It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by hawkiye
You are so clueless it is sad. Let me ask you a question and lets see if you have any clue at all.
If government will shut down if they do not raise the debt ceiling then where are they getting the money to pay everyone right now?
Originally posted by robyn
Originally posted by krossfyter
does ron paul have ayn randian views
whats his views on healthcare?edit on 23-7-2011 by krossfyter because: (no reason given)
As a medical doctor, Ron Paul swore the Hippocratic Oath many decades ago. His entire person and career is a monument to the beauty and sanctity of human life. Ron Paul knows that life without health can be very difficult and is not what it was meant to be. He has personally cared for the poor for many years, without asking anything in return.
For a very good overview visit ...
Free market means the mega corporations do not get to write laws that place the little guy at a major disadvantage as has been happening with increasing regularity.
he opposes every measure that would result in an increase of taxes - even though doing so is the obvious way of closing the debt.
detractors of ron pauls healthcare say they cant agree with free market healthcare because look at how our free market businesses are.... no regulation is a disaster.... so they say.
in regards to ayn rand...
someone sent me this... thehill.com...
So has former Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan, whose monetary policies, not unrelated to his admiration for Ayn Rand, did as much as anyone to cause the financial crash
Ayn Rand, like Karl Marx, was a strong disbeliever in the values of organized religion, and Jesus Christ in particular. Ayn Rand, a fierce and aggressive critic of President Kennedy, was a strong disbeliever in the concept of patriotism that involves sacrifice for others.
The core of Ayn Rand's view, incorporated into many of the policies of Dr. Paul and certain (but not all) Tea Party believers, is that the poor are poor because they are inferior, that workers are jobless because they are inferior (how many times have Ayn Rand believers opposed jobless benefits, falsely believing the jobless would rather have the benefits than the jobs?). thehill.com...
...Basically, the US government is cutting checks for its multitudes of employees; they are giving the government their labor, and in return, they get these banknotes, tokens, etc, that basically say "Trust me, I'm good for it.".....
Those pretty green slips of paper in your wallet commonly known as U.S. dollars are Federal Reserve Notes. Bank scrip. The Fed can print as much of it as it wants or needs to. With this in mind, consider that fully eighty percent (80%) of U.S. Treasuries (U.S. government debt) sold in 2009 were bought by the Fed because there were no other willing buyers. factsnotfantasy.blogspot.com...
Appendix E – Money Is Created by Banks Evidence Given by Graham Towers
Some of the most frank evidence on banking practices was given by Graham F. Towers, Governor of the Central Bank of Canada (from 1934 to 1955), before the Canadian Government's Committee on Banking and Commerce, in 1939. Its proceedings cover 850 pages. (Standing Committee on Banking and Commerce, Minutes of Proceedings and Evidence Respecting the Bank of Canada, Ottawa, J.O. Patenaude, I.S.O., Printer to the King's Most Excellent Majesty, 1939.) Most of the evidence quoted was the result of interrogation by Mr. “Gerry” McGeer, K.C., a former mayor of Vancouver, who clearly understood the essentials of central banking. Here are a few excerpts:
Q. But there is no question about it that banks create the medium of exchange?
Mr. Towers: That is right. That is what they are for... That is the Banking business, just in the same way that a steel plant makes steel. (p. 287)
The manufacturing process consists of making a pen-and-ink or typewriter entry on a card in a book. That is all. (pp. 76 and 238)
Each and every time a bank makes a loan (or purchases securities), new bank credit is created — new deposits — brand new money. (pp. 113 and 238)
Broadly speaking, all new money comes out of a Bank in the form of loans.
As loans are debts, then under the present system all money is debt. (p. 459)
Q. When $1,000,000 worth of bonds is presented (by the government) to the bank, a million dollars of new money or the equivalent is created?
Mr. Towers: Yes.
Q. Is it a fact that a million dollars of new money is created?
Mr. Towers: That is right.
Q. Now, the same thing holds true when the municipality or the province goes to the bank?
Mr. Towers: Or an individual borrower.
New money does not appear magically in equal percentages in all people's bank accounts or under their mattresses. Money spreads unevenly, and this process has varying effects on individuals, depending on whether they receive early or late access to the new money.....
Mises argued that the losses of the late-coming losers are the source of income for the early arrival winners....
...This indicates a fundamental aspect of Mises's monetary theory that is rarely mentioned: the expansion or contraction of money is a zero-sum game.... The economic benefits obtained by the early users of new money, even gold, are made at the expense of those who gain access to it after it has altered the array of prices.... www.lewrockwell.com...
Of all the contrivances for cheating the laboring classes of mankind, none is so effectual as that which deludes them with paper money. It is the most perfect expedient ever invented for fertilizing the rich man’s fields by the sweat of the poor man’s brow. Ordinary tyranny, oppression, excessive taxation, these bear lightly on the happiness of the community compared with fraudulent currencies and the robberies committed by depreciated paper. [inflation cv] Our own history has recorded enough, and more than enough, of the demoralizing tendency, the injustice and intolerable oppression on the virtuous and well disposed, of a degraded paper currency, authorized by law, or in any way countenanced by Government. ~Nelson W. Aldrich, United States Senator, at a New York City dinner speech on October 15, 1913 IV Proceedings of the Academy of Political Science #1, at 38 (Columbia University, New York (1914)). [He was quoting Andrew Jackson. cv] www.linuxtoday.com...
First National Bank of Montgomery vs. Daly (1969)
Mr. Morgan, the bank's president, took the stand. To everyone's surprise, Morgan admitted that the bank routinely created money "out of thin air" for its loans, and that this was standard banking practice. "It sounds like fraud to me," intoned Presiding Justice Martin Mahoney amid nods from the jurors. In his court memorandum, Justice Mahoney stated:
Plaintiff admitted that it, in combination with the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis, . . . did create the entire $14,000.00 in money and credit upon its own books by bookkeeping entry. That this was the consideration used to support the Note dated May 8, 1964 and the Mortgage of the same date. The money and credit first came into existence when they created it. Mr. Morgan admitted that no United States Law or Statute existed which gave him the right to do this. A lawful consideration must exist and be tendered to support the Note.
...Given the previous hyperinflation, clearly there was ample reason for currency revulsion. So you can consider this argument a necessary but not sufficient precondition. What makes the universal acceptance stick is that government accepts its own money to expunge liabilities to it. In plain English, fiat money has value because it is the only money you can use to pay taxes. ....The fact that this money is also the medium of exchange only entrenches its use. So the tax liability is a necessary pre-condition for fiat currency to work, something I will return to....
[No wonder Amendment 16 - Status of Income Tax Clarified was Ratified 2/3/1913, a couple months after the Federal Reserve Act. cv]
Weimar Germany 1919-1923
The key to Weimar's hyperinflation was two-fold.
1. The German government had a large foreign currency debt obligation.
2. The German economy lost huge amounts of productive capacity causing prices to soar as demand outstripped supply....
While the facts in Zimbabwe are different, the underlying causes for hyperinflation were the same: foreign currency obligations and a loss of productive capacity.
Zimbabwe had established Independence from Britain in 1980. Yet, by the late 1990s 70% of productive arable land was still held by the small minority 1% of white farmers in the country. After years of talk about redistribution, in 2000, the President Robert Mugabe began to redistribute this land.
The redistribution process was a disaster, .... With agricultural production having plummeted, Zimbabwe was forced to pay to import food in hard currency.
Meanwhile, the government turned to the printing presses to fulfil its domestic obligations. as in Germany, the foreign currency obligations, the loss of productive capacity and the money printing was a toxic brew which ended in hyperinflation.
Hyperinflation in the USA, May 2010
As you can see from the two most severe cases of hyperinflation, the problem in each case was a loss of productive capacity, foreign currency liabilities, and a loss of the ability to tax....
In the German example, the Germans had a huge foreign currency liability that it had to pay, meaning it could not make good on the liability by printing money. It was a currency user as far as these liabilities went. Meanwhile, with productive capacity limited, the government was then unable to ease price pressure through the tax lever. The shortage of goods drove up prices inexorably and the government was forced to turn to the printing press in order to meet its domestic obligations.
In the Zimbabwe example, taxes were again central. Unable to recoup enough tax revenue and with large foreign currency obligations and a loss of productive capacity, the government resorted to printing money in an environment where prices were rising.
So, hyperinflation has very specific preconditions that are not apparent in the U.S..
1. No foreign currency liability: The U.S. dollar is the world's reserve currency so the U.S. can pay for trade goods in U.S. dollars.. The U.S. does not have a peg to gold or some other currency which acts as a de facto foreign currency liability. And the U.S. government has substantially no foreign currency liabilities. All of the debt is issued in domestic currency.
2. Price pressures are still anchored: While commodity prices are rising, they are rising in all currencies, not just in USD. Moreover, their rise will create demand destruction before any hyperinflation could occur. Why? Unemployment is high and capacity utilization is low, meaning there are no inflationary pressures on that front to help push inflation higher before demand destruction sets in.
3. Currency revulsion has not set in: Tax compliance is high in the U.S. We are not talking about Russia, Greece or Argentina where government has had a difficult time in raising tax. Moreover, as the USD is still the world's reserve currency, there has been no freefall sell off of dollars, nor do I anticipate any in the near-to-medium term.
In short, there will be no hyperinflation in the U.S. any time soon.... www.creditwritedowns.com...
it's called "credit," Hawkiye. Since you support Ron Paul, i'm not going to assume you know how this works. So here's an explanation.
Basically, the US government is cutting checks for its multitudes of employees; they are giving the government their labor, and in return, they get these banknotes, tokens, etc, that basically say "Trust me, I'm good for it." Now, historically, the Treasury has been "good for it." Thus, when people cash in those tokens of credit, they get value for their labor in a reliable and timely manner. Basically, the US treasury has had a good credit rating; it's "trust me" was worth as much as the actual wealth being entrusted.
The debt ceiling extension is basically the treasury going "Uh... hey, I'm still good for it, but something came up, can you give me another month to pay you back, though?" It's a credit extension.
The other option - defaulting - is the treasury going "Well F# me, turns out I'm not good for it. Sorry." Now, we can't say for certainty what the results of that would be. I for one, while curious, don't really want to put it to experiment, 'cause i know what happens if you or I default on our debts.
Originally posted by krossfyter
reply to post by hawkiye
How is that article skewed? U are more than likely correct but I want know where its skewed to? Thnx.
....So if I have this right why can't we just stop making the interest payments all together and use the taxes to pay for government and just cut back and live within what comes in instead of borrowing more and more into oblivion? if we default so what what will happen the Federal reserve will repossess the government LOL! Government wont shut down and we will be forced to live within our means and cut the government pork and fat. Sounds like a good thing to me. What am I missing....
Iceland is all but officially bankrupt
Thursday, October 9, 2008
REYKJAVIK — People go bankrupt all the time. Companies do, too. But countries?
Iceland was on the verge of doing exactly that on Thursday as the government shut down the stock market and seized control of its last major independent bank. That brought trading in the country's currency to a halt, with foreign banks no longer willing to take Icelandic krona, even at fire-sale rates.
As the meltdown in the Icelandic financial system quickened, with the government seemingly powerless to do anything about it, analysts said there was probably only one realistic option left: for Iceland to be bailed out by the International Monetary Fund.
"Iceland is bankrupt," said Arsaell Valfells, a professor at the University of Iceland. "The Icelandic krona is history. The IMF has to come and rescue us."....
Iceland Bankruptcy-to-Rebound Reveals Models Ireland Won't Take
By Kati Pohjanpalo and Omar R. Valdimarsson - Dec 2, 2010 10:59 AM ET
Iceland is betting its decision two years ago to force bondholders to pay for the banking system’s collapse may help it rebound faster than Ireland.
Iceland’s taxpayers face a smaller debt burden than their Irish counterparts, where the government’s guarantee of the financial system in 2008 backfired this year when the banks came close to insolvency. Iceland’s budget deficit will be 6.3 percent of gross domestic product this year and will vanish by 2012, compared with the 32 percent shortfall in Ireland, the European Commission estimates.
While analysts expect Iceland’s recession to extend into next year, the nation’s exporters are benefiting from a 28 percent drop in the krona against the dollar since September 2008. The decline may help the nation of 320,000 people rebalance its economy faster than Ireland, whose euro membership rules out a currency devaluation. With Iceland’s OMX share index up 17 percent this year, the third-biggest gain in Europe after Denmark and Sweden, Nobel Prize-winning economist Paul Krugman says Iceland may be an example of “bankrupting yourself to recovery.”
“The difference is that in Iceland we allowed the banks to fail,” Iceland President Olafur R. Grimsson said in a Nov. 26 interview with Bloomberg Television’s Mark Barton. “These were private banks and we didn’t pump money into them in order to keep them going; the state did not shoulder the responsibility of the failed private banks.”
Originally posted by hawkiye
reply to post by TheWalkingFox
Or better yet why don't we just quit using Federal reserve notes that come with interest and print our own interest free notes?
"The worst tax increase in the world is the one that comes through government printing money. Inflating greater than what you can earn on your assets and then diminishing the value of your assets by taking it from you."
We should be focusing on creating jobs....
What Does Tariff Mean?
A taxation imposed on goods and services imported into a country. Also known as a duty tax.
Governments generally impose tariffs to raise revenue and protect domestic industries from foreign competition caused by factors like government subsidies, or lower priced goods and services.
Tariffs and Trade
Article I, Section 8, of the Constitution states that Congress shall have the power "To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations."
...Article I, Section 8 provides that duties, imposts, and excises are legitimate revenue-raising measures on which the United States government may properly rely....
...Tariffs are not only a constitutional source of revenue, but, wisely administered, are an aid to preservation of the national economy. Since the adoption of the 1934 Trade Agreements Act, the United States government has engaged in a free trade policy which has destroyed or endangered important segments of our domestic agriculture and industry, undercut the wages of our working men and women, and totally destroyed or shipped abroad the jobs of hundreds of thousands of workers.....