Inflation is caused by an expansion of the money supply; the more money there is, the less it is worth. Ask any economist, but not publically in front of the microphones. The Fed has blamed inflation on a bunch of things: oil prices, unions, ignorant shoppers who don’t know how to buy stuff on sale (Arthur Burns said that in the 70’s!) . The Fed will never admit their expansion of the money supply causes inflation, instead they always say (and the ignorant liberal media obediantly report) the Fed is always “fighting inflation”. Kind of reminds me of some cartoonish figure wrasslin’ with himself, saying he is winning.
The general ignorance about economics and money is appalling, but that is what allows the government and banks to continue their reign of power.
Yeah, and a majority of people think that Congress is a corrupt and worthless body, in general, but when it comes to the person (their own representative) they believe he/she is a good one…one of the few doing the right thing.
Again, I’m only describing the tone of the electorate. And saying ‘They’ve been tricked!’ is hand waving and, frankly, condescending to the voters who, in general, know what they want and how to get it. They may be divided but they are generally not unclear. Welfare and such is wanted by the people whether for moral reasons (don’t have people starve) or practical (without welfare the poor would vote more often and to greater extremes).
Hell, I’m a self-identified libertarian myself. But I know enough about politics and campaigns and electoral behavior to know that any hardline libertarian position is a solid non-starter with the public. It’s not a matter of being labeled an extremist but rather than hardline libertarian policies are almost entirely out of step with the mainly centrist attitudes of the American public.
I’ll explain it to you. Before the Federal Reserve was created in 1913, in order to wage war or conduct some massive welfare project (that really didn’t exist until the 1930’s) the US government had to either: a) increase taxes or b) borrow money.
Increasing taxes is a tough sell, even today in our liberal dominated culture.
Borrowing money is a little easier, except when it comes time to pay it back, then you either have to a) raise taxes or b) borrow more money to pay back the loan.
The Federal Reserve scheme was hatched by the banks and politicians about 100 years ago, so the government always had a source to borrow money from. The income tax was adopted then (how did we EVER survive without an income tax?? :eek: ) When the federal government needs to raise funds, it sells T-notes. Whatever can’t be sold on the open market are bought by the Federal Reserve Bank. They just create money out of thin air to buy the securities, while you or I have to use REAL money that we earned (or stole or whatever). That is how inflation is born, by the Federal Reserve “buying” excess federal securities.
This thread is getting kind of hijacked from discussion of Ron Paul’s candidacy, so I’ve started another thread to debate the merits of “hard currency” and the Fed’s role in inflation.
Since my campaign as a Libertarian almost 10 years ago (I got 4% in a 3 way race, not too bad considering) I’ve pondered why many Americans are so hostile to libertarian ideas. I think the “authorities” in the mainstream media have succeeding in indoctrinating Americans to worship government as the solution to our problems, whatever they may be. When some libertarian comes along, he is immediately denounced as an anti-social rabid extremist, blah, blah, blah.
Unfortunately some, if not many, of those “centrist” attitudes of the American public are irrational, like the drug laws that treat peaceful marijuana users like they are heinous villians. Or the idea that we need the federal government involved in education. Or we need the US post office to deliver letters. Or that our freeways can’t be privatized (despite all the tollways in many parts of the country). Or that peaceful gun owners are dangerous.
Ron Paul is truly an amazing example of someone who continues to keep winning elections despite the liberal establishment that opposes his ideas.
Not that Dopers are typical Americans (or typical of any country), but some of the points (pro and con) raised in this recent thread might shed some light on that question.