Ron Paul submits legislation to abolish Fed. Reserve

[MrMon]

I think you are understating the depth and breadth of financial crises prior to 1913, as well as the number of them. The Panic of 1837 lead to a 5 year depression, failure of one-quarter of all U.S. banks, and widespread unemployment. The Panic of 1873 lasted four years, lead to 14% unemployment, and bankrupted 25% of the country's railroads. The Panic of 1893 lasted at least 3 years, saw 20-25% unemployment, bankrupted the country's biggest railways, and saw over 500 banks fail. The Panic of 1907 lasted only a year, but saw the stock market drop by 50%. That's certainly "sharp", to say the least.

Post-WWII, we really have nothing to compare to the above. Even the worst crisis, the 1973-4 oil shocks and the follow-on stagflation, were mild compared to those. People simply don't think in terms of bank failures any longer. You might argue that inflationary currency is somehow unsound and evil, but given the volitile past, I think people will take the stability of the current system, which was invented to eliminate the roller coaster ride of pre-Fed time.

[LooseCaller]

[ QUOTE ]
You provided a bogus answer. Why is the Fed necessary?

[/ QUOTE ]

i never argued the fed was a good thing, i simply stated what would happen when ron paul tried to talk congress into agreeing with him.

im actually pretty shocked it wasnt clear that my statement was intended to be humorous.

anyone with an ability to find the search function could have found the many threads on this issue that have already been started. i was kind of berating him for not doing that.

[nietzreznor]

[ QUOTE ]
You might argue that inflationary currency is somehow unsound and evil, but given the volitile past, I think people will take the stability of the current system, which was invented to eliminate the roller coaster ride of pre-Fed time.

[/ QUOTE ]

People would only accept such stability because most people don't understand how much they're getting [censored] over by the Fed's inflationary policy--if they understood that the Fed inflates essentially at the peoples' expense, then they might realize that a little instability isn't all that bad.

[MrMon]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You might argue that inflationary currency is somehow unsound and evil, but given the volitile past, I think people will take the stability of the current system, which was invented to eliminate the roller coaster ride of pre-Fed time.

[/ QUOTE ]

People would only accept such stability because most people don't understand how much they're getting [censored] over by the Fed's inflationary policy--if they understood that the Fed inflates essentially at the peoples' expense, then they might realize that a little instability isn't all that bad.

[/ QUOTE ]

We're not talking "a little instability". Pre-Fed, we're talking about financial ruin for millions during a panic. And even if the Fed is inflationary, if we know that they are to a tune of about 2% per year, we can easily plan around that.

People want stability, they'll trade a lot to get it, even their right to be free, one need only look at a number of counties around the world to see that. Of course, freedom + stability is the greatest combination, but don't think that people will willingly trade large amounts of stability for a small amount of financial freedom. They won't. That's why any move away from the current financial system, absent some massive disaster, simply isn't going to happen.

[Richard Tanner]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You might argue that inflationary currency is somehow unsound and evil, but given the volitile past, I think people will take the stability of the current system, which was invented to eliminate the roller coaster ride of pre-Fed time.

[/ QUOTE ]

People would only accept such stability because most people don't understand how much they're getting [censored] over by the Fed's inflationary policy--if they understood that the Fed inflates essentially at the peoples' expense, then they might realize that a little instability isn't all that bad.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is about the end of it. If people knew exactly how bad the fed is compared to other systems, it might lead to progress. No one is going to do anything if everyone is kept (or chooses to be) in the dark about the SOP of the Fed.

Cody

[Exsubmariner]

The man's got balls. Big, brass, dense, hairy balls. If he makes it out of the primaries, he's got my vote.

He's got big problems, though. Most people are kept woefully ignorant about the fed and he's facing an uphill struggle to educate people about something they never learned in school. Hell, it's taken me years of consistent effort to wade through all the dirge of information out there to make sense of it.

[Dan.]

[ QUOTE ]
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h110-2755

What would be the most profound impact of this type of move?

[/ QUOTE ]

Most profound? I guess that would be the Fed being abolished.

[bobman0330]

That link doesn't have the full text of the bill. What is Paul proposing to replace the Fed with? Depending on the answer, the impact could be a huge economic mess or very little.