As the bailouts continue, I urge the Reader to remember the republicans who gave warning decades ago. One is Dr. Paul, another is the “First Ron Paul Republican” Vern McKinley.
by Jake, the Champion of the Constitution Originally published September 29, 2008 at http://www.nolanchart.com/article5048.html
I recently came across a summary article (full version with sources here) from Vern McKinley on Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae published for the Cato Institute where he warned of its threat to the taxpayer in 1997.
“Although Freddie and Fannie are privately owned, they are what is known as government-sponsored enterprises (GSEs). GSEs don’t have to follow all the rules that true privately owned companies do: they don’t have to register their securities with the government, their securities receive special treatment for investment purposes, they don’t have to pay state and local income taxes and–most important–their government sponsorship gives them the aura of a fully guaranteed government entity. That final benefit means they save billions in borrowing costs, just as lenders are willing to offer low-interest student loans that are guaranteed by the government. That savings alone allows the GSEs to pocket about $2 billion per year, according to estimates by the Congressional Budget Office and the Treasury Department.”
“Allowing Congress to grant such special privileges is a bad idea. Those privileges, which are granted solely to Freddie and Fannie, crowd out other potential competitors in their market. Privately owned companies should not receive such preferred borrowing status, because it redirects investor funds into the middle- and upper-income housing market at the expense of other potential investments. Finally, the failure of either Freddie or Fannie could saddle taxpayers with a huge liability.”
“Congress should immediately revoke all the benefits of government sponsorship: clearly, Freddie and Fannie can be profitable without them. Eliminating special privileges will force mortgage markets to be truly competitive and will eliminate the possibility that the current system of government sponsorship will someday lead to yet another taxpayer-funded bailout.”
Vern also warned that these millions of dollar of savings were recycled into a “high-powered public relations and lobbying machine.” The GSEs also evenly supporting both Democrats and Republicans with $750 million in the latest contemporary election cycle at the time of his article. The article was published in 1998 in USA Today with the title “Privatize Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.”
Without further ado, here is the speech I promised:
“It’s time to change America! I have news for the forces of greed and the defenders of the status quo: Your time has come and gone. It’s time for a change in America! [Photo source]
“Tonight 10 million of our fellow Americans are out of work, tens of millions more work harder for lower pay. The incumbent President says that unemployment always goes up a little before a recovery begins, but unemployment only has to go up by one more person before a real recovery can begin. And Mr. President, you are that man.
“This election is about putting power back in your hands and putting government back on your side. It’s about putting people first.
“Frankly, I am fed up with politicians in Washington lecturing the rest of us about family values. Our families have values. But our government doesn’t. I want an America where family values live in our actions, not just in our speeches.
“I do want to say something to the fathers in this country who have chosen to abandon their children by neglecting their child support: Take responsibility for your children or we will force you to do so.
“I was raised to believe the American Dream was built on rewarding hard work. But we have seen the folks of Washington turn the American ethic on its head. For too long those who play by the rules and keep the faith have gotten the shaft, and those who cut corners and cut deals have been rewarded.
“People are working harder than ever, spending less time with their children, working nights and weekends at their jobs instead of going to PTA and Little League or Scouts. And their incomes are still going down. Their taxes are still going up. And the costs of health care, housing and education are going through the roof. Meanwhile, more and more of our best people are falling into poverty even though they work 40 hours a week.
Ron Paul was on the radio with Glenn Beck this morning. They discussed the bailout legislation and how it may or may not affect the United States. Both lamented the push towards globalism and the truly frightening prospect of an authoritative central bank for the world. He specifically mentions that he fears a coming “dark ages” due to the stripping of individual liberty through centralized control of money.
Ron Paul also delves into the inner workings in the House of Representatives on how these types of bills get pushed through Congress. He derides the practice of Congressional leadership accusing colleagues of not being “team players” when it comes to voting on the bills.
In an especially interesting moment, Paul tells Beck… “You may not like this, but it means our empire has to end.” Beck then attempts to clarify his position as being more in line with Paul’s thinking than Paul may think. The audio is almost 16 minutes long.
I like to say that Harry Browne made me a libertarian and Ron Paul made me an economist. Ron Paul lead me to Peter Schiff’s doomy and gloomy words of truth, but now I’ve found a new true professor of economics. He can take complicated economics topics and make them simple to understand. His name is Chris Martenson and if you truly want to understand the inner workings of the U.S. economy his “Crash Course” is indispensable.
Martenson’s “Crash Course” is a series of freely available short (longest is around 17 minutes) online videos walking you through the daunting task of where we’ve been, where we are now, and where we are headed as it relates to America’s economy. He clearly explains how money is created, how inflation is a necessary function of our flawed system, and how the government’s numbers are more than fuzzy. They are downright hairy.
To put it bluntly, if you are reading this article right now stop what you are doing, go over to ChrisMartenson.com and start learning. You will thank us later.
Learn how by reading. Article is intended as a poke-in-the-eye for members of the Ron Paul Revolution who complain about the bailouts and the financial, banking, and housing crises and do not realize that they may in fact be hypocrites.
I think recent interviews on the antics of the federal government are making our fearless grandfather quite hoarse. The fairly dire economic and monetary fault lines and consequences Congressman Ron Paul has predicted for the past thirty (30) years are now evident even to the masses in the American (and global) financial system. All members of the Revolution and the Campaign for Liberty have a stark choice. Listen to him in between the lines and heed his advice. Or listen to the siren song of Bernanke, Bush, and Paulson. Your choice. Let me explain.
Listen to Bernanke, Bush, and Paulson?
It is interesting to hear the pro-bailout talk these days from the likes of our modern-day Roman triumvirate of Bernanke, Bush, and Paulson. Per the very latest from Bloomberg, the latest $700 billion bailout will pass shortly, possibly on Monday, September 29.
Apparently, the lawmakers of our “humble” country have reached an agreement on how to “rescue” the U.S. from financial meltdown. Yes, they are calling it a rescue now instead of a bailout. Most of the lawmakers agreed that something must be done. Well, the American people are going to get that something and they are going to get it good and hard. Every dollar you own will plummet in value.
What is most disturbing to me though is the stench of socialism running through this entire event. The financial crisis is a mere symptom of the larger Constitutional crisis we are experiencing as a nation. Our founding document is truly an afterthought. Check out this gem describing one of the compromises in the proposed bill:
… the government would receive stock warrants in return for the bailout relief, giving taxpayers a chance to share in financial companies’ future profits.
Doesn’t this rub anyone the wrong way? Welcome to the policy of incremental nationalism of current private companies. This bill makes bailout a regular policy of the federal government instead of an extraordinary occurrence. No matter how you slice and dice the original Paulson plan this still amounts to lots of new dollars floating around. I wonder what people will be saying when milk is $10/gallon? They don’t seem to understand the fundamental problem because the solution they are proposing is what caused the original problem.
Now is the time to put your representatives on alert. Email them, call them, knock down their doors to tell them, “I will not vote for you if you vote for this plan. You are no longer representing me”. This may be your final chance.
I keep waiting for one of the candidates to announce that he will appoint Ron Paul as either the Treasury Secretary or the Federal Reserve Chairman. It seems the media is starting to recognize the genius of Ron Paul on the economy. Perhaps it is only a matter of time before his fellow lawmakers recognize it too. Oh nevermind, I almost forgot. They are too worried about looking like they are doing something rather than actually doing something like paying attention to truth.
Ron Paul appeared again on FOX News with Neil Cavuto today. They discuss the bailout some more and Neil Cavuto actually calls Ron Paul a genius on these things. Nothing like a little Ron Paul man-love for a Saturday afternoon. Enjoy it below.
Everyone in the country is talking about the Paulson Plan, wherein one clause would make Paulson de-facto financial dictator of the United States, accountable to no one. The article is a summary of my brief investigation and asks for help in finding out WHO IS THIS GUY?
Henry Paulson, Jr., our current Secretary of Treasury under President Bush deserves a little scrutiny. I’ve done some quick searching, but if anyone has anything else to add, please do so in the comments section. Add your documentation please. As an unelected official appointed by Bush (Strike One!) his recent $700 billion buy-up-illiquid-debt-with-taxpayer-money-to-save-us now known as the Paulson Plan has an odious clause. Per the Associated Press, Section 8 of the proposal stipulates that all decisions are “non-reviewable and committed to agency discretion, and may not be reviewed by any court of law or any administrative agency.” Translation: Paulson would be financial dictator no longer subservient to Bush (who was elected!), Congress, the Federal Reserve, the Supreme Court (well, it does say “any court of law”) and, in effect, We the People. Strike Two!
Paulson is a strong Keynesian, like most of the world’s central bankers and investment bankers. Translation is that he strongly believes in central planning, fiat currencies, and market interventions. (Strike Three! says the free market and sound money Austrian in me.) This belief is illustrated most convincingly in a most stunning statement was when Paulson unveiled his “bazooka” economic theory, where prior to the US Treasury takeover of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, he asked for unlimited federal funds to deal with the failure of these mortgage companies.
“If you’re not used to thinking about these issues it seems counterintuitive. But if you’re used to thinking about the issues, it is very intuitive. That if you’ve got a squirt-gun in your pocket you may have to take it out. If you’ve got a bazooka, and people know you’ve got it, you may not have to take it out. By increasing confidence, it will greatly reduce the likelihood it will ever be used.”
Sort of like the Cold War nuclear deterrent policy (otherwise known as MAD – Mutually Assured Destruction), if he had the power, there would be no danger of ever actually using it, but without the power, confidence would fail and the entire American financial system would collapse. Paulson was granted a largess of power by Congress, although not unlimited.
The final question that was posed to Bob Barr during the live debate event at Reason Magazine’s headquarters in Washington DC was regarding the snub of Ron Paul and Paul’s endorsement of Chuck Baldwin.
10:48- Bob Barr: [Responding to, "Final question: You had a very public falling out with Ron Paul. What went wrong? And what would you say to Paul supporters?"] They ought to be disappointed in Ron Paul. Endorsing a theocratic candidate makes little sense whatsoever. What we’re trying to do is what we hoped Ron Paul would have done, which is to provide true focused leadership.
As hard it is for me to admit, I think Bob Barr is right here to a certain extent. I think there were many who were disappointed in Ron Paul. Of course there were also many who were disappointed in Bob Barr as well. As I’ve written before, I am disappointed in both.
While I don’t believe Baldwin wants a theocracy as Barr accuses, Baldwin’s historical statements on policy backed by religion worry me greatly. So it matters little to me that Ron Paul is endorsing Chuck Baldwin now. I will not vote for him.
Bob Barr’s type of “true focused leadership” is likely different than Ron Paul’s type of leadership. Paul is focusing on education and activism. Barr is all about furthering his own standing in the election and propping up the Libertarian Party as legitimate.
Now after the Barr snub, Paul chooses to endorse Baldwin, more or less. This comes off as a bit like a couple of stubborn kids arguing over toys when what we lovers of liberty need is a bit of unity. Unity is no longer in the cards when it comes to voting for liberty this year.
I’m disappointed in both Barr and Paul, but the real travesty is the wasted potential for spreading the freedom message to the masses. Paul blew it when he originally chose to help his own party’s nominee by endorsing no individual candidate. Barr blew it by over-reacting to Paul’s decision.
They are equally culpable, but because Barr will be the one on the ballot in my state he will get my vote and Ron Paul will get my support for his educational and activist efforts.
If they won’t show unity themselves, I will bridge their differences with my own advocacy.