Battered Voter Syndrome

For Those Suffering from This Debilitating Disorder, New Poll Suggests Recovery Has Begun.

A recent poll taken at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) in Washington, D.C. shows conservatives are fed up with the current political regime and want a new batch of leaders.

The poll ( shows 82% of those asked think the Republican Party no longer represents them. The results of the poll are tantamount to a “no confidence” vote and come in the wake of the Republican Party’s stunning defeat in November.

“Like battered spouses, many voters held on, believing time and again the promises the Republicans made about limiting government, staying true to conservative ideals and getting the country back on track” commented Constitution Party ( National Chairman Jim Clymer. “For far too long voters endured the disappointment of years of broken promises from those they trusted. Now, it appears voters are quietly packing their bags, filing for divorce from their abusive political party and moving in with a party that has never strayed from its constitutionally-sound platform” Clymer noted.

We Won’t Be Fooled Again

The CPAC respondents also registered their disapproval of the so-called ‘front-runners’ the GOP is offering as presidential candidates in ’08. Close to 90% of those polled said they’d vote for the conservative standard bearer Colorado Congressman Tom Tancredo over such hyper-liberal GOP darlings as Rudy Giuliani (24%) and Arizona Senator John McCain (16%). In fact, those asked said they’d vote for a third party candidate if McCain wound up being the Republican nominee. Texas Congressman Ron Paul-who has a 100% constitutionally-sound voting record, but is assiduously ignored by the Republican leadership, polled at a high 62%.

“It appears conservatives have had their hearts broken far too many times to sit quietly by and take another beating,” said Constitution Party Communications Director Mary Starrett. “Even the most trusting party loyalists have come to the embarrassing conclusion that it’s time to seek a dissolution, cut their losses and recoup what’s left of their political pride. That is why the Constitution Party has become the third largest party in the country. Disheartened voters leaving both “Big Box” parties are contacting us daily, flooding the political blogosphere with posts about their new home at the Constitution Party and visiting our website( in unprecedented numbers,” Starrett added.

Time to Move Out

“My view is that the Republican Party is beyond repair” commented author Tom Kovach. One cannot be for border security and vote Republican. The leading proponents of border security within the Republican Party — US Representatives Tom Tancredo and Ron Paul — are being virtually ignored by their own party”, Kovach lamented. Jim Clymer noted: “Now that voters recovering from Battered Voter Syndrome are discovering there is a way out after all, the Republican policy makers will have to realize they have no one to blame but themselves”.

70 Responses to “Battered Voter Syndrome”

  1. globalist_elitist Says:

    My dream scenario is that Mike Huckabee, Ron Paul, or Tom Tancredo win the GOP nomination and Bill Richardson wins the Dem. That would immediately realign the two parties - which is something that’s slowly happening anyway - with the business community switching to Dem, and the anti-growth liberals switching to the GOP. The way that the parties are aligned now is illogical and historically unique. The GOP was the liberal of the two parties for most of the time up until the Civil Rights Act.

  2. Trent Hill Says:

    It doesn’t matter. The flick of a wrist decides which party is to the left/right of the other. They are so similar it doesn’t even REALLY matter.

    Mike Huckabee is authoritarian.

  3. globalist_elitist Says:

    Huckabee is really, really, really bad. But the Republican-Christian-Right (as opposed to the anti-war CP-Christian-Right) only care about one thing - the declared religiosity of the candidate.

    As someone who wants to hasten the realignment of political parties, I would really like to see Huckabee someone come away with the nomination. He would be my top pick. He got like an F from Cato and the Club For Growth has practically said they will campaign against him.

    I see the parties eventually realigning into one that is pro-growth and secular, and another that is anti-growth and theonomist. The misalignment now does not make sense.

  4. Trent Hill Says:

    No, the Christian Right does not just care about the Religiosity of the candidate. Otherwise JimmyCarter would have been awarded widespread support from them. Sam Brownback would be garnering about 10%.
    That being said, the Club For Growth is one of the better groups in the GOP. If they could succeed,maybe we wouldnt have to work so HARD against the GOP. But that wont happen.

    Of course. After all that. I think I would rather see Richardson elected over Huckabee. And Guliani and McCain too.
    Richardson is by far the best Democrat.

  5. Doug Craig Says:

    Does anyone rember the Harry Browne commercials-Battered voter ads

  6. globalist_elitist Says:

    Hey Trent, we are agreeing a little too much.

    The Religious Right was not much of a political force in the Carter era. They stayed out of politics. I blame Carter for bringing relgiosity into mainstream politics; a vein on which Reagan seized.

    As it stands, Richardson is my candidate right now. I do not like his leftist rhetoric on many issues, nor the targetted tax breaks (as opposed to general tax cuts) he promoted in NM, but who are my other options as a pro-growth liberal? Giuliani’s civil liberties record is too poor, and he is a Republican, so he will make Republican appointments, etc.

    This is THIRD-PARTY WATCH, and I wish there were a candidate for me, either an independent or Libertarian, who better suited my views. Maybe there could be. But we can talk about two things, which aren’t necessarily the same things: 1) Who we will/should vote for; and 2) Who we hope will win (of those who have a realistic chance). Unfortunately, as a long-time supporter of third-party candidates, I do not have a horse in this race. If Phillies were not anti-immigration and anti-trade, he would be my man. If Kubby were more pro-growth (i.e. not dillusionally anti-Fed), he would be my man. As it is, Richardson is the best (for me).

  7. Trent Hill Says:

    I was saying Richardson is the best of the Democrats.
    This is like being the best snow skier in all of Guam.

    The best candidate is Ron Paul.
    Getting him elected would be the best overall. He would appoint small-government republicans, Libertarians, Constitutionalists, and conservatives in general.

  8. globalist_elitist Says:

    I knew what you meant. Sorry if you thought I was trying to put words in your mouth. Then again, in another thread, you accused me of saying that I liked Giuliani, when that is not what I said at all.

  9. matt Says:

    Pimping (old definition) religous folk by using all the right rhetoric is at least as old as Lincoln, who was notorious.

    I agree that Ron Paul is 100% the man, and also intend to spread his name around, but what’s the backup? I don’t see a #2 guy presenting himself for the freedom movement. I’ll vote Kubby if I have to (heck, I might vote Richardson in a certain situation) , but I just wish there was a 2nd guy to get excited about.

  10. Trent Hill Says:

    Depends on who the CP guy is. He will certainly get my vote if Ron Paul doesnt get the nomination (which is likely).
    I like Kubby,he would be my vote if there were no CP candidate.

    However, I wouldnt vote for Richardson. The reason being as follows:
    He would appoint non-like minded individuals. He would appoint whomever the DNC wanted him too, which would include heavy spenders and anti-constitutionalists. Richardson plays to his party.

    You’re probably going to say Ron Paul would too. I disagree. He is alright with not being in the favor of the GOP,he has proved this by working with Dennis Kucinich and regularly voting “hell no.”

    If it were an election with no CP/LP ticket. Then we could talk.

    Sorry about the Guliani statement, but you DID say you liked hix taxation and revnue ideas. You have to know he isnt serious.

  11. Eric Cartman Donfascist Says:

    Giuliani is the Man. You should respect his Authorita.

  12. globalist_elitist Says:

    Trent - Interesting that we can both like Richardson among the Dems and Kubby among the Libertarians, and yet be so entirely different. No, I don’t want a hug, I just think it’s interesting.

  13. globalist_elitist Says:

    Well, hell, I’d rather have Ron Paul appoint a right-wing GOP nutjob than Dennis Kucinich!

  14. Trent Hill Says:

    HAHA. We can agree there.

    The truth is, the fact that our ideologies are SO different and yet our presidential candidates of choice (in certain parties) can still be aligned shows the areas of mutual interest and the areas where the parties overlap.
    Mind you,im not suggesting the CP overlaps with the Dems. But it might do so more than with the Republicans. At least conservative democrats ACTUALLY dont spend that much and have a better civil liberty record.

  15. Andy Says:

    “globalist_elitist Says:

    March 27th, 2007 at 12:53 pm
    My dream scenario is that Mike Huckabee, Ron Paul, or Tom Tancredo win the GOP nomination and Bill Richardson wins the Dem. That would immediately realign the two parties - which is something that’s slowly happening anyway - with the business community switching to Dem, and the anti-growth liberals switching to the GOP. The way that the parties are aligned now is illogical and historically unique. The GOP was the liberal of the two parties for most of the time up until the Civil Rights Act.”

    Ron Paul being elected would be the best thing to ever happen to the economy and to liberty in general in a long time.

    “If Kubby were more pro-growth (i.e. not dillusionally anti-Fed), he would be my man. As it is, Richardson is the best (for me).”

    The Federal Reserve is not pro-growth, they are a counterfitting operation that engages in mass theft and oppression. Your support of this evil institution says that you are either an IDIOT or you are evil yourself. My guess is that you are just an IDIOT.

    Anyone who supports the Federal Reserve is NOT a libertarian.

  16. globalist_elitist Says:

    The United States has the greatest monetary system in the history of mankind; we are the richest nation in the history of civilization. Economic growth in the time since the inception of the Fed has been unlike anything the world has ever seen. And yet a small group of delusionals would abolish the system that has brought us so much prosperity and return to a system that kept us chained in poverty? It’s unbelievable.

    The money supply needs to expand with economic output, population growth, etc. It cannot rely on the energy-intensive, non-productive mining of a worthless, idolotrous metal. An independent central bank is the best mechanism for managing the money supply. It is not without error, but central banking has improved over time - particularly in the most recent years. Bankers have learned from their mistakes. I believe Bernanke will be the best Fed chairman ever, not because he’s a genius, but because he’s standing on the shoulders of all who came before him.

    You don’t support the nation’s central bank because you don’t understand how it works, how the economy works, what an economy is, and/or what money is. Would you like to read a short book I wrote explaining the Fed to mortgage brokers?

  17. George Phillies Says:

    Global Elitist:

    I receive inquiries from people with odd ideas about the Federal Reserve system, for example that it is owned by Swiss bankers, but who have minds that can be opened. I also have inquiries from people who cannot distinguish between ‘welcoming immigrants’ and ‘not being disturbed if large foreign countries ship us all their insane people to our welfare system’. What is your short book?

  18. globalist_elitist Says:

    Dr. Phillies: My book is a training manual for mortgage brokers, and as such, it does not address delusional conspiracy theories. I will email it to you if I can find your email address. It is not boring.

    The conspiracy theory that large countries are shipping boatloads full of retards to our shores is about as bad as the “Fed is a Jewish-Conspiracy” one. What are you talking about? Welfare is provided at the state level, correct? So run for governor on the platform plank of not providing welfare to non-citizens. You would have my vote.

  19. matt Says:

    You’ve got a training manual for morgtage guys? Could you send me a copy? I realize that you extended this offer to Dr. Phillies, and he is a presidential candidate, while I am a guy who surfs the web too much. That being said, I’d love a copy.

    [email protected]

  20. globalist_elitist Says:

    Sent. But to clarify, it is a training manual designed to explain interest rates and the Fed to mortgage lenders, not a “How to be a Mortgage Lender” book.

    I’ve also written one on the stock market for complete beginners.

  21. matt Says:

    even better, many thanks!

  22. Trent Hill Says:

    GE,the cynic…creating something?
    If anyone has ever seen High Fidelity (and I pray that all of you have) you’ll catch the reference.

  23. globalist_elitist Says:

    All I do all day is create. I sell my labor (often to foreigners), take the proceeds in Fed bank notes, and then reinvest in buying the labor of others (always foreigners, to date) to build the businesses that I’m creating so that one day soon, I won’t have to sell my labor at all.

    You see, this is comparative advantage. I have a skill that most others don’t, and thus I’m compensated nicely for it. I then hire those who have skills that I don’t - graphic design and computer programming. In the absence of free trade, I would have to do my own computer programming (much slower, not as good), my bosses would have to do their own writing (inferior quality, lower sales), and the Indians and Bangladeshis would need to do whatever Indians and Bangladeshis did before computer programming in order to eat. Everyone would be poorer, much less business would be contracted.

    And yet…. We - the financial writer/aspiring entrepreneur, the existing financial business owner, and the computer progammer/web designer from India - should all sacrifice ourselves so that some unskilled American douchebag gets to “keep” his job - a job for which there is no market so long as his rates are too high?

    This is the logic of the GP/CP-Fusion-Dobbs Party.

  24. globalist_elitist Says:

    I’m amazed that the CP types watch movies like High Fidelity and listen to the Jim Rome show. I thought you devoted 100% of your day to Bible study, border patrol, and envy.

  25. Eric Dondero Says:

    C-PACers saying they want to support a 3rd party.

    And ironically, we also see Libertarian Party folks now rushing to the Republican Party to support Ron Paul. So far, 2 local LPs have endorsed REPUBLICAN Ron Paul, and an entire State LP is now considering the move.

    full story at

  26. matt Says:

    Not sure it’s a move per se, Eric. I’m sure that Ron Paul will gather a good many endorsements from LP members and groups, but they’ll still promote the heck out of their own parties’ candidates for the lower offices, I daresay.

  27. Eric Cartman Donfascist Says:

    Any libertarian who is not endorsing Rudy Giuliani is clearly not mainstream.

  28. Eric Cartman Donfascist Says:

    I like how this guy thinks!

    I’m Prepared To Give My Life For This Or Any Country

    By Curtis Stalbank
    March 28, 2007 | Issue 43•13
    The Onion

    As a true patriot, I would gladly die in battle defending my homeland. I love my country more than my own life. But I would also be more than willing to give my last breath in the name of, say, Mexico, Panama, Japan, or the Czech Republic. The most honorable thing a man can do is lay down his life for his country. Or another country. The important thing is that it’s a country.

    Like those heroes who spilled their blood fighting for independence against the British Empire, I, too, would forfeit everything to win for my countrymen the right to be governed by politicians in our own capital instead of in a capital located further away. Nothing is more profound or more sacred than to die for one’s country, an adjacent country, or some other, foreign country.

    The truth is, there are a lot of countries, each of which is the most noble cause possible to die for. I only regret that I have but one life to lose for but one country.

    I would not hesitate to give my life for or against any other noble nation. Come to think of it, I would even die for a neutral third party caught in the crossfire during a heroic peacekeeping effort, just so long as my death would be in some way related to a country of some kind. That’s how committed I am to the concept of nationalism.

    The bottom line is that the current boundaries of a nation are worth protecting at all costs. Otherwise, what would so many brave and patriotic souls have lost their lives for?

    I was lucky enough to be born in one of the 200 greatest countries in the world, and I promised myself long ago that I would never forget it. I can only hope to someday have the privilege of protecting this great land against whomever may seek to do it harm. Or to defend some other country against whomever may seek to do it harm. And vice versa.

    Ideally, I’d like to die for a country that was at least in the Western hemisphere but it’d be just as heroic to expire bravely on the end of a pointed stick deep in the jungles of Africa. My wife would be widowed and my children orphaned, but they would take solace in the knowledge that I had given my life to a cause that the people of some nation believed in.

    I only ask that I be given a soldier’s funeral so that I may be buried holding the flag or flags of wherever it was I was fighting for.

    There comes a time when all of us, no matter who we are, heed the call to the battlefield. It is a call we cannot and should not ignore, no matter where it is coming from. And if I must die, in the service of this or that country, I only hope I can at least take as many of the enemy with me as possible before I fall and breathe my last. Unless of course, they’re also fighting for a country. In which case, their deaths, at my hands, will have been honorable—because they, like me, would have died for a country.

    Without nationalism, our deaths in the countless wars we constantly wage to defend our own nations against others defending their own nations against us would seem arbitrary, almost meaningless. But as long as we have a higher purpose—the love of whatever country we happen to be fighting for—we will always know we did not lose our lives in vain.

  29. Andy Says:

    “globalist_elitist Says:

    March 28th, 2007 at 2:18 pm
    Dr. Phillies: My book is a training manual for mortgage brokers, and as such, it does not address delusional conspiracy theories. I will email it to you if I can find your email address. It is not boring.”

    Sure, as a mortgage broker you are a part of the scam, so this isn’t suprising. Just keep on creating money out of nothing and keep the debt machine rolling!

  30. Eric Cartman Donfascist Says:

    Mortgage brokers are great. We need people with money. And more mainstream moderates, like me and other people who want to nuke Mecca.

  31. globalist_elitist Says:

    I’m not a mortgage broker.

    There is no scam.

    Money is worthless. It is what can be purchased with money that has value. 99% of people are richer today than all but 1% of people in 1912. Nobody had a computer, the internet, a dishwasher, air conditioning, an SUV, cable, TiVo, cell phones, etc. in 1912. Now we all do.

    If that’s a “scam” then sign me up.

  32. Trent Hill Says:

    None of those things were invented yet,GE…that has nothing to do with the FED,it has to do with ingenuity and capitalism. But not a shadowy private bank.

    As for high fidelity…it sits between V for Vendetta and Empire Records in my movie rack.

  33. globalist_elitist Says:

    The things weren’t invented because there wasn’t a pro-growth financial infrastructure, and the stable prices, predictable price levels, and liquidity that are necessary to fuel innovation, ingenuity and capitalism. Duh. Is it a coincidence that economic growth took off with the creation of the Fed? It took off again when gold was revalued under FDR. And world economic growth took off once the international gold standard was abolished once and for all. You guys are wrong to be focused on monetary policy, it is the government’s fiscal policy that is inhibitting growth. Then again, you want to end free trade and reduce immigration, so growth is not your primary concern. You are the types who would have erected barriers to “protect” the jobs of farmers back when 93% of the U.S. work force was agricultural. A transition to just 3% of the workforce in agriculture was not painless. It hurt like hell for some people. But now 3% of people work to feed the world, while the rest of us can make more stuff for us to enjoy. That is pro-growth economics.

  34. globalist_elitist Says:

    And what is “shadowy” about the Fed? Would you like me to send you my book?

  35. SovereignMN Says:

    GE says: “I’m amazed that the CP types watch movies like High Fidelity and listen to the Jim Rome show. I thought you devoted 100% of your day to Bible study, border patrol, and envy.”

    Just one of many things you are extremely wrong about.

  36. Eric Dondero Says:

    Yeah, sure Matt. Yes, the Libertarian Party even if hey back REPUBLICAN Ron Paul will continue to “promote the hell” out of their lower level candidates. But what’s the problem with that? That’s a good thing.

    It’s rather ironic that a Republican like Ron Paul may actually end up helping lower level Libertarians to win their elections. That’s a positive for the overall libertarian movement.

    I just wish more cynics of the Libertarian Republican approach would admit that.

  37. Winston Smith Says:

    Is Eric fascist for real-a product of too much Govt schooling and Faux ‘News” Network.

    Mecca is ins Saudi, which is our friend despite the majority of 9/11 hijackers coming from there. We only nuke non NWO conformists.

  38. Jay Matthews Says:

    “Money is worthless. It is what can be purchased with money that has value. 99% of people are richer today than all but 1% of people in 1912. Nobody had a computer, the internet, a dishwasher, air conditioning, an SUV, cable, TiVo, cell phones, etc. in 1912. Now we all do.”

    A dollar also had far more purchasing power in 1912 than it does now. Also the debt people have today exceeds that of 1912. Makes one wonder what your definition of “richer” is.

  39. globalist_elitist Says:

    How many 1912 dollars did it cost to buy a laptop in 1912? Let’s measure purchasing power in terms of productive goods, not worthless baubles.

    Household networth is at an all time high. Over 1/2 of American households have zero credit card debt. Homeownership in 1910 was at about 40%, now it’s over 70%. Productivy per hour of work is much greater, overall output is infinitely larger. Enterpreneurs are able to get financed… If your definition is 40 acres, a mule, and lifelong toil and poverty, then yeah, the Fed is bad.

  40. SovereignMN Says:

    The one thing that is higher today than 1912 is the standard of living…which begs the question of whether it is better to be a pampered slave or an austere freeman. Give me freedom.

  41. globalist_elitist Says:

    You’re never “free” when you’re forced to work 12 hours a day just to break even.

    If you feel oppressed by the Fed, you are entirely delusional and a loser. Anyone can be anything they want to be in this great country. It’s just liberals and theocrats who suck at life who search for boogey-men to blame for their failures as human beings.

  42. SovereignMN Says:

    GE Says: “You’re never “free” when you’re forced to work 12 hours a day just to break even.”

    You are never free when you’re forced to work 3 hours a day just to satisfy the government demanded for taxes.

  43. Jay Matthews Says:

    “Over 1/2 of American households have zero credit card debt.”

    Is this because they can’t qualify for one?

    “Productivity per hour of work is much greater, overall output is infinitely larger.”

    Productivity and output has what to do with the dollar? It has lots to do with improved and more efficient manufacturing methods. Something that existed when money backed by gold and silver.

  44. globalist_elitist Says:

    I’d rather work 3 hours a day to pay taxes, doing knowledge-work; than work 12 hours a day on a farm just to barely survive, with no medical care, no electricity, and no indoor plumbing. You jokers hate capitalism, you hate wealth, and you hate progress.

    Gold-backed dollars? There was no access to credit under the gold system. Hence the giant monopolists. Gold and sliver are essentially worthless sacramental ornaments. Do a pagan rain dance and worship the god of gold. You suck at life. If you don’t, go out and get rich.

  45. SovereignMN Says:

    “I’d rather work 3 hours a day to pay taxes, doing knowledge-work; than work 12 hours a day on a farm just to barely survive, with no medical care, no electricity, and no indoor plumbing”

    Please tell me what the working conditions were like in the capitalism utopia known as the industrial revolution?

  46. globalist_elitist Says:

    It wasn’t a capitalist utopia because a) There was no a sophisticated financial infrastructure (i.e. the Fed, etc.); b) There was not access to credit for entrepreneurs (see “a”); c) There was major protectionism and government/business collusion to hold down wages; d) Segregation and other non-market-based values inhibited the free market; and e) There wasn’t an adequate, minimal social safety net that encouraged risk taking.

    We are living in the most utopian time right now. We need to focus our energies on lowering taxes and spending, restraining government’s initiation of force, and letting markets work. Then we would have a real capitalist utopia.

  47. Jay Matthews Says:

    “We need to focus our energies on lowering taxes and spending, restraining government’s initiation of force, and letting markets work. Then we would have a real capitalist utopia.”

    Amen to that, but if you understand those who are recognized as knowledgeable on the subject, (many of which appear in Aaron Russo’s film), specifically that the IRS is collection agency for the FRB and the money collected is used to help pay down the interest on the money borrowed by the gov’t, then the utopia is a pipe-dream.

    But I’m going to guess you think those people are kooks. Am I wrong?

  48. Liberty Action Says:

    Are Eric Dondero and globalist_elitist the same person? Or are they both caricatures made up by someone to generate comments?

  49. globalist_elitist Says:

    I watched Freedo to Fascism. It was a movie of, by, and for financially illiterate people.

    The government’s debt arises from its deficit spending - not the central bank.

    F2F made a compelling case that there is no law specifically compelling individuals to pay income tax on their labor. Quite compelling. But strangely - and not surprisingly - it did not take the same care in laying out a case against the Fed. Instead, it laid out absurd allegations like “our standard of living is lower” today than in 1912. Are you kidding me?

    I think the evidence speaks very strongly to the notion that there is no law compelling people to pay their income taxes, and that when push comes to shove, they are collected by brute force. However, this is not the same as saying that the income tax is not a good idea. If we accept that some limited form of government must exist and that it must fund its operations through some mechanism, then the funding should be acquired in the least anti-growth manner as possible. A tax on the unimproved value of land is probably best of all, but a tax on income is second best. Low tax rates with a larger standard exemption at the bottom and a single flat rate. That’s my prescription.

    But what of the fact that there may be no law to collect taxes? Even a delusional freak like Ron Paul kinda eschews the question. Pass a law. Ex-post facto, pardon all non-corporate tax protestors. I’d be for that.

    Liberty Action - Dondero is an anticapitalist militarist. I am a Capitalist Dove.

  50. Devious David Says:

    ... So what happened to June Cleaver? She has to work a job now to make ends meet and send the Beaver to daycare.

    There have been substantial improvements due largely to technology. There was no laptop computer or Internet in 1912. Not all improvements, and likely none of them that you allude to are due to fiat money. They are due to technology, in spite of the government’s destruction of science via grants, regulation and various forms of intervention.

    Don’t you find it interesting that the income tax and WWI (and many other monstrosities) all came right after the establishment Federal Reserve? It’s no coincedence.

    You are correct that fiat money is great. At first. The booms are just wonderful, but they all come at the price of a bust. And inflation. We are getting near a bust and hyperinflation is around the corner. Inflation since the Carter administration has been hedonically adjusted downward at an increasing degree.

    You overlook the great depression, stock market crashes, recessions, bubbles, Asian crises etc. How ‘bout the subprime lending bubble that is busting up right now?

    Fiat money leads to imbalances within the economy and a highly unequal distribution of wealth. It also impinges private capital formation, giving the control over to the banks. And what of the control of the banks themselves? The Federal Reserve System is a private system owned by the privately owned member banks. It’s as federal as Federal Express, if you omit the board of governors.

    Do you honestly beleive that central planning of any economy is absurd… except in the case of monetary policy, which should be determined by a Soviet-inspired central committee, meeting about every month or so?

    Here’s a good video on inflation. I really need to finish it myself, but the first few minutes are good so far. (60 min Google video)

  51. globalist_elitist Says:

    Devious: Yes, June “has to work” now. As if she didn’t have to work before! Women spent entire days doing housework and preparing meals in the past. Now, thanks to technology, they don’t have to. This frees them up to pursue more productive tasks. The fact of the matter is that a one-person working household is much more easily attainable today than it was 50 years ago, when only the ultra rich could afford to have non-working women.

    Technology and innovation are directly due to ready access to credit. How do you gold freaks not see this? No credit = no economic growth.

    The crash of ‘29 and the Great Depression were a direct result of the gold standard, not of fiat money. Inflation in the 70s was caused by wreckless fiscal policy; not monetary errors. Monetary policy could have been better, but it was the mega spending of LBJ and Nixon that caused the inflation, and the cowardice of Ford and Carter that continued it. Of course, Carter did one good thing, which is appoint Volcker to the Fed. Volcker reset the economy and Reagan took all of the credit. Reaganomics, not fiat money, is the real fraud.

    The Fed isn’t “Soviet-style central planning.” It merely provides an infrastructure, no more intrusive than patent law, interstate highways, the court system, etc. The Fed cannot control everything. It can only guide. And thank the imaginary God that the Fed is privately owned, because if it weren’t, the politicians who controlled it would never have the courage to make the tough decisions like Volcker did.

    The subprime lending bubble? Yeah, it’s a mess. But a majorly overstated one. Bankers made bad loans, they deserve to bear the consequences. Yes, those consequences will have spillover effects on the rest of the economy, and may even cause a recession. Shit happens. And honestly, better central banking could have mitigated the boom and bust, but nobody can be perfect.

    I mean, Jesus Christ - do you know the economic history of the U.S. pre-Fed? It was filled with much more frequent panics, and marked by long-term economic stagnation, widespread poverty, longer working days, lower standards of living, and massive indentured servitude by the majoritarian agrarian populace, who was always in debt slavery to the banks, thanks to gold-based deflation. Life sucked. Now life is awesome. Some people hate the fact that life is good now. They hate that women work outside of the home, that we have TVs in our SUVs, etc. They yearn for the good old fuedal days. They’re morons.

  52. Trent Hill Says:


    TECHNOLOGY doesnt have much to do with Fiat currency.
    It has to do with timing, capital, and ingenuity of those living. As well as the competition that drives that ingenuity.

  53. globalist_elitist Says:

    It has to do with access to credit. It has to do with a non-deflationary environment of relatively stable prices that provides the infrastructure in which capital can become available.

    The Fed does not create wealth. It doesn’t even really create money. It plays an infrastructural role. Monetary policy clearly falls under the duties of a government and it is constitutional. An independent central bank with minimal direct oversight is preferable to political control of the money supply, which is inevitably hyper-inflationary. Gold - and other worthless (and worthy) commodities do not work well as money because the supply thereof cannot properly accomodate economic growth, and when gold is money, too much energy and productivity is sacrificed in the mining of a worthless metal. Economic growth should not be shackled by the supply of any or all commodities.

  54. Trent Hill Says:


    It is interesting to note you think the Market should drive itself, but are so focused on the HEAVY centralization of money.

  55. globalist_elitist Says:

    Um, no.

  56. Trent Hill Says:

    Um, explain how not?

    The Fed is extremely HEAVY centralization of money.

  57. globalist_elitist Says:

    I don’t agree at all. I don’t even understand the allegation. If you want a response from me, you have to spell out to me how the Federal Reserve system is a “concentration” of money. In comparison to what? Previous national banking models? Other central banks? No to both. The Fed system is extremely well dispersed.

  58. Trent Hill Says:

    The FED is the CENTRALIZATION of DECISIONS on money. It is a CENTRAL AREA for CONTROL, far from prying eyes.
    If you disagree with my allegation that it is “far from prying eyes”, check out when the last time Fort Knox was audited was…

  59. globalist_elitist Says:

    Fort Knox is the property of the U.S. Treasury, not the Fed.

    The Fed has a board of governors + the OMO committee, all appointed by the president with senate approval. They do not require appropriations from the government, and they engage in a minute percentage of Treasury transactions. They decide how much to charge member banks on overnight loans - loans that are RARELY taken out. And they determine the reserve requirement, which hasn’t been changed since 1988. There are Fed banks all throughout the country, the member banks are in virtually every city. Where is the centralization?

  60. globalist_elitist Says:

    Oh, and by the way: “Audits of the gold by the General Accounting Office (in cooperation with the United States Mint and the United States Customs Service) in 1974 and the Treasury Department from 1975 to 1981 found no discrepancies between the reported and actual amounts of gold at the Depository. Approximately 10% of the bullion is audited annually to ensure the amount and purity matches official records.”

    Governments continue to horde gold. Why? Because if they let it loose on the open market, the value would plummet. Gold is a welfare-subsidized ornament. It is worthless beyond its shine.

  61. Devious David Says:

    Governments lie. Besides, so what if the price of gold plummeted? The fact of the matter is that the central banks already have dumped their gold on the market. That’s why the price was so low during the 90’s. They are running out of ammunition. Most of the gold has been “leased” out, never to return.

    You should really go and seriously look at the work done by GATA. Fort Knox is probably empty.

    All you are really doing is parrotting what you “learned” in school. You think because you have a piece of paper from a government operated indoctrination camp, that you know money. What they taught you was wrong. Imagine for a moment if that is true (it is). Like all good Keynesians, you have a selective memory and revisionist history books.

    Your scramble to support and endorse central planning is amusing and sad. But at least we know where you really stand on the matter. You are a proponent of central planning and you cannot be relied upon to oppose it under any circumstance. You’re just a liberal that doesn’t like taxes, in other words. And a poor example of an anarchist.

    The causal link between gold and the problems you outlined is nil. You are also wrong about total wealth. June Cleaver doesn’t exist anymore because people have to run faster on the inflation treadmill. The cost of the goods is the same or lower, it’s the dollar that has depreciated. Explain why I can take a $1 silver dollar, melt it into a lump so that it has no numismatic value and then sell that lump for $10. I can buy 4 gallons of gasoline with $10. When that silver dollar was minted it would likely buy… (drumroll) 4 gallons of gasoline, because gasoline when priced in dollars was 25 cents.

    You might make a great libertarian one day, but I will have to consider staging an intervention in order to affectuate the process. Maybe I’ll start a website that people can contribute to. The money will go towards sending you to the Ludwig Von Mises Instittue to debate these issues with Lew Rockwell and Walter Block. Have you read Murray Rothbards “What has government done to our money”? Read it.

  62. globalist_elitist Says:

    I am not a Keynesian. Keynes had some valid ideas, and some elements of Keynesianism work well during certain environments. But I’m more of a monetarist.

    Central banks and governments currently hold 25% of the world’s gold - that’s 25% of all that’s ever been mined in the history of the earth. Governments hold 10 times the annual output of gold.

    If Fort Knox is empty - which is not - oh well. That would be like finding out my old copy of Monopoly has no “money” in the plastic tray.

    You are giving schools too much credit. I didn’t learn anything of any substance in school.

    Anarchist = no. Liberal = yes and proud. Fan of central planning = absolutely not. I’m a fan of American Capitalism; of the pro-growth financial infrastructure (which includes some taxation) that has allowed us all to be richer and live better lives.

  63. Devious David Says:

    Man, I thought you were an anarchist! You should be.

    “American Capitalism” is really a mixed-economy, quasi-facist perversion of true capitalism. An unfettered Market can best solve any problem. Taxation is an inhibition of the market and all government actions resulting from such are in direct contravention of the Market.

  64. globalist_elitist Says:

    Nah, I’m not an anarchist. Anarchism =/ capitalism. My former name was to symbolize an attitude, not a way of political philosophy.

    Capitalism cannot exist without the state. Adam Smith not only advocated a court system, patent office, and national defense, but also a public education system.

    Murray Rothbard is not the godfather of capitalism. He is a minor league thinker. Adam Smith, David Ricardo, John Stuart Mill, etc. These are the great minds of capitalism.

    How does capitalism exist without a court system, for example? It cannot. How can modern capitalism exist without patents, trademarks, and copyrights? Their absense is anti-growth.

    The government’s role in the economy is to facilitate prosperity. 99.9% of the time, that means doing nothing. But prosperity is best suited by the government providing a pro-growth infrastructure. This includes courts, intllectual property, defense, and public education, as well as coining money and administering monetary policy, and providing a minimal social safety net that encourages risk taking.

    John Stuart Mill said that, when the question was whether or not government should act, the default answer is always no. In order to justify action, it must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that it’s action is for the greater good or prosperity. In this way, government is guilty until proven innocent.

    99.9% of the time, 300 million individuals can individually create the greater good. Markets work; the wisdom of crowds work. But as any non-ideaologue or non-brainwashing victim of the Cult of Rand, Rothbard, or Mises knows, there is something in economics called “the freeloader effect.” The minimal necessary public purposes cannot be funded through “voluntary” means, because it is always in one’s rational self interest to hope that someone else does it. The minimal functions of government must be funded, and therefore, they must be funded in the least anti-growth manner as possible; the method in which the most decision-making power is still left with the crowd, and not the government, which will never be as efficient as the crowd. A tax on unimproved land is, in my opinion, probably the best method of taxation, but second to that is a tax on income. It is the least destructive to growth. We have low tax rates in America, but they could and should be much lower. I’m an advocate of the Steve Forbes flat tax at the federal level, and the elimination of most other taxes at every level. That’s a realistic, principled, pro-capitalist approach.

    Ayn Rand was a novelist, not an economist or even a legitimate philosopher. Murray Rothbard and Von Mises were crackpot nobodies. IT BEGINS WITH ADAM SMITH, and libertarians would be wise to revisit The Wealth of Nations, On Liberty by John Stuart Mill, etc., not these ideaologically driven, dishonest tracts by anti-American loons.

  65. Nidian Says:

    I may not be all that ‘money smart’ but even I can tell Global Elitist doesn’t understand inflation.

  66. globalist_elitist Says:

    Um, yes I do. Inflation is an expansion of the money supply that outpaces economic growth. Deflation is a contraction of the money supply so that it does not accomodate economic and/or population growth. Deflation kills economies. Hyperinflation does as well. But mild inflation does not. Price stability is the goal of monetary policy, but recognizing that zero-inflation is an impossibility, monetary policymakers err on the side of inflation because a minor degree of deflation is as damaging as a large degree of inflation.

    These people want to revert to an economic system in which growth was low, credit was tight, and people toiled for subsistence, not to add value. They want to return to a time when panics and depressions were as common as congressional elections, and of which the vast majority (if not all) were DEflation-related.

    Yes, there is a problem with people not understanding inflation. But I’m the only one not afflicted by that problem here.

  67. Trent Hill Says:

    GE, then stop peddling your expanded knowledge here. Obviously we “aren’t getting it”. So, use your vast knowledge of the economy to become FAR more rich than any of us, and then fund your own party, or run for office under the LP ticket and prove us wrong. Until then…it is an undecided point. There is no evidence one way or the other, because you cannot compare Gold to the Dollar without having BOTH of them seperated from the economy.

  68. globalist_elitist Says:

    I’m working on it. Thanks for the encouragement.

  69. Trent Hill Says:

    No problem. Maybe you could even run as a Green again. =)

  70. Christopher Says:


    ...Refurbished treadmill is not for everyone…

Leave a Reply