virtually all authority over the proposed $700 billion bailout. The legislation would allow him to decide which securities to buy, from whom to buy them, and which outside companies and people to hire to help him do so.

“If we grant the Treasury broad authority to address the immediate crisis, we must insist on independent accountability and oversight,” said Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Barrack Obama. “Given the breach of trust we have seen and the magnitude of the taxpayer money involved, there can be no blank check.”

In recent days, there’ve been few outward expressions of distrust of Paulson in particular. In fact, many said his long reign on Wall Street make him uniquely qualified to deal with today’s problems.

“Hank is the right guy,” New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who made his millions providing information to Wall Street traders, told NBC’s Meet the Press. “If I had to have one person at the helm today I would pick Hank Paulson.”

But the conflicts are also visible. Paulson has surrounded himself with former Goldman executives as he tries to navigate the domino-like collapse of several parts of the global financial market. And others have gone off to lead companies that could be among those that receive a bailout.

In late July, Paulson tapped Ken Wilson, one of Goldman’s most senior executives, to join him as an adviser on what to about problems in the U.S. and global banking sector.

Paulson’s former assistant secretary, Robert Steel, left in July to become head of Wachovia, the Charlotte-based bank that has hundreds of millions of troubled mortgage loans on its books.

The administration’s draft law also would preclude court review of steps Paulson might take, something Joshua Rosner, managing director of economic researcher Graham Fisher & Co. in New York, said could be used to mask previous illegal activity.

“The Treasury’s ability to, without oversight, determine (that) a financial institution (is) an agent of the government seems like it could be used to serve several purposes, including limiting the potential liabilities of an institution or its executives,” he wrote in a note to investors late Sunday.

The Treasury proposal sent to Congress also offers no process to hire asset managers in an open and competitive process. That’s particularly questionable given that Wall Street players are now hiring Wall Street players, Rosner said.

“This seems to invite a risk of collusion between sellers and buyers to the detriment of the taxpayer,” he wrote.

At a minimum, there’s irony in Paulson being in charge of so large a bailout.

In the last annual report at Goldman that Paulson signed off on in November 2005, a year in which he received $38 million in compensation, investors were clearly told that the federal government wouldn’t be there to save them from bad investments.

“Goldman Sachs, as a participant in the securities and commodities and futures and options industries, is subject to extensive regulation in the United States and elsewhere,” the report said.

But those regulations are designed to protect the interests of clients in the market, it said. “They are not … charged with protecting the interest of Goldman Sachs shareholders or creditors,” it said.

That’s a different tune from the one Paulson was singing Sunday.

“Last week there were times when the capital markets or credit markets were frozen,” Paulson said on NBC’s Meet the press. “American companies weren’t able to raise financing. That has very serious consequences. So what we need to do right now is stabilize the markets, and this is for the, for the benefit of the taxpayers we’re doing this, the American public. Then, once we get behind this and get this stabilized, there’s a lot we can talk about in terms of reform.”

What Paulson didn’t say is that the excesses that led to the frozen credit markets couldn’t have happened without Wall Street. Lenders weakened their standards because loans were sold to investment banks, which didn’t much care about the loan quality since they then pooled the loans with thousands of other loans and sold them as bonds to investors. If the whole thing collapsed, it would be the investors who lost out.

Those bonds, called mortgage-backed securities, are precisely the bad assets taxpayers will now be buying back from Paulson’s colleagues on Wall Street.

During Paulson’s tenure, Goldman was not as big a player in issuing mortgage bonds as two other investment banks that have gone under this year, Bear Stearns and Lehman Brothers.

But the 2005 annual report shows that Goldman was still a significant player. Its trading division, which included the mortgage bonds and complex financial instruments called derivatives, reported pre-tax earnings of more than $6.2 billion, up sharply from $3.5 billion in 2003.

The report also shows that Goldman benefited greatly from the wave that is now being deemed a wave of excess.

Goldman’s pre-tax earnings rose from $4.4 billion in 2003 to almost $8.3 billion in 2005. Similarly, its investment banking division had pre-tax earnings leap from $207 million to $413 million.

Paulson’s personal fortunes also zoomed in those years.

In 2002, Paulson received $12.1 million in compensation, including a $6.3 million bonus — an improvement over the previous three years when Wall Street accounting scandals unsettled investment banks, including a $1.5 billion settlement Goldman and other banks paid for issuing overly bullish research reports that promoted deals the banks themselves were involved in.

Published reports said Paulson received $30 million in compensation and salary in 2003.

After Paulson left Goldman and mortgage bonds began losing money, the investment bank erased those losses and then some by betting against the very products it had sold, Fortune magazine reported last year.

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/227/story/52856.html

Ron Paul: For a One-World Currency?

January 2, 2008

In this informal interview Ron Paul seems to promote not only adoption of a gold-backed currency for the U.S., but a one-world gold-backed currency (at approximately 3:08 in the video). I wonder who he figures will issue this one-world currency, if I understand him correctly:

Ron Paul: For a One-World Currency?

January 2, 2008

In this informal interview Ron Paul seems to promote not only adoption of a gold-backed currency for the U.S., but a one-world gold-backed currency (at approximately 3:08 in the video). I wonder who he figures will issue this one-world currency, if I understand him correctly:

Ron Paul: For a One-World Currency?

January 2, 2008

In this informal interview Ron Paul seems to promote not only adoption of a gold-backed currency for the U.S., but a one-world gold-backed currency (at approximately 3:08 in the video). I wonder who he figures will issue this one-world currency, if I understand him correctly:

More on Ron Paul and the Gold Standard

January 1, 2008

It is good that people are becoming more aware of the “Federal” “Reserve” racket and that there is a movement forming around the idea of abolishing it. But the timing is conspicuous. The “Fed” racket, which cannot be sustained forever, may very well be near collapse anyway. What I am attempting to do is anticipate the revolution-makers’ next move. These are people who use the Kabbalistic/Hegelian dialectic against opponents who never seem to identify it, much less understand it. It’s as if a child was playing chess against a master. The chess master has a large bag of gambits to draw from, the best of which feign a weak move which entices an anticipated reaction from the child opponent which results in disaster a few exchanges later. The child opponent is not only tricked into loosing the game, he is tricked into participating in his own defeat.

We are fighting an enemy that thinks and we don’t think. This is the “horrible anti-semitic canard” stated so well by the Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad in 2003. This is great wisdom that he tried to impart to others which was drowned out by the screeching and howling of the Zionists of the U.S. media as is so often the case.

The bankers are not just watching the collapse of the “Fed” racket figuring they had a good thing going for a while and that the party will soon be over. They intend to maintain control and further consolidate it. They have contingency plans. The debt-based “Fed” central banking racket is not the only system in their bag of tricks. The gold standard is another system that they have mastered and thrived under in the past. Supporters of Ron Paul must take note of this fact.

St. Thomas explained the role of money for Christians: it is an exchange medium for the good of the people which should serve the people, not bankers. As an exchange medium, money should not fluctuate in value as we are so accustomed. St. Thomas wrote that: “Money must keep the same value, since the value of all things must be expressed in terms of money.”

Gold is a commodity with an arbitrary value which is subject to manipulation as is any commodity. The price of gold rises and falls as it becomes dear or common; as it is hoarded or circulated. Chaining a nation’s money to gold is to chain it also to the fluctuations in volume and price of gold. This is a poor means of reaching the ideal objective of an exchange medium which has a stable value. Look at a price chart for gold over the past 2 years if you need confirmation of this fact.

Ideally, the exchange medium would be issued by the nation’s government, as the U.S. founders provided, but it is not possible for a government to completely control all gold. If the exchange medium was backed by gold it would be subject to manipulation by forces outside the body issuing it. The economy of the nation could be manipulated by manipulating the gold market.

The problem also arises: if specie currency is redeemable in gold, it would be possible for the gold to be drained from reserve by demanding exchange of currency for gold as the Rothschilds did in England. If the currency is not redeemable for gold, then the system is a farce. Why bring gold into the equation at all?

The U.S. Constitution allows the government to issue currency by fiat. This is a sound system as long as the volume of currency issued is carefully controlled to be directly proportionate to the nation’s production. The hucksters who attack the “Federal” “Reserve” in favor of the gold standard generally focus their rhetoric on the fact that the “Fed” issues paper money. This itself is not the problem however. The problems with the “Fed” system are that it is a debt-based, fractional reserve racket controlled by private individuals whose interests are their own, not the interests of the nation; that it is unsound and inevitably results in debt that cannot be paid; that it enslaves the people rather than serving them.

The argument generally is, “well I don’t want those corrupt politicians in charge of issuing currency.” But the fact is that any system no matter how perfectly laid out cannot function well if it is peopled by corrupt individuals. It’s the responsibility of the people to monitor the performance of politicians and hold them responsible for their performance. Better to have the issue of currency handled by politicians who the people have recourse to, as the system was intended, than some untouchable private organization.

The answer to the debt-based federal reserve system is not backing the currency with a commodity. This is a non-sequitur. Fiat currency is not debt-based by nature. The government can issue currency without incurring any debt, for no more cost than the price of printing or stamping the currency. This is the answer to the “Fed”: U.S. government-issued fiat currency.

If fiat currency is handled correctly it’s not subject to the fluctuations of value of any other commodity, it is a stable exchange medium, and there’s no debt incurred in issuing it other than the cost of printing/stamping it. Further, the volume of government-issued fiat currency can be increased as productivity of the nation increases thereby maintaining price stability and assuring sufficient currency to facilitate exchange as the economy grows. In the gold standard system the volume of currency is dictated by the amount of gold in reserve. I leave it to the reader to decide which system is more natural to a healthy economy.

Many of you may be aware that the gold that’s supposed to be in Fort Knox is not there. You may also be aware that whatever gold the nation does have possession of would only back a tiny fraction of the value of our present economy. Even if it were possible to acquire enough gold to back an economy measured in trillions of dollars, as it is today, where do you think that gold is going to come from? How much debt are you willing to put the nation into in order to “return to the gold standard”?

Talk about a debt-based system! Just obtaining the gold would put the nation into crushing debt. The gold would have to be acquired through loan at interest. If our currency must be backed by gold and the gold must be acquired by loan at interest, there would be no way to pay even the principle of the loan without giving the gold back, but even then there would still be debt left based on the interest. Who would be served by this arrangement? The people?

Ron Paul supporters are on notice. Ron Paul is an energetic promoter of the gold standard. If you’re fighting to put Ron Paul in office, you are responsible to understand the effect his policies would have if they’re put into practice. If you’re not dissuaded by this aspect of Paul’s ideology, then I challenge you to make this an issue that Ron Paul and his supporters must address. Let the facts come out in a healthy debate on the matter. When the time comes to deal with the collapse of the Federal Reserve, let people be educated on this issue so they don’t play into the Kabbalistic gambit prepared for them.