Edward Harrison recaps part of today's Ron Paul-Bernanke exchange via twitter:
Ron Paul is asking Bernanke why he gave the money to banks and not the people. Waiting for response.More via Daily Paul:
Bombshell. At the end of his time, Ron Paul had the following exchange:
Ron Paul: Do you believe that gold is money?
Bernanke: No.
Ron Paul: Why do central banks hold gold?
Bernanke: It is an asset, like Treasuries. They're not money.
Ron Paul: Why hold gold, and not diamonds?
Bernanke: Oh, tradition, I suppose.
PWNED!
Ron is so smart and gets Bernanke to admit the darnedest things in the ring.
ReplyDeleteHe just upper cut Bernanke by asking him if he thought Gold was money. Bernanke, in a corner, leads with a quick jab - "no".
Ron ducks and mentions gold being money for 6,000 years (I think they call that "a tradition"?) and comes back with a blow to Bernanke's chest and asks, "Why do central banks hold gold?"
Bernanke, squirming on the mat says, "it's an asset".
Ron Paul then goes for the knockout and says, "Why doesn't the Fed hold diamonds?" Bernanke, in a choke hold gasps and says, "Tradition", and the bell rings.
—comment from Daily Paul
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteHere is the youtube
ReplyDeletehttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2NJnL10vZ1Y
Anyone notice how Ben Bernanke reached for water, taking a huge gulp after Ron Paul's questioning? He clearly looked unsettled to me.
ReplyDeleteGood Job Ron Paul! Most of the rest 'questioning' Ben Bernanke were doing nothing more than kissing his behind.
You've got to love Ron Paul. A truly humble man that cares deeply and passionately about his fellow man and their well-being and all the while deftly able to wipe any semblance of smug moralism and pseudo-intellect out of the picture. And, he's able to do this at his age (wink,wink)!
ReplyDeleteGo, Ron, go!
Btw, if gold is NOT money just why was it confiscated from private use by the FDR admin? Hmmm, Ben?
ReplyDeleteGold is no longer used as a medium of exchange. It's not money anymore.
ReplyDeleteI love it. I hope RP pisses all over them over and over again until retirement.
ReplyDelete"Ron Paul is asking Bernanke why he gave the money to banks and not the people"
ReplyDeleteMan, with this statement and after his vague suggestion about defaulting on the fed's bonds, I'm convinced Ron Paul is begging for hyperinflation. Jesus, have fed give every single person 17,000 dollars? Sure, he said he didn't really endorse the idea, but does he really have to ask why? Isn't the reason obvious?
@Anonymous 1:20 PM
ReplyDeleteIt was a rhetorical question. Of course the money would not be given to the people but if giving money to the people would cause hyperinflation, why would it not cause hyperinflation when given to banks? My question is also rhetorical.
"I'm convinced Ron Paul is begging for hyperinflation."
ReplyDeleteThe hyperinflation has already occured. The question is when will the multiplier effect and velocity of money cause prices to rise at a rapid rate to match the inflation?
:)
Unless of course you're one of those that believe rapidly escalating prices is the sign of "hyperinflation". I guess then it's a "phenomenon".
If so, you'r prolly in the majority view...so I'll just go about my way.
Carry on.
Btw, the nation defaults every day...and why is it so obvious that you should hand money out to poor people instead of banksters? I'm just curious. Do you mean because then price levels will rise more quickly if it's given to poor people?
Anonymous@1:02 PM,
ReplyDeleteA thing does not cease to be that thing even if that thing is not used.
Anonymous said... "Gold is no longer used as a medium of exchange. It's not money anymore"
ReplyDeleteTell that to the trade show People who accept gold, or the grocery stores that accept gold and silver. Granted there's not many, but gold and silver are still used as currency.
"Of course the money would not be given to the people but if giving money to the people would cause hyperinflation, why would it not cause hyperinflation when given to banks? "
ReplyDeleteBecause there's a difference between giving away money and exchanging reserves for treasuries. The Fed can eventually drain out the monetary base by selling the bonds it holds, which Bernanke will do. The fed can't reverse just printing and giving away money to the public.
As Matt Rognlie explains, even raising reserve requirements to 100% on checking accounts would not be enough to drain out the the already bulging monetary base back to trend, let alone 5 trillion.
http://mattrognlie.com/2011/07/06/required-reserves-much-smaller-than-you-think/
"It was a rhetorical question. "
ReplyDeleteAlso, I don't think it was simply rhetorical. Ron Paul has on another occasion (I think it was in his first hearing as the Chairman of the Monetary subcommittee) made the same point when he said we would have been better off had the Fed given away $100,000 dollars (his math was wrong, so he probably meant something smaller like 17k as he just said) to every single person in the US instead of doing what the Fed did.
"It was a rhetorical question. "
ReplyDeleteAlso, I don't think it was simply rhetorical. Ron Paul has on another occasion (I think it was in his first hearing as the Chairman of the Monetary subcommittee) made the same point when he clearly said we would have been better off had the Fed given away $100,000 dollars (his math was wrong, so he probably meant something smaller like 17k as he just said) to every single person in the US instead of doing what the Fed did.
Obviously, I don't really believe he wants hyperfinaltion. Just doesn't understand that implications of what he's saying.
Dr Paul knows what he's saying. Hyperinflation is already baked in, it's just a matter of time.
ReplyDeleteBTW, Hyperinflation isn't just high inflation. The latter is a gross increase in money supply, while the former is a complete loss of faith in the value of the currency. They are related, but distantly.
If the dollar (and yuan and euro and yen) begin a rapid slide in purchasing power before Nov. 2012, while gold goes parabolic, Ron Paul WILL win the presidency.
Anonymous @ 1:20,
ReplyDeleteRon Paul explains his point here (beginning at approx. 5:30):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pcHOuHPdGrU&feature=player_embedded
"Because there's a difference between giving away money and exchanging reserves for treasuries. The Fed can eventually drain out the monetary base by selling the bonds it holds, which Bernanke will do. The fed can't reverse just printing and giving away money to the public."
ReplyDeleteSo when is the big day when the Fed is gonna "drain" the monetary base? With the Bernank tipping off a possible QE3 do you see that happening next year maybe? My $10 says it'll never happen...and it'd have been better to help poor people rather than reward rich people who failed...not that either should be done...but if you have to pick the lesser of two evils.
Aside from the laughable claim you make that Bernanke is gonna drain out excess money...you failed to account for the multiplier effect as the "needed" reserves from the banksters enter the system...how do you sell bonds with negative real interest rates? Oh...that's right....you use the Fed for that....lmao
Your arguments are so funny.