Atlantis Arisen
August 15, 2022, 04:48:10 pm
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Dino-Killing Asteroid Traced to Cosmic Collision
   Home   Help Search Arcade Links Staff List Login Register  
Pages: 1 ... 7 8 [9] 10
 on: July 21, 2011, 01:51:55 pm 
Started by Volitzer - Last post by Volitzer
Ron Pauls accurate predictions

 on: July 21, 2011, 01:48:22 pm 
Started by Volitzer - Last post by Volitzer
Ron Paul on Neil Cavuto: You Can’t Get Back To Growth Unless You Have Correction

 on: July 21, 2011, 01:46:24 pm 
Started by Volitzer - Last post by Volitzer
Ron Paul: “Barack Obama and the big government crowd are destroying our economy”

Ron Paul
June 3, 2011

Today, a spokesman for Congressman Ron Paul’s 2012 Republican presidential campaign remarked on the most recent U.S. jobs report and the state of the American economy. See comments below.

“If the latest job numbers are any further indication, none of the centralized schemes deployed by Washington’s elites are helping regular Americans. As a matter of fact, Barack Obama and the big government crowd are destroying our economy, and our dollar,” said Jesse Benton, Paul campaign chairman.

“Despite the fact that none of the past nearly trillion-dollar economic stimuli have worked, all signs point to the Federal Reserve gearing up for another round of ‘quantitative easing’ – meaning more destruction of the already-weakened dollar. At the same time, we have an official Washington that refuses to acknowledge the looming fiscal crisis our country faces with regards to our debt and continues to spend with no end in sight,” continued Benton.

“We are going to see real suffering in this country if we do not balance our budget and restore sound monetary policy. And we need to do it now.”

For more information on Congressman Ron Paul’s Presidential Campaign visit

 on: July 21, 2011, 01:40:56 pm 
Started by Volitzer - Last post by Volitzer
Road to the Whitehouse

Better Off? Ron Paul for President 2012, the Revolution Continues!

Ron Paul: America on the Road to Serfdom

 on: July 21, 2011, 01:36:36 pm 
Started by Volitzer - Last post by Volitzer
Ron Paul vs. the Federal Reserve

Central Bankers and Budget Deficits


Ron Paul is a long-serving representative in the U.S. Congress. He is a committed libertarian who is now embarking on his third presidential campaign. He has built up a devoted political following over the years.

While many of his ideas are outside of the mainstream, that doesn't mean that they do not deserve to be taken seriously. As a solution to the impasse over the debt ceiling in the United States, Mr. Paul suggested that the Federal Reserve Board destroy the $1.6 trillion in government bonds that it currently holds. This act would put the government far below its $14.3 trillion debt ceiling providing perhaps two more years before any action needs to be taken to raise the ceiling again.

Destroying $1.6 trillion in government debt might seem far-fetched, but it actually makes a great deal of sense. The Fed acquired this huge stock of debt through its policy of quantitative easing. This was an effort to try to provide further stimulus to the economy once the short-term lending rate had already been pushed to zero. Since the short-term rate could not go any lower, the Fed bought up several trillion dollars of mortgage-backed securities and government bonds in order to directly lower long-term interest rates.

While the mortgage-backed securities are debt from private parties to the Fed, since the Fed is an agency of the U.S government, the bonds held by the Fed are literally money that the government owes to itself. In fact, each year the Fed refunds back to the Treasury the interest earned on its assets in excess of its operating costs. This means that the interest that this is paid on the bonds held by the Fed is effectively interest that the government is paying itself.

In this context, it is very difficult to see any downside in eliminating a bookkeeping entry. The Fed would lose $1.6 trillion in assets and the government would lose $1.6 trillion in liabilities and suddenly be far below the debt limit.

In addition to the short-term benefit of getting around the standoff on the debt ceiling, this move also has the great long-term benefit of reducing the government's future interest burden. While the bonds do not create any net interest burden as long as they are held by the Fed, the plan is for the Fed to sell them off as the economy recovers. The Fed would do this to pull reserves out of the banking system, limiting its lending ability and thereby preventing inflation.

Once the bonds are in the hands of the private sector, they do create an interest burden for the government. While the Fed is currently expected to refund $80 billion to the Treasury in 2011, in 2017 it is projected to refund just $33 billion. The difference of $47 billion is lost revenue to the government.

However if the Fed destroys the bonds that it currently holds then the interest on this debt can never be a burden to the government. The bonds would cease this exist.

This would mean that the Fed would not be able to sell bonds to pull reserves out of the banking system. However it can accomplish the same result with a different tool. It can simply raise the reserve requirement, forcing banks to hold a larger fraction of their deposits on reserve.

Raising the reserve requirement can be just as effective as reducing the quantity of reserves in limiting lending. If the amount of reserves in the banking system is doubled, and the reserve requirement is also, then the banking system will just be able to make the same amount of loans. The big difference between these two paths is that the government would not have to pay as much interest on its debt, in the case where the volume of lending is limited by higher reserve requirements.

This is in effect exactly what we should want to see in this situation. The reason that the U.S. government and other governments are running large deficits is because of the collapse in private sector spending. The deficits are supporting output and employment by filling the gap in demand. In normal times, deficits may be pulling away resources from the private sector and crowding out investment; this is not the case in the downturn. The deficit is sustaining demand and therefore most likely increasing private sector investment.

The one downside to this story is that the deficit is creating a tax burden for the future. However if the government destroys the debt issued to finance its spending in the downturn, then the debt need not ever pose a tax burden.

The idea of effectively getting money for free may seem peculiar, but that is exactly the story of an economy that is below its full employment level of output. In such circumstances, the economy is not supply constrained. If there is more demand, there will be more output. The real waste in this context is the failure of the government to spend. In that case workers who have the skills and desire to work go unemployed and factories and other facilities go idle.

Representative Paul's proposal provides exactly the sort of mechanism that we should want to see in this situation. It allows the government to generate the demand needed to push the economy back toward full employment, without creating a major debt burden for future generations of taxpayers.

Now, this may not be exactly how Mr. Paul viewed his proposal. After all, he has a long history of hostility to the Fed as an institution. Two years ago he wrote a book titled End the Fed. But Mr. Paul's motives don't matter. This is a proposal that deserves to be taken seriously not just for the Fed, but by other central banks as well. The debt incurred to boost economies out of recessions should not place a burden on future taxpayers and we know how to prevent this from happening.

Dean Baker is the co-director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research (CEPR). He is the author of Plunder and Blunder: The Rise and Fall of the Bubble Economy and False Profits: Recoverying From the Bubble Economy.

This article originally appeared in the International Relations and Security Network.

 on: July 21, 2011, 01:35:16 pm 
Started by Volitzer - Last post by Volitzer
Ron Paul Goes All In!‏

Ron Paul: Conviction, Not Compromise!

Ron Paul to Congress: If Debt Is the Problem, Why Do You Want More of It?

Ron Paul: The U.S. Government Is Defaulting on the American People

Ron Paul Goes All In! Won’t Seek Reelection to Congress to Focus on Presidential Campaign

Ron Paul’s Road to 2012

More at

Check out Ron Paul's latest media appearances, video updates and columns and join in on the ongoing discussions at

 on: July 21, 2011, 01:31:04 pm 
Started by Kristina - Last post by Volitzer
He ought to get on board with Ron Paul in ending the FED.

Enough with the debt-slavery already.

 on: July 19, 2011, 01:31:48 pm 
Started by Kristina - Last post by Kristina
Exclusive Bill Clinton Interview: I Would Use Constitutional Option To Raise Debt Ceiling And "Force The Courts To Stop Me"

shareShare on:
Tue, 07/19/2011 - 12:03am —
Joe Conason

Former President Bill Clinton says that he would invoke the so-called constitutional option to raise the nation’s debt ceiling “without hesitation, and force the courts to stop me” in order to prevent a default, should Congress and the President fail to achieve agreement before the August 2 deadline.
Sharply criticizing Congressional Republicans in an exclusive Monday evening interview with The National Memo, Clinton said, “I think the Constitution is clear and I think this idea that the Congress gets to vote twice on whether to pay for [expenditures] it has appropriated is crazy.”
Lifting the debt ceiling “is necessary to pay for appropriations already made,” he added, “so you can’t say, ‘Well, we won the last election and we didn’t vote for some of that stuff, so we’re going to throw the whole country’s credit into arrears.”
Having faced down the Republican House leadership during two government shutdowns when he was president -- and having brought the country’s budget from the deep deficits left by Republican presidents to a projected surplus -- Clinton is unimpressed by the GOP’s sudden enthusiasm for balanced budgets. But he never considered invoking the Fourteenth Amendment -- which says “the validity of the US public debt shall not be questioned” – because the Republicans led by then-Speaker Newt Gingrich didn’t threaten to use the debt ceiling as a weapon in their budget struggles with him.
According to Clinton, the Gingrich Republicans thought about that tactic before rejecting it -- and Treasury officials who served under Clinton commissioned legal research on the president’s power to raise the debt ceiling without congressional approval. While some legal scholars believe the Fourteenth Amendment requires Congress to fund the debt that results from its appropriations, and therefore empowers the president to raise the debt ceiling, others vehemently disagree.
Like President Obama, Clinton is a former law professor who once taught the Constitution, and he understands that the extent of presidential power remains highly controversial, whether the issue is waging war or increasing the debt.
“Here’s what happened, as I remember – but let me back up a second,” Clinton said. “I have read accounts of that time where people at Treasury have been interviewed, and they say they did look into [the president's authority to raise the debt ceiling without congressional approval].” As for the Republicans, “they did think about doing that" -- withholding approval of a higher limit -- "and I knew they were thinking about it.” But the question ultimately did not arise for Clinton, he says, because his opponents in Congress decided “they didn’t want to get caught” in a position where they appeared to be repudiating the debt incurred by their own party’s two previous presidents.
“The reason that raising the debt limit is so unpopular is that people think you’re voting to keep [increasing] deficit spending, instead of voting to honor obligations that were already incurred,” he said. “I think [the Gingrich Republicans] figured I’d be smart enough to explain to the American people that they were refusing to pay for the expenses they had voted for when Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush were president. And that would make ‘em look bad.”
Obama could offer precisely the same explanation in the present circumstances, where most of the current debt can be traced to the profligate military spending and tax cuts of the last Bush administration. Just as the nation’s debt had tripled or quadrupled between 1981 and 1993, in the dozen years of Republican rule before Clinton’s first inauguration, as he points out, so the second Bush administration plunged the budget from surplus to deep deficit before Obama spent one penny on economic stimulus or anything else.
Although Clinton says that if he were in Obama’s place he would raise the debt ceiling without legislation – “if it came to that” -- he believes the crisis will be resolved before August 2. “It looks to me like they’re going to make an agreement, and that’s smart.”
Next: Who Clinton thinks will "win" if a debt deal is achieved, why he is "proud" of Obama, and how he would structure a "good deal" for America
Follow National Memo Editor-in-Chief Joe Conason on Twitter: @jconason

 on: June 30, 2011, 06:50:16 pm 
Started by Trent - Last post by Volitzer
How come you don't post in the main forum anymore ?   Huh?

 on: June 28, 2011, 04:53:38 pm 
Started by Trent - Last post by Trent
Forman confident Bulls will sign Mirotic in 2-3 years
1st-round pick under contract with Real Madrid through 2015

Bulls draft pick Jimmy Butler, right, shows his new Bulls jersey to Michelle Lambert, whose family took in Butler as a teenager. (Chris Walker, Chicago Tribune / June 27, 2011)   
By K.C. Johnson, Chicago Tribune reporter
6:37 p.m. CDT, June 27, 2011
There are myriad reasons general manager Gar Forman sounded confident the Bulls eventually will sign Nikola Mirotic, whose rights were acquired Thursday from the Timberwolves when the Bulls moved up in a draft-day trade.

Mirotic is under contract with Real Madrid through 2015 with a buyout of roughly $2 million Euros, according to sources. The Bulls' plan is to let him develop overseas for at least two to three seasons before negotiating a buyout. They took a similar approach with Asik, who just finished his rookie season after the Bulls acquired him in a draft-day trade in 2008.

Dukan is the Bulls' longtime international scout who has a longstanding professional relationship with Real Madrid officials.

"We can't say for sure when he'll be able to come over, but we're hopeful he'll be a big part of what we're doing," Forman said Monday at the Berto Center. "In our speaking with him, his desire and dream is to play in the NBA at some point."

Monday marked Forman's first public comments about Mirotic, whom the Bulls projected as a lottery talent whose contract status scared off teams.

"He's a 6-foot-10-inch power forward who has a great offensive package," Forman said. "He shoots it with range. He can handle and pass. He's already playing at a high level in the Euroleague in the ACB, which is probably the second-strongest league in the world behind the NBA. Historically, it's very unusual for players of that age to be playing such a significant role at that level."

Both Forman and coach Tom Thibodeau pointed to Mirotic's need to get stronger physically but believe he will complement Derrick Rose with his shooting ability.

"His skill set fits us well," Thibodeau said. "He also complements Carlos (Boozer). He's highly skilled, great touch. But he's more than a spot-up shooter. He can put it on the floor. I like his frame. He looks like one of those guys who will get better and better."

Quick connection: Jimmy Butler stood in the Houston airport when the text message landed on his phone: "Congratulations. Welcome. Maybe come by (Sunday night) and chill out for a bit and get to know each other."

Rose sent it.

So Butler, the Bulls' first-round pick, spent Sunday night watching the BET awards show with Rose and Randall Hampton. The latter is Rose's best friend and former teammate at Simon High School, who just happened to play with Butler in Butler's lone season at Tyler (Texas) Junior College.

"I've talked to Randall ever since I left junior college and went to Marquette," Butler said. "He's been one of my best friends throughout this process and he's forever one of my teammates and like a brother to me.

"We went to Derrick's house and just talked about basketball, my life. Randall and I were joking about our junior college days. It's crazy that I used to watch Derrick on TV and now I'm a teammate. He's a good dude. He's just like me for the most part. He just wants to win."

School spirit: Like Butler, Dwyane Wade is a Marquette product. He's also a member of a Heat team that eliminated the Bulls from the Eastern Conference finals. Light-heartedly asked if he liked or disliked Wade, Butler, who will wear No. 21, laughed.

"A little bit of both, I guess," Butler said. "He's a great player. I'm hoping to help shut him down in the future. He's a normal person. He's a great human being. He always comes back and talks to us like he played with us."

Twitter @kcjhoop

Pages: 1 ... 7 8 [9] 10
Bookmark this site! | Upgrade This Forum
SMF For Free - Create your own Forum

Powered by SMF | SMF © 2016, Simple Machines
Privacy Policy