Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘California’

Steve FrankOn the September 30, 2012 episode of Exposing Faux Capitalism with Jason Erb, I interviewed Steve Frank of CAPoliticalNews.com, and in the second hour, I covered the following articles:

1) Warren Buffett: “The decision to make Tim Geithner the Secretary of Treasury was a terrific decision.”

2) Warren Buffett’s inconsistencies

3) Pumping up gold is good for the Ludwig von Mises Institute’s bottom line with their nearly $3 million in gold bars

4) Lee Rogers’ last Live Free or Die Radio broadcast: December 21, 2012

Read Full Post »

Steve FrankSteve Frank of CAPoliticalNews.com is scheduled to be on Exposing Faux Capitalism with Jason Erb, September 30, 2012, at 1 PM Eastern.

Steve has been covering California’s political and economic issues on his site since 2005, and he has always been well-informed the times I have heard him in the past on Dr. Stan Monteith’s Radio Liberty program.

California is a bellwether for the country, with its significant economic potential that is limited by increasing government intrusion.

Read Full Post »

US national debt clock, 2008

In many jurisdictions, such as California, children who are entitled to receive child support payments are only entitled to simple interest on arrears.

The banksters, however, who create credit out of nothing, loan it out at compound interest.

Take the simple example of $10,000 owed over 10 years. With simple interest of 10%, as required in California, the child will be owed $20,000 10 years later.

With annual compound interest of 10%, the banksters will be owed $25,937.42, or 30% more. But hey, the banksters need that extra money to pay for their government lobbyists. After all, the children have the rest of their lives to pay off their individual compounding debt, and if that’s not enough, they can transfer it to their own children, as previous generations have.

Read Full Post »

Gary North speaking at the Mises Institute aft...

In my December 29, 2010 article, Gary North: “A government-guaranteed gold standard is a fool’s gold standard,” I argue that North has set the stage for a face-saving retreat of support for the gold standard that has gained so much support and sway among many alternative economics circles and individuals in the past few years.

From his article, I can find no standard set relative to gold, and after some discussion with members of a prominent libertarian forum, that has become even more apparent.

North writes:

Something close to a free market gold standard existed in California in 1849-54. That is about the only place it has ever existed.

Note how he says “something close” to a free market gold standard, and how it only lasted five years in a single sparsely populated (at the time) state of the U.S.

That is hardly a representative sample to make judgments about gold being adopted as a free market standard in 2010 or beyond.

He also said there would be a silver coin standard, so why didn’t he call it a free market silver standard? It seems to me that would be equally valid according to his logic, but for some reason he decided to call it a free market gold standard.

North writes:

But advocates of “the gold standard” almost always mean “a government-guaranteed gold standard.” Therein lies the problem. Governments lie. They cheat. They steal.

Human nature leads people to lie, cheat and steal, on occasion, and some more than others. Governments are compromised of people, so they will also lie, cheat and steal on occasion. It’s nothing unique to government. You will find the same thing in any association of people.

In his characteristics of his free market gold standard, North lists:

3. The enforcement of contracts by the government

That is, enforcement by the very government he says lies, cheats and steals. According to him, government can’t be relied on to enforce contracts, and by his own words, his so-called free market gold standard is no free market standard at all, and is therefore also a fool’s gold standard.

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts