Libertarian ping! To be added or removed freepmail me or post a message here.
Posted on 04/03/2008 2:03:22 PM PDT by BGHater
Mr. Chairman,
I have never been opposed to regulation, although my idea of regulation differs from that of many people in Washington. The free market and its forces of supply and demand are the most effective regulator of the private sector, and have never been known to fail absent government intervention. But piling more public sector regulation on the private sector will have a detrimental effect on the health of our financial system and sow the seeds for the next financial meltdown.
What we in Washington should be discussing is increased regulation and scrutiny of public sector regulatory and oversight agencies such as the Federal Reserve Board, the SEC, and others. The Federal Reserve's actions got us into at least one depression in the last century, and have led to continued cyclical difficulties, including the current economic slowdown.
Back in the 1970s, government-caused inflation reached levels high enough that the Nixon administration decided to implement wage and price controls. Placing blame on greedy speculators, unscrupulous mortgage originators, or panicky investors, is a common reaction on the part of government.
The solution called for, despite the numerous documented failures of government regulation, is always more regulation, more government involvement in and control over the economy, and less free enterprise. Never is the blame placed squarely where it belongs, which is on the shoulders of legislators and regulators whose actions distort the market, prohibiting legitimate market activities and encouraging the development of labyrinthine and opaque financial schemes.
The latest regulatory plan from the Treasury Department, with the potential to turn the Federal Reserve into a super-regulator overseeing state-chartered banks, bank holding companies, and acting as a guarantor of market stability, is another in a long line of half-baked government responses to financial difficulty. Recession after recession has not impressed upon government leaders the reality that the Federal Reserve's monetary policy activities are what lead to market instability.
The business cycle, contrary to what Secretary Paulson and others seem to believe, is not endemic to the free market. It is always and everywhere the result of monetary inflation and subsequent malinvestment, which when it is discovered must of necessity be liquidated in order for a true recovery to occur. Delaying the liquidation will only prolong the crisis and ensure that the next crisis will be more severe.
Every government intervention will result in a distortion of the market and a subsequent shock somewhere down the line in the future. It is about time that we recognize the failure of government intervention, get our hands out of the private sector, and for once allow the market to function.
Very good analysis. I do wish others had paid attention to what he actually has SAID instead of what the RINOs and MSM SAY he says. We might finally be on our way to having a Constitutionalist going to the White House instead of having our choice of socialist a, b or c.
Ping-a-ling.
Libertarian ping! To be added or removed freepmail me or post a message here.
Yes, but the next crisis will likewise be softened by the actions of the fed, and this will continue until every manipulation tool is exhausted. Then, when someone else is in charge, TSWHTF. The free lunch will be served until then. This is politics Mr Paul, not economics. Sound fiscal policy is not as attractive short-term, and it is on this timescale that elections are decided. Just like social security and Medicare, the goal is not to prevent a crisis, but to defer it until dealing with the fallout is the job of someone else.
“We might finally be on our way to having a Constitutionalist going to the White House instead of having our choice of socialist a, b or c.”
From your keyboard to God’s ears!
Indeed. I pray constantly that God will intervene and give us a Godly man who knows what the Constitution means and what limits to power are...
I join you in that prayer.
The man is a genius and I just can’t understand why FReepers aren’t behind him, en masse.
http://www.dollardaze.org/blog/?post_id=00360
Another Ron Paul article on money, inflation and the government.
>>The man is a genius and I just can’t
>>understand why FReepers aren’t behind him, en masse.
His foreign policy; Specifically what many view as a “cut and run” stance on Iraq.
It’s not just Iraq, I saw a video of Ron Paul speaking on foreign policy and for a few moments I thought he was quoting Obama. Literally stuff like “we need dialog with the enemy, not bombs, we need to talk with people, with Syria, Cuba...”
I like Ron Paul, I think he’s 100% right on most issues. And to an extent he’s also right we should not put American lives at risk to “police” the world. Does Paul understand the threat of radical Islam? Or...is he seeing a larger picture?
Until recently I was gung-ho on any military effort against terrorists, kill them all. But after the Haditha Marines and the Evan Vela situations, I really wonder, is it worth it? Are Iraq and Afghanistan just distractions, our troops pawns in a political game, while our leaders on both sides are dupes of the Saudis?
Egads! I just read the articles at your link. If these things are true, does it even matter who become president? Each will just tinker around with matters that have no far-reaching impact, while the momentum of these larger yet hidden issues play themselves out.
For many years now I have been reading and thinking and trying to get at the missing pieces, which has been helped a great deal by knowing some people from other parts of the world, and the New Secular World Order is what comes more and more into focus.
What we see on TV, and even much of what we read on FR, is not what is really happening. Huge fusses are made over nothing, such as the Dubai Ports Deal, easy to paint black and white and get people into a tizzy on talk radio, but does anyone care we are in debt to that country for billions of dollars? We won’t import cigars from tiny Cuba, yet we have MFNS with China! People have no idea what’s really going on. They really think prescription drug coverage for seniors or No Child Left Behind are the critical issues of our time.
How dare he make sense?!?!?!?
Is that supposed to be black pawn or bishop pawn?
Does the religion of secular humanism have bishops?
BTTT
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.