Wednesday, December 4, 2013

Ron Paul: Bitcoin Could 'Destroy the Dollar'

"There will be alternatives to the dollar, and this might be one of them," said  Ron Paul, according to CNN. If people start using bitcoins en masse, "it'll go down in history as the destroyer of the dollar.

But, Dr. Paul added, "Governments absolutely demand a monopoly on money and credit. They're not going to give it up easily.They will come down hard."

9 comments:

  1. COMEX DEC GOLD UPDATE:

    The shorts at the COMEX have or had a problem for sure. The problem is this – there is not enough registered gold to cover all the warrant transfers. That means shorts must be scrambling to find registered gold, or to find eligible gold they can transfer into register gold. IMO, this is indicated by how few of the outstanding futures have actually been issued for delivery after 3 days into the delivery period (~20%).

    http://www.jsmineset.com/2013/12/04/jims-mailbox-1411/

    ReplyDelete
  2. Governments do not demand a monopoly on money and credit. Nothing is doing to destroy the dollar. This is more crazy talk. Furthermore, if Bitcoin is going to get stronger against the dollar, then that will push Bitcoin out of circulation as people spend their dollars and hoard their Bitcoin.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "Governments do not demand a monopoly on money and credit."

      United States coins and currency (including Federal reserve notes and circulating notes of Federal reserve banks and national banks) are legal tender for all debts, public charges, taxes and dues. Foreign gold or silver coins are not legal tender for debts.
      —31 U.S.C. § 5103

      Delete
    2. You are just trying to confuse us with facts aren't you!

      Delete
    3. doing my best....

      Delete
  3. Dear commenters and RW,

    When I try to explain inflation and how the Fed has devalued the dollar, I use the game Monopoly as an example. Current rules, where the amount of dollars is fixed, the $100's are scarce but if the bank had an unlimited supply of $100s, each would be worth less and the properties would go up in price.

    Is this a correct analogy?
    Thanks for your input.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That is a good start Mark. Two other critical aspects: 1) the people who receive the money first (banksters) get to spend it before prices increase, 2) the new money tends to go to capital equipment, creating excess production. This imbalance causes the business cycle. Keynesians would say we have a lack of demand. What really occurred was over-production based on misleading price signals.

      Delete
    2. Awesome Mic!

      Add this-

      Imagine only the banker got the new $100 notes, and you ca see how quickly the hotels go to him.

      Delete
  4. OK, I guess Ron Paul supports Ponzi schemes. Mr. Wenzel please explain why Ron Paul is wrong about competing currencies?

    ReplyDelete