Nov 10 2007
Economic Policies of Ron Paul
One of the areas/platforms where I have been uncomfortable with Ron Paul’s stance has been economics and Paul’s belief that we should move back to a gold standard. This would typically make me cringe when he said it, as I think it perpetuates a common opinion that he is a wacky little dude. I began performing some research into it, and my head feels like a small alien is attempting to burst from my sinus cavity. I think my initial aversion to these statements were I had assumed that Paul meant a move back to the Breton Woods system that was established after World War II and ultimately failed in 1971. The more I look however, it appears that Paul and the flavor of Libertarian philosophy he espouses is following the Austrian school of economics. I am no economist, but have had some exposure to Macro and Micro economics in grad school, I think I will need to perform additional research so I completely understand the core issues. The more I look into this, the more I realize I have to learn. Fuck-it, maybe I should just watch TV. Your thoughts?
Loading ...
There a great interview with Kudlow and Company with Ron Paul and an analysis of his polices but they do mis the point, especially Kudlow.
But on his gold standard , a lot of people who point that gold does not work and show the 1970s as the problem forget one important detail. The gold standard does network with empire building countries. Since WWII, America has been carving an empire for itself, this means spending beyond its means to maintain that empire … this is a direct contradiction to what the policies of living on a gold standard mean.
If Ron were to push a gold standard and an empire, then he would be a loon. But he is advocating a gold standard and a release of our empire . The foreign policy of Ron Paul is in direct step with the prosperous functioning of a country living on a gold standard.
[…] Read the rest of this great post here […]
Dr. Paul wants to allow a competing currency backed by gold or silver.That would allow the free market to decide the best monetary system.He admits he can’t do by himself it will take a change in congress.
http://www.brightcove.tv/title.jsp?title=1297325815
Since Nixon took the US off the gold standard in 1971, median wages have barely increased. For the 25-34 demographic, median wages are actually lower today than they were way back in 1972, 35 years ago.
That median wages were higher in 1972, in a time before multi-GHz processors and the internet, than they are now is absolutely OUTRAGEOUS.
Getting off the gold standard means the government can expand money supply to pay for big budgets that make politicians and their friends (Halliburton, Pharmaceuticals) rich.
“In the 34 years before Nixon closed the gold window, the money supply in the U.S. grew less than two fold. In the 34 years after Nixon’s action, the money supply expanded 13 fold. “
It is important to note that Ron Paul’s decision to run for office was spurred by Nixon’s decision to take the US off the gold standard. Ron Paul knew this would lead to massive inflation and government over-spending, and he was proven to be absolutely right.
Interesting stuff! I’m just on the sidelines reading this; it’s way out of my field. I appreciate y’all sharing your expertise.
Read about the Federal Reserve and the controversys surrounding it. Summing up what ive learned, Gold standard would allow us to stop paying interest to a central bank. our own government will profit when it does loan money to our own banks. There was a president i forget his name that tryed to get rid of the federal reserve and failed. Alot of people look at the theory as stupid that the fed is privately owned, though there are many scholarly books available on the subject. The History of central banking dates back to biblical times including jesus denouncing them. They were called money changers back then. Im not a religious nut by any means but it is a coincidence.
In Americas case the fiat money system and role as world currency had many benefits for the country. George Bush killed the goose that laid the golden egg . The best hope would be a return to a bit more fiscally conservative times if that were possible.
For the average westerner though they are living beyond their means. Our trade imbalances were unsustainable in the long term.
But who wants to return to times of credit shortage like were around post WW2 where it was difficult t borrow money to build housing and fund growth. This would have to impact the ability of the economy to grow. Who ever wins there are going to be some tough decisions necessary if we want to see the world economy continue. The most likely scenaro seems to be more of the same yet with western middle class slowly lowering its living standards over time. And what will that result in long term to ur overall societies. I dont think the movers and shakers care or look that far into the future. Dog eat dog.
@mike
the fact that median wages have barely risen is not solely due to inflation or the fact that we went off of the gold standard, and that would be a huge jump to say that. There are many reasons one can speculate as to why median wages have not increased, and I personally would say inflation is the smallest problem there. Many economists would say that inflation in fact is not a big problem as long as it is expected; when you expect inflation, you can make adjustments that cancel out the adverse effects of it (such as clauses that increase your salary at the rate of inflation).
Wake up America! Educate yourself! If you want to know why Ron Paul wants to get rid of the Federal Reserve and the IRS, visit http://www.freedomtofascism.com and check out Aaron Russo’s documentary, “America, From Freedom To Fascism” Bulk order it for $1.25 each and send it to your non-computer literate baby boomer friends, heck, all of your friends and relatives!
WE THE PEOPLE need to take back our Republic!
(BTW, I’m 62 years old)