price controls

A 30 minute sit-down with Ron Paul

December 19th, 2010 8:56 pm  |  by  |  Published in Bailouts, Banking, congress, Constitution, Debt, Economics, Federal Reserve, Free Market, gold, gold standard, government spending, inflation, Money, price controls, Ron Paul, Taxes  |  Comments Off

CSPAN’s show, Newsmakers, aired this weekend. Their guest was Congressman Ron Paul. Most of the questions revolved around economics and the Federal Reserve. It’s refreshing when Dr. Paul is given the proper amount of time to explain his positions without the interruptions that always occur on the mainstream media outlets.

You can watch the entire show here at CSPAN.org.

Smackdown: Keynes vs. Hayek

July 8th, 2010 11:49 am  |  by  |  Published in Bailouts, Banking, Debt, Economics, Economics/Banking/Money/Debt, Federal Reserve, Free Market, gold standard, government spending, inflation, Liberty, Money, national debt, price control, price controls, Taxes  |  Comments Off

An interesting discussion is ongoing at Daily Kos over the merits of Keynesian economic thought.

VA Classical Liberal writes:

If John Maynard Keynes and F.A. Hayek got into a fight, who’d win?

If it was a real knock-down, drag-out brawl, my money would be on Keynes. At 6’ 6”, he’s got the size, the weight and the reach. Hayek couldn’t lay a glove on him.

But what if they were cutting heads and throwing down rhymes? Then, Keynes could have a real fight on his hands.

You can read the rest of the discussion, and comment, here.

URGENT: Congress set to deform America’s financial sector

June 30th, 2010 12:55 pm  |  by  |  Published in Activism, Bailouts, Banking, Big Government, congress, DownsizeDC.org, Economics, law, Market Regulation, Politics, price controls  |  1

The House and Senate are expected to vote on the final version of the fraudulent “financial reform” bill this week.

We need to defeat this bad bill, HR 4173, which is a whopping 2,319 pages long.

To achieve REAL financial reform we need to pass Ron Paul’s Free Competition in Currency Act instead. Please send a letter to Congress pushing for both of these outcomes.

You may borrow from or copy the following sample letter for this purpose . . .

In addition to supporting the “Free Competition in Currency Act” please vote NO on the big Obama-Dodd-Frank financial regulation bill, HR 4173. Ron Paul’s currency bill addresses the root causes of the financial crisis, while the regulation bill does not.

The financial crisis was caused by . . .

* The Federal Reserve keeping interest rates artificially low
* The Federal Reserve inflating the money supply to satisfy Congress’s deficit spending
* Government policies encouraging or forcing financial institutions to issue credit to undeserving people

Together, these policies caused the sub-prime mortgage crisis and the mal-investment of easy money. The result was the Great Recession.

What does the Obama-Dodd-Frank bill do to address these problems?

NOTHING!

Instead, it sets up a “Consumer Protection” agency whose regulations will conflict with other regulatory agencies:

Read More »

Does the Federal Reserve REALLY Control Interest Rates?

April 30th, 2010 12:09 am  |  by  |  Published in Banking, Big Government, Commentary, Constitution, Economics, Federal Reserve, Free Market, government spending, inflation, Liberty, Money, price controls, Taxes  |  Comments Off

Originally published April 29, 2010 at http://towneforcongress.com/economy/does-the-federal-reserve-really-control-interest-rates-1

Many believe that the Federal Reserve controls interest rates.  But what if they do not? Here is a case for readers to decide on.

The Federal Reserve, myself, and many others, have made the claim that the FED controls both the interest rates and supply of dollars and credit.  [For those unfamiliar with the FED, you can learn just about everything you need to know from the links at the bottom of my Federal Reserve plank, and this article "Fractional Reserve Banking in Pictures."]  Several weeks, I had a conversation with Karl Denninger from Market Ticker on the gold market, and we also discussed  his theory that while the FED can jawbone and could theoretically move the federal funds rate wherever it wants, it still follows the marketplace.  In other words, its control of interest rates may be all bluster and a false charade.

Read More »

Ron Paul vs. Ben Bernanke on unwinding, price fixing

March 25th, 2010 12:22 pm  |  by  |  Published in Bailouts, Banking, congress, Debt, Economics, Federal Reserve, Free Market, Money, moral hazard, price controls, Ron Paul  |  Comments Off

Another interesting exchange between Ron Paul and Ben Bernanke during a Financial Services Committee hearing earlier today.

Ron Paul vs. Bernanke, the Fed, inflation, and central economic planning

March 17th, 2010 5:11 pm  |  by  |  Published in Banking, Big Government, congress, Constitution, Economics, Federal Reserve, Free Market, gold standard, inflation, Liberty, Market Regulation, Money, moral hazard, price controls, Ron Paul, Taxes  |  2 Responses

Earlier today Ron Paul did what he does best: Hammered central government/economic planning during a House committee hearing. He then gets to ask Ben Bernanke a few questions on interest rate manipulation. Unsurprisingly, Bernanke claims the problems were due to not enough regulation rather than admit that regulation was the cause of the problems.

“Central Banking is an art.” – Bernanke

Near the end of the 2nd clip both men get to the heart of their differences:

Bernanke: “You are a gold standard, er, uh…”
Paul: “I’m for the Constitution.”

httpvp://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=8CBCE62A55B9A4F7

Boss Hogg

February 23rd, 2010 10:32 pm  |  by  |  Published in Big Government, Health Care, Investing, Market Regulation, nationalization, Obama, Politics, price control, price controls, Socialism  |  13 Responses

In Barack Obama’s latest health care plan is a proposal to give the Health and Human Services secretary the power to block price increases in premiums by health insurers. That power, on its face, would be subjective and political. However, it would complete the take-over of American companies by this increasingly relentless socialist administration.

Look at the facts, these days government dictates how to make a product, the government dictates what to put in a product, the government dictates shipping methodology if the U.S. Postal Service is used, the government dictates working conditions with OSHA, the government dictates minimum pay for employees and who to hire with EEOC laws, the government dictates salaries and bonuses for management in some industries, and, at the end of the day, for its efforts, the government will be on hand to collect its fair share of the company’s profit through taxation if a company is fortunate enough to make a profit on its transactions.

Now the government wants to dictate to companies what they will charge for their products. 

What decision making is left for a company under this administration? Helping pick the color of tablecloths in the company mess hall?

This proposal will be the final nail in the de facto take-over of American business. And it neatly avoids the messiness and expense of actually having to buy or run companies ala General Motors or AIG. Free companies! What socialist politician wouldn’t be giddy with excitement over the prospect?

You just gotta admire that crazy Capitalist Socialism.

Obama is not FDR, Obama is Hoover

October 4th, 2009 12:38 am  |  by  |  Published in Big Government, Constitution, Economics, Free Market, History, Liberty, Market Regulation, price controls, Taxes  |  5 Responses

What an interesting discussion Judge Napolitano had with the wonderful Robert Higgs on Freedom Watch last Friday.  They discuss how Barack Obama is more easily compared to Herbert Hoover than FDR.

Speaking of Robert Higgs, he will deliver a lecture on Monday evening at George Mason University. The event is free and is hosted by the Mason Economics Club and the Future of Freedom Foundation. For more details see the FFF web site and scroll down to the events section.

The United States of Corporate Welfare

August 12th, 2009 10:08 am  |  by  |  Published in Abortion, Bailouts, Big Government, congress, DownsizeDC.org, fascism, Free Market, government spending, Health Care, Liberty, Market Regulation, Politics, price controls  |  Comments Off

D o w n s i z e r – D i s p a t c h

Quote of the Day: “Even in the best economic times, you won’t find an investment with a greater payoff than what these companies have been getting.” — Sheila Krumholz, Executive Director of The Center for Responsive politics


The Congressional Oversight Panel charged with monitoring the T.A.R.P. bailout scheme thinks more bailouts may be needed.

In case you’ve forgotten . . .

* T.A.R.P. stands for Toxic Asset Relief Program
* The T.A.R.P. was supposed to spend $700 billion buying so-called toxic assets from institutions that were supposedly too big to fail, but . . .
* After Congress said yes to this proposal the Treasury Department instead used the funds to buy stock in major banks
* In other words, The Toxic Asset Relief Program ended up having nothing to do with toxic assets

It get’s worse. According to Wikipedia . . . .

“On February 5, 2009, Elizabeth Warren, chairperson of the Congressional Oversight Panel, told the Senate Banking Committee that during 2008, the federal government paid $254 billion for assets that were worth only $176 billion.”

And even worse . . .

“During 2008, the companies that received bailout money had spent $114 million on lobbying and campaign contributions. These companies received $295 billion in bailout money.”

Thus, our quote of the day. Spending $114 million on lobbying to gain $295 billion dollars from the taxpayers is a hell of a deal. Many thoughts flow from this . . .

* Those who told us that strong campaign finance laws would curtail corruption were wrong
* Those who tell us we need Big Government to control evil corporations overlook the fact that big corporations want big government, because they benefit from it, and largely control it
* The same kind of lobbying and corporate control is behind the scheme for increased government involvement in health care
* And the $800 billion stimulus bill was another heaping helping of corporate welfare too

Sadly, this isn’t a new development. President Obama and the Democratic Congress are just continuing the policies of President Bush and the Republican Congress . . .

* Go back and scratch beneath the surface of Bush’s prescription drug program and you’ll find that it was mostly a corporate welfare scheme for Big Pharma.
* In addition, T.A.R.P. was passed under Bush and the Republican Congress.

As long as partisan loyalists continue to believe that their particular political party, and their particular political savior (be it Obama, Bush, whoever) is somehow different, we’ll continue to be victims of the same insanity. And at some point we might as well change the country’s name to . . .

The United States of Corporate Welfare

Here’s the bottom line . . .

Read More »

We already know the results of one so-called health care reform

June 5th, 2009 10:22 am  |  by  |  Published in Big Government, congress, DownsizeDC.org, Free Market, Health Care, Liberty, Market Regulation, nationalization, Politics, price controls  |  Comments Off

D o w n s i z e r – D i s p a t c h

Quote of the Day: “Absolute, arbitrary power over the lives, liberty and property of freemen exists nowhere in a republic, not even in the largest majority.” — Kentucky Declaration of Rights – Art. I, Sec. 2 also found in the Wyoming Declaration of Rights Art. I, Sec. 7


Some politicians want to mandate that employers provide health insurance for their workers, and/or that individuals must acquire such insurance, much as we’re all required to have car insurance. This is supposed to achieve universal coverage while also reducing costs. But…

Massachusetts politicians have already run this experiment, with bad results.

Please use our generic health care campaign to tell your Congressional employees to NOT impose Massachusetts’s mistake on the entire country.

Use your personal comments to share the results of the Massachusetts mistake, as summarized by Michael Tanner of the Cato Institute…

Massachusetts politicians promised that the insurance mandate would reduce medical costs. They also estimated that health insurance premiums could drop by 25-40%. Instead…

* Premiums rose by 7.4% in 2007, 8-12% in 2008, and are expected to rise 9% this year
* This compares to an average nationwide increase of only 5.7% over the same period
* Annual health insurance costs for a family in Massachusetts average about $4,000 more than the national rate
* Health care spending has also increased in Massachusetts by 23% since the coverage mandate was enacted

We already know the results of the mandate idea. Congress MUST NOT inflict this mistaken idea on the rest of us.   Read More »