Ron Paul Still Refuses To Endorse Romney
(CNBC) Texas Republican congressman Ron Paul pointedly refused to endorse his
party’s presidential contender, Mitt Romney, arguing that neither he nor
President Barack Obama would make necessary cuts to public spending that would
avert a fiscal catastrophe.
| “No,” the iconoclastic Libertarian bluntly told CNBC’s “Futures Now,” when asked about whether he was prepared to endorse Romney. He accused both the former Massachusetts governor and the president of being captive to similar interests. |
|
“Both within the establishment where they need the Federal Reserve as lender of
last resort to make sure that you take all the risk in the world,” Paul said. He
linked the Fed — his favorite foil — and the Washington political establishment
together as part of a “one party system” that refuses to make necessary but
difficult choices to cut spending. Read The Rest Of The Story RELATED STORIES |
How ignorant he is. One or the other will be President, and at least Romney loves America and wants it to prosper, while Obama wants to destroy it.
ReplyDeleteHe is anything but ignorant. He has something that you may have never heard of, its called "principals". They used to be common in America. They are now almost extinct.
DeleteNeither candidate nor any congressional candidate is candid about the true impact of putting the Fed between the rock and hard place at every Treasury auction. The Fed has become the lender of last resort, and buys big chunks of U.S. debt with fresh-off-the-press specious currency that can only drive inflation that will make all of us envious of the economic outcome in the Weimar Republic after WWI. If the Fed stops buying, the supply of notes, bonds & bills will increase, and the interest rates the Treasury pays will increase well above the 1%+ rates they enjoy. If; however, the Fed keeps printing cash to buy the instruments, the Chinese and Arabs who are holding roughly half the debt, then they will surely increase the interest rates because their investment will be paid back in devalued dollars. If that's not a classical "rock and hard place" scenario, I've never seen one before.
ReplyDeleteAdditionally, the interest rates the Treasury pays should increase geometrically since the recent S&P credit downgrade from AAA to A isn't reflective of the true repayment risk. Given our history of fiscal irresponsibility, I'd feel a lot more comfortable as an analyst dropping the rates into the B, C or D junk category.
I'm buying gold and sliver so as to give myself a hedge against the dollar-denominated investments in my 401K and pension account which the government will be indirectly confiscating to keep the fiscal shell game afloat as the portfolio's real value deteriorates far below the face investment. Ron Paul sees that, and since I was prescient by about 8 years that the residential real estate market was a bubble, I'm comfortable predicting that the dollar bubble will also burst soon because of the same irrational and profligate deficit spending by the congress and presidents over the last half century. Before I retired the men with whom I worked in commercial lending created an acronym to explain the necessary process to preserve the value of lenders asset in a stressed market, "GOBITL," or, get out before it's too late. My grandkids won't be able to get out when they are presented with the bills for all these fiscal and monetary "adjustments." Look for a meltdown soon, probably the first indicator of the crash will be the replacement of the petrodollar (see Nixon/Kissinger's misdeeds in 1971-1974) with a basket of currencies as the global reserve currency. If you think that $5/gallon is too much to pay for gasoline now, wait until it's hardly available at any price because dollars won't be accepted as payment by the OPEC producers. Gasoline prices have been about $10/gal in northern European countries for the last 20 years because they had to convert their currencies to petrodollars or gold to get oil. We're due for the same outcome when the bubble bursts.