# This One's for The Obama Loyalists, Pay Attention.

**URL:** <https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784>\
**Category:** Great Debates\
**Created:** [August 19, 2010, 8:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784 "2010-08-19T20:08:42Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 20\
**Page:** 31

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![gonzomax](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e8c25b/32.png) [@gonzomax](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gonzomax)\
**Post date:** [September 4, 2010, 2:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/601 "2010-09-04T02:36:20Z")

</div>

> [@jrodefeld](#):
>
> > [@ITR\_champion](#):
> >
> > No, it does not make sense. In fact, I fail to see any connection between what Guido Hulsmann said and my question. The question, which you don’t seem to understand, was this:
> > 
> > **When I walk past a bank, I can see ads saying that long-term bonds (both government and corporate) are going at interest rates of 2-3%. Moreover, bond prices are actually _lower_ now than they were six months ago. If prices are actually going to shoot up in “the next couple years”, why is this not reflected in the price of long-term bonds?**
> > 
> > It’s a fairly simple question. I’ve already asked it three times and gotten no response. Why can’t you give me an answer?
> 
> The mechanisms of the marketplace are rather complex, especially considering the amount of unwise intervention and manipulation taking place by the federal reserve. Here is the issue:
> 
> **Bond markets have, since 1971, been very poor predictors of inflation. In the 1970s the bond market underestimated inflation, and the bond yields were very strong in the 80s and 90s when they overestimated inflation. It is very hard to predict future price increases when the interest rate is set by central planners.**  
> You seem to have been suckered into believing government statistics like the CPI to measure inflation. The reason central planning of the economy doesn’t work is because the intervention creates false signals in the market that don’t correspond to reality. You should not be reassured that ads you may have seen about the rate of bonds indicate that we will not see rising prices.
> 
> There was a reason that Austrian economists were able to correctly predict the crash of 08 when so few Keynesians did. It is because of things like this.
> 
> Greenspan, Bernanke, Goolsby, Geithner, Summers and the rest of the gang have failed in everything they have said and done regarding the economy. I suggest you don’t listen to another word any of these men say.
> 
> And read up on Austrian economics.

Greenspan and those in charge of the economy during Bush were loudly and proudly Libertarians.They are your peeps. They were exactly as wrong as you are espousing a economic philosophy that stupid. Don’t bring Libertarianism to people out of high school?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![jrodefeld](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/59ef9b/32.png) [@jrodefeld](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jrodefeld)\
**Post date:** [September 4, 2010, 3:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/602 "2010-09-04T03:09:33Z")

</div>

> [@Kiber](#):
>
> > [@jrodefeld](#):
> >
> > Well apart from the specific claims of the economists at UCLA, even if a recovery took longer, why should the economy be allowed to re balance itself, liquidate bad debt and find an equilibrium? That should be obvious that preventing this process will drag out the inevitable.
> 
> Well - if we did nothing, the economy would re balance itself, liquidate bad debt and find an equilibrium. The problem is that the new equilibrium would be way lower than it was before the rebalancing occured. So not my ideal outcome. But in fact, that’s what we saw during the great depression. For 4 years after the crash, the government cut spending and balanced the budget - outcome: economy continues to tank. Although I suppose that in your world, it’s just rebalancing, coming to equilibrium.

Absolutely NOT. We did not cut spending and balance the budget. That is ridiculous and completely contrary to reality. Hoover was just as much of an interventionist as Roosevelt.

Why can’t you see that propping up incompetent companies and making the too big to fails even bigger does not solve the problem? What do you think caused the Great Depression? Lack of spending? Do you understand this point:

**Whenever a bubble is created through government intervention it creates an unsustainable of debt and malinvestment that necessitates a crash later on. Therefore we should focus on preventing the creation of the bubble in the first place, not doing all the things that caused the crisis in the first place.**

This is pretty academic for an Austrian economist.

> [@](#):
>
> It didn’t. Recovery started in 1933, 4 years after the crash. From 1933 to 1937, the recovery kept on . . . . .well, recovering. Then in 1937, fiscal conservatives convinced FDR to cut spending and the economy tanked again. This set back the recovery by years, and wasn’t reversed until spending increased again in 1939. I’d post graphs and data for you - but first, I’ve already done that, and second - I don’t think you’d read it anyway.

That is complete bullshit. There was no recovery while FDR was intervening into the marketplace. Why, if Roosevelt’s policies were working so spectacularly, was he convinced to change policies? If, as you say, we had a solid four years of “recovery”, why was there a change of heart?

The truth of the matter is that Herbert Hoover started basically the same policies of federal intervention that FDR continued. So, from 1929 to 1933 Hoover basically started the beginnings of the New Deal. In 1931 Hoover said this:

> [@](#):
>
> Many undertakings have been organized and forwarded during the past year to meet the new and changing emergencies which have constantly confronted us . . . to cushion the violence of liquidation in industry and commerce, thus giving time for orderly readjustment of costs, inventories, and credits without panic and widespread bankruptcies.

The program that Hoover pursued was the following:

\*\*Establish a Reconstruction Finance Corporation, which would use Treasury funds to lend to banks, industries, agricultural credit agencies, and local governments;

Broaden the eligibility requirement for discounting at the Fed;

Create a Home Loan Bank discount system to revive construction and employment measures which had been warmly endorsed by a National Housing Conference recently convened by Hoover for that purpose;

Expand government aid to Federal Land Banks;

Set up a Public Works Administration to coordinate and expand Federal public works;

Legalize Hoover’s order restricting immigration;

Do something to weaken “destructive competition” (i.e., competition) in natural resource use;

Grant direct loans of $300 million to States for relief;

Reform the bankruptcy laws (i.e., weaken protection for the creditor).\*\*

This only touches upon a part of Hoovers interventions. Does this sound like Laissez-Faire to you?  
So, based on that information, by 1937 we had a solid seven years of the sort of federal intervention you support, yet somehow, despite its overwhelming sucess :rolleyes:, FDR decided to change policies, huh? Where is the logic in that?

> [@](#):
>
> No - I can’t. I can’t because I’ve looked at the data. I’ve posted the data. I’ve posted links to the data. I’ve described the data. Hell - I’ve sauted the data in a nice red wine reduction. I’ve lead the data to water AND made it drink. The one thing I haven’t done, apparently, is gotten you to look at it.

No, you haven’t posted “the data”. I have posted TONS of information about the true causes of the Great Depression refuting the fraudulent, propagandistic version of history you are so familiar with. So, I will do you a favor and explain the causes of the Great Depression just for you.

The Great Depression, written by Lionel Robbins is the preeminent book written on the subject. Published in 1934, Robbins was one of the most eminent followers of Ludwig von Mises (who predicted the crash when no one else did).

In it he explains the Misesian theory of the business cycle and applies it to the events of the 1920s and 1930s. He shows how bank credit expansion in the United States, Great Britain, and other countries drove the civilized world into a great depression.

In Britain the problem was the rigid wage structure caused by unions and the unemployment insurance system. In the United States the problem was a desire to inflate in order to help Britain as well as an absurd devotion to the ideal of a stable price level.

This credit expansion created the malinvestment through a sustained period of low interest rates which causes an imbalance between savings and investments. This expansion of credit causes an expansion of the supply of money, which leads to an unsustainable boom during which the artificially stimulated borrowing seeks out diminishing investment opportunities. Once the exponential credit creation cannot be sustained, a correction (or credit crunch, bust or recession, all names for the same thing) occurs.

Austrians understand that the problem comes from the creation of the bubble in the first place due to reckless monetary policy.

A recession is the cure for the mistakes created during the boom period, wiping the bad debt off the books. This is inevitable.

However, Hoover and Roosevelt took measures to “counteract and cushion” the depression, which only made the situation worse. Lionel Robbins shows how the policies pursued, including propping up unsound, shaky business positions, inflating credit, expanding public works and keeping up wage rates were counterproductive and prolonged the necessary depression adjustments profoundly aggravating the catastrophe.

Why can’t you understand this concept? This is pretty obvious for anyone who has ventured beyond the high school history textbook version of events.

You would do well to read Lionel Robbins book.

> [@](#):
>
> What??? You want me to watch a 50 minute youtube video - created by the Limited Government Institute??? Surely you don’t honestly expect me to take that as an unbiased source, do you? I’m sorry, but if you can’t make your points yourself, in a couple paragraph post, then why should I bother. I’m not about to waste an hour wading through that video to try and figure out what your argument is.

Jesus, I have never seen a group of people more resistant to reading or learning in my life. You don’t have to watch the whole thing. Just a mere ten or fifteen minutes is enough to make the point. What is an unbiased source, by the way? I would argue that there is no such thing.

The point that you would have gotten had you watched the video is that the Depression of 1920-21 signified the last time that a recession or depression was allowed to correct itself in the manner the Austrians agree is necessary. All of the interventions of the Great Depression were absent in 1920. We allowed the liquidation of debt and the market correction and we had a vibrant recovery within a year and a half. Nobody even remembers the Depression of 1920 because it was a non event. This was because the government didn’t intervene! The Great Depression was great due to the folly of the Hoover and Roosevelt policies.

Therefore there are two easy examples of major downturns which occurred less than a decade apart which were dealt with completely oppositely.

The Depression of 1920-21 was handled in the way the Austrians suggest.

The Depression of the 30s was handled the way you support.

Look at the results. One is the most traumatic economic period in our history and the other nobody even remembers.

If you want to talk about the data, it is clearly on my side. Why don’t you respond in an intelligent manner to the information presented in this post?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![jrodefeld](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/59ef9b/32.png) [@jrodefeld](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jrodefeld)\
**Post date:** [September 4, 2010, 3:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/603 "2010-09-04T03:19:11Z")

</div>

> [@Algorithm](#):
>
> > [@jrodefeld](#):
> >
> > These all sound very accurate to me. The rest could easily happen. The gist of what he said is very accurate.
> 
> Do you understand that, in 2002, Ron Paul predicted the draft would be reinstated?
> 
> Do you understand that, since 2002, the draft has not been reinstated?
> 
> Do you understand how the prediction that the draft would be reinstated is thus **not accurate**?
> 
> Thus, do you understand that, when you said this:
> 
> > [@jrodefeld](#):
> >
> > All his prediction about current economic conditions, the wars overseas and the failure of Keynesian theories has been spot on.
> 
> you were wrong?
> 
> Further, do you understand that saying event X “could easily happen” is not the proper way to determine a prediction that says: “event X **will** happen” is spot on?

No, the draft has not been reinstated. Ron Paul articulated his concerns, most of which have or will soon come true, on the house floor. He said that we should keep these predictions for a decade and he hopes he is proven wrong. I am glad he was wrong about the draft being reinstated. However there was information to the effect (and there still is) that many hawks in Washington will look for any means necessary to increased the Army personnel, including bringing back the draft. I am very glad they haven’t gotten away with it.  
Don’t you see that you are nitpicking greatly when the vast majority of the major issues that Ron Paul has talked about were pretty accurate? I never said he was 100% accurate about everything. Nobody is.

This is so beside the point. What about the big issues? The financial crisis, foreign policy, the trend of corporatism and loss of civil liberties, the increase in terrorist activities and us precipitating the hatred of Islamic countries are far more important than whether or not you can pick out a small part of a speech from 2002 that hasn’t come true yet. On the big issues, like those I just listed, he has been accurate.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![jrodefeld](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/59ef9b/32.png) [@jrodefeld](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jrodefeld)\
**Post date:** [September 4, 2010, 3:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/604 "2010-09-04T03:30:06Z")

</div>

> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#):
>
> > [@jrodefeld](#):
> >
> > The meaning of that quote was, in my experience, much of the modern left holds a view that all wealth must be created at the expense of someone else. There is a degree of envy the endeavors to take away from the rich who make more money “than they need”. I am saying that this is childish. If people make money honestly, they deserve the money they earn because they have provided that level of value to others.
> 
> Can you entertain the notion that the free market does not distribute income equitably or even economically efficiently.
> 
> I can make all sorts of arguments about the freemarket’s ability to distribute income equitably.
> 
> For teh argument on efficeincy, I would point to the perverse pay incentives provided to the folks who traded credit default swaps and packaged mortgages. It was very good at incentivizing more credit default swaps and more mortgage securitizations but it was ultimately very destructive to the economy.
> 
> I think it is hard to defend how much some peopel are paid and how little others are paid. For example I could construct an economy where teachers get a percentage of all the future earnings of their students. It would incentivize the best and brightest into becoming teachers and I wonder if this is any worse than our system which incentivizes so many really bright hard working people into becoming investment bankers.

I am talking about true free markets with Austrian economic policies. No, most people on Wall Street are NOT making their money honestly. That is the truth. They are engaged in fraud, corporatism and paying off politicians and receiving bailouts. This is a total perversion of free market economics and I don’t support it one bit.

The point I am making is the way to solve this problem is not to tax these people more, but to eliminate bad regulations that hurt their competitors, allow bankruptcies to occur, and reform the monetary system.

None of those things that you described are related to free markets. Free markets are computer companies, cell phone makers, car insurance companies and things like that. In those areas, the companies that do well are the ones that provide the best good or service at the best price. We, the consumer make them profits by buying their product. They in turn improve our lives and employ people.

That is the free market I am talking about. All the areas of corporate abuse that you can name are not free markets. The collusion of business and government is extremely dangerous and that is what we need to fight. The way to do it, however, is not move towards socialism, but emphasize the truly free market as the more fair and just alternative.

Credit default swaps and packaged mortgages and derivatives are related to our fraudulent system of money that created this casino atmosphere on Wall Street. With monetary reform and a rejection of fiat currencies and central banks these people would have to get real jobs, manufacturing things and creating value to make a living.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Jackmannii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jackmannii/32/311_2.png) [@Jackmannii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jackmannii)\
**Post date:** [September 4, 2010, 5:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/605 "2010-09-04T05:31:13Z")

</div>

[QUOTE=jrodefeld]  
The Great Depression, written by Lionel Robbins is the preeminent book written on the subject. Published in 1934, Robbins was one of the most eminent followers of Ludwig von Mises (who predicted the crash when no one else did).  
[/quote]  
It is untrue that von Mises was the only person to predict the Wall Street Crash. A number of other economists issued warnings, among them [Roger Babson](http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2008/oct/04/useconomy) (who had predicted a crash for years).

Your beloved Austrian school economists these days reportedly don’t like making “quantitative” forecasts/predictions, because of distaste for statistical analysis and other sciency stuff. It’s probably safer that way.

It should be noted in general that making predictions, some of which eventually come true (or can be interpreted as coming true, in Nostradamus-like fashion) can lead to a false impression of expertise, particularly when inaccurate predictions are glossed over or swept under the rug. There’s also a big difference between making predictions and having the ideas and expertise to forestall the negative ones or make the rosy ones come true.

> [@jrodefeld](#):
>
> If you want to talk about the data, it is clearly on my side. Why don’t you respond in an intelligent manner to the information presented in this post?

You silver-tongued devil. You’ll persuade us yet. 🙂

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Robot\_Arm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/robot_arm/32/18280_2.png) [@Robot\_Arm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Robot_Arm)\
**Post date:** [September 4, 2010, 6:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/606 "2010-09-04T06:20:16Z")

</div>

> [@jrodefeld](#):
>
> Most vaccines contain all of these substances:
> 
> \*\*Sodium chloride
> 
> Sodium Hydroxide (also known as lye, caustic soda, soda lye.) Is corrosive and is an Eye, skin and respiratory irritant. Can burn eyes, skin and internal organs. Can cause lung and tissue damage, blindness and can be fatal if swallowed. Found in oven cleaners, tub and tile cleaners, toilet bowl cleaners and drain openers.
> 
> Formaldehyde: A neurotoxin and carcinogen (effects the nervous system and known to cause cancer.) May cause insomnia, coughing, headaches, nausea, nosebleeds, and skin rashes. Commonly known to embalm corpses. It has been said that there is no safe level of formaldehyde to be ingested into the body.
> 
> Hydrochloric acid: CAN DISTROY TISSUE UPON DIRECT CONTACT! Found in aluminum cleaners and rust removers.
> 
> Aluminum: toxic, cancerous.
> 
> Thimerosal: _mercury_ derivative (contain mercury.) Extremely dangerous preservative. Made from a combination of Ethylene Glycol (AKA antifreeze!!!) and ethanol, thiosalicylic acid, sodium hydroxide and ethyl mercuric chloride. These chemicals are nerotoxic, dangerous, fatal and easily cause brain and liver damages. causes cancer.
> 
> Phosphates: suffocates all forms of aquatic life. Found in laundry and dishwasher detergent and cleaners.\*\*

That list is from [here](http://www.vaccinationnews.com/dailynews/may2001/whatsinvax.htm), verbatim (typo and all). That may not be the original source; I’ve found it in other places on the web, predating **jrodefeld** ’s post.

It lists them only as ingredients in the diphtheria, pertusiss, tetanus vaccine.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Jackmannii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jackmannii/32/311_2.png) [@Jackmannii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jackmannii)\
**Post date:** [September 4, 2010, 4:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/607 "2010-09-04T16:53:47Z")

</div>

> [@Robot\_Arm](#):
>

Actually, it lists them as ingredients in a type of broth used for growing the whooping cough bacterium. Even if we assume the list is correct (I do not see any primary source listed) the alarmism contained in it is ludicrous. Sodium chloride is freaking table salt. It’s used in intravenous solutions routinely. Most of the remaining substances (including formaldehyde) are naturally found in the human body at far higher concentrations than ever present in vaccines. Thimerosal preservative was removed from virtually all pediatric vaccines by 2002 as a precaution but never shown to have any negative health effects.

Lists like these are the product of ignorance or are deliberately meant to deceive.

I will not address antivax ideology further here unless **jrodefeld** or another libertarian/Paul supporter feels the need to revisit it.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Gyrate](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gyrate/32/3588_2.png) [@Gyrate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gyrate)\
**Post date:** [September 4, 2010, 10:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/608 "2010-09-04T22:22:33Z")

</div>

Isn’t stomach acid HCl?

I was half expecting to see “dihydrogen monoxide” on that list. I mean, think of how many children die each year from exposure to too much of that.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![jrodefeld](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/59ef9b/32.png) [@jrodefeld](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jrodefeld)\
**Post date:** [September 5, 2010, 5:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/609 "2010-09-05T05:21:25Z")

</div>

> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#):
>
> > [@Fear\_Itself](#):
> >
> > What is to prevent it? Good intentions? Feudalism is the ultimate culmination of the free market you envision. Those who do not own property become the economic slaves of those who do. Submit to your liegelord, or starve. Having done away with all the regulations that limit ‘consensual’ agreements, there can be no other outcome. Desperate, starving people will submit to slavery, and property owners will perpetuate the system that keeps the poor powerless, because it is in their economic interest.
> > 
> > Of course, eventually, the poor rise up with the power of sheer numbers, drag the property owners into the streets and burn tires around their necks. That is how your vision of liberty always ends.
> 
> Well that is the problem with pure capitalism. Capital tends to concentrate and as capital extracts more and more of the value of production, the rich get richer and the rest can only hope to tread water.

This is complete nonsense. In a free market economic system, the rich only make their money in proportion to the value they provide others. People get paid what they are worth. It is foolhardy to discourage success through government redistribution, as if the worlds problems are caused by entrepreneurs and innovators. We need to eliminate crony capitalism and special favors and government needs to participate more in prosecuting fraud and making sure nobody is initiating force or violence on anybody else.

But apart from that, the government should allow free people to make mutually beneficial economic decisions without interference.

The truth is, what we have today is the largest income gap in the industrialized world following the policies of big government, central banking and extremely high levels of regulation. Four or five decades ago, when we had freer markets, this was not the case.

Why is that?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![jrodefeld](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/59ef9b/32.png) [@jrodefeld](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jrodefeld)\
**Post date:** [September 5, 2010, 5:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/610 "2010-09-05T05:58:37Z")

</div>

> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#):
>
> > [@jrodefeld](#):
> >
> > No, bailing out the banks was not necessary.
> 
> Are you frikking kidding me? I don’t like bailing out the culprits any more than you do but we were on the verge of global financial collapse. There were grain shipments rotting in port because the banking system was starting to fail.
> 
> There were runs on perfectly healthy banks because people lost faith in their banks.
> 
> I think its very easy to criticize necessary evils in hindsight.
> 
> Yeah but not all at once and not when the global financial system is teeetering on the edge.
> 
> A market correcdtion back then mgiht not have been merely painful, it might have been fatal.
> 
> You know these ideas have been around for nearly a century. I’ve looked at this stuff in college, it was taught right alongside Keynes, marxism and monetarism. And it fell into the marxist camp more than anything in that it was a counter-ideological economic philosophy, but it was in fact ideological.
> 
> Holy re-writing history batman.
> 
> > [@](#):
> >
> > Actually it increased steadily. The issue is the linking to gold. Until the breakdown of the bretton woods agreement in 1971, there was a limit to the creation of money. After that point the deficits and national debt skyrocketed. But as the Austrians could tell you, that is the inevitable conclusion of central banking and interventionist economics. The Fed has existed for one hundred years and you point to a mere fifteen-twenty year period of moderate success as far as the debt is concerned? Thats not a very good track record.
> > 
> > Government would not be controlling prices and the market. You are really confused here. I can only suggest you spend some time reading about sound money to understand these issues.
> 
> Not that you have very much credibility but your insistence on the gold standard is hurting your credibility. Do you understand why we dropped the gold standard?

What you don’t understand is that government policies are not allowing the correction to occur at all. Why don’t you think to blame the people who created the bubble?

Why do you consider a monetary standard that we had all through our history up until 1971 to be crazy? Throughout our history our money was denominated in gold and linked to gold all the way until the Nixon Administration. The link was weakened during the Great Depression but we have only had a totally fiat currency for forty years.

I think we did pretty good for the first two hundred years of our existence, don’t you?

Do you not see the correlation between the monetary standard and our ballooning deficit and national debt? If you are going to build a house you need a solid foundation to build upon. In economic terms, that would be a stable dollar. The fraudulent, illusory bubble economies we have had since have been doomed from the outset.

There is no hope to regain true health in our economy without true fundamental reform of the banking system and the currency.

What have our politicians done to solve our economic problems? Perhaps they have delayed the inevitable? How is that helpful? Bailing out the banks and propping up illiquid (meaning worthless) assets only compounds our problems.

The reason Obama is having such a tough time right now is because people don’t see ANY benefit to the endless stimulus. The economy has only continued to get worse.

Why don’t you think about the possibility that powerful banking interests and corporate elite have so much control over our government and economy that they simply didn’t want to go bankrupt?

There would have been short term problems for the economy in 08 but in the long term things would have been a lot better if those failing companies were allowed to go under.  
As to the Depression of 1920-21, go read about it. Watch the Youtube I linked to previously. I want you to explain in detail why my policies (hands off, allow correction) succeeded and the Keynesian interventions of the 30s failed.

Go ahead. I await your answer.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![jrodefeld](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/59ef9b/32.png) [@jrodefeld](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jrodefeld)\
**Post date:** [September 5, 2010, 6:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/611 "2010-09-05T06:05:29Z")

</div>

> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#):
>
> > [@jrodefeld](#):
> >
> > You know, I don’t really want to get into the vaccination thing on this thread. It is more a matter of opinion and personal preference. I have read a number of articles by doctors and scientists warning about the negative effects of long term vaccinations. I may link to some here at another point. But its perfectly fine if you believe in vaccines. I just have a problem when the government is mandating I do ANYTHING in relation to my personal health care. I should still have some choice in the matter. If the government can inject anything into my arm, then I am not free.
> > 
> > That is how I look at it.
> 
> What if corporations can inject anything into the air that you breathe? Are you free then?

How is that related? The answer is no, corporations should not be allowed to pollute the air and water without criminal repercussions. There should be strict enforcements of property rights and no one is allowed to pollute their neighbors air, water or land. Period. Many libertarians believe this.

I am a hardcore environmentalist, by the way. The environment can be better protected through property rights and criminal suits than through endless bureaucracy and regulation (which usually protects the polluters). The Cap and Trade scam is really a pay to pollute scheme. I don’t think people should be allowed to pollute in certain amounts no matter how much money they make. If a corporation endangers your health or hurts the environment in a way that affects you personally they should pay you directly and be forced to stop the damaging activity.

Protection of the environment is a role for government, but we have to recognize that government itself is the greatest polluter. Most cases should be dealt with through the courts.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![jrodefeld](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/59ef9b/32.png) [@jrodefeld](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jrodefeld)\
**Post date:** [September 5, 2010, 6:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/612 "2010-09-05T06:10:44Z")

</div>

> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#):
>
> > [@jrodefeld](#):
> >
> > Okay, all wars since WWII have been unconstitutional. I know this because the constitution says, “Only Congress can declare war”. Is there something I am missing here? Congress hasn’t declared war since WWII.
> > 
> > On that and numerous other issues our government breaks the Constitution and the Supreme Court allows it to occur. This means THEY are failing in their job.
> 
> Did you miss the congressional act that gave the executive the authority to use force in Iraq?

That is an unconstitutional act by Congress. Tell me where the Constitution says that Congress can do anything it wants? The Constitution says it is Congress’ RESPONSIBILITY to declare war. It cannot give away that power to someone else.

What don’t you understand about this? Isn’t it GOOD that the Founders desired that a president not be a dictator in matter of war and foreign policy? Don’t you think the people deserve to have a say in whether we go to war or not?

If you don’t understand this then your understanding of the Constitution is severely lacking.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![jrodefeld](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/59ef9b/32.png) [@jrodefeld](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jrodefeld)\
**Post date:** [September 5, 2010, 6:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/613 "2010-09-05T06:54:59Z")

</div>

> [@begbert2](#):
>
> > [@jrodefeld](#):
> >
> > The point was, and I should have made this more clear, that competing currencies ARE illegal. That doesn’t stop some people from doing it anyway. The fact that some people have so little faith in the dollar that they would ignore the law and use competing currencies gives credence to my larger point about the economy.
> > 
> > But yeah, the point is competing currencies ARE illegal. These small town experiments are very small scale and infrequent because otherwise the participants get arrested. The point is that despite government prohibitions, a sufficient demand creates an underground market for things that are desired.
> > 
> > We need to repeal legal tender laws. Don’t ever claim that Ron Paul doesn’t understand economics. That shows the level of ignorance you possess. Read more on the subject of competing currencies and legal tender laws.
> 
> Ron Paul is a fucking delusional moron. (Unless he’s a poster on this board, in which case he’s a charming and erudite individual who is merely wrong about lots and lots of things.)
> 
> Regardless.
> 
> Please quote the federal law that says that barter is illegal, if you manage to pay your taxes anyway?
> 
> Please quote the federal law that says that using foreign currency is illegal? (Note that foreign currency is used to purchase american currency all the time in large, conspicuous quantities.)
> 
> Because, in case you can’t guess, I think that you are completely dead wrong here, and so is the Ron Paul you rode in on. If you disagree, back it up. With actual quotes of law, not uninformed libertarian opinions about what the law _might_ be saying.  
> I will also note that, par for the thread, you have utterly failed to answer several points I made. Specifically: “Or perhaps your/his problem is that the US hasn’t forced all vendors to accept gold and silver as legal tender? You want to buy a candy bar with a gold coin? How small a coin? If I wanted to run a garage sale, would I have to have a precisely accurate scale to weigh your gold shavings? What foolishness.”
> 
> "I will add, for all this competing currency stuff, do you want to respect the government’s right to _not_ accept your competing currencies when you pay your taxes? Just because you’re willing to accept payment in live chickens doesn’t mean the government wants them.
> 
> This is, of course, assuming that you don’t just want the government and police and courts and the like to work for you for free. Which it wouldn’t surprise me to hear you say. Heck, it wouldn’t surprise me to learn that you hope to use this “competing currency” business as a way to dodge taxes – it wouldn’t surprise me at all."
> 
> You also haven’t answered the fact that foreign currencies are _already_ competing currencies, _explicitly_, or explained why their existence isn’t good enough for you. Or why you think that _your_ competing currencies would be any different than them - do you _intend_ to be mired in currency exchange markets and refusals to accept non-preferred currencies, and see that as a feature? Or do you believe that such things will not possibly occur, because in magical bullshit Ron Paul land competing currencies don’t function like competing currencies do?  
> I believe you haven’t answered these points because you **can’t** - they show unambigously that this gold thing is utterly absurd and that adding more competing currencies won’t do anything that international currencies don’t already do. And that people who still push for them anyway have no clue whatsoever of what they’re talking about.

Jesus Christ you are ignorant. It is just astounding. Nobody is expecting people to walk into a store and pay for things with Gold coins. Where did you get that idea?

Legal Tender laws state that government controlled currency MUST be accepted for many kinds of monetary transactions. There is an economic concept called Gresham’s Law. This means that bad money drives out good money. The idea is that if someone is forced to accept bad money, you need to pass it off and hoard the good money. Therefore, good money is driven out of circulation.

These, and many other laws, make it effectively impossible to have competing currencies in this country. Other countries currencies, which are fiat as well, are not a solution. We need many competing domestic currencies to circulate allowing people to opt out of carrying Federal Reserve Notes. This is effectively impossible.

Did you hear about the Liberty Dollar? The Liberty Dollar was a private currency backed by gold and silver. However, in November 2007 they were raided by the FBI and Secret Service. He was charge with criminal activity, specifically…

> [@](#):
>
> Bernard von NotHaus is charged with one count of conspiracy to possess and sell coins in resemblance and similitude of coins of a denomination higher than five cents, and silver coins in resemblance of genuine coins of the United States in denominations of five dollars and greater, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 485, 18 U.S.C. § 486, and 18 U.S.C. § 371; one count of mail fraud in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1341 and 18 U.S.C. § 2; one count of selling, and possessing with intent to defraud, coins of resemblance and similitude of United States coins in denominations of five cents and higher, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 485 and 18 U.S.C. § 2; and one count of uttering, passing, and attempting to utter and pass, silver coins in resemblance of genuine U.S. coins in denominations of five dollars or greater, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 486 and 18 U.S.C. § 2

Don’t ever tell me people are free to circulate private currencies in this country. You clearly have no idea what you are talking about.

Oh, and about Ron Paul, that “fucking delusional moron” has forgotten more about economics than you will learn in your lifetime. He has written dozens of books, received a multitude of awards and recognition for his achievements and is the leader of a movement. Ron Paul has done these things:

He received a B.S. degree in biology at Gettysburg College in 1957.

He received his M.D. from Duke University School of Medicine shortly afterward.

He served as a U.S. Air Force flight surgeon during the Vietnam War

He was personal friends with and learned from economists Hans Sennholz and Murray Rothbard. He studied directly from the great Classical economists.

During his first term in office he founded the think tank _The Foundation for Rational Economics and Education_.

In 1982 he launched The U.S. Gold Commission which allowed people to once again own gold in this country.

Ron Paul is honorary chair of the Republican Liberty Caucus

He hosts a luncheon every Thursday to educate his fellow Congressional members on the tenets of true economics and liberty

He serves on the following committees and subcommittees:

**Committee on Financial Services**  
Subcommittee on Domestic Monetary Policy and Technology  
Subcommittee on International Monetary Policy and Trade  
Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations

**Committee on Foreign Affairs**  
Subcommittee on International Organizations, Human Rights, and Oversight  
Subcommittee on the Western Hemisphere

**Joint Economic Committee**  
He co-founded the Ludwig Von Mises Institute

He has authored the following books:

**Gold, Peace, and Prosperity: The Birth of a New Currency**. Lake Jackson, Texas: Foundation for Rational Economics and Education.

**U.S. Gold Commission (September 1982).**

**The Case for Gold: A Minority Report of the U.S. Gold Commission.** Washington, DC: Cato Institute (2d ed. Ludwig von Mises Institute, 2007).

**Ten Myths About Paper Money: And One Myth About Paper Gold**. Lake Jackson, Texas: Foundation for Rational Economics and Education.

**Mises and Austrian Economics: A Personal View**. Auburn, Alabama: Ludwig von Mises Institute (2d ed. 2004).

**Freedom Under Siege: The U.S. Constitution After 200 Years.** Lake Jackson, Texas: Foundation for Rational Economics and Education (2d ed. Ludwig von Mises Institute, 2007).

**The Ron Paul Money Book**. Plantation Publishing.  
Paul, Ron (2000).

**A Republic, If You Can Keep It.** Lake Jackson, Texas: Foundation for Rational Economics and Education.

**The Case for Defending America.** Lake Jackson, Texas: Foundation for Rational Economics and Education.

**A Foreign Policy of Freedom: Peace, Commerce, and Honest Friendship.** Lake Jackson, TX: Foundation for Rational Economics and Education.

**The Revolution: A Manifesto.** New York, NY: Grand Central Publishing.

**End the Fed.** New York, NY: Grand Central Publishing.

**Pillars of Prosperity.** Auburn, AL: Ludwig von Mises Institute. 2008.

**Liberty In Media Awards** –2001. Jersey City, NJ: Palisade Business Press. ISBN 1893958841.

\*\*Liberty In Media Awards \*\*– Vol. 2–2002. Jersey City, NJ: Palisade Business Press.  
Paul, Ron (2004).

\*\*Liberty In Media Awards \*\*– Vol. 3–2003. Jersey City, NJ: Palisade Business Press. ISBN 1893958248.  
This is not even touching the numerous house speeches he has given and contributions to other projects he has made, and forwards and introductions given to economic works by other authors.  
Let me simply suggest that you are in no position to claim someone with the accomplishments of Ron Paul is a “fucking delusional moron”. Let me also add that you may possibly fall back to a position of personal attacks and defensiveness in an effort to resist having to fully face the bredth of intellect and accomplishment that Ron Paul, von Mises, Hayek and the others have demonstrated through decades of work.

I know its getting hard to defend Obama or the “government as savior” paradigm, but believe me its going to get even harder.

_The Revolution_ is just getting started.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![jrodefeld](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/59ef9b/32.png) [@jrodefeld](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jrodefeld)\
**Post date:** [September 5, 2010, 7:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/614 "2010-09-05T07:04:25Z")

</div>

> [@Algorithm](#):
>
> > [@jrodefeld](#):
> >
> > Whatever the case, when it becomes very clear in five or ten years that the Austrians were correct in their predictions and concerns I hope you will be willing to learn from the experience.
> 
> Unfortunately, it seems quite likely that you’ll not learn from the experience when, in five or ten years, the Austrians are proven incorrect in their predictions and concerns.
> 
> You probably won’t even realize their predictions are wrong, considering how stubbornly you hold to the belief that “Ron Paul was spot on” even with faced with specific, inarguable proof that his predictions are incorrect.

I am talking about the totality of his speeches, books, writings and teachings over thirty years of public service. You pick out one house floor speech from 2002 where some of his concerns haven’t come true yet and this is supposed to invalidate everything he has said and done? I never said he was 100% correct. Name one politician or forecaster who is. But I believe he is correct FAR more often than anyone I know of. You can disagree if you want. Trust me, I spend a lot more time studying these issues than you do.

What makes you confident that despite correctly calling the 08 crash that the system won’t break down within the next decade or so? You really think they can patch things together and continue with the spending, printing and borrowing?

Is that what you believe? There is going to be a lot of hardship ahead because we didn’t heed the advice of those who argued for fiscal restraint all these years.

Why don’t you lay out for us what you think will happen in the next decade or so in terms of economics and society in the United States? I would be interested in hearing what you think.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![jrodefeld](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/59ef9b/32.png) [@jrodefeld](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jrodefeld)\
**Post date:** [September 5, 2010, 7:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/615 "2010-09-05T07:10:47Z")

</div>

> [@Procrustus](#):
>
> > [@jrodefeld](#):
> >
> > Maybe you have simply grown cynical and feel the need for authoritarian intervention. You have been convinced that free economies and voluntary association is “not practical” given the complexity of the world.
> > 
> > Whatever the case, when it becomes very clear in five or ten years that the Austrians were correct in their predictions and concerns I hope you will be willing to learn from the experience.
> 
> I have no stake in “authoritarian intervention,” nor does it exist in my life. I’m living pretty free from government intrustions, thank you very much. I’d like the seat belt laws repealed and the 18 year old drinking age reinstated. But, overall, I’m feeling pretty free.

Right on about seat belt laws and lowering the drinking age. You know, some people felt pretty free when FDR was locking up Japanese Americans. A lot of people felt free when Hitler was hunting down the Jews in Nazi Germany. A lot of people are ambivalent to assassinations carried out by our CIA illegally.

Because YOU feel free at the moment doesn’t mean significant liberty has not been lost. If you are locked up without trial indefinitely, you will think you are living under true tyranny. Yet this is happening to other people as we speak.

My concerns are more about the long term effects of economic policies and the devaluation of the dollar. We could have civil unrest and violence break out. We could have a collapse of the system within the next decade.

Don’t you see any of this? I am not saying I (or anyone) can predict everything that will happen in the future, but many are saying it is over for the United States as a world superpower and it is due to bad economic policies for decades.

I am hoping once things break down you will see things more my way.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Lobohan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lobohan/32/79_2.png) [@Lobohan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobohan)\
**Post date:** [September 5, 2010, 7:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/616 "2010-09-05T07:18:16Z")

</div>

> [@jrodefeld](#):
>
> Oh, and about Ron Paul, that “fucking delusional moron” has forgotten more about economics than you will learn in your lifetime.

If he’s forgotten it all, it would explain his utter ignorance of the subject. 😃

> [@](#):
>
> He has written dozens of books, received a multitude of awards and recognition for his achievements and is the leader of a movement. Ron Paul has done these things:
> 
> He received a B.S. degree in biology at Gettysburg College in 1957.

This isn’t economics.

> [@](#):
>
> He received his M.D. from Duke University School of Medicine shortly afterward.

This also isn’t economics.

> [@](#):
>
> He served as a U.S. Air Force flight surgeon during the Vietnam War

This also isn’t economics.

> [@](#):
>
> He was personal friends with and learned from economists Hans Sennholz and Murray Rothbard. He studied directly from the great Classical economists.

What degree did he get?

> [@](#):
>
> During his first term in office he founded the think tank _The Foundation for Rational Economics and Education_.

I could found a foundation called the Fellatio Institute. It doesn’t mean I know how to suck wang.

> [@](#):
>
> In 1982 he launched The U.S. Gold Commission which allowed people to once again own gold in this country.

This also has nothing to do with his knowledge of economics.

> [@](#):
>
> Ron Paul is honorary chair of the Republican Liberty Caucus

This also has nothing to do with his knowledge of economics.

> [@](#):
>
> He hosts a luncheon every Thursday to educate his fellow Congressional members on the tenets of true economics and liberty

Many of his fellow Congressional members don’t believe in evolution. That they could be taken in by Paul’s banal stupidity isn’t exactly far-fetched.

> [@](#):
>
> He serves on the following committees and subcommittees:
> 
> **Committee on Financial Services**  
> Subcommittee on Domestic Monetary Policy and Technology  
> Subcommittee on International Monetary Policy and Trade  
> Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations
> 
> **Committee on Foreign Affairs**  
> Subcommittee on International Organizations, Human Rights, and Oversight  
> Subcommittee on the Western Hemisphere
> 
> **Joint Economic Committee**

So?

> [@](#):
>
> He co-founded the Ludwig Von Mises Institute

See above. Founding institutes proves nothing.

> [@](#):
>
> He has authored the following books:
> 
> **Gold, Peace, and Prosperity: The Birth of a New Currency**. Lake Jackson, Texas: Foundation for Rational Economics and Education.
> 
> **U.S. Gold Commission (September 1982).**
> 
> **The Case for Gold: A Minority Report of the U.S. Gold Commission.** Washington, DC: Cato Institute (2d ed. Ludwig von Mises Institute, 2007).
> 
> **Ten Myths About Paper Money: And One Myth About Paper Gold**. Lake Jackson, Texas: Foundation for Rational Economics and Education.
> 
> **Mises and Austrian Economics: A Personal View**. Auburn, Alabama: Ludwig von Mises Institute (2d ed. 2004).
> 
> **Freedom Under Siege: The U.S. Constitution After 200 Years.** Lake Jackson, Texas: Foundation for Rational Economics and Education (2d ed. Ludwig von Mises Institute, 2007).
> 
> **The Ron Paul Money Book**. Plantation Publishing.  
> Paul, Ron (2000).
> 
> **A Republic, If You Can Keep It.** Lake Jackson, Texas: Foundation for Rational Economics and Education.
> 
> **The Case for Defending America.** Lake Jackson, Texas: Foundation for Rational Economics and Education.
> 
> **A Foreign Policy of Freedom: Peace, Commerce, and Honest Friendship.** Lake Jackson, TX: Foundation for Rational Economics and Education.
> 
> **The Revolution: A Manifesto.** New York, NY: Grand Central Publishing.
> 
> **End the Fed.** New York, NY: Grand Central Publishing.
> 
> **Pillars of Prosperity.** Auburn, AL: Ludwig von Mises Institute. 2008.
> 
> **Liberty In Media Awards** –2001. Jersey City, NJ: Palisade Business Press. ISBN 1893958841.
> 
> \*\*Liberty In Media Awards \*\*– Vol. 2–2002. Jersey City, NJ: Palisade Business Press.  
> Paul, Ron (2004).
> 
> \*\*Liberty In Media Awards \*\*– Vol. 3–2003. Jersey City, NJ: Palisade Business Press. ISBN 1893958248.

This means he’s fanatical, not intelligent.

> [@](#):
>
> This is not even touching the numerous house speeches he has given and contributions to other projects he has made, and forwards and introductions given to economic works by other authors.

Other batshit insane authors?

> [@](#):
>
> Let me simply suggest that you are in no position to claim someone with the accomplishments of Ron Paul is a “fucking delusional moron”. Let me also add that you may possibly fall back to a position of personal attacks and defensiveness in an effort to resist having to fully face the bredth of intellect and accomplishment that Ron Paul, von Mises, Hayek and the others have demonstrated through decades of work.

If you spend decades painting a cathedral with shit, you’re still a loon, no matter how nice it looks.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![jrodefeld](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/59ef9b/32.png) [@jrodefeld](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jrodefeld)\
**Post date:** [September 5, 2010, 7:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/617 "2010-09-05T07:20:41Z")

</div>

> [@Least\_Original\_User\_Name\_Ever](#):
>
> **jrodefeld** , you sound a lot like a guy I worked with. Good guy, really nice, smart guy, but pretty damned closed minded about some of these things.

Well, I don’t think of myself as close minded. In fact, there are plenty of areas where I believe I would agree with most of you guys. I am an environmentalist, I support gay marriage, I am for repealing don’t ask don’t tell, I am pro choice, I am against the drug war, I am against the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and support drastically reducing the military budget. I also care about the poor and am against corporatism and crony-ism. There are other areas as well.

I specifically targeted this thread to this audience because I knew I would get a lot of opposition. Therefore the tone may be more confrontational than it has to be. So, yes I am convinced of most of my ideas on economics and foreign policy. If that strikes you as close minded, so be it.

I am certainly willing to change my position over time and evolve as a person.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![jrodefeld](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/59ef9b/32.png) [@jrodefeld](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jrodefeld)\
**Post date:** [September 5, 2010, 7:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/618 "2010-09-05T07:37:31Z")

</div>

> [@ITR\_champion](#):
>
> > [@jrodefeld](#):
> >
> > You know at this point I am going to ask you to study economics a little. There is not too much more that can be said.
> 
> Oh ho.
> 
> I believe that you’ve promised, many times, to respond to every question and criticism addressed to you in this thread. Now it seems that you’ve decided to chuck that promise out the window. Why am I not surprised?
> 
> Oh, wait a minute, I just figured out why I’m not surprised. The reason I’m not surprised is that I _predicted_ in my first post (#168) that you would eventually chicken out and stop responding to my posts. My prediction has come true, unlike, say, those of Ron Paul.  
> I’m a little bit worried about the national debt but not much. Sure, it’s big, but naitonal debts are always big. Sure, we face large shortfalls in the future, but those can be eliminated through minor changes such as raising the retirement age and trimming benefits for the richest quartile. Bottom line is that worrying about the national debt at this moment would be like the people of Pakistan worrying about a drought thirty years in the future. You’ve got to focus on the current crisis, which is the risk of a deflationary spiral.

I’m gonna tackle this part first, because it is astounding. _I’m a little bit worried about the national debt but not much._, and _Sure, we face large shortfalls in the future, but those can be eliminated through minor changes such as raising the retirement age and trimming benefits for the richest quartile._

No. Go back and read some economics. We CANNOT deal with the problem through tinkering around the edges. Raising the retirement age and “trimming” benefits for the richest is going to cover $100 Trillion dollars? If you believe that then you need to also go back and take some math courses as well.

The options are these: Continue on as if nothing is wrong until we face a true acknowledged bankruptcy and severe devaluation of the currency and collapse of the system

OR

Cut spending drastically while changing our expectations of what government should be doing for us. Balance the budget and do away with the welfare state and the warfare state (AT LEAST until we have beaten the debt and established solid growth and a stable dollar).  
Those are really the only two options we have. Wouldn’t it be better if we had no national debt? What if we had no devaluation of the dollar? Why do you support this madness?

As to this fear of deflation, here is what is going on. Deflation is good. It is what the market is demanding. The market is demanding to establish the true price of houses and assets and liquidate the bad debt and establish equilibrium. Don’t you see how falling prices help the poor? You would rather we had inflation?

This is just an astounding ignorance you display with regards to economics. By “focusing” on the current crisis you are making the problem worse. These policies will make this crisis last maybe a decade (even two decades), rather than a couple of years.

In a downturn, WE CAN cut spending and reduce the deficit. Keynes was wrong, his theories are complete bullshit. If we cut spending and restrained the printing presses the correction would occur, it would be painful and it would be over.

Is it responsible to put off dealing with the debt and the long term deficit which will hurt me later in life and certainly my children? Their future is being consumed because you and others like you put off dealing with the fundamental long term problems for decades.

Don’t believe Keynes.

> [@](#):
>
> Oh really? Are you going to give me any reason why I should believe this? (On top of all those other cites that you owe me from previous posts in this thread and from previous threads?

I can’t convince you. You have to do the work to understand the fundamentals of Austrian economics and why a stable dollar is so important for true economic growth. You could read some books, but I doubt that you will.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![jrodefeld](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/59ef9b/32.png) [@jrodefeld](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jrodefeld)\
**Post date:** [September 5, 2010, 7:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/619 "2010-09-05T07:41:47Z")

</div>

> [@Kiber](#):
>
> > [@jrodefeld](#):
> >
> > Probably not. I’m sure I will change, but in ten to twenty years I will likely look back on a horrendous period of social unrest and economic ruin precipitated by Keynesian economics and out of control spending. Hopefully, by that time we have recovered from catastrophe and are able to establish an economic and social system that has more respect for human liberty.
> 
> Tell me about it - the 80’s were a crazy time, that’s for sure. Thankfully, the Austrio-Libertarian 90’s were able to rescue us from our long Keynesian Nightmare - if only for a short time.

I don’t know what you are trying to say here. The 80s and 90s were when this bubble was being formed by Alan Greenspan. Republicans embraced supply side economics and blew up the deficit.

The crisis is here. The BIG one. Prepare because they won’t be able to put this one back together.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![jrodefeld](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/59ef9b/32.png) [@jrodefeld](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jrodefeld)\
**Post date:** [September 5, 2010, 7:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/620 "2010-09-05T07:47:18Z")

</div>

> [@villa](#):
>
> > [@jrodefeld](#):
> >
> > Well, I’m not a doctor. I never claimed to be. Unlike economics and history, medicine is not my area of expertise.
> 
> Well that expertise in economics isn’t from a degree as you said. From what source do you claim this expertise?
> 
> > [@jrodefeld](#):
> >
> > Don’t ever claim that there isn’t valid scientific argument and serious medical doctors who oppose vaccination.
> 
> There isn’t (_sic_) valid scientific argument and serious medical doctors who oppose vaccination.

How do you know? I have and can easily demonstrate hundred of quotes from MDs and Phd doctors who oppose mandatory vaccination and believe that the number of vaccination given to our children is compromising their health. How can you claim that no serious doctors raise any objections to dozens and dozens of vaccines being given to our children? Vaccines that contain unsafe levels of Mercury and Formaldehyde?

You are the one who is close minded and ignorant on this issue.

[Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784.md?page=30)

[Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784.md?page=32)