Ron Paul to Bernake (Federal Reserve) 7-17-12

[Alie]

HARDHITTING!!!!! Yea Ron Paul!

Source: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R_NMgAnvncA

[GlassSteagallfan]

Here is the problem with Ron Paul on the monetary issue:

At 3:00 approx, Dr Paul admits that the system is 'flawed'.

At 8:15, Bernanke say "there's no constitutional reason why Congress couldn't take over monetary policy". The constitution ONLY allows congress to coin money (Article 1 Sec 8)

Then Dr Paul says, at 8:32, "I want to work within the [current] system"


You see, Ron Paul will keep the current financial paradigm going. A gold standard will not change much of the current policy. After all, who has all the gold?

Without the congress taking over monetary policy and creating a national bank, unconstitutional foreign banks like the Federal Reserve will continue to dictate monetary policy in favor of themselves, even under a gold standard.

Now I understand why LaRouche doesn't support Dr Paul's financial policy.

Also, Dr Paul is not a co-sponsor for HR 1489 Return to Prudent Banking [Glass Steagall].

[T Smith]

Posted by GlassSteagallfan (here)

A gold standard will not change much of the current policy. After all, who has all the gold?

[Glass Steagall].

Returning to a gold standard may have other problems associated with it, but the implication that bankers could horde gold and control the money supply is not one of them. This is generally misunderstood, and understandably so, since we are all conditioned to understanding monetary economics via a fiat paradigm. Gold as legal tender changes the dynamic entirely. A gold standard would serve to decentralize the money supply, which makes hording and controlling the money much, much more difficult. In other words, to address your question directly, who has all the gold? The people do, in their pockets. You and me.

[Alie]

Thank you to GlassSteagallfan & T Smith

I know NOTHING about the monetary system except one thing .... Stand up to the Federal Reserve, which is why I said Yea Ron Paul. But maybe Lyndon LaRouche & Ron Paul should have lunch together. I wish I could host it

Got any ideas?

[the_vast_mystery]

Posted by T Smith (here)
Returning to a gold standard may have other problems associated with it, but the implication that bankers could horde gold and control the money supply is not one of them.

It isn't? according to whom? Have you even DONE any legwork to prove this isn't the case? Or is this just yet another one of those "You left-brained people could never understand anything that has to be taken on faith!" style statements? The ones where we're supposed to magically believe that this cannot happen so that when it does the bankers involved can easily cover it up?

Posted by T Smith (here)
This is generally misunderstood, and understandably so, since we are all conditioned to understanding monetary economics via a fiat paradigm. Gold as legal tender changes the dynamic entirely.

Okay, so can you explain to us this misunderstanding? Can you say what it is, how it happens and how it is not true?

Posted by T Smith (here)
A gold standard would serve to decentralize the money supply, which makes hording and controlling the money much, much more difficult. In other words, to address your question directly, who has all the gold? The people do, in their pockets. You and me.

Oh, so by taking this as your answer to the above as your preliminary answer then that means: The misunderstanding is that people don't all believe what I do, and it's not true because everything I believe is magically true? How the hell do the people have the gold? Does every one of us have a deposit? How big is it? How much can we redeem it for in these new "liberty" dollars? How do you repatriate all of the gold that was stolen under FDR? How do you decentralize and keep decentralized a finite material commodity? Define decentralization in this context if you will please and define in all full specificity the mechanics that will keep this currency decentralized.

[T Smith]

Posted by the_vast_mystery (here)

Okay, so can you explain to us this misunderstanding? Can you say what it is, how it happens and how it is not true?

Sure, I can try to explain. Our understanding of money is based on a paradigm of fiat, which, literally translated, from Latin, means, "let it be". The powers that be, in this case those who enjoy the monopoly of defining what money is and how much or little we can use to exchange for goods and services (Federal Reserve), can literally control the means of exchange by letting money be, or by letting money not be. Rendered to the simplest terms, this is a plank of enslavement. Those who enslave us literally create the money supply by waving a wand, i.e. by "letting it be", and then they expand or contract the supply of money accordingly to control the economy and all of us worker bees who make the economy work. The power that drives the machine is engrained in our very psyches, even if we do not consciously understand the what, the why, and the who in all the abstract dynamics, and those of us who are aware enough to intuitively understand that there is a controlling power behind the scenes necessarily assume that the same power would exist under any system of money, e.g., we assume this power derives from wealth, and we assume the rich and powerful would somehow buy their way into a position of gaming the system at the expense of the commoners given any monetary system. But the power we're acknowledging here does not derive from wealth. This is the general misunderstanding. It derives from "fiat", e.g., from creating and extinguishing money by fiat, or by simply waving a wand and "letting it be". This power does not exist where the money is linked to a material commodity (save for alchemy, in which case all bets are off). In other words, it doesn't matter how rich or powerful one is, unless you can wave a magic wand and create a pile of gold and extinguish a pile of gold (as the powers that be can in our current system of fiat), you cannot control the money supply, nor can you enslave a population.

To answer your second question: How do the people have the gold? Every single person who participates in the economy, from the seven-year-old who runs a lemonade stand, to a bus driver on the street, to the tycoon who oppresses his underlings, receives gold (or a bill or certificate redeemable for gold) in exchange for that which they produce. In other words, if you work and take payment, you have gold. If you save, you have capital. You have a real piece of the economy, instead of that elusive measurement of the economy deemed and determined by the controllers. One might argue that the bankers could corner the market and manipulate the price of gold (e.g. the Hunt brothers/silver market circa 1980s) or they could simply seize power by taking all the gold and only allowing scraps to their groveling subjects, as DeBeers did with diamonds (this, by the way, is an indoctrinated understanding of the monetary system based on real-life experiences of fiat)... but this simply would not happen given the laws of economics. The bankers still have to pay their slaves real money (and deplete their own stockpile of wealth in so doing) for their services. In short, there is no indentured servitude given a system of sound money.

[ExomatrixTV]

Source: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9XCHaYF7gzc

[CdnSirian]

Worthwhile review of this exchange by economist here: http://www.invertedalchemy.com/

"Sunday, July 22, 2012
Bernanke v. Paul Title Bout: Pay Per View
0 comments

"First of all, in private contracts: wherever the unjust is the partner of the just you will find that, when the partnership is dissolved, the unjust man has always more and the just less. Secondly, in their dealings with the State: when there is an income tax, the just man will pay more and the unjust less on the same amount of income; and when there is anything to be received the one gains nothing and the other much. Observe also what happens when they take an office; there is the just man neglecting his affairs and perhaps suffering other losses, and getting nothing out of the public, because he is just; moreover he is hated by his friends and acquaintance for refusing to serve them in unlawful ways. But all this is reversed in the case of the unjust man."

Plato's reply to Socrates, The Republic

I watched with ironic despondency as Representative Ron Paul (R-Texas) engaged, for what most commentators suggest is his farewell bout, with Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke (R - Banks & High Net Worth Investor Pals) on the cost of opacity in the Federal Reserve. Characteristically, Chairman Bernanke knew that his philosophical battle with Rep. Paul has been a war of attrition and the last man standing will be proclaimed the victor. To be clear, all Ben needed to do is be silent and he knew that the halls of Congress would serve as a cavernous acoustic curtain that would suck Ron's words into the void. And, for the most part, he did what he needed to do. The only place he lost his script of the silent treatment was in his unbelievable statement that, "To eliminate the exemption on monetary policy deliberations would effectively - at least to some extent - create a political influence, or a political dampening effect, on the Federal Reserve’s policy decisions." Really, transparency would lead to political influence? No wonder Socrates wound up drinking the hemlock!

This past week we have seen an expansion of unfathomable crimes being 'uncovered' long after their effects have wrought great damage on the General Public. While I have, for years been commenting on the massive abuses in the municipal bond market - abuses which undermine every pension investor in the United States and many around the world - the U.S. Department of Justice has succeeded in getting 13 guilty pleas from muni riggers at Bank of America, JPMorgan, UBS, Wells Fargo, and General Electric resulting in a reported $700 million in restitution and penalties. And now, this week the Justice Department announced an indictment for wire fraud and conspiring to defraud the United States against Bank of America's municipal derivatives desk former executive Phillip D. Murphy who allegedly played a key role in rigging the price of funds for things like building schools and roads.

Rep. Ron Paul's frustration with a system out of control and operating with impunity is justified. Chairman Bernanke's reply to Rep. Paul suggests that he either never read or forgot what Congress actually authorized on that wonderful Christmas Eve eve session in 1913 at the passage of the FederalReserve Act. He overlooked the fact that Congress actually stated that "shareholders of every Federal Reserve bank shall be held individually responsible, equally and ratably, and not one for another, for all contracts, debts, and engagements of such bank…." He also seemed to assume that We The People wouldn't go back and read the actual Act that put his position into effect and see that, "Nothing in this Act contained shall be construed as taking away any powers heretofore vested by law in the Secretary of the Treasury which relate to the supervision, management, and control of the Treasury Department and bureaus under such department, and wherever any power vested by this Act in the Federal Reserve Board or the Federal reserve agent appears to conflict with the powers of the Secretary of the Treasury, such powers shall be exercised subject to the supervision and control of the Secretary." Oh, and did I mention that the Fed's salary cap was $12,000 annually?

This week's news highlighted one of the great cognitive ischemias of our time. We're either supposed to listen to sound bites emanating from Congressional hearings and assume that one or more of the parties is actually telling the truth or we're supposed to be sufficiently anesthetized not to care (or both). Without basic financial literacy, We the People are incapable of knowing when justice is being served and when it's being usurped. While we've got a basic impulse that senses that injustice is at hand, we wait to see who is left in relative paucity and then conclude that the one that got away with all the wealth was the unjust. While this logic is consistent with Plato's argument in The Republic, I am compelled to suggest that outing the bad guy is not overly constructive. In fact, as Chairman Bernanke quite correctly said to Rep. Paul, "there's no constitutional reason why Congress couldn't just take over monetary policy," concluding that if Rep. Paul doesn't like the job the Fed is doing Congress can "take it back."

This exchange was Chairman Bernanke's crowning achievement in the two days of testimony. While guilty of grievous over-simplifications of the law authorizing his job, he quite correctly stated that the same Congress that passed the Federal Reserve Act in 1913 could repeal any or all of it. And, this rather frontal retort should be a clarion call for citizens to join in the effort to reform or reconstitute a more transparent system. In his defense, Chairman Bernanke is only as good as the ideas that he receives from his advisors and the public. The lack of constructive solutions to monetary policies and the economy is, in large part, due to the lack of constructive input coming from citizens. But, as Occupites across the globe have quite convincingly proven, disgruntled ignorance, regardless of its justification, is, in the end, as unhelpful as incumbent complacency.

So, here's an idea. This year, the U.S. Department of Justice is likely going to rake in record fines from banking institutions. If the first two quarters are any indication (see their graph above), they could blow through last years $1 billion mark quite easily. So why don't We the People petition for the Treasury (the recipient of these windfalls) to provision a Town-Hall-for-Financial-Literacy Campaign - funded by the temple robbers' levies - so that We the People actually know enough to form constructive critiques and, in so doing, actually create a More Perfect Union? "

[T Smith]

Posted by CdnSirian (here)
Worthwhile review of this exchange by economist here: http://www.invertedalchemy.com/

" In fact, as Chairman Bernanke quite correctly said to Rep. Paul, "there's no constitutional reason why Congress couldn't just take over monetary policy," concluding that if Rep. Paul doesn't like the job the Fed is doing Congress can "take it back."

"

Allow me to paraphrase.

BERNAKE, in response to Ron Paul's tacit accusations: "...Yeah, that's right. You get the picture, Mac. Whaddya gonna do about it?"

[humanalien]

The House Of Reps just passed the bill to audit the fed.

[Falcor]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/0...ef=mostpopular

well ill be......

[humanalien]

I think that the audit has to be done by the end of 2012
so it will be moving pretty fast...

[Alie]

Well let's say it again ... yea Ron Paul!

[Fred Steeves]

Posted by humanalien (here)
I think that the audit has to be done by the end of 2012
so it will be moving pretty fast...

I hate to be a downer, but the system is not going to investigate itself, regardless of what it might chirp out like a trained parrot. Sorry...

Source: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K7ht0a2-OnA

[humanalien]

I'm just passing on information Fred. Nothing more, nothing less. I'm
well aware of how our government operates.... On that note, here's a
yahoo article about it. Take note of the last sentence.

Ron Paul’s ‘Audit the Fed’ bill passes the House

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/r...185936757.html

[Alie]

Posted by humanalien (here)
I'm just passing on information Fred. Nothing more, nothing less. I'm
well aware of how our government operates.... On that note, here's a
yahoo article about it. Take note of the last sentence.

Ron Paul’s ‘Audit the Fed’ bill passes the House

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/r...185936757.html

"While Wednesday's passage in the lower chamber is a victory for Paul and his supporters, the bill is considered dead on arrival in the Senate. Harry Reid, the Senate majority leader and a Nevada Democrat, has vowed not to put it to a vote."

well ... that's what makes politics so FRUSTRATING---DISGUSTING !

[humanalien]

That's the way the government works. They give you a shot of good
news and then destroy your happiness with bad news..

What was the sense in the house passing a bill if they knew the
senate would not pass it? This is a crazy setup?

[Fred Steeves]

Posted by humanalien (here)
That's the way the government works. They give you a shot of good
news and then destroy your happiness with bad news..

What was the sense in the house passing a bill if they knew the
senate would not pass it? This is a crazy setup?

A 24 hour deluge of programming, aimed at cognitive dissonance, combined with sensory overload. Remember how a couple of months ago, all the hype in the U.S. was $5+ gasoline by summer? Or war is imminent with Iran, and then it's not, then it is, then it isn't? Or Obama's opened a big lead in the polls, now whoopsy, Romney has a big lead. Wait...Now obama by a nose, now Romney, now Obama, now...Aurora, Colorado...Now... This is textbook stuff, we're being mind ****ed every day, and it's right there in front of our faces.

It's tried and proven design is to so baffle us with bullsh!t, that we give up thinking, and leave that to the "experts".

For any that need a refresher course on the blueprint for what's going on, please re-read George Orwell's 1984.

Cheers,
Fred

[GoodeTXSG]

Seriously, These Politicians and Bankers need to go to JAIL. NO more resignations or fines. PRISON. Join us in email campaigns and peaceful protesting at Gov and Financial HQ's. If you are tired of the blatant corruption that no one is doing anything about then join us! http://www.facebook.com/BankAndPolit...cialCorruption

[humanalien]

Posted by Fred Steeves (here)

Posted by humanalien (here)
That's the way the government works. They give you a shot of good
news and then destroy your happiness with bad news..

What was the sense in the house passing a bill if they knew the
senate would not pass it? This is a crazy setup?

A 24 hour deluge of programming, aimed at cognitive dissonance, combined with sensory overload. Remember how a couple of months ago, all the hype in the U.S. was $5+ gasoline by summer? Or war is imminent with Iran, and then it's not, then it is, then it isn't? Or Obama's opened a big lead in the polls, now whoopsy, Romney has a big lead. Wait...Now obama by a nose, now Romney, now Obama, now...Aurora, Colorado...Now... This is textbook stuff, we're being mind ****ed every day, and it's right there in front of our faces.

It's tried and proven design is to so baffle us with bullsh!t, that we give up thinking, and leave that to the "experts".

For any that need a refresher course on the blueprint for what's going on, please re-read George Orwell's 1984.

Cheers,
Fred

Your post was so funny that i had to laugh.