Bill Still criticizing Ron Pauls idea about sound money

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Acala

Congress is fully aware of, condones, and authorizes the Federal Reserve's creation of the money supply. Congress is not a victim of the Federal Reserve, somehow being forced against its will to participate in the fiat scheme. Congress is a full partner in the Federal Reseve/banking scam. Why on earth anyone would think that simply transfering the money-creation function from one partner in crime to the other would result in any meaningful difference is beyond me.

---

Though, I think the Federal Reserve Act was actually passed using underhanded methods having to do with Congress itself.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GeorgiaAvenger

Though, I think the Federal Reserve Act was actually passed using underhanded methods having to do with Congress itself.

---

Early in the process there was quite a bit of resistance... even into the 1930's, but before long the power gets to virtually all of them. "Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely." - Lord Acton

Quote:

---

"The few who understand the system, will either be so interested in its profits, or so dependent on it's favors, that there will be no opposition from either class." - Rothschild Brothers of London, 1863

---

if you allow gold as a traded second competing currency there would be some who make money from gold sure.... the smart ones who buy it!
Bankers cannot print more gold period. Just look up Yugoslavia mid 90s

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Freedomluvinmamma30

if you allow gold as a traded second competing currency there would be some who make money from gold sure.... the smart ones who buy it!
Bankers cannot print more gold period. Just look up Yugoslavia mid 90s

---

+rep, and add to that platinum, iridium, copper, nickel, tobacco, shells, and anything else we want as SEPARATE competing currencies, and you have an instant check and balance on artificial control of values for all competing currencies. A herd of proverbial cats that would drive the counterfeiters into extinction.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GeorgiaAvenger

Though, I think the Federal Reserve Act was actually passed using underhanded methods having to do with Congress itself.

---

Perhaps, but Congress could undo it tomorrow if it so desired. It does not so desire. It is an enthusiastic participant in the scam.

Great thread.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nedomedo

Good points, sorry to ask but aside from peoples belief that Gold is money, what kind of difference is there to Gold vs Paper aside from scarcity? I have just started getting into this over the last few days (debt free money) and I can't simply dismiss every argument they make against gold. I am a strong Austrian Economics supporter, but I never engaged in a factual discussion about it.

When I was at the late night caucus here in Nevada for Ron Paul I got into an argument with someone over Federal Reserve and the Gold standard. At one point the person asked me: What is gold backed by? I didn't have an answer for him and felt kind of stupid because if you think about it Gold isn't backed by anything. The only argument I could think of on the spot is that Gold has been used for thousands of years as money and everyone trusts it.

Bill Still says that Gold standard is fiat money too.

One more question, current argument is that our money isn't backed by anything, but couldn't you say that the dollar is backed by US economy and assets? If all oil is traded in dollars then couldn't you say that the dollar is backed by oil? This is so confusing and frustrating, I hope you can understand what I am asking.

---

A monetary system is only ever as good as the people who oversee and administer it.

Obviously, the temptation to game the system is enormous.

Gold has one very distinct advantage over paper money. You can't print gold

Gold would be a good money if the people owned and controlled most of it. They DON'T which is why I don't believe a gold standard is really any better than fiat in the current socio-economic environment

Best solution of all is to allow competing currencies. Let the people decide what they wish to use as money.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mattsa

Best solution of all is to allow competing currencies. Let the people decide what they wish to use as money.

---

Substitute "allow" for "stop prohibiting", and you're dead on the mark. We were always "allowed" to use competing currencies. In the U.S., that's a Constitutional power, among others, reserved to the people. It is a power that was unconstitutionally abrogated by legislative fiat.

It is sad that we even need an actual Competing Currencies Act spelled out to our lame public servants - only to repeal Legal Tender laws and remove all those nasty, presumptuous, economically destabilizing legislative prohibitions and other constraints against competing currencies.

The 'all in it together' mindset in this country, even with regard to the so-called "money supply", as reckoned by aggregate-thinking manipulators and social engineers, needs a giant ball-peen to the forehead.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mattsa

Gold would be a good money if the people owned and controlled most of it. They DON'T which is why I don't believe a gold standard is really any better than fiat in the current socio-economic environment.

---

The people own a LOT of gold. Especially in the form of jewelry. But it wouldn't matter if the banks owned ALL the gold because if gold is remonetized, they would have no choice but to spend it. And that puts it back into circulation. The banks wanted a fiat system rather than a gold standard because they want to be able to CREATE money. That's where the action is. When money can't be created out of thin air, it is much harder to get it without earning it and even then you have to spend what you have, not just create more.

Bankers have to eat and wear clothing and live in a house and drive a car etc. If gold is money, all of those things must be paid for in gold. And voila! The bankers' gold is in circulation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Steven Douglas

Substitute "allow" for "stop prohibiting", and you're dead on the mark. We were always "allowed" to use competing currencies. In the U.S., that's a Constitutional power, among others, reserved to the people. It is a power that was unconstitutionally abrogated by legislative fiat.

It is sad that we even need an actual Competing Currencies Act spelled out to our lame public servants - only to repeal Legal Tender laws and remove all those nasty, presumptuous, economically destabilizing legislative prohibitions and other constraints against competing currencies.

The 'all in it together' mindset in this country, even with regard to the so-called "money supply", as reckoned by aggregate-thinking manipulators and social engineers, needs a giant ball-peen to the forehead.

---

HR 1098, the Free Competition in Currency Act was introduced by Ron Paul long ago but nobody hastens to co-sponsor or support it in this Congress.