Absolutely agree. Can those who know economics and finance please take the reins? Not those who can talk ideals, appeal to 19-year old college students and love to be filmed while behind the microphone. I think it's OK if our next president can't breakdance.
Schiff is insane. Krugman is absolutely right about stimulus. Big business has been on a long leash with little to no regulation, and now we're paying the price for that.
Little to no regulation? What world are you living in? You can't even engage in economic transactions in the currency of your own choices, the government essentially owns the banking industry, the mortgage industry, etc. The government manipulates the rate of interest and hence the entire process of production, they steal half of what people make, there are over 70,000 pages of regulation and you say there was too much freedom?
That's all they did was look the other way right? It's not like the FHA, Fannie, and Freddie insure what is it, 80% of all mortgages? It's not that the Fed kept expanding credit beyond the supply of savings, and it's not like they still aren't trying to prop up home prices by purchasing huge amounts of MBS. Where would Goldman Sachs be without the Federal government? Oh yeah, bankruptcy. But it was all the markets fault.
Paul Krugman, what a genius - Let's solve the problems caused by inflating too much, consuming too much, and borrowing too much by inflating more, borrowing more, and consuming more. This guy follows the economic doctrine of a jackass that believed that building pyramids, burying jars of paper money, and natural disasters could get rid of economic depression (Keynes).
Perhaps you should read Keynes before you claim that is not what he said. Maybe you could read the clown's magnum opus, his "General Theory" which interestingly enough in the preface for one edition even states that his plans would be easier applied to a totalitarian country. Keynes was a joke.
Let them see what value their money has then. They may then come to regard each other as the common muck they have proved themselves to be. Innit though?
Yours sincerely
Lucian Coulson.
P.S. I understand the Maldives are due to become submerged in the not too distant future. No wait, make it the Chagos (Aircraft carrier) Island. Too nice? Who in their right mind would entertain them anyway? Ah what the hell, just take them out and shoot them. Fuck the economy stupid.
All the overpaid, under representitive economists, bankers, politicions and every other colour of money grubbing deviants are a bunch of completely psychopathic and pathalogical liars, totally lacking in integrity, honour and ethics, with all the morals of a crack/heroin dealer. They ought to be shipped off on mass to an island someplace (and take their toxic paper with them) where they may reflect upon thier deviance while suffering the company of their fellows.
China has the capability to say to u.s. simply fuck off. They have manufacturing,farms and cheap labor they dn't care about. never worry about unions Start walmarts allover world to fill up. They have reserve capital and could simply write debt off and keep going. tell USA you screwed me big time but for last time. Then what the hell do we have?Starbucks?Dominos mcdonalds whoopdee fuckin doo.
o Israel has killed Americans (eg. Sailors on USS Liberty, Rachel Corrie, etc...)
o Israel spies on this country.
o Israel blackmails our corrupt politicians.
o Israel steals our taxes.
o Israel uses our country as their toilet.
For more info, click my name then browse my "Favorite" tab.
Please distribute this post and tell your Senator and/or Representative about Israel's killing Americans, heinous crimes, stealing our taxes, and its spying on USA. Peace!
Where do you socialists come from? :) Your ancestors surely did not cross the pond to be babysit by the government. Get off the nanny train. America, the beautiful, is not meant to be a welfare state. Get your butt off the couch and instead of watching American Idol, go get another job to pay off your debts. I work 16 hours a day, why shouldn't you?
By the way, I'm still curious as to how economic calculation is possible without the means of production being privately owned and freely exchanged. Maybe you can look that one up in the General Theory, although I'm sure Keynes doesn't mention it between praising printing money and going into debt.
Why is it that Peter Schiff is unable to ever directly answer questions. He just seems to spout the same lines over and over again. The guy at the end asked two good questions both of which Peter failed to give credible answer to. Just like the last Max Keiser show he just ignores the specific questions and spouts the same speech he said a thousand times.
I think he is wisely using the airtime to get the most important points across. And why shouldn't he dodge the questions? He is no Jesus, he does not have all the answers.
"And why shouldn't he dodge the questions?" what kind of logic is that!!!!!!!!!
I just find economists like Michael Hudson and Marc Faber way more credible.
How on earth can Peter broadly say regulation is bad, greed and corruption is the reason for this mess, weather it be the public or private sectors. It was private companies that forced governments ease regulation causing so much of this.
Maybe you should listen with your good ear next time or learn some form of comprehension. If you go back and listen again you'll hear that in fact, he does answer both of those final questions, he just doesn't do it with the technical-single-sentence method you learned in 3rd grade.
"what is America going to produce that the rest of the world is going to buy from us, that can't be produced better and cheaper in countries around the world"
Peters answer: "we need to make things"
I agree with Peter, but he doesn't answer the question. "What is America going to produce"
Perhaps you can give some examples or are you only capable of insulting people!
Bcause Schiff is a doomsday opportunist. It's precisely why he "isn't running for senate". He's a business man in a position of leverage that sees an economy on it's heels. He's not in the business of GDP, or trends. He's been diefied by the "Inside Job" crowd, that sees that their only "bailout" will come with total collapse. This starts a psychological quagmire that besets recovery in a small way. It's pretty easy to predict something that's already happened. Like making a hero of a corpse.
oh please, Schiff predicted the CRA/Fannie Mac Housing bubble before it collapsed as did others such as Nouriel Roubini and still others:
Howard Husock
Winter 2000
The Clinton administration has turned the Community Reinvestment Act, a once-obscure and lightly enforced banking regulation law, into one of the most powerful mandates shaping American cities. $1 trillion... most of it funneled through a nationwide network of left-wing community groups
Why didn't he predict his admitted loss of clientele faith because if their portfolio's tanking after dealing directly with Schiff? Some as many as $70,000 in one day. He is an investment opportunist. He admits that he's waiting until the market value equals 1 ounce of gold to start heavily reinvesting. Meanwhile Buffet has been offsetting B. Hath losses and the like by turning millions in profits from investment firms like his collapsing. There are no prophets among us.
I don't know, are you only capable of one dimensional thinking?
Schiff, like anyone on these panels is restricted by concision...i.e. they're not really given enough time to speak fully to their points.
But the answer to your skewed question is actually within your question!
The rest of the world produces goods that are perhaps "better" and measurably cheaper RIGHT NOW, but why does that have to be forever? Don't you think if that changed, America would then be a net exporter?
I don't take anyone too seriously who doesn't mention the pain that comes form a policy that they advocate. I'll give half of that accusation to Mr. Schiff. He says that a short recession to deal with the banking crisis would be painful. However, on a more local level, what he is advising is that all those sub-prime mortgages proceed to foreclosure. He is essentially saying that millions of American's should be removed from their homes and then they should be auctioned.
Um no you have it backwards. Take the lending crisis... the bailout gives liquidity to the lenders, right, which means that they're under no pressure to liquefy existing assets. There actually is no such thing as "illiquid assets" - there are assets that holders want to sell for more than they're worth. All we have to do is NOT BAIL THEM OUT. Then, to stay in business, those lenders must take losses on their holdings. If this happened, homes would become cheap.
You make an excellent point. The bottom third of Americans make less than $25,000 a year; a huge demographic. Yet the U.S. federal government is adamant that the price of houses stay artificially high, by, as you rightly say, giving them liquidity. Americans might simply ask themselves: what is in it for me if house prices are high? It costs more to buy a house and keeps rent high. Auction those boarded up houses. Someone will buy them for dirt cheap, and rent them out dirt cheap.
Exactly. What Peter is saying is that loans would proceed to foreclosure... which is unfortunate, and families must move out.
But then lenders are stuck with property that they paid too much for, which they must pay taxes on and upkeep to stop them from becoming derelict. So they want to get rid of it. If they need money, they will have to get rid of it by any means necessary.
So the evicted family buys a similar house, only cheaper. With the bailout - they can't.
It is kinda sad to listen to the caller who quietly waits for the Government to tell him which, bank is safe. How sad that he didn't hear Shiff say all the banks are insolvent. It would be nice if people understood fiat currency always fails and the more that gets pumped into artificial organs the more unstable (less valuable) it becomes. The discussion over the medium of exchange and monitary issues is an important one. I hate to see people blind sighted & unable to protect themselves.
If I sat in front of you, giving you 1 dollar per second...you'd have $3600 in one hour...pretty nice hourly wage, huh! I'd have to do that for a little less than 12 days before you had one million bucks. For me to count out one Billion would take............31 years.
700 Billion....pushing 25.000 years.
PS: Looks like "RonPaulHatesBlacks" has a new pen name. How do you sleep at night, you sorry S.O.B.
Do what you think is right penguin, group with the bully's.
All you are showing is your own weakness/cowardice.
The only thing is, when the time comes to be tried for your crimes, dont make any excuses, dont blame anyone else for your actions, dont tell any lies.
Hold your hand up like a MAN, accept responsibilty for your actions. It will be your last chance (to be a 'REAL' MAN) before you suffer the death your rightly deserve.
LOVE is the key penguin, 'YOUR WORLD' is devoid of it
People like yourself have the blood of many millions of dead women and children on their hands.
You have exactly the same mentality as the german SS, as the people who participated in the murder/torture/rape of millions of innocents.
There are people who have the balls to speak out against injustice, and then there are those who cower and grovel, doing what they are told to do to others, even though they know deep down what they are doing is wrong.
The GOP has been a joke for so long. One man (Ron Paul) has the ability to see beyond "Reagan" (credit card "conservatism"). The other 99% are clueless.
But then I consider Ron Paul a libertarian more than a Republican. He's too smart for that gang of idiots.
I love how Republicans are in denial they fucked everything up and now they cling to Ron Paul and Peter Schiff so they don't have to admit they're wrong.
The real problem is that conservatives can't manage the economy. Conservative Presidents have run up the deficit 8 Trillion over the last 30 years and dug the economy into a serious recession at least 4 times. Average wages have been cut in half since 1970.
Schiff and Paul's ideas would only benefit the rich. Same as any other Republican.
RP was against bank bailout while Obama and Bush were for it. Obama wants to continue the US presence in the Middle East like Bush while RP wants to end the occupations. Obama wants government deficits like Bush and RP wants to balance the budget. Obama never addresses the FRB problem either.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Anyone who wants to maintain a free market economy should be for the bailout, since the entire financial system will collapse without it. If you don't know that you really don't know much about the problem we have right now.
Second, if RP was against deficits why did he vote for the 1.3 trillion Bush tax cut which put us 1.3 trillion in the hole?
RP talks a good game, but he's talking out of both sides of his mouth. He voted with Bush 70% of the time. That's not a maverick, that's a sidekick.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
No it doesn't. That's a flat out lie pushed by RP people who really don't have the facts on their side. The reality is that the 2 biggest tax cutting presidents (reagan and bush) have also run the largest deficits (3 and 4 trillion), and their presidencies both ended in massive recessions.
Bush Sr and Clintons moderate tax hikes resulted in a booming economy and balanced budgets.
Face it, the facts are irrefutable and they don't favor Ron Paul's irresponsible economic views.
Clinton did a good job and he had a great team of economic advisers. No stock market plunges or real estate meltdowns on his watch.
What spending would you like to cut? Mexico doesn't spend shit on their infrastructure and it shows, ditto every other third world nation. Which defense spending are you going to cut? Whose mothers Social Security are you going to take away? RP and his supporters avoid answering these questions.
Maybe you should all stop being cheap bastards and pay your taxes.
Watch your mouth. What spending would I cut? All troops out of the middle east. the multi-billions saved per month would be used to secure the borders, wich would make America much more secure and leave a surplus. Money for infrastructure can be used from taxes on gasoline and liquor. The income tax is taxation without representation.
You have plenty of representation, smart guy, that's what you vote for.
Secondly, taking the military out of iraq will be a great way to save money, but it won't save you enough to eliminate income tax. Hell, that's all deficit spending right now so that won't even save us money it'll just slow our increase in debt.
This is all simple addition and subtraction. When you're in debt 10 trillion, elimination of income tax isn't even an option.
But it's a big step in the right direction, and I'm also talking about responsibly pulling troops from afghanistan and other places. Trying to maintain an empire is the most unrealistic goal imaginable. as far as cutting domestic spending, letting shity businesses fail is a start. cutting welfare is good. Not eliminating it overnight, but some people have babies just to get bigger welfare checks. Other people should be forced to work for their welfare checks, cleaning the streets or whatever.
We're talking about a 10 trillion dollar deficit, not 10's of billions of dollars. Seriously, you're underestimating the problem and overestimating the solution, as is Ron Paul.
It's kind of silly to take economic advice from a gynecologist, or whatever the hell Paul practices.
Ron Paul was warning of the economic meltdown and criticizing Fed policies while Bill Clinton was giving speaches on Oprah about charity. When I say they have no visibility about what the Fed is doing, I mean they do it behind closed doors. This whole current mess is mostly cause of Greenspan's artificially low interest rates in place for over a decade combined with government spending.
The Fed is part of the equation, but not as big Ron Paul makes it out to be. How about startling bad economic policy and tax cuts funded largely on deficit spending? How about market deregulation spinning out of control? How about the Fed acting as a straw man to distract away from the failure of 30 years of conservative economic policy?
It isn't hard to predict economic collapse when the economy was so badly mismanaged by Bush & Co. Ron Paul is no prophet.
I don't think he's a prophet. Whoa there. Of course the Fed is the biggest part of the problem, the root of the problem. A central bank that can print money that is backed by nothing will always bring down an economy and gain too much power. They cause bubles to occur with low interest rates, the market gets over leveraged.
As far as regulation goes, it should come from the private sector or we see politicians let their banking masters get away with anything, only to get bailed out, while the little guys are heavily regulated. Regulation is not the answer, look at the Russians, weren't they heavily regulated?
hyper, all of your comments have been long on rhetoric - i.e. a lot of smack talk with few details that show you know any of what you're talking about - and short on logic...why isn't Fed as "big" as Ron Paul makes it out to be? Who's "startling"(ly) bad economic policy are you talking about? Do you even know what you're saying when you mention "tax cuts funded largely on deficit spending"? Put down the Keynesian textbook glossary, and speaks specifics like you know some. Enough rhetoric.
I've stated specifics, but whether your open to hearing them is another matter. Ron Paul's ideal economic environment was late 1800's reality and America still wound up in recessions depressions (Panic of 1873 - Panic of 1893), so to say abolishing the Fed will be the magic bullet that cures the economy is completely false. Not that I support the Fed, but at the same time RP's claims just aren't true.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Care to refute my claims with facts, dipshit? Or are you afraid to because your fairytale Ron Paul talking points fall apart when exposed to realistic evaluation?
Secondly, "startlingly bad economic policy" is the long run of deregulation and tax cuts that stated with Reagan and continued through Bush. Ron Paul says "let's eliminate the deficit", but then he votes for a 1.3 trillion tax cut without considering where it would be funded from (larger deficits). The he says "let's reduce spending", but his spending reductions don't add up to the amount that would be lost with his proposed elimination of income tax.
LOL@typical neo-marxists who get everything ass-backwards. Tax cuts increase Fed Revenue. Bush's 2003 tax cuts raised receipts by at least $785 billion. FYI2007,they took in 6.7% more tax revenues than in 2006.The deficit was shrinking. Domestic spending under Bush took off. Then the neo-marxist experiment of "a home is a right" CRA/Fannie Mae shit hit the fan when banks were forced under penalty of law to literally give money away. Government creates boom and bust cycles.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Take a look at the economy now. Doesn't look like those tax cuts worked out in the long term. perhaps you'd like to brag about Republican driving the economy into the shitter?
The fact is those "increased" revenues didn't even add up to the amount of the tax cut and never did reach year 2000 levels. Keep on fucking with the numbers though and maybe something will work in your favor.
LOL. Another transparent attempt to argue pre post 2000 recession fed revenue levels. Inflation-adjusted 20 percent tax revenue increase between 2004 and 2006 represents the largest two-year revenue surge since 19651967. Tax cuts increase fed revenue. It`s the spending stupid. Bush`s "compassionate conservatism" saw socialist spending increases that pushed federal spending up from 18.5 percent of GDP in 2001 to 20.2 percent in 2006. It`s the unconstitutional spending stupid.
Real tax cuts, and not just transfer payments to lower class earners who don't pay net taxes, are needed, more now than ever, but REDUCED spending is also needed. It is irrelevant whether taxes are cut or kept the same at this point IF WE INCREASE DEFICIT SPENDING AND DEBT in the process. We may be on the hairy edge of everyone losing confidence in the dollar, and if that happens, it is going to get UGLY.
Everyone who makes under 250k is getting a tax cut. That's not a lower class earner. Much of these funds are also going into deficit reduction. You really don't have any idea what Obama's plan is, do you? Just spitting out bullshit you heard on Fox today. How juvenile.
@jimmyjoe1975 I do too, every single day. I already pulled 2/3 of my entire life savings out of the US and I now live in Germany. I bought silver, gold, Euros when they are cheap and Francs. Get your money out. US is in much worse shape long term and when the other countries realize America can't pay back all the PayDay loans from China and Ben Bernanke's money press is not coming off warp speed anytime soon...then you will see the entire collapse. It's coming under ''Owe''bama's watch.
@msungs Oh, I wish I could. See, once, despite obvious flaws, I believed in this country. I currently "serve" it. I a dope who was duped. Nearly all of my assets are held in the Thrift Savings Plan, a government christened IRA. It isn't horrible, except that it is in dollars and locked in. I get out of the military in 3 yrs (can't any sooner without taking my family on the run) and then I've got military pension in dollars. I am going to do my best over the next three years. What a dope!
OK, so you don't like a guy who has done everything he can to cut taxes AND cut spending, while simultaneously warning us, correctly, that the Fed and govt was going to bring on a serious collapse. Let's see, the alternative is to support a socialist idiot who wants to raise taxes on everyone, INCLUDING the poor, AND is busy increasing the debt in his first year more than Bush did in eight! Yeah, that makes a lot of sense.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Wait, in the comment above this one you just said the poor WOULD get a tax cut. Now you're just making shit up.
Who cares if the government is big as long as it works? Obama inherited this recession and he's had to make some tough decisions to keep the economy from falling into a Depression. It would be a hell of a lot easier on all of us if ignorant whiners like yourself would stop crying all the time. Admit it, you don't know what you're talking about., so just shut the fuck up.
Nobody is going to have any tax cut considering the sky rocketing debt and soon to be exponentially increasing price level. The government doesn't work, they can't even deliver mail at a profit. What makes you think they're going to micromanage an economy? The Great Depression lasted as long as it did because of interference with the market. 1920-1921 had a far greater drop in output than 1929-1930 and the government did almost nothing and it was over in 18 months.
Bullshit. The postal service is way cheaper than UPS or Fed Ex. It not about systems so much as it is management. If you have the right people running things, then it works.
I'd love to know how economic calculation is possible when the means of production are not privately owned and voluntarily bought/sold on the market? Without real prices you can never know whether or not resources are being squandered, and without buyers/sellers bidding for factors of production in the market there are no real prices. You could have an omniscient bureaucrat running a government agency and he still couldn't calculate.
Third, deregulation has been the equivalent of letting the inmates run the asylum. Much has been made of the mortgage crisis, but the REAL crisis consists of the multi-trillion dollar credit default swap market that collapsed while the Bush administration let it go unchecked for 8 years. This problem in particular is what has led us to the brink of outright depression and economic collapse. Ron Pauls solution? More of the same: deregulation and tax cuts.
Un-fucking real. You cannot have bogus credit default swaps without underlying bogus assets. Those chimera assets were created by the neo-marxist social experiment of the Carter/Clinton Community Reinvestment Act along with the GSEs that forced private banks under penalty of law to literally give money away. Get the fuck outta here ya moron ! LOL
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Typical Republican perspective. Sit on your ass while the country falls apart for 8 years then blame someone else. No wonder you've gotten your asses handed to you in the last two elections. You're so fucking stupid that you assume everyone else is just like you. Looks like your wrong, jackoff.
LOL @ U neo-marxists. There could be no credit derivatives without the underlying assets created by Jimmy Carter`s CRA,then placed on steroids by Clinton that forced private banks to give away Billions under penalty of law. Wasn`t your Messiah as a lawyer involved in suing banks that didn`t give away money in their neo-marxist experiment of " a home is a right" ?
Ron Paul, nor his disciples can cite any precedent for PR's plan working, so it all amounts to pointless bomb throwing because they have some irrational grudge about getting their asses handed to them during the election.
We have a huge deficit that requires an income tax to be paid down, so get over your fantasyland notions of eliminating the income tax unless you have some solid ideas on where else the money is coming from. Otherwise you're all just blowing smoke up your asses.
In addition, Clinton started his presidency with a 30 billion dollar stimulus package which focused overwhelmingly on infrastructure. The republicans in congress said it would produce a depression worse than the 1930's.
You`re ignorant so i won`t waste too much of my precious time on you. National debt is made up of public debt and intergovernmental holdings. Clinton NEVER ran any surplus in any fiscal year under any of his budgets. These numbers are easily available at the US treasury site. FYI 1994 Clinton= a 281 Billion deficit. FYI 95=281/FYI96=250/FYI97=188/FYI98=113/FYI99=130/FYI00==17/FYI01=133. ALL DEFICITS,EVERY SINGLE YEAR.
More revisionist history from Republican swine. No reason to debate your fairytale figures. I never mentioned national debt, only budget, dipshit.
We are living result of conservative economic philosophy: unemployment, low wages, deficits, and economic collapse. It's obvious that the popularity of the Ron Paultard devolution is fueled by turncoat Bush supporters realizing that their president was an epic failure. RP is just another Republican corporatist stooge.
It`s like trying to debate a teenager that`s just shoplifted and he thinks he can outwit the CCTV. In one breath you say, " I never mentioned national debt, only budget" And in another breath then say, " We're talking about a 10 trillion dollar deficit."
LOL You`re meta stupid. Rock hard stupid.You are trans-stupid stupid. Meta-stupid. Stupid collapsed on itself so far that even the neutrons have collapsed.
PS. Im not a RP fan, his foreign policy is like you, ignorant.
I`ve said plenty, using your own words. If it suits you attempt to argue FYI deficits invoking the deceptive practice of ignoring intergovernmental holdings and then when it suits you invoke it and talk of debt. There was never a Clinton surplus and the cold hard facts support that position. In fact, far from a $360 billion reduction in the national debt in FY1998-FY2000, there was an increase of $281 billion. Typical know nothing neo-marxist.
First of all, it's "free markets economy" not "free market economy".
Secondly, we live under a Collectivist Economy run by the Democrats, Republicans Top CEOs, Fed Res Central Bankers and promoted by the media and academicians.
Yeah, because the only other solutions to this crisis are a) letting the world slide into a long depression, or b) nationalization of the banking system.
The bailout Obama, Bush and Mccain supported (TARP) has not had a any dicernible effect on the financial system. The gov wont disclose or force any disclosure of where the money is going and executive bonuses, acquisitions have sucked up alot of those funds.
RP is for tax cuts and reduced spending. If you reduce spending on military then you can reduce taxes and balance a budget.
Obama supports military expansionism and is just another corporate puppet.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Obama has been against the war in Iraq from the start so calling him a neo-con if fucking laughable on it's face. He'll bring our troops home, but of course Ron Paul supporters will find something to bitch about that too.
2) Democrats and Republicans -- the American Collectivists -- have run the USA into the ground in a march to destruction since 1913.
They alone have caused the murder of millions worldwide and have caused untold suffering and misery through economic war both on Americans and foreigners.
Did you hear him say 'we need less regulation" ...just like republicans have done over the years that allowed for the shadow markets to happen and ruin millions of retirees and squander peoples lifesavings.
He preaches no governement intervention. So we should not subsidize the oil industry, or the agricultural industry, or the textile industry, etc,
all over "the private industry' government subsidizes "private investment".
Republicans are just scared at the thought of Obama's success
Less regulation is the answer. It was the regulation of the C.R.A. that FORCED banks to loan money to people who could NEVER pay it back under penalty of law, criminal or civil. Schiff predicted it as did others. Bush warned Congress over 18 times that Fannie Mae had to be reigned in over it`s policies of buying up sub primes. It was the socialist experiment of " a home is a RIGHT" that created the largest financial crash of the free markets in US history.
this is all so so complicated very much so on purpose, so that when put so simply ie. by Dr. Paul, Schiff, Rogers, Celente and others it sounds rediculous. But its no different then a small house hold, or individuals finances. More going out than coming in puts you in the negative...and in a fiat currency (espeically ours) this happens as soon as its printed. And this is very profitable for Central Banks...but to most in mainstream only nut jobs see this. But, what comes around goes around.
Could you imagine if we had people in senate and congress that actually used their head and did what was right.Thats the only way we will ever get this country back..get ppl in that CANT be corrupted or bought off and held these crooks accountable.
Its like most of the American population has been sheltered from an understanding of economics...a bubble finds a pin, and this time everyone feels it, and thus not understanding the process of Creative Destruction (and under the impression that, for example, Bank of America is so big and thus should be around forever), feel like its the end of the world, when in fact its just the beginning of another cycle.
The FED, acting as bartender, gives out free booze to the bankers
The latest bailout (bank heist) is $5 trillion, triple the original $700 billion; Amazingly the FED has been paying these bankers 188 billion a day all along
The Federal Reserve Bank is privately owned
The FED owes its duty to private shareholders!
America can no longer create money debt & interest free!
The FED wants the USA to collapse! The FED is NOT part of the US Government!
Great interview! By the way guys, I always go to financialtruth0.blogspot . com because they post the latest videos there of RON PAUL, PETER SCHIFF, MARC FABER and JIM ROGERS! Thanks for uploading anyway!
Schiff is right let them fail., why? simply because they failed that is why. More responsible business men are ready willing and able. Get these government thieves out of my way.
Yeah. Where does the government get the authority to bail them out? They don't get it from the Constitution, so Constitutionally it's wrong. It's morally wrong to pass debt onto people who aren't born yet. It's Biblically bad to get into debt, Biblically wrong to steal from one person and give to another. Bailouts and stimulus are Constitutionally, morally, and Biblically wrong.
1. The capital is already lost, and the bad assets that were purchased are being propped up by the central banks. That doesn't mean all the money in the world is gone, only the money invested in those bad assets. In a capitalistic society that's what small recessions are for - to restart the system. They are a solution to the problem of bad investments / bubbles.
2. The US would export to any and everyone if we had the products to export. Problem is, we don't have the products to export because we have a "phony service sector economy". The world doesn't need the US, it only thinks it does. The real wealth is not with the consumer, but with the manufacturer. We've got away with it for years based on what was set up at Bretton Woods 40 years ago.
I think because we basically said "our dollar is as good as gold" even though it wasn't redeemable for gold. That means we didn't have to back our dollars with anything that took production (IE print out of thin air) which means that instead of producing things to exchange for other goods, we could just print money to exchange for things that other countries produced.
Essentially the US dollar became the "gold standard" to which all the major currencies relied on. The US could continue to print as much money as they wanted and take risks that they wouldn't have been able to if really their money was tied to gold. This caused the illusion of wealth when in reality wealth is in the production of assets. The rest is just middle-man stuff making money off producers.
1. if we let the whole shithouse go up in flames, massive amounts of capital will be lost... world-wide. where will the private capital come from to restart business, anywhere?
2. if the US econ collapses, every other country will follow suit, even China. Who will we export to? what would we export? how would be produce products if the vast majority of private equity/capital is wiped out in a collapse?
Absolutely agree. Can those who know economics and finance please take the reins? Not those who can talk ideals, appeal to 19-year old college students and love to be filmed while behind the microphone. I think it's OK if our next president can't breakdance.
avrilsdream 1 year ago
Schiff is insane. Krugman is absolutely right about stimulus. Big business has been on a long leash with little to no regulation, and now we're paying the price for that.
Antiks72 2 years ago
Little to no regulation? What world are you living in? You can't even engage in economic transactions in the currency of your own choices, the government essentially owns the banking industry, the mortgage industry, etc. The government manipulates the rate of interest and hence the entire process of production, they steal half of what people make, there are over 70,000 pages of regulation and you say there was too much freedom?
readthepaper 2 years ago
Um yeah. They've looked the other way while Goldman Sachs and the other financial crooks created this housing bubble.
Antiks72 2 years ago
That's all they did was look the other way right? It's not like the FHA, Fannie, and Freddie insure what is it, 80% of all mortgages? It's not that the Fed kept expanding credit beyond the supply of savings, and it's not like they still aren't trying to prop up home prices by purchasing huge amounts of MBS. Where would Goldman Sachs be without the Federal government? Oh yeah, bankruptcy. But it was all the markets fault.
readthepaper 2 years ago
Paul Krugman, what a genius - Let's solve the problems caused by inflating too much, consuming too much, and borrowing too much by inflating more, borrowing more, and consuming more. This guy follows the economic doctrine of a jackass that believed that building pyramids, burying jars of paper money, and natural disasters could get rid of economic depression (Keynes).
readthepaper 2 years ago
that is not what keynes taught and you know it.
Antiks72 2 years ago
Perhaps you should read Keynes before you claim that is not what he said. Maybe you could read the clown's magnum opus, his "General Theory" which interestingly enough in the preface for one edition even states that his plans would be easier applied to a totalitarian country. Keynes was a joke.
readthepaper 2 years ago
lol couldn't agree more
cbronsgi 2 years ago
Peter Schiff would make Paul Krugman his bitch any day.
Alternate2GOP 2 years ago
better start buying up that silver and gold
ForTehNguyen 2 years ago
Let them see what value their money has then. They may then come to regard each other as the common muck they have proved themselves to be. Innit though?
Yours sincerely
Lucian Coulson.
P.S. I understand the Maldives are due to become submerged in the not too distant future. No wait, make it the Chagos (Aircraft carrier) Island. Too nice? Who in their right mind would entertain them anyway? Ah what the hell, just take them out and shoot them. Fuck the economy stupid.
LukeCoulson 2 years ago
Dear PeterSchiffVideos,
All the overpaid, under representitive economists, bankers, politicions and every other colour of money grubbing deviants are a bunch of completely psychopathic and pathalogical liars, totally lacking in integrity, honour and ethics, with all the morals of a crack/heroin dealer. They ought to be shipped off on mass to an island someplace (and take their toxic paper with them) where they may reflect upon thier deviance while suffering the company of their fellows.
LukeCoulson 2 years ago
China has the capability to say to u.s. simply fuck off. They have manufacturing,farms and cheap labor they dn't care about. never worry about unions Start walmarts allover world to fill up. They have reserve capital and could simply write debt off and keep going. tell USA you screwed me big time but for last time. Then what the hell do we have?Starbucks?Dominos mcdonalds whoopdee fuckin doo.
rrdrums110 2 years ago 2
Yeah! Fire them all and hire Ron Paul. But it's probably too late.
Baracheta 2 years ago 5
This has been flagged as spam show
Go to this website for the best financial information on the Internet and then take a look at their latest t-shirt designs:
TOO BIG TO FAIL!
and
Where's MY Bailout?!
These T-Shirts are so FUNNY I had to order both of them!
wallstreetmarketnews. com
]e
NewChristianSoldiers 2 years ago
o Israel has killed Americans (eg. Sailors on USS Liberty, Rachel Corrie, etc...)
o Israel spies on this country.
o Israel blackmails our corrupt politicians.
o Israel steals our taxes.
o Israel uses our country as their toilet.
For more info, click my name then browse my "Favorite" tab.
Please distribute this post and tell your Senator and/or Representative about Israel's killing Americans, heinous crimes, stealing our taxes, and its spying on USA. Peace!
HateAllNazis 2 years ago 2
We need Peter Schiff in congress!
Thrice13 2 years ago
and Peter Griffin too.
Baracheta 2 years ago
I agree
AWE319 2 years ago
People need to realize that liberty is the same as responsibility.. The government can't solve problems.
Socialism doesn't bring the poor to the middle class, it brings the middle class to the poor.
With all rights come with obligations for others
cyalaterthan 2 years ago 2
Where do you socialists come from? :) Your ancestors surely did not cross the pond to be babysit by the government. Get off the nanny train. America, the beautiful, is not meant to be a welfare state. Get your butt off the couch and instead of watching American Idol, go get another job to pay off your debts. I work 16 hours a day, why shouldn't you?
BlueSkies360 2 years ago
Congrats on spending your entire life at work. sucker.
Antiks72 2 years ago
By the way, I'm still curious as to how economic calculation is possible without the means of production being privately owned and freely exchanged. Maybe you can look that one up in the General Theory, although I'm sure Keynes doesn't mention it between praising printing money and going into debt.
readthepaper 2 years ago
Yes getting rid of the FDIC is a great idea.
side1981 2 years ago
Why is it that Peter Schiff is unable to ever directly answer questions. He just seems to spout the same lines over and over again. The guy at the end asked two good questions both of which Peter failed to give credible answer to. Just like the last Max Keiser show he just ignores the specific questions and spouts the same speech he said a thousand times.
siy01 2 years ago
I think he is wisely using the airtime to get the most important points across. And why shouldn't he dodge the questions? He is no Jesus, he does not have all the answers.
BlueSkies360 2 years ago
"And why shouldn't he dodge the questions?" what kind of logic is that!!!!!!!!!
I just find economists like Michael Hudson and Marc Faber way more credible.
How on earth can Peter broadly say regulation is bad, greed and corruption is the reason for this mess, weather it be the public or private sectors. It was private companies that forced governments ease regulation causing so much of this.
siy01 2 years ago
Maybe you should listen with your good ear next time or learn some form of comprehension. If you go back and listen again you'll hear that in fact, he does answer both of those final questions, he just doesn't do it with the technical-single-sentence method you learned in 3rd grade.
fakeplasticme 2 years ago
"what is America going to produce that the rest of the world is going to buy from us, that can't be produced better and cheaper in countries around the world"
Peters answer: "we need to make things"
I agree with Peter, but he doesn't answer the question. "What is America going to produce"
Perhaps you can give some examples or are you only capable of insulting people!
siy01 2 years ago
Bcause Schiff is a doomsday opportunist. It's precisely why he "isn't running for senate". He's a business man in a position of leverage that sees an economy on it's heels. He's not in the business of GDP, or trends. He's been diefied by the "Inside Job" crowd, that sees that their only "bailout" will come with total collapse. This starts a psychological quagmire that besets recovery in a small way. It's pretty easy to predict something that's already happened. Like making a hero of a corpse.
itowedin 2 years ago
oh please, Schiff predicted the CRA/Fannie Mac Housing bubble before it collapsed as did others such as Nouriel Roubini and still others:
Howard Husock
Winter 2000
The Clinton administration has turned the Community Reinvestment Act, a once-obscure and lightly enforced banking regulation law, into one of the most powerful mandates shaping American cities. $1 trillion... most of it funneled through a nationwide network of left-wing community groups
classic7890 2 years ago 4
Liberalism/socialism=comunism
conservatisim/libratarianism=Freedom/liberty
cyalaterthan 2 years ago 2
Comment removed
itowedin 2 years ago
Why didn't he predict his admitted loss of clientele faith because if their portfolio's tanking after dealing directly with Schiff? Some as many as $70,000 in one day. He is an investment opportunist. He admits that he's waiting until the market value equals 1 ounce of gold to start heavily reinvesting. Meanwhile Buffet has been offsetting B. Hath losses and the like by turning millions in profits from investment firms like his collapsing. There are no prophets among us.
itowedin 2 years ago
That is where free enterprise comes in and entrupinuers peter schiff doesn't have all the answers just the right pyilosipyh
cyalaterthan 2 years ago
I don't know, are you only capable of one dimensional thinking?
Schiff, like anyone on these panels is restricted by concision...i.e. they're not really given enough time to speak fully to their points.
But the answer to your skewed question is actually within your question!
The rest of the world produces goods that are perhaps "better" and measurably cheaper RIGHT NOW, but why does that have to be forever? Don't you think if that changed, America would then be a net exporter?
fakeplasticme 2 years ago
Go Peter!
experimentsingeekdom 2 years ago
I don't take anyone too seriously who doesn't mention the pain that comes form a policy that they advocate. I'll give half of that accusation to Mr. Schiff. He says that a short recession to deal with the banking crisis would be painful. However, on a more local level, what he is advising is that all those sub-prime mortgages proceed to foreclosure. He is essentially saying that millions of American's should be removed from their homes and then they should be auctioned.
drmodestoesq 2 years ago
Um no you have it backwards. Take the lending crisis... the bailout gives liquidity to the lenders, right, which means that they're under no pressure to liquefy existing assets. There actually is no such thing as "illiquid assets" - there are assets that holders want to sell for more than they're worth. All we have to do is NOT BAIL THEM OUT. Then, to stay in business, those lenders must take losses on their holdings. If this happened, homes would become cheap.
Jaspian 2 years ago
You make an excellent point. The bottom third of Americans make less than $25,000 a year; a huge demographic. Yet the U.S. federal government is adamant that the price of houses stay artificially high, by, as you rightly say, giving them liquidity. Americans might simply ask themselves: what is in it for me if house prices are high? It costs more to buy a house and keeps rent high. Auction those boarded up houses. Someone will buy them for dirt cheap, and rent them out dirt cheap.
drmodestoesq 2 years ago
Exactly. What Peter is saying is that loans would proceed to foreclosure... which is unfortunate, and families must move out.
But then lenders are stuck with property that they paid too much for, which they must pay taxes on and upkeep to stop them from becoming derelict. So they want to get rid of it. If they need money, they will have to get rid of it by any means necessary.
So the evicted family buys a similar house, only cheaper. With the bailout - they can't.
Jaspian 2 years ago 2
nothing can be stupider than your nickname.,
ExtraTerrestrials 2 years ago
thanks for your objective analysis... Mohammed
rexriley 2 years ago
I don't agree with Peter Schiff on investment matters (technical definition disagreement) - but do agree on all others matters.
morlhzd 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
It is kinda sad to listen to the caller who quietly waits for the Government to tell him which, bank is safe. How sad that he didn't hear Shiff say all the banks are insolvent. It would be nice if people understood fiat currency always fails and the more that gets pumped into artificial organs the more unstable (less valuable) it becomes. The discussion over the medium of exchange and monitary issues is an important one. I hate to see people blind sighted & unable to protect themselves.
BeanGene 2 years ago
Peter's correct once again.
Shaunt1 2 years ago 6
Why do Obama kool aid drinkers always pull out the race card instead of debating the issue?
y2knoproblem 2 years ago 3
I desperately want to see a moderated debate between Schiff and Krugman.
martyR13 2 years ago
Krugman stands no chance.
BlueSkies360 2 years ago
Big govt. spending...Here ya go math class.
If I sat in front of you, giving you 1 dollar per second...you'd have $3600 in one hour...pretty nice hourly wage, huh! I'd have to do that for a little less than 12 days before you had one million bucks. For me to count out one Billion would take............31 years.
700 Billion....pushing 25.000 years.
PS: Looks like "RonPaulHatesBlacks" has a new pen name. How do you sleep at night, you sorry S.O.B.
Peace, Mt.
mete1954 2 years ago
uh...no. Most people that support Ron Paul don't like Obama's policies of big government spending.
stealthswimmer 2 years ago
What are you talking about? I don't see ANY racist comments about this video... Do you think any criticism of Obama is somehow racist?
crystalcalia 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Peter Schiff is the MAN!
Check out me and my brother's new show!!! THANKS! /watch?v=69k5XAoXQoA
BlueTunisia 2 years ago
Peter Schiff is the MAN!
Check out me and my brother's new show!!! Thanks! /watch?v=69k5XAoXQoA
BlueTunisia 2 years ago
Great interview. I hope he considers running for public office, we need men like him representing the people.
PopularHypocrisy 2 years ago
hyperreal,
you really don't know what your talking about.
If you honestly think that Bush's tax cuts got us into the mess, I pity you.
"He voted with Bush 70% of the time. That's not a maverick, that's a sidekick."
Thanks for pulling numbers out of your ass.
tlkshowhst 2 years ago
I hope you're successful in your campaign, meaning I hope there are enough intelligent people that will vote for your campaign.
The the idiots in NJ did not vote for Sabrin and simply voted the same politicians back into office.
tlkshowhst 2 years ago
i like money
forestloves 2 years ago
twit
buttonmonkey01 2 years ago
Do what you think is right penguin, group with the bully's.
All you are showing is your own weakness/cowardice.
The only thing is, when the time comes to be tried for your crimes, dont make any excuses, dont blame anyone else for your actions, dont tell any lies.
Hold your hand up like a MAN, accept responsibilty for your actions. It will be your last chance (to be a 'REAL' MAN) before you suffer the death your rightly deserve.
LOVE is the key penguin, 'YOUR WORLD' is devoid of it
NowisEvollovetion 2 years ago
Thats the problem with the youth today, somehow it is COOL TO BE DUMB.
Be very carefull what you wish for, those things have a tendency to turn around and bite 'YOU'.
We live in a love-less, sex obsessed society. A society where money has become more important than human life (and yes that DOES include yours).
In my experience things only become so bad, before they eventually begin to improve.
Change is coming over the horizon Penguin, and YOU ARE on the side that is going to loose.
NowisEvollovetion 2 years ago 3
People like yourself have the blood of many millions of dead women and children on their hands.
You have exactly the same mentality as the german SS, as the people who participated in the murder/torture/rape of millions of innocents.
There are people who have the balls to speak out against injustice, and then there are those who cower and grovel, doing what they are told to do to others, even though they know deep down what they are doing is wrong.
And all to save their own skins.
NowisEvollovetion 2 years ago 2
The GOP has been a joke for so long. One man (Ron Paul) has the ability to see beyond "Reagan" (credit card "conservatism"). The other 99% are clueless.
But then I consider Ron Paul a libertarian more than a Republican. He's too smart for that gang of idiots.
RonPaulGeorgeRingo 2 years ago 6
Well said, I agree.
daniel987878 2 years ago
I love how Republicans are in denial they fucked everything up and now they cling to Ron Paul and Peter Schiff so they don't have to admit they're wrong.
The real problem is that conservatives can't manage the economy. Conservative Presidents have run up the deficit 8 Trillion over the last 30 years and dug the economy into a serious recession at least 4 times. Average wages have been cut in half since 1970.
Schiff and Paul's ideas would only benefit the rich. Same as any other Republican.
hyperrreal 2 years ago
Ron Paul is a republican but he is the opposite of all the Neocons. Obama is a Neocon too.
daniel987878 2 years ago
How do you figure?
hyperrreal 2 years ago
RP was against bank bailout while Obama and Bush were for it. Obama wants to continue the US presence in the Middle East like Bush while RP wants to end the occupations. Obama wants government deficits like Bush and RP wants to balance the budget. Obama never addresses the FRB problem either.
daniel987878 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Anyone who wants to maintain a free market economy should be for the bailout, since the entire financial system will collapse without it. If you don't know that you really don't know much about the problem we have right now.
Second, if RP was against deficits why did he vote for the 1.3 trillion Bush tax cut which put us 1.3 trillion in the hole?
RP talks a good game, but he's talking out of both sides of his mouth. He voted with Bush 70% of the time. That's not a maverick, that's a sidekick.
hyperrreal 2 years ago
Tax cuts ALWAYS results in increased federal revenue. The problem is spending. No matter how high the Fed revenue the pols always spend it and more.
classic7890 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
No it doesn't. That's a flat out lie pushed by RP people who really don't have the facts on their side. The reality is that the 2 biggest tax cutting presidents (reagan and bush) have also run the largest deficits (3 and 4 trillion), and their presidencies both ended in massive recessions.
Bush Sr and Clintons moderate tax hikes resulted in a booming economy and balanced budgets.
Face it, the facts are irrefutable and they don't favor Ron Paul's irresponsible economic views.
hyperrreal 2 years ago
Of course, credit Clinton with the technical innovations from Americans in the 90's. Clinton was also parly responsible for the housing bubble.
BUSH DIDN'T CUT SPENDING. You have to cut spending to cut tax cuts, something Ron Paul advocates, something Bush didn't achieve.
emosdieslow 2 years ago
Clinton did a good job and he had a great team of economic advisers. No stock market plunges or real estate meltdowns on his watch.
What spending would you like to cut? Mexico doesn't spend shit on their infrastructure and it shows, ditto every other third world nation. Which defense spending are you going to cut? Whose mothers Social Security are you going to take away? RP and his supporters avoid answering these questions.
Maybe you should all stop being cheap bastards and pay your taxes.
hyperrreal 2 years ago
Watch your mouth. What spending would I cut? All troops out of the middle east. the multi-billions saved per month would be used to secure the borders, wich would make America much more secure and leave a surplus. Money for infrastructure can be used from taxes on gasoline and liquor. The income tax is taxation without representation.
emosdieslow 2 years ago
You have plenty of representation, smart guy, that's what you vote for.
Secondly, taking the military out of iraq will be a great way to save money, but it won't save you enough to eliminate income tax. Hell, that's all deficit spending right now so that won't even save us money it'll just slow our increase in debt.
This is all simple addition and subtraction. When you're in debt 10 trillion, elimination of income tax isn't even an option.
hyperrreal 2 years ago
But it's a big step in the right direction, and I'm also talking about responsibly pulling troops from afghanistan and other places. Trying to maintain an empire is the most unrealistic goal imaginable. as far as cutting domestic spending, letting shity businesses fail is a start. cutting welfare is good. Not eliminating it overnight, but some people have babies just to get bigger welfare checks. Other people should be forced to work for their welfare checks, cleaning the streets or whatever.
emosdieslow 2 years ago
We're talking about a 10 trillion dollar deficit, not 10's of billions of dollars. Seriously, you're underestimating the problem and overestimating the solution, as is Ron Paul.
It's kind of silly to take economic advice from a gynecologist, or whatever the hell Paul practices.
hyperrreal 2 years ago
Ron Paul was warning of the economic meltdown and criticizing Fed policies while Bill Clinton was giving speaches on Oprah about charity. When I say they have no visibility about what the Fed is doing, I mean they do it behind closed doors. This whole current mess is mostly cause of Greenspan's artificially low interest rates in place for over a decade combined with government spending.
emosdieslow 2 years ago
The Fed is part of the equation, but not as big Ron Paul makes it out to be. How about startling bad economic policy and tax cuts funded largely on deficit spending? How about market deregulation spinning out of control? How about the Fed acting as a straw man to distract away from the failure of 30 years of conservative economic policy?
It isn't hard to predict economic collapse when the economy was so badly mismanaged by Bush & Co. Ron Paul is no prophet.
hyperrreal 2 years ago
I don't think he's a prophet. Whoa there. Of course the Fed is the biggest part of the problem, the root of the problem. A central bank that can print money that is backed by nothing will always bring down an economy and gain too much power. They cause bubles to occur with low interest rates, the market gets over leveraged.
emosdieslow 2 years ago
As far as regulation goes, it should come from the private sector or we see politicians let their banking masters get away with anything, only to get bailed out, while the little guys are heavily regulated. Regulation is not the answer, look at the Russians, weren't they heavily regulated?
emosdieslow 2 years ago
hyper, all of your comments have been long on rhetoric - i.e. a lot of smack talk with few details that show you know any of what you're talking about - and short on logic...why isn't Fed as "big" as Ron Paul makes it out to be? Who's "startling"(ly) bad economic policy are you talking about? Do you even know what you're saying when you mention "tax cuts funded largely on deficit spending"? Put down the Keynesian textbook glossary, and speaks specifics like you know some. Enough rhetoric.
fakeplasticme 2 years ago
I've stated specifics, but whether your open to hearing them is another matter. Ron Paul's ideal economic environment was late 1800's reality and America still wound up in recessions depressions (Panic of 1873 - Panic of 1893), so to say abolishing the Fed will be the magic bullet that cures the economy is completely false. Not that I support the Fed, but at the same time RP's claims just aren't true.
hyperrreal 2 years ago
And with that bilge I can say you truly are a mindless idiot.
Jaycephus01 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Care to refute my claims with facts, dipshit? Or are you afraid to because your fairytale Ron Paul talking points fall apart when exposed to realistic evaluation?
hyperrreal 2 years ago
I'm ready to debate.
jimmyjoe1975 2 years ago
You've got claims, but have yet to present facts to refute.
Alternate2GOP 2 years ago
Secondly, "startlingly bad economic policy" is the long run of deregulation and tax cuts that stated with Reagan and continued through Bush. Ron Paul says "let's eliminate the deficit", but then he votes for a 1.3 trillion tax cut without considering where it would be funded from (larger deficits). The he says "let's reduce spending", but his spending reductions don't add up to the amount that would be lost with his proposed elimination of income tax.
hyperrreal 2 years ago
LOL@typical neo-marxists who get everything ass-backwards. Tax cuts increase Fed Revenue. Bush's 2003 tax cuts raised receipts by at least $785 billion. FYI2007,they took in 6.7% more tax revenues than in 2006.The deficit was shrinking. Domestic spending under Bush took off. Then the neo-marxist experiment of "a home is a right" CRA/Fannie Mae shit hit the fan when banks were forced under penalty of law to literally give money away. Government creates boom and bust cycles.
classic7890 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Take a look at the economy now. Doesn't look like those tax cuts worked out in the long term. perhaps you'd like to brag about Republican driving the economy into the shitter?
The fact is those "increased" revenues didn't even add up to the amount of the tax cut and never did reach year 2000 levels. Keep on fucking with the numbers though and maybe something will work in your favor.
hyperrreal 2 years ago
LOL. Another transparent attempt to argue pre post 2000 recession fed revenue levels. Inflation-adjusted 20 percent tax revenue increase between 2004 and 2006 represents the largest two-year revenue surge since 19651967. Tax cuts increase fed revenue. It`s the spending stupid. Bush`s "compassionate conservatism" saw socialist spending increases that pushed federal spending up from 18.5 percent of GDP in 2001 to 20.2 percent in 2006. It`s the unconstitutional spending stupid.
classic7890 2 years ago
Go peddle your partisan lies somewhere else.
Real tax cuts, and not just transfer payments to lower class earners who don't pay net taxes, are needed, more now than ever, but REDUCED spending is also needed. It is irrelevant whether taxes are cut or kept the same at this point IF WE INCREASE DEFICIT SPENDING AND DEBT in the process. We may be on the hairy edge of everyone losing confidence in the dollar, and if that happens, it is going to get UGLY.
Jaycephus01 2 years ago
Everyone who makes under 250k is getting a tax cut. That's not a lower class earner. Much of these funds are also going into deficit reduction. You really don't have any idea what Obama's plan is, do you? Just spitting out bullshit you heard on Fox today. How juvenile.
hyperrreal 2 years ago
Would you bet your life on Obama's plan?
jimmyjoe1975 2 years ago
I pray for the fall of the dollar.
jimmyjoe1975 2 years ago 2
@jimmyjoe1975 I do too, every single day. I already pulled 2/3 of my entire life savings out of the US and I now live in Germany. I bought silver, gold, Euros when they are cheap and Francs. Get your money out. US is in much worse shape long term and when the other countries realize America can't pay back all the PayDay loans from China and Ben Bernanke's money press is not coming off warp speed anytime soon...then you will see the entire collapse. It's coming under ''Owe''bama's watch.
msungs 1 year ago
@msungs Oh, I wish I could. See, once, despite obvious flaws, I believed in this country. I currently "serve" it. I a dope who was duped. Nearly all of my assets are held in the Thrift Savings Plan, a government christened IRA. It isn't horrible, except that it is in dollars and locked in. I get out of the military in 3 yrs (can't any sooner without taking my family on the run) and then I've got military pension in dollars. I am going to do my best over the next three years. What a dope!
jimmyjoe1975 1 year ago
OK, so you don't like a guy who has done everything he can to cut taxes AND cut spending, while simultaneously warning us, correctly, that the Fed and govt was going to bring on a serious collapse. Let's see, the alternative is to support a socialist idiot who wants to raise taxes on everyone, INCLUDING the poor, AND is busy increasing the debt in his first year more than Bush did in eight! Yeah, that makes a lot of sense.
Jaycephus01 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Wait, in the comment above this one you just said the poor WOULD get a tax cut. Now you're just making shit up.
Who cares if the government is big as long as it works? Obama inherited this recession and he's had to make some tough decisions to keep the economy from falling into a Depression. It would be a hell of a lot easier on all of us if ignorant whiners like yourself would stop crying all the time. Admit it, you don't know what you're talking about., so just shut the fuck up.
hyperrreal 2 years ago
Nobody is going to have any tax cut considering the sky rocketing debt and soon to be exponentially increasing price level. The government doesn't work, they can't even deliver mail at a profit. What makes you think they're going to micromanage an economy? The Great Depression lasted as long as it did because of interference with the market. 1920-1921 had a far greater drop in output than 1929-1930 and the government did almost nothing and it was over in 18 months.
readthepaper 2 years ago
Bullshit. The postal service is way cheaper than UPS or Fed Ex. It not about systems so much as it is management. If you have the right people running things, then it works.
Antiks72 2 years ago
I'd love to know how economic calculation is possible when the means of production are not privately owned and voluntarily bought/sold on the market? Without real prices you can never know whether or not resources are being squandered, and without buyers/sellers bidding for factors of production in the market there are no real prices. You could have an omniscient bureaucrat running a government agency and he still couldn't calculate.
readthepaper 2 years ago
Well, I'm poor and I don't pay any taxes.
vanostraniii 2 years ago
Third, deregulation has been the equivalent of letting the inmates run the asylum. Much has been made of the mortgage crisis, but the REAL crisis consists of the multi-trillion dollar credit default swap market that collapsed while the Bush administration let it go unchecked for 8 years. This problem in particular is what has led us to the brink of outright depression and economic collapse. Ron Pauls solution? More of the same: deregulation and tax cuts.
hyperrreal 2 years ago
Un-fucking real. You cannot have bogus credit default swaps without underlying bogus assets. Those chimera assets were created by the neo-marxist social experiment of the Carter/Clinton Community Reinvestment Act along with the GSEs that forced private banks under penalty of law to literally give money away. Get the fuck outta here ya moron ! LOL
classic7890 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Typical Republican perspective. Sit on your ass while the country falls apart for 8 years then blame someone else. No wonder you've gotten your asses handed to you in the last two elections. You're so fucking stupid that you assume everyone else is just like you. Looks like your wrong, jackoff.
hyperrreal 2 years ago
LOL @ U neo-marxists. There could be no credit derivatives without the underlying assets created by Jimmy Carter`s CRA,then placed on steroids by Clinton that forced private banks to give away Billions under penalty of law. Wasn`t your Messiah as a lawyer involved in suing banks that didn`t give away money in their neo-marxist experiment of " a home is a right" ?
classic7890 2 years ago
Ron Paul, nor his disciples can cite any precedent for PR's plan working, so it all amounts to pointless bomb throwing because they have some irrational grudge about getting their asses handed to them during the election.
We have a huge deficit that requires an income tax to be paid down, so get over your fantasyland notions of eliminating the income tax unless you have some solid ideas on where else the money is coming from. Otherwise you're all just blowing smoke up your asses.
hyperrreal 2 years ago
Actually, in your case you don't get taxation or representation since you're Canadian. Poser.
hyperrreal 2 years ago
Actually, I have dual citizenship. Smart guy.
emosdieslow 2 years ago
Great, then you should take a civics class to learn about your representation in US government since obviously you don't know the basics.
hyperrreal 2 years ago
I'm not sure you know the history of the income tax. It's unconstitutional. Elected representives have no visibility of what the Fed is doing.
emosdieslow 2 years ago
In addition, Clinton started his presidency with a 30 billion dollar stimulus package which focused overwhelmingly on infrastructure. The republicans in congress said it would produce a depression worse than the 1930's.
drmodestoesq 2 years ago 2
You`re ignorant so i won`t waste too much of my precious time on you. National debt is made up of public debt and intergovernmental holdings. Clinton NEVER ran any surplus in any fiscal year under any of his budgets. These numbers are easily available at the US treasury site. FYI 1994 Clinton= a 281 Billion deficit. FYI 95=281/FYI96=250/FYI97=188/FYI98=113/FYI99=130/FYI00==17/FYI01=133. ALL DEFICITS,EVERY SINGLE YEAR.
F**k you`re dumb.
classic7890 2 years ago
More revisionist history from Republican swine. No reason to debate your fairytale figures. I never mentioned national debt, only budget, dipshit.
We are living result of conservative economic philosophy: unemployment, low wages, deficits, and economic collapse. It's obvious that the popularity of the Ron Paultard devolution is fueled by turncoat Bush supporters realizing that their president was an epic failure. RP is just another Republican corporatist stooge.
hyperrreal 2 years ago
It`s like trying to debate a teenager that`s just shoplifted and he thinks he can outwit the CCTV. In one breath you say, " I never mentioned national debt, only budget" And in another breath then say, " We're talking about a 10 trillion dollar deficit."
LOL You`re meta stupid. Rock hard stupid.You are trans-stupid stupid. Meta-stupid. Stupid collapsed on itself so far that even the neutrons have collapsed.
PS. Im not a RP fan, his foreign policy is like you, ignorant.
classic7890 2 years ago
That wasn't in answer to your question, fool.
You say nothing but you keep on saying it. Pathetic.
hyperrreal 2 years ago
I`ve said plenty, using your own words. If it suits you attempt to argue FYI deficits invoking the deceptive practice of ignoring intergovernmental holdings and then when it suits you invoke it and talk of debt. There was never a Clinton surplus and the cold hard facts support that position. In fact, far from a $360 billion reduction in the national debt in FY1998-FY2000, there was an increase of $281 billion. Typical know nothing neo-marxist.
classic7890 2 years ago
Irresponsible is being putting it nicely. Paul flat advocates policies that would lead to an overt corporate feudalism.
side1981 2 years ago
First of all, it's "free markets economy" not "free market economy".
Secondly, we live under a Collectivist Economy run by the Democrats, Republicans Top CEOs, Fed Res Central Bankers and promoted by the media and academicians.
TruthAxe 2 years ago
hyperreal with all do respect you have no clue what you are talking about.
We should support the bailout if we believe in a free market economy? Do you even know what the free market is?
The definition of a free market......
A free market is a market that is free of government intervention and regulation.
Ron Paul would try to get rid of the income tax, that hardly makes him Bush's sidekick.
He voted against Bush on anything unconstitional unlike Obama. Patriot act anyone?
runned 2 years ago
Yeah, because the only other solutions to this crisis are a) letting the world slide into a long depression, or b) nationalization of the banking system.
And it's with all "due" respect, genius.
hyperrreal 2 years ago
The bailout Obama, Bush and Mccain supported (TARP) has not had a any dicernible effect on the financial system. The gov wont disclose or force any disclosure of where the money is going and executive bonuses, acquisitions have sucked up alot of those funds.
RP is for tax cuts and reduced spending. If you reduce spending on military then you can reduce taxes and balance a budget.
Obama supports military expansionism and is just another corporate puppet.
daniel987878 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Obama has been against the war in Iraq from the start so calling him a neo-con if fucking laughable on it's face. He'll bring our troops home, but of course Ron Paul supporters will find something to bitch about that too.
hyperrreal 2 years ago
No, hussein is a neo-marxist. And bringing the troops home after a victory does not take courage.
classic7890 2 years ago
You need to hire a cult de-programmer to clear your head.
You're parroting false beliefs inculcated into your mind by your elite masters.
TruthAxe 2 years ago
Which false beliefs would those be? That republicans have fucked up the economy many, many times? Do you deny that?
hyperrreal 2 years ago
1) Republicans despise Ron Paul and Peter Schiff
2) Democrats and Republicans -- the American Collectivists -- have run the USA into the ground in a march to destruction since 1913.
They alone have caused the murder of millions worldwide and have caused untold suffering and misery through economic war both on Americans and foreigners.
TruthAxe 2 years ago
Did you hear him say 'we need less regulation" ...just like republicans have done over the years that allowed for the shadow markets to happen and ruin millions of retirees and squander peoples lifesavings.
He preaches no governement intervention. So we should not subsidize the oil industry, or the agricultural industry, or the textile industry, etc,
all over "the private industry' government subsidizes "private investment".
Republicans are just scared at the thought of Obama's success
smilingseal 2 years ago
Less regulation is the answer. It was the regulation of the C.R.A. that FORCED banks to loan money to people who could NEVER pay it back under penalty of law, criminal or civil. Schiff predicted it as did others. Bush warned Congress over 18 times that Fannie Mae had to be reigned in over it`s policies of buying up sub primes. It was the socialist experiment of " a home is a RIGHT" that created the largest financial crash of the free markets in US history.
classic7890 2 years ago
this is all so so complicated very much so on purpose, so that when put so simply ie. by Dr. Paul, Schiff, Rogers, Celente and others it sounds rediculous. But its no different then a small house hold, or individuals finances. More going out than coming in puts you in the negative...and in a fiat currency (espeically ours) this happens as soon as its printed. And this is very profitable for Central Banks...but to most in mainstream only nut jobs see this. But, what comes around goes around.
dankeewolnir4042 2 years ago 2
Could you imagine if we had people in senate and congress that actually used their head and did what was right.Thats the only way we will ever get this country back..get ppl in that CANT be corrupted or bought off and held these crooks accountable.
xsleef 2 years ago
Go Dr. Paul, A great in depth documentary on the Federal Reserve can be found at:
TheMoneyMasters(dot)com
LetFreedomRlng 2 years ago 5
That couldn't have been the entire interview?
jvittetoe 2 years ago
"Fire them all and ask Ron Paul what to do."
Right on! Go Peter! Go Paul!
galetski 2 years ago 9
"People do more research buying a plasma TV than they do opening a bank account."
Hahaha. Peter's so true.
MooseOfReason 2 years ago 6
Its like most of the American population has been sheltered from an understanding of economics...a bubble finds a pin, and this time everyone feels it, and thus not understanding the process of Creative Destruction (and under the impression that, for example, Bank of America is so big and thus should be around forever), feel like its the end of the world, when in fact its just the beginning of another cycle.
So, so sad...
chaztikov 2 years ago
Bankruptcy would have taken the assets out of the hands of the bad managers and given them over to the well managed institutions
Why do ANY banks need to be given money?
Banks are allowed to create all the money they want out of thin air - Fractional lending allows banks to create an unlimited money!
This is insane!
If under those circumstances the bank somehow manages to go bankrupt, then the managers need to be hanged, flogged, drawn & quartered!
China executes bankers over this stuff!
sugarpuddin88 2 years ago
The FED, acting as bartender, gives out free booze to the bankers
The latest bailout (bank heist) is $5 trillion, triple the original $700 billion; Amazingly the FED has been paying these bankers 188 billion a day all along
The Federal Reserve Bank is privately owned
The FED owes its duty to private shareholders!
America can no longer create money debt & interest free!
The FED wants the USA to collapse! The FED is NOT part of the US Government!
sugarpuddin88 2 years ago
The Federal Reserve is privately owned? Any movies or videos that go into this?
Benaiahh 2 years ago 2
freedom to fascism
fraudgov 2 years ago 6
google search "fiat empire". Great documentary.
Mastinox803 2 years ago
Zeitgeist goes into it...though you may want to pick and choose what info you find credible (at least, the first time you watch it)
chaztikov 2 years ago
Zeitgeist has alot of false facts. Research it for yourself and you will throw that film aside. It is like a Micheal Moore film.
Mastinox803 2 years ago
Benaiahh
You have to be kidding me?!
You can try to look it up in the Business pages next to Federal Express! The USA can't even audit their books
Wow - If you are unaware of this basic fact, (I can't blame you being USA educated), I will msg you the pertinent information
There isn't enough room here
sugarpuddin88 2 years ago
" fire everybody & just ask ron paul what to do " !!... love it ..
& agree !00%
bebop54 2 years ago 2
clear as water
ronpaulspanish 2 years ago
Haha, I've just been talking about the lack of risk caused by the FDIC being a big part of the problem.
Abolish the Fed, FDIC, Fanny, Freddie and fiat currency for starters.
Epic878787 2 years ago
fractional reserve banking has to go!
jeffsst 2 years ago
Soon the FDIC will be insuring Americans up to a million bucks.
Benaiahh 2 years ago
I have never heard that before " greed is good " perhaps you intend "Ambition is good "
StoneWallD 2 years ago 2
yeah, "ambition is good" is the better thing to say.
qwertydj2003 2 years ago
We all know that greed is the problem.
StoneWallD 2 years ago
Greed is good. It creates wealth for everyone. It's bad when the government takes away the fear that balances it out.
nscipione 2 years ago
government is a parasite Schiff once said. That was awesome.
Benaiahh 2 years ago
Great interview! By the way guys, I always go to financialtruth0.blogspot . com because they post the latest videos there of RON PAUL, PETER SCHIFF, MARC FABER and JIM ROGERS! Thanks for uploading anyway!
Justbeatit999 2 years ago 4
Schiff is right let them fail., why? simply because they failed that is why. More responsible business men are ready willing and able. Get these government thieves out of my way.
StoneWallD 2 years ago 2
Yeah. Where does the government get the authority to bail them out? They don't get it from the Constitution, so Constitutionally it's wrong. It's morally wrong to pass debt onto people who aren't born yet. It's Biblically bad to get into debt, Biblically wrong to steal from one person and give to another. Bailouts and stimulus are Constitutionally, morally, and Biblically wrong.
Benaiahh 2 years ago
Drug Traffic and Corporate Mercenaries should buy the toxic asset. These are Private.
StoneWallD 2 years ago
"...people do more research buying a plasma TV than opening a bank account."
-- hahaha classic Schiff, you gotta love the guy.
trxtan1 2 years ago 8
Yeah. What drives me nuts are all these people who follow sports more than they do anything else.
Benaiahh 2 years ago 2
1. The capital is already lost, and the bad assets that were purchased are being propped up by the central banks. That doesn't mean all the money in the world is gone, only the money invested in those bad assets. In a capitalistic society that's what small recessions are for - to restart the system. They are a solution to the problem of bad investments / bubbles.
nscipione 2 years ago 2
2. The US would export to any and everyone if we had the products to export. Problem is, we don't have the products to export because we have a "phony service sector economy". The world doesn't need the US, it only thinks it does. The real wealth is not with the consumer, but with the manufacturer. We've got away with it for years based on what was set up at Bretton Woods 40 years ago.
nscipione 2 years ago 2
Hey man, i'm a bit new to economics.
How exactly did Bretton woods cause the average american Consumer to over-consume and under-produce?
Claytrainor 2 years ago
I think because we basically said "our dollar is as good as gold" even though it wasn't redeemable for gold. That means we didn't have to back our dollars with anything that took production (IE print out of thin air) which means that instead of producing things to exchange for other goods, we could just print money to exchange for things that other countries produced.
Benaiahh 2 years ago 2
Essentially the US dollar became the "gold standard" to which all the major currencies relied on. The US could continue to print as much money as they wanted and take risks that they wouldn't have been able to if really their money was tied to gold. This caused the illusion of wealth when in reality wealth is in the production of assets. The rest is just middle-man stuff making money off producers.
nscipione 2 years ago
That's not true that America doesn't export anything... it exports debt and slutty Hollywood crap.
Benaiahh 2 years ago 2
Comment removed
nscipione 2 years ago
thats where the beauty of the free market comes in and determines this...its not a global crisis its only a crisis where they're central banks in.
deliciousho 2 years ago 2
two questions:
1. if we let the whole shithouse go up in flames, massive amounts of capital will be lost... world-wide. where will the private capital come from to restart business, anywhere?
2. if the US econ collapses, every other country will follow suit, even China. Who will we export to? what would we export? how would be produce products if the vast majority of private equity/capital is wiped out in a collapse?
FattKidd 2 years ago