End the Fed
In the post-meltdown world, it is irresponsible, ineffective, and ultimately useless to have a serious economic debate without considering and challenging the role of the Federal Reserve. Most people think of the Fed as an indispensable institution without which the country's economy could not properly function. But in END THE FED, Ron Paul draws on American history, economics, and fascinating stories from his own long political life to argue that the Fed is both corrupt and unconstitutional. It is inflating currency today at nearly a Weimar or Zimbabwe level, a practice that threatens to put us into an inflationary depression where $100 bills are worthless. What most people don't realize is that the Fed -- created by the Morgans and Rockefellers at a private club off the coast of Georgia -- is actually working against their own personal interests. Congressman Paul's urgent appeal to all citizens and officials tells us where we went wrong and what we need to do fix America's economic policy for future generations.
Stats for nerds
4recommend
10mentions
9people
2010–2025years
40% recommend60% neutral
Mentions per year
What Hacker News says
- I would recommend Ron Paul's "End The Fed." I'm sure there are other books but Paul keeps it straight and to the point. Quick but important read.
- > Why would it be good to free currency from government regulation?
Obviously this is a huuuuge question, but it's such a good one.
The simplest compact answer, at least to me (and it may in fact be an oversimplification) goes something like this:
* Nearly invariably (and with a decreasing number of exceptions as technology advances), states which have control over both sides of the economic equation (ie, monetary concerns as well as national finance) find themselves unable to resist devolving into empire, and a specific type of empire called a "welfare-warfare" state, where the money supply is carefully controlled in such a way as to produce just enough support (often through pseudoscientific 'macro-economic' analysis and 'unemployment' prevention) to preclude revolution, while also projecting military power on poorer parts of the world in order to capture resources in a misguided effort to service the never-ending debt that accompanies the fiat money system.
In this view (and to be clear, it's one I hold), states with these powers (a clear conflict of interest, IMO) will continue to plunder the earth and attempt to enslave its people indefinitely, and can only be practically stopped by the economic adjustment that comes from the introduction of a hard currency (which causes the cycle of debt service to become impossibly onerous, even for an empire state).
* For a less oversimplified version, I might recommend Ron Paul's book "End the Fed", which is an introduction to the history of hard-money economics and can be read in a day or two.
* For an even less oversimplified version, you'll need to delve into the "Chicago School" and / or "Austrian School" of economics. Milton Friedman and Ludwig Von Mises are probably the best known scholars of each.
- I felt the same way when I discovered bitcoin last year. Here are some books that I read that helped:
* "End the Fed" by Ron Paul
* "Economics in One Lesson" by Henry Hazlitt
* "The Mystery of Banking" by Murray Rothbard
* "What has government done with our money?" by Murray Rothbard
* "Debt: The First 5000 Years" by David Graeber
- I'm not a troll. Read my blog, my past posts here, posts on reddit, posts on the Bitcoin Forum, and my Tweets. I mean what I say.
> Are you a techie? Do you understand the web? Who would you want writing legislation to govern the web? Lawyers who are clueless about the web and think that the internet is a series of tubes, or people that are VERY web savvy - like Tim Berners-Lee, et. al? The same thing applies to finance, banking and everything else. Makes no sense to have people writing legislation or creating systems that don't understand what they are doing.
The tech equivalent of the Fed would be if the techies designed an internet where 1) all information goes through some central servers that they control, 2) they sell that information and profit, 3) everyone is legally required to use their internet and not a competing internet for sending information over long distances. This would be a corrupt, Fed-like version of the internet where some particular group of people have all the power and use it for their own benefit. This analogy isn't perfect, but it captures the basic point, that the Fed was designed in a corrupt way. It doesn't matter that the corrupt people were experts or not. If anything, being experts and using expert-jargon just allowed them to mislead everyone about the true purpose of their design - socialism for the rich.
For more of this type of information on the Fed, read "End the Fed" by Ron Paul and "The Case Against the Fed" by Murray Rothbard.
> If that's the case, why has inflation been so low in the US in the last two years, when the Fed undertook the largest expansion of it's balance sheet in modern history? i.e. it has printed more money recently, than at any other time in it's mandate - but inflation AND inflation expectations are still low.
The Fed publishes misleading inflation numbers. Anyone who spends a lot of their income on things like food and energy recognizes that prices are rising pretty quickly. For me one price that stands out is that a cup of coffee used to cost less than $2 a few years ago, but now costs something like $2.30. It stands out because paying $2 and receiving a nickle as change is a lot more convenient than paying $3 and receiving $0.70 as change.
However, I agree that inflation is not as high as I would expect given just how much money the Fed has printed. I'm not exactly sure where the new money has gone, but it is probably just sitting around in some bank accounts somewhere, not circulating in the economy, and that's why we haven't felt it more than we have. I suppose it is probably being used by banks to patch up their balance sheets after the crisis and that's why it is just sitting there. My bet would be that in the coming years, that money will get used, and that's when we will really start to feel the inflation. When coffee reaches $5 per cup, we will know QE1 and QE2, etc., have trickled down.
- > Ron Paul's cries to Audit The Fed
Its "End the Fed"
- I had this view as an undergraduate in economics. I got really really into reading Marx and Mises and Hayek etc... which at the time was mostly just academic theory. "End the Fed" lead by Ron Paul kind of started this movement IMO.
Anyway, the reality is people don't want the constraints of denominated money because it's not flexible enough for human desires.
Credit has roots in non-exact social contract that predate banking forever, so the concept of borrowing, interest etc... are as you point out old. The fact that Islamic traders in 600AD decided to not charge interest is totally irrelevant to modern monetary theory
And that's what I find is the difference in how people view these issues, do you look forward to how we can use existing and new methods for exchange? Or do you look backwards and try to re-create a previous system?
I've never seen the second strategy actually work because people reject it.
Related
The Case Against the Fed
1 recommend · 2
Debt
182 recommend · 440
Shut Out
2 recommend · 7
Macroeconomics
2 recommend · 2
Basic economics
88 recommend · 156
What Has Government Done to Our Money?
16 recommend · 19
Central Banking 101
13 recommend · 18
