Busted: Fox News Caught Faking CPAC Booing Reaction to Ron Paul Win

Because current exchange rates operate on a free market (which I assume you like) to determine the value of said currency?

Also a gold standard only creates a fixed value for a currency IN RELATION to other currencies. So while you are essentially pegging currencies together permanently, that doesnt actually address Ron Paul's criticisms which is the value of the dollar internally within the US economy. So while the dollar might be pegged to the euro at say 1 dollar = 1 euro, the cost of a loaf of bread isn't affected by this. (unless you plan on exchanging your currency and then traveling to other countries to buy basic goods) Inflation didn't disappear with the gold standard in the past and prices rose and fell with it. Gold standard supporters act like deflation never happened in the great depression in spite of a gold standard that supposedly kept the value of money grounded to something tangible or that inflation never happened earlier.

I'm seriously tired of the strawman arguments about the gold standard and the federal reserve. It's a good way of making everyone angry and convincing everyone that they are amateur economists, but its based on nothing.

 

Worst compared to who?

CNN? - pro-capitalist? not a chance
MSNBC? - same here
ABC? - again same thing
CBS? - may as well change their names to communist broadcasting network
NBC? - Still the same

I agree with your premise about slants but you might want to get your slants going in the right direction...lol

They all sell out and have their slants. Its what big media business is all about nowadays.

As for Ron Paul, I can say that some of his stances I agree with but he has little love for Israel so I would be less inclined to vote for him. His foreign polices would destroy America's role in the world. Even worst than our current president has done.

 

what exactly was America's role in the world when Bush left office?

 

I never stop being amused by how the low tier wingers believe that media outlets owned by huge capitalist entities known as corporations are somehow anti-capitalist. Of course, the upper tier wingers know what's really shaking and just pretend they don't.

 

I totally agree. Those guys spend way too much time talking about the plight of the working class, the evils of advertising, and really underpay their executives and top anchors. If I hear "Property is Theft" one more time I'm really going to go crazy. I mean seriously, how much Proudhon do we really need shoved in our faces?

I live in Israel, and I understand that without US support the country would probably become a bankrupt theocratic dictatorship, but it doesn't change the fact that Israel hasn't been a strategic asset to the US since the end of the Cold War, and excepting Iraq and Afghanistan, is probably their biggest liability. It's a relationship that is very one-sided. As much as I'm a beneficiary of it, I don't see what US politicians gain from it other than Jewish and Evangelical votes, and maybe some election bucks from AIPAC.

The only pragmatic arguments I'd entertain in how this benefits the US are geopolitical ones that believe that it keeps some form of order that is a lesser evil than likely alternatives.

My question for you is, why do you personally care?

What role would that be exactly, other than wasting taxpayer money to maintain a military that's more expensive than the rest of the world's armies combined and use it in imperialistic nation-building missions that fail & piss off the rest of the world?

For all that Ron Paul proposes that borders the kooky, he brings up the point that if the US had followed it's own constitution and not become a far-reaching, greedy, and corrupt empire it wouldn't find itself an empire in decline. He says it when everyone thinks it but remains too afraid of the political consequences of saying it, other than the shrill voices of the tiny sliver of America's radical left. That resonates with me more than anything else.

 

It would be cool if Fox News took News out of its title.

 

they could call it Fox Views

 

I think we would all be better off without Fox, Bill'O, Sean and those other tools.

 

is it that he has "little love" for israel or that he doesnt think we should be providing them with billions in military aid? and is he singling out israel on this issue or does he think that we shouldnt be giving anyone billions in military aid?

republican and democrat foreign policies have already destroyed americas role in the world.

personally, id rather our country practice what we preach and not go around interfering in other counties affairs and wasting billions of taxpayer dollars propping up dictators around the world. it would also be nice if we didnt go around supporting terrorism like reagan in latin america. or overthrowing democratically elected regimes like arbenz in guatemala or mossadegh in iran. or lying our country into a war which costs hundreds of billions and kills hundreds of thousands like johnson in vietnam or junior in iraq.

 

i went to fxstreet.com and looked around and saw nothing that changes my opinion that printing money out of thin air with nothing to back it up is not a good idea.

is that supposed to inspire confidence? i have no faith in the united states government and do not find them credible in the least. why should anyone?

go back and look at what paul was saying from 2003-2007 about the impeding economic collapse, inflation and the housing bubble - dude comes off like nostradamus.

 

This is ludicrous. How does a gold standard generate confidence? Great, so countries decide to fix exchange rates based on gold. Literally in market terms, you are artificially determining the value of currencies. There's no actual legal basis and if the government decided it didnt want to use gold anymore (aka Bretton Woods), then it can just decide to. I dont understand what gold would do to make currency have more value? Or governments can decide to devalue currencies and say that 1 dollar is now worth half as much gold as before.

Also the gold standard doesnt do anything to solve domestic inflation. All it does is limit the federal reserve's ability to do anything which is interesting because the US doesn't even have any real inflation today and in fact it was only a few years ago that we were freaking about deflation. Goods and services in a gold standard economy would still fluctuate like any market. Even if a dollar is worth X amount of gold, that doesn't mean that a coke wont change in relative price.

Furthermore, people act like the Fed wasn't creating money in the gold standard days. The Fed used to create Federal Reserve notes (hey its like currency) and sell them to banks in exchange for gold and vice versa. And it went and bit them in the ass in during the 30s when banks basically ran on the Fed and started converting everything back into gold leaving the Fed with no ability to expand the money supply since people just wanted to horde gold. This of course later became the classic deflation that wrecked the country. And seeing as how everyone was predicting apocalypse in 2008, there's no reason not to believe that the same thing wouldve happened again if we had a gold standard.

So maybe I'm missing something obvious but why exactly do you want the gold standard as opposed to the current system?

 

There are lots of people like that all through history. They are just permanently negative and convinced a crisis is the beginning of the downfall. Eventually there will be that crisis because that's the nature of free market economics. The problem with those people is that they get famous for the one time they are right, but don't tend to be right twice. Peter Schiff is a perfect Ron-Paul-like example of that.

Ron Paul b****ed all about TARP and how it would destroy the dollar and wouldn't work at all. As it turns out, it worked brilliantly, was FREE to the government & people, prevented a total economic meltdown, and the dollar is worth more today than it was before TARP. He was just a tad bit off there.

 

I believe in supporting Israel. My view is that if I were to choose to stand with and side with anyone, it would be Israel. I do not believe that we should be propping it up and dumping huge amounts of money into it for no real reason. But turning our backs on them completely would be a big mistake IMO.

I do not cater to that particular leftist view of America. Spreading freedom is never a bad thing. Supporting dictators and the like, thats bad.

Ron would have us turn away and not help freedom grow through humanitarian help and support. If there is a disaster, who is the first there and gives the greatest, the US. Yet we hear the drum beat of how cruel and greedy, and bad the US is through the media worldwide, including our own media outlets. I do not believe this to be bad support or evil working of the corrupt empire when you help people. Has the US government made bad decisions, yes , both sides of the aisle has when they were in control. There is no easy fix. I just don't think Mr. Paul's foreign policy views are what the US and the world needs.

 

IF you read Paul's message more clearly. You would understand that he does not want to peg the dollar to gold. He is not advocating that. He wants to get rid of the monopolistic system that is the federal reserve. He wants to have competing currencies legal. Is it wrong that if you make a purchase with gold you would have to go to jail for it? This is a free society right?

 

We give as much or more to Isreals enemies at the same time. Besides, Isreal is much more powerful than all the nations in the mid east combined without contest.

I don't know where you have heard this from. Paul is does not want to be nation building and spreading our military to countries. He wants to trade and be friends with countries. Besides, where do all the humanitarian money come from in the United States. The People. We donate a ton of money from our own pocket to help countries already.

Pauls views is exactly what the world needs. a non-interventionist approach. Honestly, can you justify troops in Japan, south Korea or Germany for instance?

 

For the same freaking reason that I can't go down to the store and buy stuff using yen tomorrow.

 

If the United States is a real free society. Then why would the government make it ILLEGAL for the people exchange gold for services? Thomas Jefferson knew how destructive a monopolistic system of currency is. That's why he argued that a central bank would be destructive for the country.

 

I'm first going to observe that Jefferson in general got a LOT of stuff wrong when it comes to the nature of a society. Any middle school history textbook will tell you about the conflicts between him and Hamilton, and I'd argue that history shows that Hamilton was correct and Jefferson wasn't.

Secondly, what rights in the Constitution are being violated by my inability to purchase stuff with gold? And what is the difference between the fact that I can't buy stuff with yen at a store and that I can't buy stuff with gold tomorrow?

 

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."
You tell me if Jefferson was wrong.

First of all. There is a difference between the yen and gold. Obviously, you should be smart enough to know the difference between the two. The Coinage Act of 1965 makes gold and silver to be illegal tender. which means you cannot use gold and silver as a form of currency. I believe it violates Article 1 sec 10 of the constitution.

 

Good god man. Ok, you clearly don't know what the gold standard is but the idea of the gold standard is that every dollar in the economy is backed by a certain quantity of gold. As a result you are legally entitled to exchange any amount of money you hold for the corresponding set of gold.

As a result in a gold standard, you are allowed to purchase with gold. Although I'd imagine most businesses probably wouldnt want to deal with the hassle of people walking in with gold bricks and would rather accept dollars.

Additionally if your complaint about the current system is that you deserve the "right" to purchase with gold then you seriously might have created the single worst argument for the gold standard ever. Also the whole point of the gold standard is to dilute the Fed's ability to "print money." That's why you guys supposedly want a return to this archaic nonsense.

Also thanks for confirming the fact that I have yet to find a Ron Paul supporter that even understands the gold standard or the federal reserve.