Gee
06-19-2007, 01:26 PM
Its a fair article, and there is a link to a video on the last page
http://www.thestreet.com/_googlen/markets/commodities/10363490.html?cm_ven=GOOGLEN&cm_cat=FREE&cm_ite=NA
...and I think it brings up an important point. Ron Paul will never get nominated if he actually says, in a major debate or on national TV, that he wants to ditch the Federal Reserve and go back to the gold standard. Most people don't know what either of those things really mean, but many, including most entrepreneurs and bankers, believe the Fed is part of what keeps the economy from collapsing, ala Great Depression (and yes, I know the Fed caused the Great Depression). People are more willing to play around with abstract concepts of government and law like returning to the Constitution than they are to play around with their job and savings. No one who believes the Fed protects their savings (which it actually does do, to an extent, by being the lender of last resort) and their family's future will even think about voting for Paul. Yes the housing boom-bust hurt a lot of people, but most do not know it was Fed policies that started it.
It doesn't help that our central banking system employs so many economists, of course.
In my opinion, I think the only way Paul will be electable is if he states that he wishes to allow alternative currencies which may compete with the Fed. This is what he has said in a few interviews on how he'd hope to phase out the Fed, and I think this is the only message which will not set off alarm bells in anyone who is involved in banking, finance or economics. If they simply hear that Paul wishes to abolish the Fed, they may likely assume he wishes to do commit economic suicide by doing so overnight.
Anyways, I think all Ron Paul supporters who wish to get him elected should consider not telling people that he wishes to immediately close down the Fed. Allowing competition with them in the form of other currencies is the most sensible position, and leaves the decision in the hands of the individual, where it belongs.
http://www.thestreet.com/_googlen/markets/commodities/10363490.html?cm_ven=GOOGLEN&cm_cat=FREE&cm_ite=NA
...and I think it brings up an important point. Ron Paul will never get nominated if he actually says, in a major debate or on national TV, that he wants to ditch the Federal Reserve and go back to the gold standard. Most people don't know what either of those things really mean, but many, including most entrepreneurs and bankers, believe the Fed is part of what keeps the economy from collapsing, ala Great Depression (and yes, I know the Fed caused the Great Depression). People are more willing to play around with abstract concepts of government and law like returning to the Constitution than they are to play around with their job and savings. No one who believes the Fed protects their savings (which it actually does do, to an extent, by being the lender of last resort) and their family's future will even think about voting for Paul. Yes the housing boom-bust hurt a lot of people, but most do not know it was Fed policies that started it.
It doesn't help that our central banking system employs so many economists, of course.
In my opinion, I think the only way Paul will be electable is if he states that he wishes to allow alternative currencies which may compete with the Fed. This is what he has said in a few interviews on how he'd hope to phase out the Fed, and I think this is the only message which will not set off alarm bells in anyone who is involved in banking, finance or economics. If they simply hear that Paul wishes to abolish the Fed, they may likely assume he wishes to do commit economic suicide by doing so overnight.
Anyways, I think all Ron Paul supporters who wish to get him elected should consider not telling people that he wishes to immediately close down the Fed. Allowing competition with them in the form of other currencies is the most sensible position, and leaves the decision in the hands of the individual, where it belongs.