Skip to comments.Ron Paul: "Nothing to fear from global currency" (C-SPAN 3/13/2001)
Posted on 01/03/2012 9:16:08 PM PST by Nachum
This clip, taken from C-Span, from a House session dating back to March 2001, shows Ron Paul stating there is nothing to fear from a global currency.... as long as it's backed by gold, of course. Listen at 0.32 (more in your face numerology), where Paul states there being nothing to fear from a "single, worldwide currency." He then goes on to praise the wonders of globalism, which he also claims is nothing to fear.
Is the establishment running scared of Ron Paul, or is that what "they" would like you to think? Is it so absurd to think they could be promoting Ron Paul while simultaneously "ignoring" and "attacking" him, thus giving him a sort of legitimacy in the eyes of a targeted vector in the never-ending dialectic scheme of mass media mind control?
What if abolishing the Fed has been in the plans all along, only to be replaced with something ever bigger and more nefarious?
(Excerpt) Read more at youtube.com ...
Maybe Obama can make Paulus Dumbus his VP instead of Biden.
So much for the Constitution
And a single Global government sounds dandy as well.
Beat me to it.
And that Global Government will respect the US Constitution that Paul professes to honor.
Bozo the clown is alive and well and running for Pres.
Does he still get Alex Jones’ support after this little gem? I’m confused, is RP an isolationist or a globalist?
So we’re all just one big, happy family tiptoeing through the tulips together. Well, isn’t that just ducky.
I’m so glad that he did NOT win tonight in Iowa or even take second. They said it was due in large part to his “foreign policy”. Well, DUH.
This guy has to go.
Interesting find...we have speculated before that the Pauls and their allies are simply another side of the same coin being tossed by the likes of Soros, etc. for their agenda along with Obama and company. This just adds more evidence to support that theory.
Even were it not for the ramifications of Revelations, I would find *both* a global government, and its necessary precursor, a global currency to be abhorrent. The reason?
Simply this, I am not so naive as to believe that when the adherents of same say "globally" that they do not mean exactly *that*, "GLOBALLY". I see neither galactic-travel capable space ships in orbit around our planet, nor have heard of any viable destination to take such to, in order to 'vote with my feet'. Have you?
Thus, these folks boldly state their intention of taking *my* interests in this planet, and any resources it may have, to serve *their* interests, wether I like it or not, by fraud, or by force if they deem it necessary. This is still theft on the grandest scale imagineable, no matter which way you care to slice it...
The abolish the fed crowd won’t like this.
In the video, he was referring to a gold backed international currency, not a CB paper Ponzi scheme. He didn’t mention an international currency that would exclude national currencies, either. He’s talking about gold, not a one world government or usurping the COTUS, but abiding by it. Just my 2 cents.
I can’t even wrap my brain around what kind of complete dolt would support this nuttier-than-squirrel-poop ass-hat!
He’s talking about gold as currency.
This makes sense.
Any currency backed by gold (really backed) and without any trickery or serious sovereign risk is better than any fiat currency - especially if that gold is dispersed throughout the market and instantly convertible from notes and/or non-precious specie.
There already is a global currency: gold.
The US dollar became the de-facto international currency, because it was "good as gold." If you had a US $20 bill, you could turn it in for a 22-karat gold double eagle. The slip of paper was simply the title to the gold. So the "international currency" wasn't actually the US dollar, it was gold, and gold still is today.
The fact that the US dollar still clings to the "international currency" designation even though it was detached from gold long ago is just an indication of the overwhelming inertia of the international financial system.
But gold cannot lie. Anyone can test it and determine its weight and purity. This fact is why FDR criminalized the possession of gold coin in 1933, as he went about ripping the heart out of the US dollar and replacing it with a web of lies spun by the Federal Reserve Bank and the US Treasury. The gleam of legal gold would have outshone the tarnished brass with which he replaced it, and he couldn't have that.
As a result the dollar has been in more-or-less free-fall ever since then as you can see from any graph, steadily destroying the hard-won savings of hundreds of millions of people, channeling it into the insatiable maw of big government. Unless you use a logarithmic scale, the line goes nearly straight down by 1990 or so.
If you have gold, as Ron Paul was saying here, you don't need the hollow assurances of corrupt, self-serving governments in order to trade with anyone, anywhere in the world. You have gold, and that's all you need.
Hes talking about gold as currency. This makes sense.
Not really. The only way you could increase money supply would be to mine more gold, and gold is really scarce!
As economies grow and populations increase, gold would become more valuable, locking the nation using gold as currency into constant deflation.
For example, take the US dollar. We own about 200 million ozs of gold. That is approximately 300 billion dollars worth at $1600.00 an ounce.
Our M1 money supply is 2.1 trillion dollars. That means that the gold would have to be valued at $11,200 per oz to cover money in demand accounts and on hand cash. Of course, you could devalue the dollar by 85% and accomplish the same thing. This is just based on the M1 money supply.
Our M2 money supply is four times higher.....
Gold backed currency, especially for the US, is a fantasy. That is the reason only RP is talking about it.
Whether its backed by gold or not, a global currency is a political move rather than a financial move. We already have (had?) a global currency in the dollar. The US dollar is accepted anywhere on the planet.
Simple question; where in the Constitution Ron Paul professes to support does it give the Federal Govt the authority to subordinate America to a global currency?
The global currency would certainly not be controlled by America and it would certainly have to be compliant with the requirements of Islam.
How LIBERTARIAN is a single currency, Paul? Ron, you need to leave the GOP.
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.