I agree with peter. Rand i hate to say sounds too appeasing. Peter sums it up best, "stand up for simething". Just say no and dont negotiate on things of principle.
Good Interview.. Rand is a great addition to the Senate and hopefully he can bring a bit of the Libertarian philosophy into the mix. Peter needs to get elected as well, that guy has some great ideas.
I'm curious about Rand's numbers, they do sound bogus to me. But until I see otherwise, I gotta say I'm extremely impressed with his behavior, candor, and fidelity to campaign promises.
To everyone criticizing Rand...I think Peter kindof upstaged him, but nonetheless Rand is a libertarian/Austrian true believer and we are very fortunate to have him in the senate. He has given some great speeches and has made some great media appearances...don't get too down on him because he wasn't on level 10 in this one interview. Also, from what I've seen his voting record has been good and he has been a lone no voter at least once.
@tfrye724 Rand is not a libertarian. He is another neo-con sellout. I had high hopes for him but his statement in this interview and many others shows he's just another puppet for the coal industry and Mitch McConnell. He flat out lied here and many other times and does not uphold the principles his father surely tried to teach him.
@cellspotbiz He talks about cutting defense at times, yet won't close Guantonimo, won't end the wars, and doesn't actually cut defense (really we should call it offense to be honest) in his budget proposal. Then he's still supporting subsides right alongside Mitch McConnell. I haven't seen Rand act Libertarian in action, only in words and not that many words. Since he flat out lies about coal and wind we know he can't be taken seriously.
@pureaggression Rand does want to cut...as long as we aren't cutting subsidies for coal. Coal companies are bleeding both the federal government and Kentucky dry. It's incredible that Kentucky has debt problems. They have relatively high taxes, yet they have no real infrastructure, hardly any social services, and they even make a lot taxing gambling income. What has KY broke is their corporate welfare for coal companies. Rand is just as dirty as a chimney sweep.
That wind energy cost estimate from Rand Paul is complete BS. He may be looking at only the upfront costs and not the lifetime costs, even then that number sounds way off. I do however agree that the market should be choosing the energy technology and not the politicians.
@lambedan Yeah I agree he's lying his @ss off. He quotes lies handed to him from coal lobbyists and tries to act like wind power gets all the subsidies when in fact coal gets more subsidies than any other form of energy. If he was a champion of the free market like he claims then he would stop spreading these lies lobbyists have him telling.
@dreamz771 Maybe, or....Maybe he sounds like he does as a front for the Neo-cons. Maybe he's playing asleep in order to get in. He's the libertarian sleeper agent. lol Just a thought. I know that's what I would do if I were in his position.
I don't like where Rand Paul is going. He has already been polluted by the jerks. Why will he not say "I will filibuster"? He may get over-ridding? So what? That's no reason not to try. What is this talk about getting others to agree? Screw them! We know they won't agree. Stick it to them, keep sticking it to them, and never stop sticking it to them.
Renewable energy technologies have actually developed most significantly at times when they are not subsidized. The most dramatic growth in technological development for wind and solar actually occurred in the 1980s and 1990s when oil prices were low and subsidies were stripped away. Before attacking renewables, let's not forget that public utilities have greatly undermined autonomous systems thanks to government subsidies. Schiff never mentions that fact
Hey Peter, Im in community college and taking economics, havin a bit of trouble understanding what gives the American dollar value. Do you consider it to be currently weak? Listening to you suggests we dont really produce much, but I constantly hear how high our gdp is per person or whatever, ..
@pureaggression Schiff will not respond but I will. American dollar is given value purely by the faith of the American people and foreign investors. It is not backed by anything and is essentially worthless, as opposed to the old days when the dollar was backed by gold and silver. By production, Schiff is talking about net exports. The U.S. imports much more goods than we export, which puts us in a massive trade deficit. GDP growth has mainly based on inflationary growth, which is fake wealth
Used to follow Schiff, but lately it seems like greed has gotten the best of him, why the insistence on polarizing, that does not benefit the common citizen, it only alienates the effort that could help the country progress, everybody that tastes power becomes drunk and blind, and witty, and e more I listen the more disenchanted I become, cronies at the end of the day. Lame bloodsuckers, and lamer the one that actually buys their rants. You better stop the propaganda and start working, or else.
Just read an article about China is open up yuan to a international reserve currency, Just what Linsey Williams says he been told, keep an eye on what China is doing, forget about what happen in the Arab world. That is just an diversion, of your mind/attention to the real things.
"If we're gonna go down, let's go down swinging! Let's stand for something! ... You've got the truth on your side, you've got knowledge on your side!"
Now while I'm on a roll here. The market also would not allow corps to burn coal for energy if we actually upheld property rights. I can't dump trash on my neighbors lawn and rightly so. Coal companies should not be able to spew mercury and arsenic into the air and pollute my land and all the farmland in our once great farm belt either. Property rights should be upheld, we should end regulations and allow property laws to let people sue these companies that destroy our land.
Peter also should understand that windmills would be the best option and could compete in the market effectively if the government would stop subsidizing coal!! You hear that Peter?? THE U.S. SUBSIDIZES COAL!!! We do not subsidize wind and we should not subsidize anything. We should let the free market decide and if we did then wind is the cheapest form or energy available. I wish Peter has his facts straight and I wish Rand hadn't sold out to coal lobbyists so fast.
@johnsenkenn Here is an entire list and explanation of all the coal subsidies w w w .sourcewatch.o r g /index.php?title=Federal_coal_subsidies
I'm not sure where you live, but maybe your state is subsidizing wind somehow. That would only be fair since we subsidize the heck out of coal. We're all forced to pay for coal when our gov. pays subsidies. Windmills however are far cheaper than coal power plants, the cost different is incredible.
@johnsenkenn If you're interested in learning more about the comparison of wind and coal among other energies read here extension.purdue.edu/renewable-energy/wind-energy.s h t m l
Wind has gotten subsidies at times, then not, then subsidies again, then not. Yet the level of subsidies for wind hardly make a difference compared to those for coal. And if you look at just a costs basis for each if there were no subsidies at all, wind wins by a good bit.
No I don't buy that, wind does not win, wind is the technic of two hundreds years ago. It's like implementing horses, just as wrong. It destroys capital, capital there could be used to invest in new real energy. Therefor we shall use, which is for now coal, natural gas, or whatever is the best/efficient to create a surplus of capital to invest in new real competitive energy. Then we pollute more in short term, but less in the long term, not going back to windmills - horses.
@johnsenkenn You're saying you don't like wind because wind has always been in existence? That makes no sense. Look at which is cheapest, look and which doesn't destroy our country. You want what is the best and most efficient right? You say so. So why have you written off wind when it is by far the most efficient? I mean take a look at what you're saying and the assumptions you're making, then take the time to learn from an actual engineer how each actually works. Wind does win.
@johnsenkenn Let me clarify more. We have engineers and businessmen lined up ready to build wind turbines, high voltage DC lines (which waste far less electricity than those we have now), and hydoelectric plants. We're dieing to build this stuff. We can also build coal plants, we know how to do both, we know how much both cost and we know wind is far cheaper. We're dieing for fair competition. We'd like government to stop subsidizing coal so we can beat coal on the free market!
Ahhh...an engineer, well sure if you can do it at a competitive price, but no body can do it here in DK. It's what I remember 6 times more costly, and as you know, they only turn when the wind is blowing. And the mill you build to day can only supply a small amount of the energy need. It's not an replacement of the present energy form. And nobody want them in their backyard. Maybe Viktor Schauberger had a solution, do you know him/heard of him.
@johnsenkenn Where is DK? Seriously though look at what you're saying. 6 times more costly?? No form of energy is 6 times more costly than any other form, that's just drastic sales propaganda. I'm not saying you made it up of course, I know you heard it somewhere, but you have to rationally analyze the things you hear. I haven't heard of Victor, i'll read up. But T. Boone Pickens has a good wind plan, and the people I know that live by windmills don't mind them at all.
DK is Denmark, guess where that is....no it's not a county in Nebraska. Ahhh....wind is free, but the grid pay 0,10 Kroner at a power station, and 0,60 Kroner form a windmill, for a kW, now it might be that they are a bit generous to the windmills. I got it from the press some time ago. And it's not sales propaganda from my side, I don't sell any of it. I cal tell you that those high-class green spokespeople there live up in the whiskey belt make a lot of noise if they see one.
@johnsenkenn continuing from last.. I mean the windmills aren't pretty or anything but they sure look better than a dirty coal power plant. Rarely some debris can get stuck in it and it will make some noise but technicians are fairly quick to fix that. But seriously read some of the information from Purdue's site that I gave you. If you had read that then you'd already know wind is cheaper and no energy is 6 times more costly than any others.
There are a lot in the press about people protesting when some one want to build one in their site, and so does the rich green academic assholes, they are the rich here. Energy is 6 times more costly to produce on a windmill than on a power station, according to a newspaper I read.
@johnsenkenn You have to be careful about the newspaper you're reading then. Because no energy costs 6 times more than another form. Get your information from engineering schools, trade studies, or simply corporate balance sheets. If you're paying 60 kroner per KW/hr from wind and 0,10 from coal, then that coal is heavily subsidized or someone made the mistake of building the windmill inside a building with absolutely no wind.
@johnsenkenn I have no idea what you guys do. I just know there's no way coal can be 6 times cheaper than something else without it being subsidized. That's just economically impossible given the current prices here in the U.S. and everywhere else. If here the price of non-subsidized coal based energy is 5 dollars more per KW/hr than non-subsidized wind then that would translate to Denmark based on the exchange rate, unless like I said you guys have absolutely no wind.
I used to like Rand Paul, but hearing him lie like this and repeat lies from coal industry lobbyists is just ridiculous. I'm an electrical engineer and I know first hand as do many engineers that wind energy is far more efficient and cheaper than coal energy. These numbers Rand is saying are completely made up. What should have been pointed out is that the government is actually subsidizing coal!! Wind energy is not subsidized yet has to compete with government funded coal energy. Rand booo!
@iversonfan75 -Ron Paul is controlled opposition...do not be fooled! He denies that the government had anything to do with 911...
Believe me, it is painful to say what I just said as I was the biggest Ron Paul supporter ever! I voted for him, bought t-shirts, had a bumper sticker , educated people about him at every turn...but, what has Ron really done? He talks a lot about issues, but NOTHING is done. Listen to the 1 minute radio spot below and you will hear him say it
Peter, our priority should be to cut a lot of our military spending before we cut retired peoples pensions. The public in general is joy ready for these exteme measures that you have proposed.
@ibislee - Do you think that the public is ready for the economic disaster that WILL happen if you don´t take those drastic measures? Read the book When Money Dies - The Nightmare of they Weimar Hyper Inflation and tell me if the US public is ready for that scenario. It is pretty ugly I can tell you. The task is to make that clear to the public.
if U enforce the debt ceiling you must have the public onboard with these stiff cuts and higher taxes. heck, a recent poll said that the majority of americans dont wish to harm nor cut the public sector payroll and union. if we can't do that, how can we do the less obvious things?
I'm not from the US but if you don't think Ran Paul is as thick as a brick you have problems. But being an idiot christian he should do well in the states.
I contributed money to Rand's election campaign. I contributed money to Peter's election campaign. I'm glad I did it, but it was simply rearranging deck chairs on the sinking Titanic. USS Titanic America is sinking. Man the lifeboats. Good luck if you are poor, perhaps I can help you when I run across you. Buy a store of food, store water, then buy physical silver as you can afford it. Along the way try to build a tight local community of like-minded people. In the end, all we have is each other
If seniors owned 100% of the stock market, most would starve to death as the average profit of a corporation is like 4%. SS has increase the lefespan about 15 years and there has never been a case where someone has yet to be paid out of 500 million people. You can try to convert medicare to voucher system, but are making a grave mistake wanting to eliminate SS. Yes the 15.3% stings, but look at all the seniors that depend on it.
@msungs Rand Paul is a sell out to lobbyists. I hate that he can piggyback off his dad's name and people will assume he follows the same principles. I always had skepticism about him, but this interview shows me that he has completely sold out, especially to coal lobbyists. He was telling the most bold lies possible while leaving out the fact that coal is actually subsidized by our government. If he wants the free market, then end coal subsidies.
@msungs - Ron Paul is controlled opposition...do not be fooled! He denies that the government had anything to do with 911...
Believe me, it is painful to say what I just said as I was the biggest Ron Paul supporter ever! I voted for him, bought t-shirts, had a bumper sticker , educated people about him at every turn...but, what has Ron really done? He talks a lot about issues, but NOTHING is done. Listen to the 1 minute radio spot below and you will hear him say it...
TSHTF ? Who knows, maybe he is doing a job, as to be a puppet as to cool the angry, so they are running up and down the street, and shout.....hail Ron Paul, without doing any harm. Anyway it wouldn't change anything if he got the white house, you can't change it with words....please. You got to shoot some of them, then they will understand you are serious.
NO one and I repeat NO one can or will be President and do anything of real change for the people. No matter if it is Ron Paul or Donald Trump...NO one will be able to wreck the NWO plans...they have been at this for hundreds of years and they will not allow anyone to FU** it up.
They already no who the next President will be. We are and have been witnessing the BIGGEST puppet show on earth.
Give the people BREAD and CIRCUSES and you can get away with anything.
Right it's a puppet show, a theater where the people/voters sit and glance at the play, clapping and roaring, and it's controlled behind the curtain, by someone you cant see/don't know. When the actors are finish their roaring, they leave the stage, in behind the curtain and have a drink together.
@TheReallitycheck Yup, Im not falling for another politician ever again - the whole schtick of "elect me Ill fix it" then getting in and making it worse is getting real old....
@deshaebeasley You can't be anti-mainstream and do anything in politics. 1 Senator, 1 Congressman, 1 Justice will NOT make a difference. We need 40 Rand Pauls in the Senate and about 100 in the Congress to make a difference. Rand is a lone voice and simply for that fact along, he will never get anywhere in DC.
What kind of voodoo does RP invoke to calculate a wind vs coal cost of 55:1??? Coal has been subsidized for many billions. Numerous coal costs are externalized. An honest calculation of per Kw cost shows wind is only 2x the expense of coal, and equal if you remove construction costs (see bit.ly / auy8CS). But hey, you guys continue to prop up non-renewable non-sustainable energy for political/economic/partisan reasons -- this will ensure China gets an unbeatable headstart in R&D.
@Joe11Blue We should be working on multiple redundant complementary renewable energy systems (wind + solar + geo + hydro + gas, etc) instead of massive over-dependence on one centralized un-sustainable resource (coal). On-site power generation via solar/wind would allow users to sell back to the grid during over production. One thing is certain: we will exhaust coal & oil long before we exhaust wind & sun.
@TehBren What's this we shit!? I don't have to do anything. I don't owe any of your people a damn thing.
If you really believe in it, then do it yourself. No one is stopping you, but I would suggest you atop telling everyone else what to do. Eventually that's what's going to start the violence in this country. That's why people end up calling you an idiot, because they get tired of everyone telling them what to do. That's how eventually someone will either rob you or shoot you.
@TehBren I'd be more inclined to believe that if there were not so many people crying foul, and actually opening up with a rational and logistical conversation on the problems that we are currently involved in. So far from what I can tell from my short and rather unimpressive life is people just trying to take advantage of others. Whether it be the intelligent CEO gaming the system, or the low motivation=income people demanding more for nothing. We haven't evolved enough for civility.
@Joe11Blue Funny to see you talk of civility, considering your first reply had none of it. Perhaps you were just angry and frustrated, as "we" all get some times. I am doing "what I believe in" -- I hope you do the same. "Be the change you want to see in the world." May you live a long and impressive life.
@TehBren I was drunk. I do that sometimes. My posting gets irrational, and I lose my civility. In general I just become a prick, or rather I let the prick in me lose. Either way, it's a matter of perspective, and could be sexual innuendo. That would be rash and uncivil of me though. I do believe in being honest, so that doesn't help the situation when drunk.
@pirucreek The source I cite put coal at $0.04/KwH (with great externalized costs) and wind at $0.08/KwH (with greater construction costs). Agree on one thing, 55:1 is outrageous!
Peter, no amount of austerity will work. The real issue is WHO CONTROLS THE QUANTITY OF MONEY. The government does not have to go in debt to begin with when they can simply print their own money at 0% interest. U.S. simply needs to issue government backed debt-free money and give the power of the money supply back to the people voiced through elected representatives. Also end the fractional reserve banking only let banks lend out what they actually have. Debt is a fiction made up by the banks
@dogbarker1981 "Also end the fractional reserve banking only let banks lend out what they actually have". Whenever a bank loans money out, that is fractional reserve. The money will end up at another bank for new loans. What is needed are full reserve checking accounts and the end of fdic insurance except fr checking accounts.
Banks only lend out what they actually have, how can they lend out money they don't have ?. Show me a banks balance sheet, where they are somehow lending out more than they have ?.
@johnsenkenn Fractional reserve banking mate. For every dollar the bank recieves, they give out 9 dollars on that one dollar. It's absolutely crazy and it makes no sense, but that's the system we are in.
No mate, that's not what fractional reserve means, it means what it says, the bank must hold a fraction in reserve of what it is lending out. For the moment, I don't think there are any demand for bank reserve in the US. If you need an authority to tell you, why don't you ask Peter.
@johnsenkenn Why not take 10 minutes and look it up, it's basic economics that 14 year old do in school.
Take $100 that Bob has and decides to deposit in the bank. Now the Bank has $100 of deposits and at 10% fractional reserve can loan out $90. It loans $90 to Bill, Bill buys something from Jill for $90 and Jill puts it in the bank. The bank now has $190 of deposits and only $90 of loans and so can lend out another $81. And round and round it goes. M = 1/R is the result of doing the math.
How old are you, this is the most stupid thing there are circling here on YouTube. What you claim is that there magically are popping money up out of the blue. Bank loans 90 dollars to Bill, their 90 dollars are gone....to Bill, Jill put 90 dollars back in the bank.....bank are back to hundred dollars ???. and you are bragging about doing the math ?.
@johnsenkenn Actually he is correct. It's called Fracional Reserve Banking and there's nothing magic about it. When you deposit $100 into the bank, the bank doesn't set aside $100 in your name. With a few keystrokes, you have $100 worth of bank credit and the bank has your real $100, 90% of which they can wipe their asses with (assuming a 10% reserve requirement). This system has been around for centuries. Where have you been?
@johnsenkenn That's what that so, if you're to stupid to look at a teenager's economic textbook that's your own fault. Or try thinking, but I guess that's far to difficult for you. Do the balance sheet if you want.
Do you seriously think that Bank of America has every single dollar deposited with them available in cash at the bank branches?
Teenagers economic textbook, have you read this textbook. You are obviously so stupid that you don't even understand you are, you think you are clever. You can't even try thinking, it's an impossibility for you. The bank of America do not only have the depositors money, they are the dealers of the feds printed money, it's the fed there are expanding the money supply by the banks ( and the state ) not the banks, they don't produce money. This is stupid.
Why do you not look fractional reserve up, you moron. have you seen lately which is biggest M1 or M2. Banks fail because their loaners fail. Their loaners fail because the bubbles blown up by the fed, pop. What an idiot.
@johnsenkenn Banks failed before the Fed existsed moron. Do they have a time machine? You seriously think that Bank of Amserdam failed in the 18th centiuty because the Fed blew up a bubble?
M1 is $1853.8 billion. M2 is $8837.7 billion. I'm pretty sure I know which is bigger, you obviously don't because you are just making shit up and using terms you don't understand.
And I have looked it up, heck I quoted the economic text book definition already.
That's good for you, if you understand, if your understanding is that the banks loans out money they don't have, then your understanding is wrong. Show me a bank balance sheet that they do. I have just looked the M1 up on shadow Government, and it's expanding.
@johnsenkenn Of course M1 is expanding, the Fed has been printing money like crazy. That is completely irrelevant to Fractional Reserve Banking which has nothing to do with printing money.
If you were paying attention you'd see that I never said the bank loans money it doesn't have, you are making that up because you can't be bother to look up a simple definition. I said it loans 90% of the money it has received in deposits.
I am not sure there is a Governments Fractional Reserve requirements for the time being. I think they can loan out everything they have, the reserve is the fed. But I don't know, haven't googled it.
@johnsenkenn You think I'm so dumb you can't believe I'm alive, but you are trying to discuss Fractional Reserve Branking and you don't even know how the reserves are set under the current system?
In the US it is 0% up to $10.7 million, 3% up to $58.8 million, and 10% for everything else. But keep just making stuff up about things you know nothing about. You still don't know what reserve ratio means right? Or what money multiplier means right? Or the trivial relationship between the two?
No, I haven't looked up the reserve requirements in the US, do you know the ECB's. It was about fractional Reserve, and what it means, and it does not mean what many believe, because they have seen money masters. Those fooled people believe that it means the bank only have to have 10 % of the money they lend out. And that is not right.
@johnsenkenn ECB's is 2%, though the definitions of what counts are a little different.
Fractional reserve doesn't mean what you seem to think it does, but for most people it makes perfect sense - the fraction of deposits that are required to be available. It has nothing to do with lending other than that that is what banks usually do with it to make money. But they can do things other than make loans with the money, and they can make loans with money from other sources.
@johnsenkenn I can't see the point I've repeated it over and over again already. But, "fractional reserve" means that the bank only has to keep a fraction of *deposits* in reserve.
It has nothing to do with loans, a bank that makes no loans still has to keep reserves for deposits. A bank that takes no deposits can make loans without having any reserves.
It has nothing to do with loans, if it makes no loans, the whole money is a reserve, Well if they loan out their own money, they might not need any reserve. You have just stated that the US banks need to hold 10 % of their loan in reserve ?. That's is what reserve ratio means, no. The regulation does not say a % of the deposit, does it.
@johnsenkenn The regulations says a % of deposits, as I keep saying and you keep denying. TITLE 12, CHAPTER 3, SUBCHAPTER XIV, § 461 - but you're too stupid (or more likely just trolling) to look that up.
A bank can have $1 million in deposits, $100,000 in reserves and $2 million loaned out and still meet 10% reserve requirements. They could have borrowed $1.1 million and loaned it back out, for example.
How can you not understand such a simple definition?
You have not mention % of the deposit, if that is the case, I am wrongly informed, which does not mean i am innocent. Well there is a hell a lot of reading, but so far I can see it says.......the reserve is of the total transaction.....agree.....
So far I haven't found a word there specific says it's a fraction on the deposit, but I can surely understand why so many are occupied reading these paragraph, it's a full time job, to figure out in what case, and how much deposit is needed.
I can't find a definition of the Fractional Reserve in your Fed link, so I have googled it, which I have done before of course, it seem to I have got that wrong that fractional reserve is a reserve of the out loan, and not the deposit. How that is possible I don't know, sure it's the head. I feel pretty embarrassed, but done is done. But I still got the fact right, that the banks itself don't multiplies the money, not without the help of the Fed.
@jedfa987 It has a lot to do with loans actually. With a 9-1 reserve ratio, banks can lend out money they don't have of up to 9x the amount of debited cash they hold in reserves. Of that credited money, once deposited into another bank, 90% of it can be lent out. It does mean that the bank has to hold a certain % in reserves but it also is used for the creation of credit in the lending process.
Not starting a fight I just thought I should aid to clear it up. Search "money as debt 2 of 5."
Uh no, Fractional Reserve means the bank only has to have 10% deposited of the amount they lend out. Ergo the Federal Reserve borrows $100 from China, lends $1000 to JP Morgan based on that, then JP Morgan lends $10,000 to you to buy your house. So you're paying interest for $10,000 borrowed from the bank on an initial government loan of $100, which they will never pay back to China. This is the problem with Fractional Reserve Banking
Federal Reserve borrow 100 dollars from China ? and then it magically magnify 100 times ?. Federal Reserve don't borrow money from China, the Government does, or it did, the government prints bonds, they sell the bonds, 93 % of the bonds are sold to The Federal Reserve, the Fed buys them with printed money. No body else want them, that's why the dollar will be worthless in a couple of years.
@pr3ban That is not what Fractional Reserve Banking is. That that sequence is a figmant of your imagination is irrelevent anyway, it simple has nothing to do with fractional reserve banking which existed before the Federal Reserve existed. Heck it existed when the deposits were gold bullion because there were no fiat currencies at the time.
@jedfa987 You're wrong. Under a 10% fractional reserve system a bank deposit of $100 would mean the bank could then lend out $900 not 90, 90 would be a 110% reserve system. Who taught you math? Scarier yet is that you have a highly rated comment.
@clint0nify right- hey maybe you can help make something clear to me. recently I looked up the Definition of Quantative Easing. Per the definition i understood that is where percentage used in Fractional Reserve System is made smaller - so that the banks can have less reserves on hand-- is that how it is now in this Quantative Easing that has been takling place?
Is that what they are doing? making the Banks less able to resist a run?
@johnsenkenn It comes out of thin air the same way the Federal Reserve creates money, check out a book called The Mystery of Banking by Murray Rothbard.
I know it's a popular idea that the banks loan out money they don't have, but I don't buy it. The banks have 3 ways to get money, depositors.....their own capital.....the central bank. And that's how they get their money, no magical lending money they don't have.
@clint0nify It's not scary, because you're simply completely wrong. "Fractional Reserve" just means the fraction of deposits a bank must keep available for to be withdrawn. If someone deposits $100, then the bank can loan out $90 if a 10% fractional reserver is required. I ends up being $900 because it gets redeposited again and that the what the infiinte sum adds to.
The term is it's own definition, I'm amazed you can be so dumb and still type.
Comment removed
bct2702 4 months ago
Wait, Atlas Shrugged is in a movie?
*whoosh*
Pendrokar 11 months ago
Rand sounds flip flopping... all he talks about are rhetoric, nothing of any substance. This guy not even half as good as his father. Disappointing!
chimpanchu 11 months ago
the paul family is powerful!
Metalgear55 11 months ago
3.73 trillion budget.
1.5+ trillion deficit.
One party wants a 0.03 trillion cut.
The other wants a 'Draconian' 0.06 trillion cut.
Seriously? Seriously?
fredianoB 11 months ago 2
Listen to Schiff, Rand.
Rand is pretty much telling us that nothing is going to happen in time, its on.
Prepare for the collapse.
daisycutterz 1 year ago
I agree with peter. Rand i hate to say sounds too appeasing. Peter sums it up best, "stand up for simething". Just say no and dont negotiate on things of principle.
g00se99 1 year ago
Good Interview.. Rand is a great addition to the Senate and hopefully he can bring a bit of the Libertarian philosophy into the mix. Peter needs to get elected as well, that guy has some great ideas.
snorkymn 1 year ago
Comment removed
snorkymn 1 year ago
I'm curious about Rand's numbers, they do sound bogus to me. But until I see otherwise, I gotta say I'm extremely impressed with his behavior, candor, and fidelity to campaign promises.
MrKurtigo 1 year ago
To everyone criticizing Rand...I think Peter kindof upstaged him, but nonetheless Rand is a libertarian/Austrian true believer and we are very fortunate to have him in the senate. He has given some great speeches and has made some great media appearances...don't get too down on him because he wasn't on level 10 in this one interview. Also, from what I've seen his voting record has been good and he has been a lone no voter at least once.
tfrye724 1 year ago
@tfrye724 Rand is not a libertarian. He is another neo-con sellout. I had high hopes for him but his statement in this interview and many others shows he's just another puppet for the coal industry and Mitch McConnell. He flat out lied here and many other times and does not uphold the principles his father surely tried to teach him.
pryorka82 1 year ago
@pryorka82 you are spot on.
nicademus1974 1 year ago
@pryorka82 Dude how can you call him a neo-con when he's advocating cutting defence. The neo-cons hat him.
cellspotbiz 11 months ago
@cellspotbiz He talks about cutting defense at times, yet won't close Guantonimo, won't end the wars, and doesn't actually cut defense (really we should call it offense to be honest) in his budget proposal. Then he's still supporting subsides right alongside Mitch McConnell. I haven't seen Rand act Libertarian in action, only in words and not that many words. Since he flat out lies about coal and wind we know he can't be taken seriously.
pryorka82 11 months ago
@pryorka82 hes not bad, hes not a sell out hahaha he wants to cut! who else is doing that!
pureaggression 11 months ago
@pureaggression Rand does want to cut...as long as we aren't cutting subsidies for coal. Coal companies are bleeding both the federal government and Kentucky dry. It's incredible that Kentucky has debt problems. They have relatively high taxes, yet they have no real infrastructure, hardly any social services, and they even make a lot taxing gambling income. What has KY broke is their corporate welfare for coal companies. Rand is just as dirty as a chimney sweep.
midtra52 11 months ago
Rand Paul, Ron Paul, Peter Schiff, all 3 are awesome
a4finger 1 year ago
That wind energy cost estimate from Rand Paul is complete BS. He may be looking at only the upfront costs and not the lifetime costs, even then that number sounds way off. I do however agree that the market should be choosing the energy technology and not the politicians.
lambedan 1 year ago
@lambedan Yeah I agree he's lying his @ss off. He quotes lies handed to him from coal lobbyists and tries to act like wind power gets all the subsidies when in fact coal gets more subsidies than any other form of energy. If he was a champion of the free market like he claims then he would stop spreading these lies lobbyists have him telling.
pryorka82 1 year ago
Rand sounds like he is asleep.
dreamz771 1 year ago
@dreamz771 Maybe, or....Maybe he sounds like he does as a front for the Neo-cons. Maybe he's playing asleep in order to get in. He's the libertarian sleeper agent. lol Just a thought. I know that's what I would do if I were in his position.
Pepsifx357 1 year ago
Makes ya wish Schiff were in there with Rand Paul.
PilsenB 1 year ago 8
@PilsenB Shiff yeah...
pureaggression 11 months ago
Schiff makes more sense and has more passion than Rand does. Very disappointing.
lintburger 1 year ago
I love Ron, I don't like Rand.
boston65boston65 1 year ago
Wow Rand was completely unimpressive. Sounded like Bob Dole solutions.
vegaswolf 1 year ago
I don't like where Rand Paul is going. He has already been polluted by the jerks. Why will he not say "I will filibuster"? He may get over-ridding? So what? That's no reason not to try. What is this talk about getting others to agree? Screw them! We know they won't agree. Stick it to them, keep sticking it to them, and never stop sticking it to them.
FILIBUSTER or give up.
honestann 1 year ago
Renewable energy technologies have actually developed most significantly at times when they are not subsidized. The most dramatic growth in technological development for wind and solar actually occurred in the 1980s and 1990s when oil prices were low and subsidies were stripped away. Before attacking renewables, let's not forget that public utilities have greatly undermined autonomous systems thanks to government subsidies. Schiff never mentions that fact
EyeAmTheIlluminati 1 year ago
Hey Peter, Im in community college and taking economics, havin a bit of trouble understanding what gives the American dollar value. Do you consider it to be currently weak? Listening to you suggests we dont really produce much, but I constantly hear how high our gdp is per person or whatever, ..
pureaggression 1 year ago
@pureaggression Schiff will not respond but I will. American dollar is given value purely by the faith of the American people and foreign investors. It is not backed by anything and is essentially worthless, as opposed to the old days when the dollar was backed by gold and silver. By production, Schiff is talking about net exports. The U.S. imports much more goods than we export, which puts us in a massive trade deficit. GDP growth has mainly based on inflationary growth, which is fake wealth
EyeAmTheIlluminati 1 year ago
Used to follow Schiff, but lately it seems like greed has gotten the best of him, why the insistence on polarizing, that does not benefit the common citizen, it only alienates the effort that could help the country progress, everybody that tastes power becomes drunk and blind, and witty, and e more I listen the more disenchanted I become, cronies at the end of the day. Lame bloodsuckers, and lamer the one that actually buys their rants. You better stop the propaganda and start working, or else.
OSCARINACOSTA72 1 year ago
@OSCARINACOSTA72 Agreed. PS seems to be drinking a dangerous flavour of Kool-Aid recently.
TehBren 1 year ago
Hahah "a new generation that will come from outer space".
mcbain434444 1 year ago
There is no "try" Rand! Only Do!
mcourtmiller 1 year ago
Just read an article about China is open up yuan to a international reserve currency, Just what Linsey Williams says he been told, keep an eye on what China is doing, forget about what happen in the Arab world. That is just an diversion, of your mind/attention to the real things.
johnsenkenn 1 year ago
So Peter... which one of you was the preacher, and which one the choir? :)
eagleeye1975 1 year ago
"If we're gonna go down, let's go down swinging! Let's stand for something! ... You've got the truth on your side, you've got knowledge on your side!"
Fuck yeah, Peter!
mcsenget 1 year ago
I want to comment that Peter has great intro/outro music for each break. Whoever picks it has pretty good taste!
mcsenget 1 year ago
Great interview Peter! I wish you continued success with your show you're bringing knowledge to the people.
lovedalord88 1 year ago
Now while I'm on a roll here. The market also would not allow corps to burn coal for energy if we actually upheld property rights. I can't dump trash on my neighbors lawn and rightly so. Coal companies should not be able to spew mercury and arsenic into the air and pollute my land and all the farmland in our once great farm belt either. Property rights should be upheld, we should end regulations and allow property laws to let people sue these companies that destroy our land.
pryorka82 1 year ago
Peter also should understand that windmills would be the best option and could compete in the market effectively if the government would stop subsidizing coal!! You hear that Peter?? THE U.S. SUBSIDIZES COAL!!! We do not subsidize wind and we should not subsidize anything. We should let the free market decide and if we did then wind is the cheapest form or energy available. I wish Peter has his facts straight and I wish Rand hadn't sold out to coal lobbyists so fast.
pryorka82 1 year ago
@pryorka82
How do the US subsidies coal, for the moment windmills are much more costly, they are heavily susidized here, otherwise they would shut down.
johnsenkenn 1 year ago
@johnsenkenn Here is an entire list and explanation of all the coal subsidies w w w .sourcewatch.o r g /index.php?title=Federal_coal_subsidies
I'm not sure where you live, but maybe your state is subsidizing wind somehow. That would only be fair since we subsidize the heck out of coal. We're all forced to pay for coal when our gov. pays subsidies. Windmills however are far cheaper than coal power plants, the cost different is incredible.
pryorka82 1 year ago
@johnsenkenn If you're interested in learning more about the comparison of wind and coal among other energies read here extension.purdue.edu/renewable-energy/wind-energy.s h t m l
Wind has gotten subsidies at times, then not, then subsidies again, then not. Yet the level of subsidies for wind hardly make a difference compared to those for coal. And if you look at just a costs basis for each if there were no subsidies at all, wind wins by a good bit.
pryorka82 1 year ago
@pryorka82
No I don't buy that, wind does not win, wind is the technic of two hundreds years ago. It's like implementing horses, just as wrong. It destroys capital, capital there could be used to invest in new real energy. Therefor we shall use, which is for now coal, natural gas, or whatever is the best/efficient to create a surplus of capital to invest in new real competitive energy. Then we pollute more in short term, but less in the long term, not going back to windmills - horses.
johnsenkenn 1 year ago
@johnsenkenn You're saying you don't like wind because wind has always been in existence? That makes no sense. Look at which is cheapest, look and which doesn't destroy our country. You want what is the best and most efficient right? You say so. So why have you written off wind when it is by far the most efficient? I mean take a look at what you're saying and the assumptions you're making, then take the time to learn from an actual engineer how each actually works. Wind does win.
pryorka82 1 year ago
@johnsenkenn Let me clarify more. We have engineers and businessmen lined up ready to build wind turbines, high voltage DC lines (which waste far less electricity than those we have now), and hydoelectric plants. We're dieing to build this stuff. We can also build coal plants, we know how to do both, we know how much both cost and we know wind is far cheaper. We're dieing for fair competition. We'd like government to stop subsidizing coal so we can beat coal on the free market!
pryorka82 1 year ago 7
@pryorka82
Ahhh...an engineer, well sure if you can do it at a competitive price, but no body can do it here in DK. It's what I remember 6 times more costly, and as you know, they only turn when the wind is blowing. And the mill you build to day can only supply a small amount of the energy need. It's not an replacement of the present energy form. And nobody want them in their backyard. Maybe Viktor Schauberger had a solution, do you know him/heard of him.
johnsenkenn 1 year ago
@johnsenkenn Where is DK? Seriously though look at what you're saying. 6 times more costly?? No form of energy is 6 times more costly than any other form, that's just drastic sales propaganda. I'm not saying you made it up of course, I know you heard it somewhere, but you have to rationally analyze the things you hear. I haven't heard of Victor, i'll read up. But T. Boone Pickens has a good wind plan, and the people I know that live by windmills don't mind them at all.
pryorka82 1 year ago
@pryorka82
DK is Denmark, guess where that is....no it's not a county in Nebraska. Ahhh....wind is free, but the grid pay 0,10 Kroner at a power station, and 0,60 Kroner form a windmill, for a kW, now it might be that they are a bit generous to the windmills. I got it from the press some time ago. And it's not sales propaganda from my side, I don't sell any of it. I cal tell you that those high-class green spokespeople there live up in the whiskey belt make a lot of noise if they see one.
johnsenkenn 1 year ago
@johnsenkenn continuing from last.. I mean the windmills aren't pretty or anything but they sure look better than a dirty coal power plant. Rarely some debris can get stuck in it and it will make some noise but technicians are fairly quick to fix that. But seriously read some of the information from Purdue's site that I gave you. If you had read that then you'd already know wind is cheaper and no energy is 6 times more costly than any others.
pryorka82 1 year ago
@pryorka82
There are a lot in the press about people protesting when some one want to build one in their site, and so does the rich green academic assholes, they are the rich here. Energy is 6 times more costly to produce on a windmill than on a power station, according to a newspaper I read.
johnsenkenn 1 year ago
@johnsenkenn You have to be careful about the newspaper you're reading then. Because no energy costs 6 times more than another form. Get your information from engineering schools, trade studies, or simply corporate balance sheets. If you're paying 60 kroner per KW/hr from wind and 0,10 from coal, then that coal is heavily subsidized or someone made the mistake of building the windmill inside a building with absolutely no wind.
pryorka82 1 year ago
@pryorka82
0,60 Kroner KW.....windmill, they definitely don't subsidize coal here, absolutely on the contrary. Then how many times more costly are windmills ?.
johnsenkenn 1 year ago
@johnsenkenn I have no idea what you guys do. I just know there's no way coal can be 6 times cheaper than something else without it being subsidized. That's just economically impossible given the current prices here in the U.S. and everywhere else. If here the price of non-subsidized coal based energy is 5 dollars more per KW/hr than non-subsidized wind then that would translate to Denmark based on the exchange rate, unless like I said you guys have absolutely no wind.
pryorka82 1 year ago
I used to like Rand Paul, but hearing him lie like this and repeat lies from coal industry lobbyists is just ridiculous. I'm an electrical engineer and I know first hand as do many engineers that wind energy is far more efficient and cheaper than coal energy. These numbers Rand is saying are completely made up. What should have been pointed out is that the government is actually subsidizing coal!! Wind energy is not subsidized yet has to compete with government funded coal energy. Rand booo!
pryorka82 1 year ago
ron paul 2012!!!!
iversonfan75 1 year ago
@iversonfan75 -Ron Paul is controlled opposition...do not be fooled! He denies that the government had anything to do with 911...
Believe me, it is painful to say what I just said as I was the biggest Ron Paul supporter ever! I voted for him, bought t-shirts, had a bumper sticker , educated people about him at every turn...but, what has Ron really done? He talks a lot about issues, but NOTHING is done. Listen to the 1 minute radio spot below and you will hear him say it
watch?v=v60TWZNVgtk
godlydoor320 1 year ago
Correction: replace "joy" with "not" on previous comment. Damn iPhones always auto correct with the wrong words.
ibislee 1 year ago
Peter, our priority should be to cut a lot of our military spending before we cut retired peoples pensions. The public in general is joy ready for these exteme measures that you have proposed.
ibislee 1 year ago
@ibislee - Do you think that the public is ready for the economic disaster that WILL happen if you don´t take those drastic measures? Read the book When Money Dies - The Nightmare of they Weimar Hyper Inflation and tell me if the US public is ready for that scenario. It is pretty ugly I can tell you. The task is to make that clear to the public.
runarolsen 1 year ago
Honestly ! Peter should have been elected. Instead of Rand Paul.
Tomta20012 1 year ago
I'm no Keynes fan, but I think Paul gives him too much credit for the distorted modern day adaptations of his ideas in his first comments.
Shadyhunter04 1 year ago
Ron, Peter and Rand= truth and hope for America!
ronheri 1 year ago
I don't like our government, I think I'll just stop paying taxes and start using gold coins instead of dollars. Booya!
gradiu3rox 1 year ago
the US must:
End the killing terror (waging war is waging terror)
End the financial terror (now printing money digitally!!! Commodity prices JP M.)
End the governance/'security' terror ( fellow citizens are paid to rob & oppress us)
if not then the USA will be an 'emerging nation' (3rd world) in 3 years.
JonathanSeagullUtube 1 year ago
Was this an interview? Or an opportunity for Peter to get back on his soap box?
fluff125 1 year ago
@fluff125 Hehe. It's always a little of both with Peter. Mostly the latter.
svenp 1 year ago
These two are great together!
homertalk 1 year ago
The problem is that the politicians don't have enought guts to change. Let's means we are finished.Eend of story! Soon to be end of U.S.A.!
lacourb1 1 year ago
if U enforce the debt ceiling you must have the public onboard with these stiff cuts and higher taxes. heck, a recent poll said that the majority of americans dont wish to harm nor cut the public sector payroll and union. if we can't do that, how can we do the less obvious things?
Romulan112 1 year ago
RON PAUL FOR PRESIDENT 2012
tophat27 1 year ago
Foundation needs to be made into a movie
qadison 1 year ago 2
Comment removed
johnsenkenn 1 year ago
I'm not from the US but if you don't think Ran Paul is as thick as a brick you have problems. But being an idiot christian he should do well in the states.
movieklump 1 year ago
I contributed money to Rand's election campaign. I contributed money to Peter's election campaign. I'm glad I did it, but it was simply rearranging deck chairs on the sinking Titanic. USS Titanic America is sinking. Man the lifeboats. Good luck if you are poor, perhaps I can help you when I run across you. Buy a store of food, store water, then buy physical silver as you can afford it. Along the way try to build a tight local community of like-minded people. In the end, all we have is each other
MrDorkusMaximus 1 year ago
If we are allow to opt-out of ponzi scheme, I will be the first one to do it
chriswu5 1 year ago 2
If seniors owned 100% of the stock market, most would starve to death as the average profit of a corporation is like 4%. SS has increase the lefespan about 15 years and there has never been a case where someone has yet to be paid out of 500 million people. You can try to convert medicare to voucher system, but are making a grave mistake wanting to eliminate SS. Yes the 15.3% stings, but look at all the seniors that depend on it.
pirucreek 1 year ago
Ron Paul is a modern day Founding Father and Jedi master, Rand Paul is still an apprentice.
msungs 1 year ago 16
@msungs: Like a Jedi Padawan learner? Give Rand more credit than that.
espada9 1 year ago
@msungs hmm. I think Padawan is more suitable.
Xenthoid 1 year ago
@msungs Rand Paul is a sell out to lobbyists. I hate that he can piggyback off his dad's name and people will assume he follows the same principles. I always had skepticism about him, but this interview shows me that he has completely sold out, especially to coal lobbyists. He was telling the most bold lies possible while leaving out the fact that coal is actually subsidized by our government. If he wants the free market, then end coal subsidies.
pryorka82 1 year ago
@msungs - Ron Paul is controlled opposition...do not be fooled! He denies that the government had anything to do with 911...
Believe me, it is painful to say what I just said as I was the biggest Ron Paul supporter ever! I voted for him, bought t-shirts, had a bumper sticker , educated people about him at every turn...but, what has Ron really done? He talks a lot about issues, but NOTHING is done. Listen to the 1 minute radio spot below and you will hear him say it...
watch?v=v60TWZNVgtk
godlydoor320 1 year ago
@godlydoor320
It depends who is asking, hi tries to have one foot in each camp.
johnsenkenn 1 year ago
@johnsenkenn - I can agree with that assessment...but and the big BUT...who's side is he really on??? Especially, when TSHTF!
godlydoor320 1 year ago
@godlydoor320
TSHTF ? Who knows, maybe he is doing a job, as to be a puppet as to cool the angry, so they are running up and down the street, and shout.....hail Ron Paul, without doing any harm. Anyway it wouldn't change anything if he got the white house, you can't change it with words....please. You got to shoot some of them, then they will understand you are serious.
johnsenkenn 1 year ago
@johnsenkenn You are correct!
NO one and I repeat NO one can or will be President and do anything of real change for the people. No matter if it is Ron Paul or Donald Trump...NO one will be able to wreck the NWO plans...they have been at this for hundreds of years and they will not allow anyone to FU** it up.
They already no who the next President will be. We are and have been witnessing the BIGGEST puppet show on earth.
Give the people BREAD and CIRCUSES and you can get away with anything.
godlydoor320 1 year ago
@godlydoor320
Right it's a puppet show, a theater where the people/voters sit and glance at the play, clapping and roaring, and it's controlled behind the curtain, by someone you cant see/don't know. When the actors are finish their roaring, they leave the stage, in behind the curtain and have a drink together.
johnsenkenn 1 year ago
@johnsenkenn - Just like WWF wrestling...
godlydoor320 1 year ago
@msungs haha totally agree
garrethdavis 1 year ago
OBAMA TICKLE APP NOW ON ITUNES !!
123t954 1 year ago
I like the passion Peter, but I am afraid that when it comes down to the wire Rand is just another limp dick.
TheReallitycheck 1 year ago
@TheReallitycheck Yup, Im not falling for another politician ever again - the whole schtick of "elect me Ill fix it" then getting in and making it worse is getting real old....
uwmbigb 1 year ago
@uwmbigb Its the oldest trick in the book. I always say that if voteing ever helped it would have been outlawed a long time ago.
TheReallitycheck 1 year ago
@TheReallitycheck haha I like that Im gonna use that=]
uwmbigb 1 year ago
@11mac11s I like toilet paper and computers
45means45 1 year ago
I'm glad Peter called out Rand on the Social Security issue. I like Rand a lot but his stance on SS has been very unrealistic.
StepUPNJ 1 year ago
I think that Peter would make a much better senator than Rand...
Ron Paul 2012!
deshaebeasley 1 year ago
@deshaebeasley You can't be anti-mainstream and do anything in politics. 1 Senator, 1 Congressman, 1 Justice will NOT make a difference. We need 40 Rand Pauls in the Senate and about 100 in the Congress to make a difference. Rand is a lone voice and simply for that fact along, he will never get anywhere in DC.
residentzombie 1 year ago
@residentzombie In order to get 100 you must first have 1.... think about it!
deshaebeasley 1 year ago
Yrying to find the truth, will take some research.
they could be slaming him, or it could be real.
I'd love to jump on the ron paul band wagon, he sounds great,
but I am very weary of any body that sounds too good to be true.
I do not vote, it dosn't matter. Why do you think they tell you to keep your vote a secret?
so they can manipulate it of course.
If he is for the people, it would be impossible to win for him.
brickmason26 1 year ago
What kind of voodoo does RP invoke to calculate a wind vs coal cost of 55:1??? Coal has been subsidized for many billions. Numerous coal costs are externalized. An honest calculation of per Kw cost shows wind is only 2x the expense of coal, and equal if you remove construction costs (see bit.ly / auy8CS). But hey, you guys continue to prop up non-renewable non-sustainable energy for political/economic/partisan reasons -- this will ensure China gets an unbeatable headstart in R&D.
TehBren 1 year ago
@TehBren The cost to produce electricity from wind is $0.03 per KwH. Coal costs about 0.03 per KwH, and they don't pay for all the pollution.
pirucreek 1 year ago
@pirucreek Works great, when the wind is blowing.
Joe11Blue 1 year ago
@Joe11Blue We should be working on multiple redundant complementary renewable energy systems (wind + solar + geo + hydro + gas, etc) instead of massive over-dependence on one centralized un-sustainable resource (coal). On-site power generation via solar/wind would allow users to sell back to the grid during over production. One thing is certain: we will exhaust coal & oil long before we exhaust wind & sun.
TehBren 1 year ago
@TehBren What's this we shit!? I don't have to do anything. I don't owe any of your people a damn thing.
If you really believe in it, then do it yourself. No one is stopping you, but I would suggest you atop telling everyone else what to do. Eventually that's what's going to start the violence in this country. That's why people end up calling you an idiot, because they get tired of everyone telling them what to do. That's how eventually someone will either rob you or shoot you.
Joe11Blue 1 year ago
@Joe11Blue To quote Seinfeld: "Some of us are trying to have a civilization here."
TehBren 1 year ago
@TehBren I'd be more inclined to believe that if there were not so many people crying foul, and actually opening up with a rational and logistical conversation on the problems that we are currently involved in. So far from what I can tell from my short and rather unimpressive life is people just trying to take advantage of others. Whether it be the intelligent CEO gaming the system, or the low motivation=income people demanding more for nothing. We haven't evolved enough for civility.
Joe11Blue 1 year ago
@Joe11Blue Funny to see you talk of civility, considering your first reply had none of it. Perhaps you were just angry and frustrated, as "we" all get some times. I am doing "what I believe in" -- I hope you do the same. "Be the change you want to see in the world." May you live a long and impressive life.
TehBren 1 year ago
@TehBren I was drunk. I do that sometimes. My posting gets irrational, and I lose my civility. In general I just become a prick, or rather I let the prick in me lose. Either way, it's a matter of perspective, and could be sexual innuendo. That would be rash and uncivil of me though. I do believe in being honest, so that doesn't help the situation when drunk.
Joe11Blue 1 year ago
@Joe11Blue Keyboards should come with breathalyzers.
TehBren 1 year ago
@TehBren lol, that's a good one.
Pepsifx357 1 year ago
@TehBren So should should elected positions.
Joe11Blue 1 year ago
@Joe11Blue
You have come a long way on the road to growing up, at the age of 30, keep on moving.
johnsenkenn 1 year ago
@johnsenkenn LOL! Not sure how to take that one.
Joe11Blue 1 year ago
@pirucreek The source I cite put coal at $0.04/KwH (with great externalized costs) and wind at $0.08/KwH (with greater construction costs). Agree on one thing, 55:1 is outrageous!
TehBren 1 year ago
@11mac11s woooooooo! lol
arcanekrusader 1 year ago
ron paul is a mason.
Just another peice on the chess board awaiting instruction.
brickmason26 1 year ago
@brickmason26 any proof?
arcanekrusader 1 year ago 2
@brickmason26
Austrian economics/ Libertarian
Ludwig von Mises
F A Hayek nobel prize winner
Murray Rothbard
Tom Woods harvard/columbia graduate new york times best seller Meltdown
europa 1 year ago
I paul was president then he would appoint schiff to head the fed
trexx32 1 year ago
@trexx32
The fed would be abolished like under the constitution states
europa 1 year ago
Peter, no amount of austerity will work. The real issue is WHO CONTROLS THE QUANTITY OF MONEY. The government does not have to go in debt to begin with when they can simply print their own money at 0% interest. U.S. simply needs to issue government backed debt-free money and give the power of the money supply back to the people voiced through elected representatives. Also end the fractional reserve banking only let banks lend out what they actually have. Debt is a fiction made up by the banks
dogbarker1981 1 year ago 2
@dogbarker1981 "Also end the fractional reserve banking only let banks lend out what they actually have". Whenever a bank loans money out, that is fractional reserve. The money will end up at another bank for new loans. What is needed are full reserve checking accounts and the end of fdic insurance except fr checking accounts.
pirucreek 1 year ago
@pirucreek
Banks only lend out what they actually have, how can they lend out money they don't have ?. Show me a banks balance sheet, where they are somehow lending out more than they have ?.
johnsenkenn 1 year ago
@johnsenkenn Fractional reserve banking mate. For every dollar the bank recieves, they give out 9 dollars on that one dollar. It's absolutely crazy and it makes no sense, but that's the system we are in.
FUZZYisBIG 1 year ago
@FUZZYisBIG
No mate, that's not what fractional reserve means, it means what it says, the bank must hold a fraction in reserve of what it is lending out. For the moment, I don't think there are any demand for bank reserve in the US. If you need an authority to tell you, why don't you ask Peter.
johnsenkenn 1 year ago
@FUZZYisBIG
I think demand is not the right word, Government requirements, is more correct.
johnsenkenn 1 year ago
@johnsenkenn Why not take 10 minutes and look it up, it's basic economics that 14 year old do in school.
Take $100 that Bob has and decides to deposit in the bank. Now the Bank has $100 of deposits and at 10% fractional reserve can loan out $90. It loans $90 to Bill, Bill buys something from Jill for $90 and Jill puts it in the bank. The bank now has $190 of deposits and only $90 of loans and so can lend out another $81. And round and round it goes. M = 1/R is the result of doing the math.
jedfa987 1 year ago
@jedfa987
How old are you, this is the most stupid thing there are circling here on YouTube. What you claim is that there magically are popping money up out of the blue. Bank loans 90 dollars to Bill, their 90 dollars are gone....to Bill, Jill put 90 dollars back in the bank.....bank are back to hundred dollars ???. and you are bragging about doing the math ?.
johnsenkenn 1 year ago
@johnsenkenn Actually he is correct. It's called Fracional Reserve Banking and there's nothing magic about it. When you deposit $100 into the bank, the bank doesn't set aside $100 in your name. With a few keystrokes, you have $100 worth of bank credit and the bank has your real $100, 90% of which they can wipe their asses with (assuming a 10% reserve requirement). This system has been around for centuries. Where have you been?
JediKnifeTricks 1 year ago
@JediKnifeTricks
Where have you been, have I said anything else.
johnsenkenn 1 year ago
@johnsenkenn That's what that so, if you're to stupid to look at a teenager's economic textbook that's your own fault. Or try thinking, but I guess that's far to difficult for you. Do the balance sheet if you want.
Do you seriously think that Bank of America has every single dollar deposited with them available in cash at the bank branches?
jedfa987 1 year ago
@jedfa987
Teenagers economic textbook, have you read this textbook. You are obviously so stupid that you don't even understand you are, you think you are clever. You can't even try thinking, it's an impossibility for you. The bank of America do not only have the depositors money, they are the dealers of the feds printed money, it's the fed there are expanding the money supply by the banks ( and the state ) not the banks, they don't produce money. This is stupid.
johnsenkenn 1 year ago
@johnsenkenn Look is up you retard. How do you think banks fail if they always have all the deposits? What do you think FDIC insurance is for?
Seriously stick "Fractional Reserve Banking" into google and look you fucking moron.
Do you really think M2 isn't bigger than M1? How do you manage to breath let alone type?
jedfa987 1 year ago
@jedfa987
Why do you not look fractional reserve up, you moron. have you seen lately which is biggest M1 or M2. Banks fail because their loaners fail. Their loaners fail because the bubbles blown up by the fed, pop. What an idiot.
johnsenkenn 1 year ago
@johnsenkenn Banks failed before the Fed existsed moron. Do they have a time machine? You seriously think that Bank of Amserdam failed in the 18th centiuty because the Fed blew up a bubble?
M1 is $1853.8 billion. M2 is $8837.7 billion. I'm pretty sure I know which is bigger, you obviously don't because you are just making shit up and using terms you don't understand.
And I have looked it up, heck I quoted the economic text book definition already.
jedfa987 1 year ago
@jedfa987
That's good for you, if you understand, if your understanding is that the banks loans out money they don't have, then your understanding is wrong. Show me a bank balance sheet that they do. I have just looked the M1 up on shadow Government, and it's expanding.
johnsenkenn 1 year ago
@johnsenkenn Of course M1 is expanding, the Fed has been printing money like crazy. That is completely irrelevant to Fractional Reserve Banking which has nothing to do with printing money.
If you were paying attention you'd see that I never said the bank loans money it doesn't have, you are making that up because you can't be bother to look up a simple definition. I said it loans 90% of the money it has received in deposits.
jedfa987 1 year ago
@jedfa987
I am not sure there is a Governments Fractional Reserve requirements for the time being. I think they can loan out everything they have, the reserve is the fed. But I don't know, haven't googled it.
johnsenkenn 1 year ago
@johnsenkenn You think I'm so dumb you can't believe I'm alive, but you are trying to discuss Fractional Reserve Branking and you don't even know how the reserves are set under the current system?
In the US it is 0% up to $10.7 million, 3% up to $58.8 million, and 10% for everything else. But keep just making stuff up about things you know nothing about. You still don't know what reserve ratio means right? Or what money multiplier means right? Or the trivial relationship between the two?
jedfa987 1 year ago
@jedfa987
No, I haven't looked up the reserve requirements in the US, do you know the ECB's. It was about fractional Reserve, and what it means, and it does not mean what many believe, because they have seen money masters. Those fooled people believe that it means the bank only have to have 10 % of the money they lend out. And that is not right.
johnsenkenn 1 year ago
@johnsenkenn ECB's is 2%, though the definitions of what counts are a little different.
Fractional reserve doesn't mean what you seem to think it does, but for most people it makes perfect sense - the fraction of deposits that are required to be available. It has nothing to do with lending other than that that is what banks usually do with it to make money. But they can do things other than make loans with the money, and they can make loans with money from other sources.
jedfa987 1 year ago
@jedfa987
What rubbish, fractional reserve means the bank must keep a fraction of their out loan in reserve, what else does it mean ?.
johnsenkenn 1 year ago
@johnsenkenn I can't see the point I've repeated it over and over again already. But, "fractional reserve" means that the bank only has to keep a fraction of *deposits* in reserve.
It has nothing to do with loans, a bank that makes no loans still has to keep reserves for deposits. A bank that takes no deposits can make loans without having any reserves.
jedfa987 1 year ago
@jedfa987
It has nothing to do with loans, if it makes no loans, the whole money is a reserve, Well if they loan out their own money, they might not need any reserve. You have just stated that the US banks need to hold 10 % of their loan in reserve ?. That's is what reserve ratio means, no. The regulation does not say a % of the deposit, does it.
johnsenkenn 1 year ago
@johnsenkenn The regulations says a % of deposits, as I keep saying and you keep denying. TITLE 12, CHAPTER 3, SUBCHAPTER XIV, § 461 - but you're too stupid (or more likely just trolling) to look that up.
A bank can have $1 million in deposits, $100,000 in reserves and $2 million loaned out and still meet 10% reserve requirements. They could have borrowed $1.1 million and loaned it back out, for example.
How can you not understand such a simple definition?
jedfa987 1 year ago
@jedfa987
You have not mention % of the deposit, if that is the case, I am wrongly informed, which does not mean i am innocent. Well there is a hell a lot of reading, but so far I can see it says.......the reserve is of the total transaction.....agree.....
johnsenkenn 1 year ago
@jedfa987
So far I haven't found a word there specific says it's a fraction on the deposit, but I can surely understand why so many are occupied reading these paragraph, it's a full time job, to figure out in what case, and how much deposit is needed.
johnsenkenn 1 year ago
@jedfa987
I can't find a definition of the Fractional Reserve in your Fed link, so I have googled it, which I have done before of course, it seem to I have got that wrong that fractional reserve is a reserve of the out loan, and not the deposit. How that is possible I don't know, sure it's the head. I feel pretty embarrassed, but done is done. But I still got the fact right, that the banks itself don't multiplies the money, not without the help of the Fed.
johnsenkenn 1 year ago
@jedfa987 It has a lot to do with loans actually. With a 9-1 reserve ratio, banks can lend out money they don't have of up to 9x the amount of debited cash they hold in reserves. Of that credited money, once deposited into another bank, 90% of it can be lent out. It does mean that the bank has to hold a certain % in reserves but it also is used for the creation of credit in the lending process.
Not starting a fight I just thought I should aid to clear it up. Search "money as debt 2 of 5."
BTbass 1 year ago
@jedfa987
Uh no, Fractional Reserve means the bank only has to have 10% deposited of the amount they lend out. Ergo the Federal Reserve borrows $100 from China, lends $1000 to JP Morgan based on that, then JP Morgan lends $10,000 to you to buy your house. So you're paying interest for $10,000 borrowed from the bank on an initial government loan of $100, which they will never pay back to China. This is the problem with Fractional Reserve Banking
pr3ban 1 year ago
@pr3ban
Federal Reserve borrow 100 dollars from China ? and then it magically magnify 100 times ?. Federal Reserve don't borrow money from China, the Government does, or it did, the government prints bonds, they sell the bonds, 93 % of the bonds are sold to The Federal Reserve, the Fed buys them with printed money. No body else want them, that's why the dollar will be worthless in a couple of years.
johnsenkenn 1 year ago
@pr3ban That is not what Fractional Reserve Banking is. That that sequence is a figmant of your imagination is irrelevent anyway, it simple has nothing to do with fractional reserve banking which existed before the Federal Reserve existed. Heck it existed when the deposits were gold bullion because there were no fiat currencies at the time.
jedfa987 1 year ago
@jedfa987 You're wrong. Under a 10% fractional reserve system a bank deposit of $100 would mean the bank could then lend out $900 not 90, 90 would be a 110% reserve system. Who taught you math? Scarier yet is that you have a highly rated comment.
clint0nify 1 year ago
@clint0nify right- hey maybe you can help make something clear to me. recently I looked up the Definition of Quantative Easing. Per the definition i understood that is where percentage used in Fractional Reserve System is made smaller - so that the banks can have less reserves on hand-- is that how it is now in this Quantative Easing that has been takling place?
Is that what they are doing? making the Banks less able to resist a run?
captkirkconnell 1 year ago
@clint0nify
A bank deposit of $100, mean they can loan out $900, and where is that $900 coming from ?.
johnsenkenn 1 year ago
@johnsenkenn It comes out of thin air the same way the Federal Reserve creates money, check out a book called The Mystery of Banking by Murray Rothbard.
clint0nify 1 year ago
@clint0nify
I know it's a popular idea that the banks loan out money they don't have, but I don't buy it. The banks have 3 ways to get money, depositors.....their own capital.....the central bank. And that's how they get their money, no magical lending money they don't have.
johnsenkenn 1 year ago
@johnsenkenn Question.. where do you think the central bank gets its money from?
dankfizzy 1 year ago
@dankfizzy
Where the central bank gets its money from ? the printing press ?.
johnsenkenn 1 year ago
@clint0nify It's not scary, because you're simply completely wrong. "Fractional Reserve" just means the fraction of deposits a bank must keep available for to be withdrawn. If someone deposits $100, then the bank can loan out $90 if a 10% fractional reserver is required. I ends up being $900 because it gets redeposited again and that the what the infiinte sum adds to.
The term is it's own definition, I'm amazed you can be so dumb and still type.
jedfa987 1 year ago
@jedfa987
I am amazed you can be so dumb, and still alive.
johnsenkenn 1 year ago
@jedfa987 You are retarded, don't go preaching about shit you can't comprehend.
clint0nify 1 year ago