Ron Paul: The Movie

Road Map to Sound Money: A Legislative Hearing on H.R. 1098 and Restoring the Dollar

Ron Paul's Urgent Warning!

Keynesian Economics vs. Austrian Economics

Ron Paul: End the FED

End the Fed

Mises Daily by Ron Paul | Posted on 9/3/2009

Most Americans haven't thought much about the strange entity that controls the nation's money. They simply accept it as though it has always been there, which is far from the case. Visitors to Washington can see the Fed's palatial headquarters in Washington, D.C., which opened its doors in 1937. Tourists observe its intimidating appearance and forbidding structure, the monetary parallel to the Supreme Court or the Capitol of the United States.

People know that this institution has an important job to do in managing the nation's money supply, and they hear the head of the Fed testify to Congress, citing complex data, making predictions, and attempting to intimidate anyone who would take issue with them. One would never suspect from their words that there is any mismanagement taking place. The head of the Fed always postures as master of the universe, someone completely knowledgeable and completely in control.

But how much do we really know about what goes on inside the Fed? With the newest round of bailouts, even journalists have a difficult time running down precisely where the money is coming from and where it is headed. From its founding in 1913, secrecy and inside deals have been part of the way the Fed works...

..To read Ron Paul's complete article on Mises.org, please click HERE

Hyperinflation Nation!

The following is a -must see- video documentary (in 3 parts) entitled, "Hyperinflation Nation" which tells all about the past, present, and future state with regards to the outlook of the USD.

Ron Paul: Audit the Fed, Then End It!

I have been very pleased with the progress of my legislation, HR 1207, which calls for a complete audit of the Federal Reserve and removes many significant barriers towards transparency of our monetary system. This bill now has nearly 170 cosponsors, with support from both Republicans and Democrats. Senator Bernie Sanders has introduced a companion bill in the Senate S 604, which will hopefully begin to gain momentum as well. I am very encouraged to see so many of my colleagues in Congress stand with me for greater transparency in government.

Some have begun to push back against this bill, and I am very happy to address their concerns.

The main argument seems to be that Congressional oversight over the Fed is government interference in the free market. This argument shows a misunderstanding of what a free market really is. Fundamentally, you cannot defend the Federal Reserve and the free market at the same time. The Fed negates the very foundation of a free market by artificially manipulating the price and supply of money – the lifeblood of the economy. In a free market, interest rates, like the price of any other consumer good, are decentralized and set by the market. The only legitimate, Constitutional role of government in monetary policy is to protect the integrity of the monetary unit and defend against counterfeiters.

Instead, Congress has abdicated this responsibility to a cabal of elite, quasi-governmental banks who, instead of stabilizing the economy, have destabilized it. It took less than two decades for the Federal Reserve to bring on the Great Depression of the 1930’s. It has also inflated away the value of our currency by over 96 percent since its inception. It has invisibly stolen from the poor and given to the rich through this controlled inflation, and now openly stolen through recent bank bailouts. It has predictably exacerbated the very problems it was meant to solve.

Detractors have also argued that the Fed must remain immune from the political process, and that that more congressional oversight would distort their very important decisions. On the contrary, the Federal Reserve is already heavily entrenched in the political process, as the Fed chairman is a political appointee. High level officials routinely make the rounds between positions at the Fed, member banks, Treasury and back again, taking care of friends and each other along the way.

As far as the foolishness of placing complex monetary policy decisions in the hands of politicians – I couldn’t agree more. No politician or central banker, no matter how brilliant, is smart enough to know more than the market itself. The failure of central economic planning has been witnessed over and over. It is frankly beyond me why we ever agreed to try it again.

To understand how unwise it is to have the Federal Reserve, one must first understand the magnitude of the privileges they have. They have been given the power to create money, by the trillions, and to give it to their friends, under any terms they wish, with little or no meaningful oversight or accountability. Thus the loudest arguments against greater transparency are likely to come from those friends, and understandably so.

However, it is the responsibility of every member of Congress to represent the interests of the people that sent them to Washington and find out what has been happening with our money. As the branch of government with the power of the purse, we really have no other reasonable choice when the economy is in the shape it is in.

-----

U.S. Rep. Ron Paul is a Republican representing the 14th District of Texas. He sought the Republican presidential nomination last year.

* * *

Ron Paul questions Bernanke on gold

Bernanke's only discussions about gold involve selling it.
Fiat Dollar Reserve System Dead?
New World Reserve Currency?
Does the Subject of Gold Ever Come Up?

At Tuesday's meeting of the House Financial Services Committee, Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, got a couple of minutes to ask Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke about the prospects for a new international reserve currency system and about whether Bernanke has ever discussed with other central bankers a place for gold in such a new system. Bernanke replied that there are no such plans and that the only discussions he has with other central bankers about gold involve central bank gold sales. At least that much was pretty revealing, suggesting that as the international financial system falls apart, central bankers talk about selling gold, as if such selling is a mechanism for holding the system together -- as of course it is, gold being a competitive international currency.

Ron Paul: Too Big to Fail?

In the midst of highly unpopular bailouts of Wall Street, many justifications have been given about why Washington feels the need to act. Some claim that capitalism and the free market are to blame, but we have not had capitalism. If you compare our financial capital to our aggregate debt, this would be obvious. In the same way, we have not had a truly free market. The monetary manipulations of the Federal Reserve, a complex tax code, the many “oversight” agencies and their mountains of regulations show that we are far removed from a free market economy.

Another unsatisfying argument is that certain entities have to be bailed out because of their economic importance. Supposedly, some entities can be so big, so important, that no matter what they do, citizens must perpetually sustain them.

Even limited government has a basic duty to defend against force and fraud. Some argue that force is somehow permissible just because the entity engaging in it is "economically significant." But one could use this reasoning to prop up slavery. It could be deemed unfortunate but economically beneficial, and indeed these arguments have been used historically to deprive people of their liberty. But slavery should never be tolerated regardless of any economic benefit, just as systemic fraud should not be tolerated. Some banks on Wall Street should fail. Fannie and Freddie should fail. They are perpetrating fraud against the people. Yet, government insists on rewarding behavior which should instead be investigated, prosecuted, and punished.

There has been much evidence of fraud at Fannie and Freddie, but when one man, Franklin Raines, defrauded the organization out of millions of dollars through illegal accounting tricks, and ends up agreeing to pay back just a fraction, one could argue that it was well worth it to him. Fannie went on to only get more deeply involved in subprime mortgages after this investigation. Several organizations are suffering right now precisely because the free market is trying to work and punish mismanagement, if only the government would get out of the way and let it. Perhaps banks are not lending to each other because they know that complicated accounting standards, created in part to defend against confiscatory tax policy, enables false fiscal pictures to be presented, which erodes trust. But this is not a time for the government to step in with more burdensome and complicated regulations, or more foolish liquidity injections. This is a time for some banks to fail, and remaining banks to deal honestly and transparently once again. More regulations will only result in more lies.

Just as economies that turned away from slave labor had a transition period, our economy would transition as well, but in the end, if we turned to honest, sound money and a truly free market, we would end up with a more just society, founded on truthfulness and decency, not subject to the violence of force or the whims of fraudulent institutions. Unfortunately, it seems we are headed into a new era of slavery, however, where all taxpayers will be forced to render to the Fed and big banking interests the bulk of the fruits of their labor, possibly through higher taxes but definitely through the eroding force of inflation.

Ron Paul: Statement on the Passage of the Bailout

United States House of Representatives
Statement on HR 1424
October 3, 2008

Madame Speaker, only in Washington could a bill demonstrably worse than its predecessor be brought back for another vote and actually expect to gain votes. That this bailout was initially defeated was a welcome surprise, but the power-brokers in Washington and on Wall Street could not allow that defeat to be permanent. It was most unfortunate that this monstrosity of a bill, loaded up with even more pork, was able to pass.

The Federal Reserve has already injected hundreds of billions of dollars into US and world credit markets. The adjusted monetary base is up sharply, bank reserves have exploded, and the national debt is up almost half a trillion dollars over the past two weeks. Yet, we are still told that after all this intervention, all this inflation, that we still need an additional $700 billion bailout, otherwise the credit markets will seize and the economy will collapse. This is the same excuse that preceded previous bailouts, and undoubtedly we will hear it again in the future after this bailout fails.

One of the most dangerous effects of this bailout is the incredibly elevated risk of moral hazard in the future. The worst performing financial services firms, even those who have been taken over by the government or have filed for bankruptcy, will find all of their poor decision-making rewarded. What incentive do Wall Street firms or any other large concerns have to make sound financial decisions, now that they see the federal government bailing out private companies to the tune of trillions of dollars? As Congress did with the legislation authorizing the Fannie and Freddie bailout, it proposes a solution that exacerbates and encourages the problematic behavior that led to this crisis in the first place.

With deposit insurance increasing to $250,000 and banks able to set their reserves to zero, we will undoubtedly see future increases in unsound lending. No one in our society seems to understand that wealth is not created by government fiat, is not created by banks, and is not created through the manipulation of interest rates and provision of easy credit. A debt-based society cannot prosper and is doomed to fail, as debts must either be defaulted on or repaid, neither resolution of which presents this country with a pleasant view of the future. True wealth can only come about through savings, the deferral of present consumption in order to provide for a higher level of future consumption. Instead, our government through its own behavior and through its policies encourages us to live beyond our means, reducing existing capital and mortgaging our future to pay for present consumption.

The money for this bailout does not just materialize out of thin air. The entire burden will be borne by the taxpayers, not now, because that is politically unacceptable, but in the future. This bailout will be paid for through the issuance of debt which we can only hope will be purchased by foreign creditors. The interest payments on that debt, which already take up a sizeable portion of federal expenditures, will rise, and our children and grandchildren will be burdened with increased taxes in order to pay that increased debt.

As usual, Congress has show itself to be reactive rather than proactive. For years, many people have been warning about the housing bubble and the inevitable bust. Congress ignored the impending storm, and responded to this crisis with a poorly thought-out piece of legislation that will only further harm the economy. We ought to be ashamed.

***

Ron Paul: In Government We Trust?

As always, Congressman Ron Paul doesn't chew his words and hits the monetary nail hard and head on in his latest "Texas Straight Talk" commentary:

In Government We Trust?

Part I

"Many who agree with me on a lot of other issues, do not understand my enthusiasm for gold and sound money or why I spend so much time studying and talking about monetary policy. It's true that I talk about money differently than most, but the fact is sound money offers many benefits. For example – peace.

Can sound money really bring about peace? Actually, it plays a big part in peaceful international relationships. Money based on commodities, rather than paper, is not subject to government manipulation, and is a key component to free and honest trade. History shows that if countries engage in trade with each other, their governments tend to find ways to get along for the same reason you do not kill your customers at your place of business, even if they occasionally annoy you. If someone outright cheats you, however, you may engage in “war” by taking them to court, for example, and the relationship will sour. Governments and central banks with unfettered power to manipulate currency also have the ability to cheat their creditors. One way they do this is to simply create enough currency to pay off debts. This devalues the currency and “cheats” the recipient out of what they are owed. It would not be fair if you watered down your product the way our government waters down its currency, so it is not hard to understand, in these simplified terms, why loose monetary policy contributes so much to ill will and war around the world.

Sound money, on the other hand, simply is what it is. Removing governmental power to manipulate money, removes the temptation for government to spend, print and cheat. Sound money ensures that our government’s spending priorities would be brought into sharp focus and reduced to only what we can afford.

Sound money also limits the ability to wage wars of aggression. Imagine how much more careful Washington would have to be about starting a war if they did not have this financial sleight of hand at their disposal! Fiat currency allows government do expensive things they should not be doing while paying the bills with cheap money. The Federal Reserve has lately been auctioning off large amounts of treasury bills as a way to finance the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and our crushing entitlement burden. The resulting devaluation of the dollar is quickly eroding our image as a good trading partner in the world. As a consequence, there is therefore more talk of economic isolation and war.

This vicious cycle of spending, fighting and inflating is not what Americans want. It is what the government wants, and it has had to deceive the citizens into allowing and supporting it. Sound money curbs the government’s ability to engage in these shenanigans and reduces the wars we fight to only truly defensive ones, for which Americans are more than willing to stand and fight. So in these ways, sound money is very conducive to peace."

Part II

"Last week I discussed how sound money contributes to peaceful relationships around the world. It is not gold, in and of itself that excites me, but the many benefits of sound money. Another benefit is financial security.

Can sound money give you financial security? There is something very comforting in knowing that what you earn today will retain its purchasing power in the years to come. Indeed, the same silver dime that bought a loaf of bread in the 1960's can still buy a loaf of bread with its precious metal content – which is worth about $1.00 today. An ounce of gold has always been about evenly exchangeable for a finely tailored men's suit, which these days is roughly $800. And in these days of fluctuating gas prices, when priced in gold, oil has been stable. Meanwhile, since the creation of the Federal Reserve, the fiat dollar has lost 94f its purchasing . The erosion of purchasing power rapidly accelerated when it was completely uncoupled from gold in 1971. This sort of fluctuation in the medium of exchange creates a lot of uncertainty in the marketplace and necessitates that you either take extraordinary defensive maneuvers, or face financial ruin. Trusting in government for financial security in retirement is not a safe option. Indeed, a recent study by the Consumer Bankruptcy Project shows that bankruptcies among those 75 and older has more than quadrupled since 1991. This represents wealth and savings that have been eroded by inflation, and trust in entitlement promises that were more fantasy than reality. Even with the pittance that social security pays to seniors, it is bankrupt and bringing the economy to its knees. It is no wonder that many in the younger generations want no part of it, and they should not be forced into a failed system.

On the other hand, holding physical gold can defend against aggressive government monetary policies that threaten to inflate away the value of your life savings. During the hyperinflation in post WWI Germany, what used to be a comfortable nest egg was suddenly the value of a postage stamp. If one held just a portion of their savings in precious metals, the crisis was greatly softened. Gold will never be worth nothing, even if the exact price fluctuates. There is a famous photograph, however, of a German woman during this time period burning piles of tightly bound banknotes to keep warm.

Imagine if the money you earned had honest, stable value, or even appreciated like an investment! No such special measures, like converting dollars to gold, would be required to ensure that your savings would sustain you in your golden years. That is the way it could be and is supposed to be. However, the government's thirst for power will not be easily, or cheaply, quenched. Fiat currency is one tool governments have to extract wealth quietly from the working class. It is time for the people to wake up to this ruse and look to the Constitution to restore sound currency."

U.S. government sued over seizure of Liberty Dollars

By Joseph Goldstein
New York Sun
Friday, June 20, 2008


The federal government's attempt to stop a group of gold-standard activists from minting an alternative to the greenback is about to face its first legal test.

A dozen people around the country filed suit in U.S. District Court in Idaho this week demanding the return of all the copper, silver, gold, and platinum coins -- more than seven tons of metal in all -- that the FBI and Secret Service seized in November during raids of a mint in Idaho and a strip mall storefront in Indiana.

The Justice Department had decided that the coins, many of which bear the familiar symbol of Lady Liberty and the phrase "Trust in Gold," were being illegally marketed as government-sanctioned currency, according to the sworn affidavit of an FBI agent.

The creator of the coins, Bernard von NotHaus, who lives in Miami, claims that the federal government is trying to shut down production of his liberty dollars, as the coins are called, because of the competition they pose to the greenback. In recent years his precious metal coins have outperformed the dollar, whose value has plunged in relation to gold.

The raids in November were the result of a two-year undercover investigation of Mr. Von NotHaus and how he sold liberty dollars. The Justice Department has not followed up with any criminal charges against Mr. Von NotHaus or the regional distributors of his coins.

In the suit filed in Idaho, the various plaintiffs say the federal government has no right to continue holding onto their coins any longer.

While it is common for agents to warehouse property seized during criminal investigations, such as firearms or surveillance equipment, the plaintiffs say coins of precious metal should be off-limits.

The coins "do not constitute contraband or other property subject to seizure," the legal papers state, adding that the seizures violated the Fourth Amendment rights of the plaintiffs.

For the most part, the plaintiffs had possessed bearer certificates for the silver liberty dollars that were being warehoused in Couer d'Alene, Idaho, at a mint. The mint, Sunshine Minting, is one of the sites that federal agents raided.

In an unusual request, the plaintiffs ask for an order, at the very least, forbidding federal agents from touching or moving the coins so that they are not dirtied in any way.

"Mishandling numismatic material can negatively impact value," the legal papers say.

A spokesman for the Justice Department, Charles Miller, said that the agency had not yet seen the legal papers and could not comment.

E-mail messages circulating among Liberty Dollar enthusiasts have expressed fears that the federal government intends to publicly auction off the coins. There has been no public announcement indicating that to be the case. The U.S. attorney's office in Asheville, N.C., which led the investigation that prompted the raids last November, did not return several calls for comment over the last few weeks.

Mr. Von NotHaus markets his coins via the Internet as an inflation-proof currency and claims that between 100,000 and 250,000 Americans own them. They have attracted the interest of coin enthusiasts, as well as critics of the Federal Reserve.

A 1999 report by the Southern Poverty Law Center said that many of the stores that accepted liberty dollars "are run by men and women connected to the radical right." The coins have caught on particularly well in Asheville, N.C., and Austin, Texas, and are accepted by some merchants there.

More than 50,000 of the coins seized last year bear the likeness of Rep. Ron Paul, whose monetary policies Mr. Von NotHaus supports.

"About a quarter of a million people holding liberty dollars are almost up-in arms -- not up in arms yet, but almost -- about having their property seized, and rightly so," Mr. Von NotHaus told The New York Sun yesterday.

* * *

Ron Paul's "Revolution: A Manifesto" top Best Seller at Amazon

Despite a media blackout, this septuagenarian physician-turned-congressman sparked a movement that has attracted a legion of young, dedicated, enthusiastic supporters . . . a phenomenon that has amazed veteran political observers and made more than one political rival envious. Candidates across America are already running as "Ron Paul Republicans." "Dr. Paul cured my apathy," says a popular campaign sign. THE REVOLUTION may cure yours as well.

Ron Paul: Bailing Out Banks

From Congressman Ron Paul's Texas Straight Talk:

Bailing Out Banks

There has been a lot of talk in the news recently about the Federal Reserve and the actions it has taken over the past few months. Many media pundits have been bending over backwards to praise the Fed for supposedly restoring stability to the market. This interpretation of the Fed's actions couldn't be further from the truth.

The current market crisis began because of Federal Reserve monetary policy during the early 2000s in which the Fed lowered the interest rate to a below-market rate. The artificially low rates led to overinvestment in housing and other malinvestments. When the first indications of market trouble began back in August of 2007, instead of holding back and allowing bad decision-makers to suffer the consequences of their actions, the Federal Reserve took aggressive, inflationary action to ensure that large Wall Street firms would not lose money. It began by lowering the discount rates, the rates of interest charged to banks who borrow directly from the Fed, and lengthening the terms of such loans. This eliminated much of the stigma from discount window borrowing and enabled troubled banks to come to the Fed directly for funding, pay only a slightly higher interest rate but also secure these loans for a period longer than just overnight.

After the massive increase in discount window lending proved to be ineffective, the Fed became more and more creative with its funding arrangements. It has since created the Term Auction Facility (TAF), the Primary Dealer Credit Facility (PDCF), and the Term Securities Lending Facility (TSLF). The upshot of all of these new programs is that through auctions of securities or through deposits of collateral, the Fed is pushing hundreds of billions of dollars of funding into the financial system in a misguided attempt to shore up the stability of the system.

The PDCF in particular is a departure from the established pattern of Fed intervention because it targets the primary dealers, the largest investment banks who purchase government securities directly from the New York Fed. These banks have never before been allowed to borrow from the Fed, but thanks to the Fed Board of Governors, these investment banks can now receive loans from the Fed in exchange for securities which will in all likelihood soon lose much of their value.

The net effect of all this new funding has been to pump hundreds of billions of dollars into the financial system and bail out banks whose poor decision making should have caused them to go out of business. Instead of being forced to learn their lesson, these poor-performing banks are being rewarded for their financial mismanagement, and the ultimate cost of this bailout will fall on the American taxpayers. Already this new money flowing into the system is spurring talk of the next speculative bubble, possibly this time in commodities.

Worst of all, the Treasury Department has recently proposed that the Federal Reserve, which was responsible for the housing bubble and subprime crisis in the first place, be rewarded for all its intervention by being turned into a super-regulator. The Treasury foresees the Fed as the guarantor of market stability, with oversight over any financial institution that could pose a threat to the financial system. Rewarding poor performing financial institutions is bad enough, but rewarding the institution that enabled the current economic crisis is unconscionable.

Ron Paul: What the Price of Gold Is Telling Us

What the Price of Gold Is Telling Us

by Ron Paul

The financial press, and even the network news shows, have begun reporting the price of gold regularly. For twenty years, between 1980 and 2000, the price of gold was rarely mentioned. There was little interest, and the price was either falling or remaining steady.

Since 2001 however, interest in gold has soared along with its price. With the price now over $1000 an ounce, a lot more people are becoming interested in gold as an investment and an economic indicator. Much can be learned by understanding what the rising dollar price of gold means.

The rise in gold prices from $250 per ounce in 2001 to over $1000 today has drawn investors and speculators into the precious metals market. Though many already have made handsome profits, buying gold per se should not be touted as a good investment. After all, gold earns no interest and its quality never changes. It’s static, and does not grow as sound investments should.

It’s more accurate to say that one might invest in a gold or silver mining company, where management, labor costs, and the nature of new discoveries all play a vital role in determining the quality of the investment and the profits made.

Buying gold and holding it is somewhat analogous to converting one’s savings into one hundred dollar bills and hiding them under the mattress – yet not exactly the same. Both gold and dollars are considered money, and holding money does not qualify as an investment. There’s a big difference between the two however, since by holding paper money one loses purchasing power. The purchasing power of commodity money, i.e. gold, however, goes up if the government devalues the circulating fiat currency.

Holding gold is protection or insurance against government’s proclivity to debase its currency. The purchasing power of gold goes up not because it’s a so-called good investment; it goes up in value only because the paper currency goes down in value. In our current situation, that means the dollar.

One of the characteristics of commodity money – one that originated naturally in the marketplace – is that it must serve as a store of value. Gold and silver meet that test – paper does not. Because of this profound difference, the incentive and wisdom of holding emergency funds in the form of gold becomes attractive when the official currency is being devalued. It’s more attractive than trying to save wealth in the form of a fiat currency, even when earning some nominal interest. The lack of earned interest on gold is not a problem once people realize the purchasing power of their currency is declining faster than the interest rates they might earn. The purchasing power of gold can rise even faster than increases in the cost of living.

The point is that most who buy gold do so to protect against a depreciating currency rather than as an investment in the classical sense. Americans understand this less than citizens of other countries; some nations have suffered from severe monetary inflation that literally led to the destruction of their national currency. Though our inflation – i.e., the depreciation of the U.S. dollar – has been insidious, average Americans are unaware of how this occurs. For instance, few Americans know nor seem concerned that the 1913 pre-Federal Reserve dollar is now worth only four cents. Officially, our central bankers and our politicians express no fear that the course on which we are set is fraught with great danger to our economy and our political system. The belief that money created out of thin air can work economic miracles, if only properly “managed,” is pervasive in D.C.

In many ways we shouldn’t be surprised about this trust in such an unsound system. For at least four generations our government-run universities have systematically preached a monetary doctrine justifying the so-called wisdom of paper money over the “foolishness” of sound money. Not only that, paper money has worked surprisingly well in the past 35 years – the years the world has accepted pure paper money as currency. Alan Greenspan bragged that central bankers in these several decades have gained the knowledge necessary to make paper money respond as if it were gold. This removes the problem of obtaining gold to back currency, and hence frees politicians from the rigid discipline a gold standard imposes.

Many central bankers in the last 15 years became so confident they had achieved this milestone that they sold off large hoards of their gold reserves. At other times they tried to prove that paper works better than gold by artificially propping up the dollar by suppressing market gold prices. This recent deception failed just as it did in the 1960s, when our government tried to hold gold artificially low at $35 an ounce. But since they could not truly repeal the economic laws regarding money, just as many central bankers sold, others bought. It’s fascinating that the European central banks sold gold while Asian central banks bought it over the last several years.

Since gold has proven to be the real money of the ages, we see once again a shift in wealth from the West to the East, just as we saw a loss of our industrial base in the same direction. Though Treasury officials deny any U.S. sales or loans of our official gold holdings, no audits are permitted so no one can be certain.

The special nature of the dollar as the reserve currency of the world has allowed this game to last longer than it would have otherwise. But the fact that gold has gone from $252 per ounce to over $1000 means there is concern about the future of the dollar. The higher the price for gold, the greater the concern for the dollar. Instead of dwelling on the dollar price of gold, we should be talking about the depreciation of the dollar. In 1934 a dollar was worth 1/20th of an ounce of gold; $20 bought an ounce of gold. Today a dollar is worth 1/1000th of an ounce of gold, meaning it takes $1000 to buy one ounce of gold.

The number of dollars created by the Federal Reserve, and through the fractional reserve banking system, is crucial in determining how the market assesses the relationship of the dollar and gold. Though there’s a strong correlation, it’s not instantaneous or perfectly predictable. There are many variables to consider, but in the long term the dollar price of gold represents past inflation of the money supply. Equally important, it represents the anticipation of how much new money will be created in the future. This introduces the factor of trust and confidence in our monetary authorities and our politicians. And these days the American people are casting a vote of “no confidence” in this regard, and for good reasons.

The incentive for central bankers to create new money out of thin air is twofold. One is to practice central economic planning through the manipulation of interest rates. The second is to monetize the escalating federal debt politicians create and thrive on.

Today no one in Washington believes for a minute that runaway deficits are going to be curtailed. In March alone, the federal government created an historic $85 billion deficit. The current supplemental bill going through Congress has grown from $92 billion to over $106 billion, and everyone knows it will not draw President Bush’s first veto. Most knowledgeable people therefore assume that inflation of the money supply is not only going to continue, but accelerate. This anticipation, plus the fact that many new dollars have been created over the past 15 years that have not yet been fully discounted, guarantees the further depreciation of the dollar in terms of gold.

There’s no single measurement that reveals what the Fed has done in the recent past or tells us exactly what it’s about to do in the future. Forget about the lip service given to transparency by new Fed Chairman Bernanke. Not only is this administration one of the most secretive across the board in our history, the current Fed firmly supports denying the most important measurement of current monetary policy to Congress, the financial community, and the American public. Because of a lack of interest and poor understanding of monetary policy, Congress has expressed essentially no concern about the significant change in reporting statistics on the money supply.

Beginning in March, though planned before Bernanke arrived at the Fed, the central bank discontinued compiling and reporting the monetary aggregate known as M3. M3 is the best description of how quickly the Fed is creating new money and credit. Common sense tells us that a government central bank creating new money out of thin air depreciates the value of each dollar in circulation. Yet this report is no longer available to us and Congress makes no demands to receive it.

Though M3 is the most helpful statistic to track Fed activity, it by no means tells us everything we need to know about trends in monetary policy. Total bank credit, still available to us, gives us indirect information reflecting the Fed’s inflationary policies. But ultimately the markets will figure out exactly what the Fed is up to, and then individuals, financial institutions, governments, and other central bankers will act accordingly. The fact that our money supply is rising significantly cannot be hidden from the markets.

The response in time will drive the dollar down, while driving interest rates and commodity prices up. Already we see this trend developing, which surely will accelerate in the not too distant future. Part of this reaction will be from those who seek a haven to protect their wealth – not invest – by treating gold and silver as universal and historic money. This means holding fewer dollars that are decreasing in value while holding gold as it increases in value.

A soaring gold price is a vote of “no confidence” in the central bank and the dollar. This certainly was the case in 1979 and 1980. Today, gold prices reflect a growing restlessness with the increasing money supply, our budgetary and trade deficits, our unfunded liabilities, and the inability of Congress and the administration to rein in runaway spending.

Denying us statistical information, manipulating interest rates, and artificially trying to keep gold prices in check won’t help in the long run. If the markets are fooled short term, it only means the adjustments will be much more dramatic later on. And in the meantime, other market imbalances develop.

The Fed tries to keep the consumer spending spree going, not through hard work and savings, but by creating artificial wealth in stock markets bubbles and housing bubbles. When these distortions run their course and are discovered, the corrections will be quite painful.

Likewise, a fiat monetary system encourages speculation and unsound borrowing. As problems develop, scapegoats are sought and frequently found in foreign nations. This prompts many to demand altering exchange rates and protectionist measures. The sentiment for this type of solution is growing each day.

Though everyone decries inflation, trade imbalances, economic downturns, and federal deficits, few attempt a closer study of our monetary system and how these events are interrelated. Even if it were recognized that a gold standard without monetary inflation would be advantageous, few in Washington would accept the political disadvantages of living with the discipline of gold – since it serves as a check on government size and power. This is a sad commentary on the politics of today. The best analogy to our affinity for government spending, borrowing, and inflating is that of a drug addict who knows if he doesn’t quit he’ll die; yet he can’t quit because of the heavy price required to overcome the dependency. The right choice is very difficult, but remaining addicted to drugs guarantees the death of the patient, while our addiction to deficit spending, debt, and inflation guarantees the collapse of our economy.

Special interest groups, who vigorously compete for federal dollars, want to perpetuate the system rather than admit to a dangerous addiction. Those who champion welfare for the poor, entitlements for the middle class, or war contracts for the military industrial corporations, all agree on the so-called benefits bestowed by the Fed’s power to counterfeit fiat money. Bankers, who benefit from our fractional reserve system, likewise never criticize the Fed, especially since it’s the lender of last resort that bails out financial institutions when crises arise. And it’s true, special interests and bankers do benefit from the Fed, and may well get bailed out – just as we saw with the Long-Term Capital Management fund crisis a few years ago. In the past, companies like Lockheed and Chrysler benefited as well. But what the Fed cannot do is guarantee the market will maintain trust in the worthiness of the dollar. Current policy guarantees that the integrity of the dollar will be undermined. Exactly when this will occur, and the extent of the resulting damage to the financial system, cannot be known for sure – but it is coming. There are plenty of indications already on the horizon.

Foreign policy plays a significant role in the economy and the value of the dollar. A foreign policy of militarism and empire building cannot be supported through direct taxation. The American people would never tolerate the taxes required to pay immediately for overseas wars, under the discipline of a gold standard. Borrowing and creating new money is much more politically palatable. It hides and delays the real costs of war, and the people are lulled into complacency – especially since the wars we fight are couched in terms of patriotism, spreading the ideas of freedom, and stamping out terrorism. Unnecessary wars and fiat currencies go hand-in-hand, while a gold standard encourages a sensible foreign policy.

The cost of war is enormously detrimental; it significantly contributes to the economic instability of the nation by boosting spending, deficits, and inflation. Funds used for war are funds that could have remained in the productive economy to raise the standard of living of Americans now unemployed, underemployed, or barely living on the margin.

Yet even these costs may be preferable to paying for war with huge tax increases. This is because although fiat dollars are theoretically worthless, value is imbued by the trust placed in them by the world’s financial community. Subjective trust in a currency can override objective knowledge about government policies, but only for a limited time.

Economic strength and military power contribute to the trust in a currency; in today’s world, trust in the U.S. dollar is not earned and therefore fragile. The history of the dollar, being as good as gold up until 1971, is helpful in maintaining an artificially higher value for the dollar than deserved.

Foreign policy contributes to the crisis when the spending to maintain our worldwide military commitments becomes prohibitive, and inflationary pressures accelerate. But the real crisis hits when the world realizes the king has no clothes, in that the dollar has no backing, and we face a military setback even greater than we already are experiencing in Iraq. Our token friends may quickly transform into vocal enemies once the attack on the dollar begins.

False trust placed in the dollar once was helpful to us, but panic and rejection of the dollar will develop into a real financial crisis. Then we will have no other option but to tighten our belts, go back to work, stop borrowing, start saving, and rebuild our industrial base, while adjusting to a lower standard of living for most Americans.

Counterfeiting the nation’s money is a serious offense. The founders were especially adamant about avoiding the chaos, inflation, and destruction associated with the Continental dollar. That’s why the Constitution is clear that only gold and silver should be legal tender in the United States. In 1792 the Coinage Act authorized the death penalty for any private citizen who counterfeited the currency. Too bad they weren’t explicit that counterfeiting by government officials is just as detrimental to the economy and the value of the dollar.

In wartime, many nations actually operated counterfeiting programs to undermine our dollar, but never to a disastrous level. The enemy knew how harmful excessive creation of new money could be to the dollar and our economy. But it seems we never learned the dangers of creating new money out of thin air. We don’t need an Arab nation or the Chinese to undermine our system with a counterfeiting operation. We do it ourselves, with all the disadvantages that would occur if others did it to us. Today we hear threats from some Arab, Muslim, and far Eastern countries about undermining the dollar system- not by dishonest counterfeiting, but by initiating an alternative monetary system based on gold. Wouldn’t that be ironic? Such an event theoretically could do great harm to us. This day may well come, not so much as a direct political attack on the dollar system but out of necessity to restore confidence in money once again.

Historically, paper money never has lasted for long periods of time, while gold has survived thousands of years of attacks by political interests and big government. In time, the world once again will restore trust in the monetary system by making some currency as good as gold.

Gold, or any acceptable market commodity money, is required to preserve liberty. Monopoly control by government of a system that creates fiat money out of thin air guarantees the loss of liberty. No matter how well-intended our militarism is portrayed, or how happily the promises of wonderful programs for the poor are promoted, inflating the money supply to pay these bills makes government bigger. Empires always fail, and expenses always exceed projections. Harmful unintended consequences are the rule, not the exception. Welfare for the poor is inefficient and wasteful. The beneficiaries are rarely the poor themselves, but instead the politicians, bureaucrats, or the wealthy. The same is true of all foreign aid – it’s nothing more than a program that steals from the poor in a rich country and gives to the rich leaders of a poor country. Whether it’s war or welfare payments, it always means higher taxes, inflation, and debt. Whether it’s the extraction of wealth from the productive economy, the distortion of the market by interest rate manipulation, or spending for war and welfare, it can’t happen without infringing upon personal liberty.

At home the war on poverty, terrorism, drugs, or foreign rulers provides an opportunity for authoritarians to rise to power, individuals who think nothing of violating the people’s rights to privacy and freedom of speech. They believe their role is to protect the secrecy of government, rather than protect the privacy of citizens. Unfortunately, that is the atmosphere under which we live today, with essentially no respect for the Bill of Rights.

Though great economic harm comes from a government monopoly fiat monetary system, the loss of liberty associated with it is equally troubling. Just as empires are self-limiting in terms of money and manpower, so too is a monetary system based on illusion and fraud. When the end comes we will be given an opportunity to choose once again between honest money and liberty on one hand; chaos, poverty, and authoritarianism on the other.

The economic harm done by a fiat monetary system is pervasive, dangerous, and unfair. Though runaway inflation is injurious to almost everyone, it is more insidious for certain groups. Once inflation is recognized as a tax, it becomes clear the tax is regressive: penalizing the poor and middle class more than the rich and politically privileged. Price inflation, a consequence of inflating the money supply by the central bank, hits poor and marginal workers first and foremost. It especially penalizes savers, retirees, those on fixed incomes, and anyone who trusts government promises. Small businesses and individual enterprises suffer more than the financial elite, who borrow large sums before the money loses value. Those who are on the receiving end of government contracts – especially in the military industrial complex during wartime – receive undeserved benefits.

It’s a mistake to blame high gasoline and oil prices on price gouging. If we impose new taxes or fix prices, while ignoring monetary inflation, corporate subsidies, and excessive regulations, shortages will result. The market is the only way to determine the best price for any commodity. The law of supply and demand cannot be repealed. The real problems arise when government planners give subsidies to energy companies and favor one form of energy over another.

Energy prices are rising for many reasons: Inflation; increased demand from China and India; decreased supply resulting from our invasion of Iraq; anticipated disruption of supply as we push regime change in Iran; regulatory restrictions on gasoline production; government interference in the free market development of alternative fuels; and subsidies to big oil such as free leases and grants for research and development.

Interestingly, the cost of oil and gas is actually much higher than we pay at the retail level. Much of the DOD budget is spent protecting “our” oil supplies, and if such spending is factored in, gasoline probably costs us more than $5 a gallon. The sad irony is that this military effort to secure cheap oil supplies inevitably backfires, and actually curtails supplies and boosts prices at the pump. The waste and fraud in issuing contracts to large corporations for work in Iraq only add to price increases.

When problems arise under conditions that exist today, it’s a serious error to blame the little bit of the free market that still functions. Last summer the market worked efficiently after Katrina – gas hit $3 a gallon, but soon supplies increased, usage went down, and the price returned to $2. In the 1980s, market forces took oil from $40 per barrel to $10 per barrel, and no one cried for the oil companies that went bankrupt. Today’s increases are for the reasons mentioned above. It’s natural for labor to seek its highest wage, and businesses to strive for the greatest profit. That’s the way the market works. When the free market is allowed to work, it’s the consumer who ultimately determines price and quality, with labor and business accommodating consumer choices. Once this process is distorted by government, prices rise excessively, labor costs and profits are negatively affected, and problems emerge. Instead of fixing the problem, politicians and demagogues respond by demanding windfall profits taxes and price controls, while never questioning how previous government interference caused the whole mess in the first place. Never let it be said that higher oil prices and profits cause inflation; inflation of the money supply causes higher prices!

Since keeping interest rates below market levels is synonymous with new money creation by the Fed, the resulting business cycle, higher cost of living, and job losses all can be laid at the doorstep of the Fed. This burden hits the poor the most, making Fed taxation by inflation the worst of all regressive taxes. Statistics about revenues generated by the income tax are grossly misleading; in reality much harm is done by our welfare/warfare system supposedly designed to help the poor and tax the rich. Only sound money can rectify the blatant injustice of this destructive system.

The Founders understood this great danger, and voted overwhelmingly to reject “emitting bills of credit,” the term they used for paper or fiat money. It’s too bad the knowledge and advice of our founders, and their mandate in the Constitution, are ignored today at our great peril. The current surge in gold prices – which reflects our dollar’s devaluation – is warning us to pay closer attention to our fiscal, monetary, entitlement, and foreign policy.

Meaning of the Gold Price – Summation

A recent headline in the financial press announced that gold prices surged over concern that confrontation with Iran will further push oil prices higher. This may well reflect the current situation, but higher gold prices mainly reflect monetary expansion by the Federal Reserve. Dwelling on current events and their effect on gold prices reflects concern for symptoms rather than an understanding of the actual cause of these price increases. Without an enormous increase in the money supply over the past 35 years and a worldwide paper monetary system, this increase in the price of gold would not have occurred.

Certainly geo-political events in the Middle East under a gold standard would not alter its price, though they could affect the supply of oil and cause oil prices to rise. Only under conditions created by excessive paper money would one expect all or most prices to rise. This is a mere reflection of the devaluation of the dollar.

Particular things to remember:

* If one endorses small government and maximum liberty, one must support commodity money.

* One of the strongest restraints against unnecessary war is a gold standard.

* Deficit financing by government is severely restricted by sound money.

* The harmful effects of the business cycle are virtually eliminated with an honest gold standard.

* Saving and thrift are encouraged by a gold standard; and discouraged by paper money.

* Price inflation, with generally rising price levels, is characteristic of paper money. Reports that the consumer price index and the producer price index are rising are distractions: the real cause of inflation is the Fed’s creation of new money.

* Interest rate manipulation by central bank helps the rich, the banks, the government, and the politicians.

* Paper money permits the regressive inflation tax to be passed off on the poor and the middle class.

* Speculative financial bubbles are characteristic of paper money – not gold.

* Paper money encourages economic and political chaos, which subsequently causes a search for scapegoats rather than blaming the central bank.

* Dangerous protectionist measures frequently are implemented to compensate for the dislocations caused by fiat money.

* Paper money, inflation, and the conditions they create contribute to the problems of illegal immigration.

* The value of gold is remarkably stable.

* The dollar price of gold reflects dollar depreciation.

* Holding gold helps preserve and store wealth, but technically gold is not a true investment.

* Since 2001 the dollar has been devalued by 60%.

* In 1934 FDR devalued the dollar by 41%.

* In 1971 Nixon devalued the dollar by 7.9%.

* In 1973 Nixon devalued the dollar by 10%.

These were momentous monetary events, and every knowledgeable person worldwide paid close attention. Major changes were endured in 1979 and 1980 to save the dollar from disintegration. This involved a severe recession, interest rates over 21%, and general price inflation of 15%.

Today we face a 60% devaluation and counting, yet no one seems to care. It’s of greater significance than the three events mentioned above. And yet the one measurement that best reflects the degree of inflation, the Fed and our government deny us. Since March, M3 reporting has been discontinued. For starters, I’d like to see Congress demand that this report be resumed. I fully believe the American people and Congress are entitled to this information. Will we one day complain about false intelligence, as we have with the Iraq war? Will we complain about not having enough information to address monetary policy after it’s too late?

If ever there was a time to get a handle on what sound money is and what it means, that time is today.

Inflation, as exposed by high gold prices, transfers wealth from the middle class to the rich, as real wages decline while the salaries of CEOs, movie stars, and athletes skyrocket – along with the profits of the military industrial complex, the oil industry, and other special interests.

A sharply rising gold price is a vote of “no confidence” in Congress’ ability to control the budget, the Fed’s ability to control the money supply, and the administration’s ability to bring stability to the Middle East.

Ultimately, the gold price is a measurement of trust in the currency and the politicians who run the country. It’s been that way for a long time, and is not about to change.

If we care about the financial system, the tax system, and the monumental debt we’re accumulating, we must start talking about the benefits and discipline that come only with a commodity standard of money – money the government and central banks absolutely cannot create out of thin air.

Economic law dictates reform at some point. But should we wait until the dollar is 1/1,000 of an ounce of gold or 1/2,000 of an ounce of gold? The longer we wait, the more people suffer and the more difficult reforms become. Runaway inflation inevitably leads to political chaos, something numerous countries have suffered throughout the 20th century. The worst example of course was the German inflation of the 1920s that led to the rise of Hitler. Even the communist takeover of China was associated with runaway inflation brought on by Chinese Nationalists. The time for action is now, and it is up to the American people and the U.S. Congress to demand it.


March 15, 2008
Dr. Ron Paul is a Republican member of Congress from Texas.

Ron Paul questions Bernanke on FED's policies

U.S. Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, got the better of Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke in an exchange yesterday during a hearing of the House Financial Services Committee.

Paul observed that inflation is an increase in the money supply, and he quoted estimates that the U.S. money supply has been exploding lately -- estimates Bernanke did not attempt to contradict. This explosion in the money supply, Paul said, is currency debasement that expropriates savers. He asked Bernanke how it could be justified.

Bernanke replied that the Fed's statutory mandate is price stability rather than money supply.

Whereupon Paul cited the sharply rising Producer Price Index.

Bernanke answered that he prefers to go by the Consumer Price Index. (Maybe because it is more aggressively manipulated by the government?)

Paul countered that even the CPI has turned up sharply lately.

The best Bernanke could do was to acknowledge that the Fed is concerned about that -- concern that seems likely to manifest itself shortly in a strange way, with more reductions by the Fed in official interest rates, pushing them even farther below official inflation and expropriating savers even more to rescue the banks and financial houses that lately defrauded the world with the Fed's connivance.

Gold : A precious metal that's not just an investment but a worldview too..

By Rob Baedeker, San Francisco Chronicle
Monday, February 25, 2008

Last week, gold hit a record high of $958.40 an ounce. In 1959, the average price of gold was around $35 an ounce. That's the year Burton Blumert opened his Camino Coin Company in Burlingame.

To the outside observer, it would appear that the rise of gold is a success story for long-time dealers and investors like Blumert and his clients. And in many respects it is. As Blumert told me on the phone from his home in El Granada, "I retired at the top of my game." (After giving the Camino Coin Company to a long-time employee last year, Blumert, 79, stays peripherally involved, helping out occasionally when needed).

But there is, so to speak, another side to the coin. "If you want a dismal view of the future, talk to a gold dealer," Blumert adds. The high price of gold may represent a handsome return on investment, but it's hardly been a steady ascent, and for Blumert and other "goldbugs" it's also an ominous sign.

Goldbug is a term used, sometimes pejoratively, to refer to investors who are bullish about gold. Blumert describes himself as a "philosophical goldbug" to emphasize the theoretical underpinnings of his interest in the malleable yellow metal (and to distinguish himself from the more capricious "newsletter crowd" of investors, who might jump on the gold bandwagon following trends rather than principles).

The story of how Blumert became a philosophical goldbug is the story of a worldview shaped by coins and bullion.

It starts with a whirlwind verbal tour of watershed dates in "the significant monetary history that coincided" with his life and crystallized his philosophy of money. He jumps from decade to decade, adducing examples with a zeal that somehow sounds both beleaguered and self-assured: There was 1933, when President Roosevelt passed an executive order making it "illegal for Americans to hold gold coins"; 1964, when the United States stopped producing real silver coins; and 1971, when Nixon ended the gold standard for good. ("From that point we were dealing with fiat money," says Blumert, "money that is not claimable in precious metals.")

The history of American currency's relationship to the gold standard is long and tortuous (you can read an overview here) but what I come away with after listening to Blumert's history lesson is more a sense of how the government's interventions in monetary policy became almost personally offensive to him. He talks about 40-year-old moments in the history of currency in the same way that some people talk about a bad breakup they're still trying to work through. ("August 16, 1968. That was when it was all over. If you had a silver certificate, you had to redeem it prior to August 16.")

All of the dates Blumert brings up are occasions when the federal government took actions to divorce currency from its precious-metal backing. And for the philosophical goldbug, a currency with nothing behind it is a recipe for disaster — when the government can print money and the Fed can adjust credit rates, the system, in the goldbug's view, is headed for collapse.

Blumert says his experiences with money led him to a natural political stance. "I became a libertarian," he says, "an advocate of freedom." Blumert is publisher of the libertarian Web site Lew Rockwell.com, whose motto is "anti-state, anti-war, pro-market." He is also a longtime friend and supporter of Ron Paul, and managed the Ron Paul Coin Company for several years. Paul, not coincidentally, is an advocate of returning to the gold standard and abolishing the Fed.

"There are those who would criticize followers of Ron Paul as people out of the mainstream," says Blumert. But Blumert is used to being regarded as part of the fringe. "Those who own gold are regarded as wackos," he says. "If you buy an ounce of gold, you're saying no (to the system). If you buy a share of Microsoft, you're a patriot — you're participating, you're part of it."

"That was the prevailing view" for most of his tenure in the gold and coin business, Blumert says. "And it still is, although to a lesser extent."

The reputation of the goldbug as an outsider — and as a stubborn fanatic — prevails in a 2000 New Yorker magazine article in which author James Collins wrote that nearly any investment purchased in 1980 "would have increased in value by the year 2000 ... There was, however, one investment that would have lost you money, causing not only financial distress but also shame and humiliation. That investment was gold."

In 1980, Collins went on to explain, the price of gold peaked at $825.50 an ounce; in 2000, the price was about $280 an ounce. "So," the author continued, "while the popular crowd has rocked on at the bull-market beach party, gold investors have been holed up in somebody's basement, with two beers among them, and no girls."

Blumert recalls, "It was a horrible time in our industry from 1980 through 2000. We were in a depression." When Collins' article came out, Blumert wrote a response on LewRockwell.com, calling the piece "scurrilous" and another example of the establishment marginalizing the gold investor. "I was very sensitive to these people who attacked our industry," Blumert says in retrospect.

But something funny happened after that New Yorker article appeared: In 2001, gold prices went up. And they haven't declined since. According to Platts, a provider of energy and metals information, "The gold market is now enjoying its longest rally since the metal began trading openly on an exchange in 1974."

Which brings us to the goldbug's paradox. Precious-metal prices tend to increase in times of economic uncertainty and a weakened U.S. dollar. And this inverse relationship is key to understanding Blumert's reference to gold dealers' dismal view of the future. To a philosophical goldbug, when the price of their commodity increases, it's a sign that the global economy is tanking. Inflation is proof that the fiat money system is an illusion — and an affirmation that, in the portentous, Arthurian terms of a recent book by Nathan Lewis, gold is The Once and Future Money.

But — and here's the paradox — for the goldbug's worldview to be finally vindicated, the fiat money system has to collapse. "Many of my clients would like to be standing in the rubble of our society saying, 'I told you so,'" Blumert says. "And there was a time when I did want collapse — when I was young and excited about my view. But the older I get, personally I can't deal with rubble anymore. I don't want to see a collapse, to be vindicated and say, 'See, I was right.'"

Instead, Blumert is enjoying his semi-retirement ("I'm looking out at the Pacific," he said when I phoned him on a weekday afternoon) and remembering the pleasures of his long career in the gold business. He says he's proud that the Camino Coin Company developed a reputation for professionalism and integrity: "How could we not deal in integrity, when that's what the commodity was founded on?"

As he watches gold prices climb, Blumert sees further evidence of the weakness of a paper money system that, in his view, lacks the integrity of a precious metal. And as he expounds on his philosophy in an emphatic and excited baritone, the goldbug's paradox is contained in his genial voice — it expresses apprehension but also confidence at the same time. More baseless paper dollars may be required to buy an ounce of gold today compared with 50 years ago, says Blumert, but "the gold doesn't change. The gold is constant."

The Double Whammy of Geopolitical Gold Games

The Double Whammy of Geopolitical Gold Games

Antal E. Fekete
Gold Standard University
aefekete@hotmail.com


Even the most rabid silver bugs admit the possibility that the Chinese are the Big Silver Shorts. This suggests that the Big Gold Shorts are also governments. Neither are naked by any stretch of the imagination. The double whammy of gold and silver accumulation by unnamed governments is the big puzzle of the present financial crisis in the world as it holds the key to the resolution.

For a better understanding of the Chinese silver picture you have to know a little background of the role of silver in China. The facts are as follows. China has been on a silver standard since time immemorial. China stayed on the silver standard after other trading nations of the world demonetized silver and embraced the gold standard at the end of the 19th century. China's external trade was insignificant, but the volume of silver currency for domestic use must have been enormous. In addition, there was an avalanche of silver from abroad raining on China. As the silver price fell over 75 percent from $1.29 in 1873 to $0.25 by 1932 (with a brief spike back to $1.29 at the end of World War I), other governments were dumping silver on China mercilessly. China was the only country on the silver standard and the Chinese central bank had to take all the silver offered to it at a fixed price. This situation lasted right up to 1949 when the Communists took over the government. In fact, several Western historians blame the Communist victory on the unprecedented silver inflation that Western governments inflicted on the Chinese economy by their insane silver dumping policy before World War II.

Nobody knows how much silver the Chinese Communists found in bank vaults and in the safe deposit boxes of Chinese merchants who fled the country, when they took over the mainland. Nobody knows how much silver is still hidden in the mattresses of Chinese peasants. The amounts must be enormous. The best estimate is that most of that silver has never been consumed and still exists in monetary form. China's primitive economy under Mao was in no position to put that silver to industrial use. All that silver is now at the disposal of the Chinese government that could easily buy up silver coins scattered around the cities and in the countryside, at the present rising price of silver.

China is the only country in the world that has consistently run trade surpluses since 1950. As far as it is known, silver never figured in China's exports (except re-exporting foreign-owned refined silver.) Why should the Chinese export silver, when they could export almost anything else? Silver to the Chinese mind is money. You don't export money unless you are forced to cover your trade deficit, of which China has none. China has always paid for its imports with exports, a smart thing to do, too.

The Chinese are alive to the fact that escaped the silver bugs in the West, that you can derive a silver income from your pile of silver by covered short selling, even while retaining physical control of your silver hoard. THIS IS AN UNPRECEDENTED BONANZA IN THE HISTORY OF MONEY. It has never before happened that you earn interest while retaining physical control of your money. Typically you have to release control of money in order to earn interest income, that is, you have to assume risk. Lending money necessarily involves risks: the borrower may default. But if you don't give up physical control, then you will escape the monetary debacle unscathed. Because of the imbecility of the managers of the paper dollar standard there exist durable risk-free profit opportunities in holding monetary metals in the balance sheet. The trick is: covered selling. That's possible because the price of monetary metals has been allowed to fluctuate. The price fluctuation of a monetary metal, like the flow-and-ebb of the oceans, represents energy. Energy that can be harnessed. Energy that can be harnessed only by those who understand monetary economics.

The Chinese are not stupid. They looked askance at the silver and gold demonetization farce perpetrated on a gullible world by Western governments. (Gold was demonetized 100 years after silver had been, in 1973.) They are not falling for the cheap trick. They hang on to their silver. They make most of the stupidity of their adversaries. Nor are they in a hurry to push the silver price to three or four digits in order to sell their silver for a quick profit in irredeemable dollars (which is what the get-rich-quick crowd plans to do). Rather, it is in their interest to derive constant and consistent income in silver from covered writing, or using other dynamic hedging strategies. Why should they trade their silver for dollars, when they have far more dollars already than they want?

From the point of view of the Chinese, a slow rise in the silver price (and a gradual rather than an abrupt depreciation of the irredeemable paper dollar) appears more desirable than an overnight jump in the silver price to three digits that would put an end to their lucrative silver income from covered writing. They certainly have the clout to dictate the pace of silver price appreciation, and probably also of paper dollar depreciation.

The Chinese are inscrutable. They don't show you their blueprint for the new international monetary system which they plan to impose on the world after the inglorious end of the paper dollar era. It may be a born-again silver standard. The Chinese are using their cash silver and the silver income derived from covered writing as a hedge for their exposure to irredeemable paper dollars to the tune of $1.3 trillion, by far the largest accumulation of dollars the world has ever seen. What they will lose on their paper portfolio they will gain on their cash silver position. They will probably gain much more. While the finance-capital of the world denominated as it is in paper dollars is programmed to self-destruct, the Chinese will control much of the liquid capital in the world after the dollar-debacle. They will be a great source of capital exports, if you can pay their price, that is.

The Chinese can earn their way in the world. They can work when work is necessary, and they can save when saving is called for. They are doing fine, thank you very much. You need not worry about the Chinese losing their kitty of $1.3 trillion invested in U.S. T-bills and T-bonds.

However, you had better start worrying about America which is no longer in control of its economic and financial destiny. It has let world monetary leadership slip out of its hands. America's industrial capital is in shambles. From the largest creditor it turned itself into the largest debtor. The light has gone out at the great American universities as far as monetary science is concerned. Through bribe, blackmail, and attrition all upright and serious monetary economists were bumped from their academic chairs. The Great Chinese Cultural Revolution was a picnic in comparison to the Great American Cultural Revolution eliminating monetary economics from the curriculum. Courses on money presently taught consist of pure Keynesian and Friedmanite bunk.

It is a farce to blame the present financial crisis on lax lending standards and rogue traders. What we see is the return of the chickens to roost. This crisis has been in the making for over a century, involving the so-called demonetization of both monetary metals. The move was inspired and led by the United States. In particular, the so-called demonetization of gold was designed to camouflage the default of the U.S. Treasury on its gold-obligations. The industrial nations of the West did not even say 'ouch' when America's default caused them losses measured in hundreds of billions on their holdings of dollars in 1971. They became accomplices eager to start milking their own savers and producers by joining the paper-money farce. The day of reckoning dawns.

America's plight is self-inflicted. Yet America could still turn the train of monetary events to its advantage, reclaiming monetary leadership, if it opened the U.S. Mint to gold and silver. It should do it before China or Russia opened theirs. Unfortunately, there does not seem to exist one grain of wisdom in Washington to see this, let alone to do this. It would take the election victory of the maverick candidate, Dr. Ron Paul, Minority of One in the House of Representatives, to pull it off. It is certainly a proof of the American genius that great crises produce great men who are capable of dealing with them. If the Chinese beat America to the finish line by opening their Mint to silver, then the silky metal would be the international currency of the future.

Next to the Chinese the Russians are the most inscrutable players, ganging up against America's monetary hegemony. Their turf is gold. Perhaps it will be the Russians who will beat America to the finish line by opening the Russian Mint to gold, even before the Chinese open theirs to silver. Either way, America would be left in the lurch, denuded of its industrial capital, its savings, but left with a pile of worthless paper, and paper-worshippers in charge of the Treasury, and in charge of teaching monetary economics at all levels.

America can then embark on the arduous path to accumulate capital from scratch, while Russian and Chinese capitalists will be producing goods in spanking new plants, aided by spanking new equipment, complemented by shiny gold and silver pieces to trade their products world wide.

It is past wake-up call. To save itself, America had better listen to the message of Ron Paul who, in a counter double whammy, would open the U.S. Mint to both gold and silver if elected President.

GOLD STANDARD UNIVERSITY LIVE

Session Three, will be held in Dallas, Texas, February 11-17, 2008. For details, go to www.professorfekete.com.

Fed up with the Federal Reserve...

We've Been Told Not to Imagine
a World Without the Federal Reserve.
Maybe We Should.

By Alvaro Vargas Llosa
The New Republic
Wednesday, November 28, 2007

WASHINGTON -- Recently the Washington Post carried a front-page story about a federal raid on the headquarters of the National Organization for the Repeal of the Federal Reserve Act and Internal Revenue Code (Norfed). The Indiana-based company, which advocates "sound money," has been selling coins and paper certificates backed by gold and silver for years, in effect trying to compete with the dollar.

The government ignored Norfed's "Liberty Dollars" for a long time -- until the group started selling thousands of coins with Ron Paul's likeness to show support for the Republican presidential candidate. Paul also wants to abolish the Federal Reserve.

To the public at large, the activities of Norfed seem utopian, naive, and even downright fraudulent. The idea that the world's greatest economy could be run without a central bank and private parties could replace the government as issuers of currency is one that many people will find scary. With the dollar in something of a free fall and the United States in the midst of a housing and credit crisis that has sent some of the nation's top CEOs packing, Americans will be looking for financial security, not monetary adventures.

And yet it is precisely in such a financially wobbly environment that the actions of Norfed should invite a critical look at the way money is managed. Some of the country's greatest economists, including Nobel Prize winners, have been saying for years that the Federal Reserve has probably caused more problems than it has solved since its creation in 1913. Its role in the last century's boom-and-bust cycles is a matter of record; it looks as though it played a similar role in the current housing market crisis too.

While the creation of the Federal Reserve was essentially a response to a series of bank runs, those crises were mild compared to the ones that were to follow. In 1913 the United States was under the gold standard. Although the government issued currency, the fact that currency was tied to gold meant that the authorities could not manipulate the money supply easily. The Fed's initial mission was to guarantee the convertibility of deposits into currency on demand. A few decades later the United States abandoned the gold standard and the Federal Reserve became the country's most powerful economic institution, exercising its monopoly in issuing currency based on the discretionary power of its board of governors.

All in all, financial instability has been far greater since the creation of the Federal Reserve. What did the Great Depression teach us? Essentially that even with the best of intentions, it is impossible for the authorities to manage the supply of money in accordance with the exact needs of the economy.

A country's economy is the sum of millions of people making decisions that no single individual is in a position to anticipate. As the economist Murray Rothbard showed in his book "America's Great Depression," in the 1920s the Federal Reserve pumped up the money supply, expanding credit by more than 60 percent. Because the economy was very productive, this monetary expansion did not show up in the regular inflation figures. But, as is always the case with inflation, many resources went to the wrong kind of investments -- until the crisis hit.

The late Milton Friedman showed how the Fed made things worse by not providing the system with enough liquidity once the Depression was obvious.

The current housing market and debt market crises are in good part the children of the Federal Reserve. By cutting rates 13 times between 2001 and 2003 and then keeping them very low for years, monetary policy contributed to the housing bubble. That is not to say that other factors -- including financial instruments that made it difficult to see that the underlying foundation was not as solid as it seemed -- did not play a part too. But once again the Fed has turned out to be a factor of financial instability.

In this context, Norfed's attempt to prove to the Fed that the market is ready to trust private currency backed by gold is a welcome occasion to take a second look at some of the economic institutions we take for granted. Naive and utopian? You bet. But that is probably because of how far the world has moved from the time when money was too important to be left to the politicians.

----

Citing Liberty Dollar, Rep. Paul offers Free Competition in Currency Act

Statement by U.S. Rep. Ron Paul
U.S. House of Representatives, Washington, D.C.
Thursday, December 13, 2007

Statement Introducing the Free Competition in Currency Act

Madame Speaker, I rise to introduce the Free Competition in Currency Act. This act would eliminate two sections of US Code that, although ostensibly intended to punish counterfeiters, have instead been used by the government to shut down private mints. As anti-counterfeiting measures, these sections are superfluous, as 18 USC 485, 490, and 491 already grant sufficient authority to punish counterfeiters.

The two sections this bill repeals, 18 USC 486 and 489, are so broadly written as to effectively restrict any form of private coinage from competing with the products of the United States Mint. Allowing such statutes to remain in force as a catch-all provision merely encourages prosecutorial abuse. One particular egregious recent example is that of the Liberty Dollar, in which federal agents seized millions of dollars worth of private currency held by a private mint on behalf of thousands of people across the country.

Due to nearly a century of inflationary monetary policy on the part of the Federal Reserve, the US dollar stands at historically low levels. Investors around the world are shunning the dollar, and millions of Americans see their salaries, savings accounts, and pensions eroded away by rising inflation. We stand on the precipice of an unprecedented monetary collapse, and as a result many people have begun to look for alternatives to the dollar.

As a proponent of competition in currencies, I believe that the American people should be free to choose the type of currency they prefer to use. The ability of consumers to adopt alternative currencies can help to keep the government and the Federal Reserve honest, as the threat that further inflation will cause more and more people to opt out of using the dollar may restrain the government from debasing the currency. As monopolists, however, the Federal Reserve and the Mint fear competition, and would rather force competitors out using the federal court system and the threat of asset forfeiture than compete in the market.

A free society should shun this type of strong-arm action, and the Free Competition in Currency Act would take the necessary first steps to freeing the market for competing currencies. I urge my colleagues to support this bill.