You are here: Home / Archives for Economics

Please Support Ron Paul’s Audit the Fed Initiative – HR459 and S202

January 28, 2011 By 1 Comment

Over the past several months, Dr. Ron Paul has made it his personal mission to take on the Federal Reserve. Clearly, it is an issue that is important to him, as is evident by his scores of TV interviews on the matter, his bestselling book End The Fed, and his surprisingly popular bill HR-1207, which supports an “audit” of the Federal Reserve.

Recently, Congressman Paul was also appointed chairman of a subcommittee to oversee the federal reserve. While this position seems to have been overstated in it’s importance, it is a valuable platform for someone so passionate about monetary reform and has strengthened his voice supporting a full and public audit of the Federal Reserve bank.

Dr. Paul and his recently-elected son, Rand Paul, have reintroduced legislation into both houses of Congress – HR459 and S202 (originally HR1207 and S604). The support for this bill has been continuously building. The bill has hundreds of cosponsors. With our current economic situation and with the Federal Reserve printing money at will, we’ve never had a better time to pass such legislation. This initiative has a real chance of passing. Ben Bernanke and the Federal Reserve can print money at will, despite growing debt, without any oversight of Congress. Bailouts of private business and printing money despite growing debt is a clear recipe for financial disaster in our country. If you think the recent recession was bad, I fear, unless something is done, our economy will take a plunge much more severe. For more information on the Audit the Fed bill(s), check out AuditTheFed.com, which provides information on the bill, a petition, and tools to contact your local representatives about this bill.

The Campaign or Liberty has created a separate petition where you can encourage your Congressman to support a full audit of the Federal Reserve.

From the Campaign For Liberty’s petition:

“Audit the Fed”
Petition to Congress

Whereas: Congress has the authority to perform a public audit of the Federal Reserve, and the American people deserve to know how their tax dollars are being spent; and
Whereas: The Federal Reserve refuses to publicize its meetings and its inner-workings or even to account for $2 TRILLION in recent taxpayer-backed loans; and
Whereas: Allowing such secrecy to continue clearly allows for the potential for abuse; and
Whereas: The Federal Reserve System leads to constant economic crises like the current housing crisis and the resulting chaos; and
Whereas: The Federal Reserve System forces fuel, food, housing, medical care and education costs upward, meaning that everyone who is NOT on the government dole is forced to make do with less as the value of their money slowly decreases; and
Whereas: History shows us that riots, violence and full-scale police states can result when people finally realize fiat money isn’t worth the paper it’s printed on and REFUSE to accept it;
Therefore: In the interest of a healthy economy and more transparent government, I urge you to cosponsor the Audit the Fed Bill and seek a vote in the House.

Again, you can sign this petition here. If you support transparency in government and think we have a right to know how our money is being spent you should support this bill.

There is no reason I can think of not to support Ron Paul’s audit of the federal reserve. Even if you disagree with Dr. Paul’s view on ending the Federal Reserve, supporting and audit of the Federal Reserve and encouraging transparency can do no harm. Please take a moment to voice your support for these bills with your Congressmen.

On topic, Ron Paul recently addressed the House of Representatives, where he discusses the problems with the Federal Reserve, including it’s lack of transparency, how it creates economic problems such as inflation and unemployment, and how the Federal Reserve “facilitates deficit financing. Watch CSPAN’s video here:

At approximately 4:15 – “It’s the Federal Reserve. They are the ones who literally facilitate deficit financing. So for them to turn around and say it’s all the blame of the Congress, the are absolutely being disingenuous. It’s the Federal Reserve and the monetary system that encourages runaway deficits, runway spending, runaway militarism and runaway welfare-ism.”

At approximately 5:50 - “It was never meant for the Federal Reserve to have free reign and not have any oversight whatsoever. And we have to realize that this whole issue of central banking is not a new issue. It was here from the very beginning. Hamilton and Jefferson argued about it, Jefferson and Jackson, and many others were absolutely opposed to central banking . So it’s not a new issue, but there is no authority in the Constitution that grants this right to have a central bank and to create money out of thin air just to accommodate the politicians. We have a right and an obligation and a responsibility for oversight of the Federal Reserve. And our responsibility is to look at bad policy. The Federal Reserve is responsible for the inflation, and the business cycle, the unemployment – it is up to us to do something about it.”

According to Dr. Paul, the Federal Reserve has hired lobbyists and launched a Public Relation campaign for support their position.

I think it’s clearly a necessity for us to have transparency with an independent bank that can print money at will without any Congressional oversight.

Filed Under: Current Events, Economics, Federal Reserve, Legislation, Monetary Policy, Ron Paul Tagged With: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Quantitative Easing Explained Video

November 26, 2010 By Leave a Comment

Chances are you might have seen this already, but if you haven’t, here is great video explaining quantitative easing in a very straightforward, realist perspective:

Filed Under: Economics

Should We Really Tax “Radical” Oil Profits?

August 8, 2008 By 1 Comment

Many of you have heard the complaining or have been the ones complaining about the record profits that oil companies are making. ExxonMobil recent released their high record earnings for oil and natural gas, showing a $11.7 billion profit this quarter. This is the most profitable quarter for any company, ever. Barack Obama has called Exxon’s profits outrageous, suggesting a $1,000 rebate for working couples; this attractive rebate would be funding by “a windfall profits penalty on oil selling at over $80 per barrel.”

It’s hard to deny that for the average American, this is a very appealing proposal. The big oil companies are making record profits – shouldn’t we get a piece? As is expected, the concept of a federal handout is appealing to those who receive the handout, but we should consider the principle of the matter. Why should we get a portion of a public companies profits through tax? Did they lie, cheat, or steal? No. They’re simply being successful in the free market. Some argue that this taxation on windfall profits is necessary. Is it? Let’s look into it in more detail.

Worth noting is the fact that Exxon Mobil’s earnings actually fell short of what analysts predicted, which resulting in their stock price actually dropping. More importantly, the company’s net profit was a modest 8.5%. That’s a good profit margin, but it isn’t fantastic. Moreover, a company that has a mere 8.5% gain shouldn’t be taxed excessively with a profit penalty. That being said, few people know the difficulty it is to actually get the oil America has grown to depend on. Oil companies have to explore and produce oil, which requires large amounts of capital. Many times this process can hurt the company significantly, so there is a large amount of risk involved. When you contrast the 8.5% profits to a near 20% profit by Coca-Cola, things are put into a better perspective, especially considering that many regard oil as a necessary and soda as a luxury. Following the ideology of many people today, Barack Obama included, all companies that make more than Exxon Mobil’s radical 8.5% profits should have a penalty, profit tax. Not only does this go against the concept of liberty, the concept of taxing someone for being successful is fundamentally wrong.

The idea of taxing profits that aren’t excessive or placing a price cap goes against gthe entire concept of the free market. I would propose that with one comes the other. If we place a windfall profits tax on big oil companies, what do you think will happen? It doesn’t take a genius to figure it out – they’ll raise the price even higher to make up for the new tax! If the federal government increases tax on Exxon on other companies, it makes economic and business sense for the company, in turn, the raise their prices to make up for their decrease in revenue. If that happens, gas prices will spike even higher, leaving us with a choice; remove the profits tax, add a price cap, or live with an increased price for oil and gasoline. No one wants to pay high prices, so I think it’s practical to say that many legislators would propose we add a price cap. If they artificially force the price lower, this will result in a shortage. Not only will we have a shortage of fuel, but we will have a increased demand. With lower prices, people will want to travel more, but will be unable to do so because of the shortage.

The solution is to help create opportunities for entrepreneurs to find new ways to get oil, increase our supply by use of domestic oil, and explore alternative fuel options. Price ceilings, profit taxes, and more restrictions on the free market are not the solution and will only harm the economy and the average consumer, despite how just or attractive politicians make it sound.

Filed Under: Current Events, Economics, Free Market Tagged With: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

The Dangers of Economic Compromise

August 5, 2008 By Leave a Comment

Any type of political compromise is dangerous. In my opinion, you should never give up what you stand for, your  beliefs, your principles, or your personal liberty. Any law or compromise politically that takes away from one’s doctrine should be regarded with high scrutiny.

Economic compromise is especially dangerous and problematic to the country as a whole. One thing I’ve noticed in the past year or two is that there’s been increased anger over the free market. Because of recent economic problems, many people have blamed capitalism for Americas problems. Some people have gone so far as to suggest that we should rethink our entire economic structure and scrap capitalism for a much dangerous and unworkable socialistic system. In reality, socialism would be far worse that the most restricted of free markets; moreover, it is not the free market that has caused our recent economic problems, but rather restrictions on the free market and economic compromise.

What many people don’t realize is that the free market and limited government often go hand in hand. With a big government, the ability to have a truly free market is greatly restricted. Increased taxes, high tariffs, trade restrictions, zoning laws and other restrictions on trade are restrictions on free trade and should be reduced or eliminated.

A good example of a poor economic compromise would be keeping tax cuts for the poor but disposing of them for the rich. On the surface, this sort of thing sounds good to the average American. The greedy upper class gets taxed and I get taxed less. This is not good for the average citizen or America. Taxing the rich more than the poor doesn’t help the poor become any richer, it only makes the rich poorer – and that doesn’t help anyone. More importantly, the rich, the ones who would be taxed in such a compromise, are many of the people who create jobs, invest in companies, or venture in new startups. Essentially, by taxing the rich we would be hurting the economy by taking money away from people who would have otherwise pooled that money into economic investments and ventures.

Another example of a bad economic compromise would be in the matter of federal spending. The federal government is constantly spending more money than they have or receive in tax revenue; many times these spending are on trivial and unnecessary things. The government should be run like a household, at least in this case. Would you spend more than you have? Many people do and they end up with enormous debt and often file bankruptcy. It doesn’t take a genius to realize that radical spending and poor fiscal responsibility is hurting America.

In order to move towards economic freedom and keep our current economic liberties, compromise must be a rarity. Political compromise may sometimes be necessary, but one should never sacrifice ones principles or liberties, regardless of how attractive it may be.

Filed Under: Economics, Free Market Tagged With: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Bailouts Devalue the Dollar and Hurt the Taxpayer

July 27, 2008 By 1 Comment

People say that by not bailing out certain “essential” companies, things will get much worse. This is probably true. However, solving this problem by bailing them out isn’t the answer. It might help temporarily, but it doesn’t help the value of the dollar. These bailouts, including the housing bailout and bailouts of failing banks, do more longterm harm than good. They hurt the average citizen. In order to bail out these corporations, the federal government must use money it has collected. Where does it get the money? From the taxpayer. When the FDIC took over IndyMac, it’s estimated that around 10,000 people will lose $500 million that isn’t covered by the federal insurance. The FDIC estimated that the takeover of IndyMac will cost between four to eight billion dollars, which is quite a difference. That four to eight billion dollars comes out of the pocket of the average taxpayer, assuming they didn’t underestimate.

These bailouts are happening more and more frequently, and are costing the taxpayers more and more. The recent bailout of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac is estimated by the S&P to cost $1 trillion dollars, which is about $3,300 per person. Some have estimated the housing bill to cost around $1,300 per person as well.

This housing bill that was recently approved by the Senate throws billions more to the banks and homeowners who’ve acted recklessly. What happened was that lenders relaxed their standards and let home buyers take out loans that inflated the prices of homes. The housing bubble burst, making the losses enormous. Now many people are left with loans that they cannot repay. The Federal Reserve is partly to blame for these failures because they’re the one’s who set the conditions, such as artificially low interest rates that helped create these problems. This new 600 page bill that was recently approved does four things that hurt our economy and liberty. Firstly, this bill bails out Fannie Mae and Freddie mac, which gives an unlimited amount of credit to buy housing securities from these two companies. As Ron Paul mentioned, the Treasury will exchange Treasury Bills for the mortgage-backed securities; essentially, these securities now back the dollar. This will hurt the dollar’s value even more. Additionally, this bailout expands the national debt by nearly 1 trillion dollars. It also expands the reach of the government, making it mandatory that all mortgage brokers get fingerprinted unnecessarily and makes personal credit card transactions report to the IRS.

Additionally, bailouts set a bad precident and could potentially lead to more poor loans and bad spending. It’s a bad mindset to have, and could possibly lead to larger banks to make more reckless decision in hopes that the federal government will bail them out as well.

Filed Under: Economics, Federal Reserve, Legislation Tagged With: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
  • RSS
  • Twitter
  • Facebook