http://www.webofdebt.com/articles/economic_sovereignty.php

RESTORING ECONOMIC SOVEREIGNTY: THE PUSH FOR STATE-OWNED BANKS

yeah, it is getting old.

Sorry Pete but you are going on ignore...

As of this writing, there are 55 views of this thread. If you and Robi can convince me those are bots or people who share your views, I'll stop posting on this subject.

But, as long as I believe people are reading, I'll keep posting.

Pete,
A polite suggestion:
Why don't you start your own blog or do it on facebook. That would let you know how many people are really interested in your topic vs. how many people are watching you get picked apart. That should either fill your narcissistic needs or give you a reality check. It's actually kind of sad, because this is a SAILING forum.

Here's what I'll do. If I don't get some positive response, in the open, by midnight tonight I'll stop.

YOU seem to be very interested and in fact enough so to read and write a comment.

So why don't you start your own blog or do it on facebook. That would let you know how many people are really interested in your complaining. That should either fill your narcissistic needs or give you a reality check. It's actually kind of sad, boo hoo..

I'm viewing the thread periodically for the sparring - not for it's original subject. Personally, I don't care to see non-sailing-related stuff on here (so don't count this as positive).

banking and finance?

Our Enemy, the Fed

by Ron Paul

Before the US House of Representatives Committee on Financial Services Monetary Policy and Rising Prices, March 17, 2011

There is perhaps no topic as important to the average American today as rising prices. Whether we consider food, gasoline, or clothing, the cost of living is increasing significantly. At a time of high unemployment, rising prices trap American families between a rock and a hard place. While rising prices colloquially are referred to as "inflation," true inflation is defined as an increase in the money supply, and all other things being equal, an increase in the money supply leads to a rise in prices. Inflation is and always has been throughout history a monetary phenomenon, and its destructive effects have ruined societies from the Roman Empire to Weimar Germany to modern-day Zimbabwe.

Blame for the most recent round of price increases has been laid at the feet of the Federal Reserve's program of quantitative easing, and rightly so in my opinion. This program, known as QE2, sought to purchase a total of $900 billion in US Treasury debt over a period of 8 months. Roughly $110 billion of newly created money is flooding into markets each month, markets which still have not fully recovered from the financial crisis of the last few years. Banks still hold billions of dollars in underperforming mortgage-backed securities on their books, securities which would render numerous major banks insolvent if they were "marked to market." These nervous banks are hesitant to loan out further money, instead holding well over a trillion dollars on reserve with the Fed. Is it any wonder, then, that the Fed's new hot money is flowing into commodity markets?

The price of cotton is up more than 170% over the past year, oil is up over 40%, and many categories of food staples are seeing double-digit price growth. This means that food, clothing, and gasoline will become increasingly expensive over the coming year. American families, many of whom already live paycheck to paycheck, increasingly will be forced by these rising prices into unwilling tradeoffs. Rising prices lead to consumers purchasing ground beef rather than steak, drinking water rather than milk, and choosing canned vegetables over fresh. Clothes are worn until they are threadbare, in order to conserve money that keeps food on the table and pays the heating bill. While some might argue that this new frugality is a good thing, frugality is virtuous only when it results from free choice, not when it is forced upon the citizenry by the Fed's ruinous monetary policy.

While the Fed takes credit for the increase in the stock markets, it claims no responsibility for the increases in food and commodity prices. Even most economists fail to understand that inflation is at root a monetary phenomenon. As the supply of money increases, more money chases the same amount of goods, and prices rise. There may be other factors that contribute to price rises, such as famine, flooding, or global unrest, but these effects on prices are always short-term, not long-term. Consistently citing rising demand, bad weather, or energy supply uncertainty while never acknowledging the effects of monetary policy is a cop-out. Governments throughout history have sought to blame price increases on bad weather, speculators, and a whole host of other factors, rather than acknowledging the effects of their inflationary monetary policies. Indeed, tyrants of many stripes have debased their nations' currencies while denying responsibility for the suffering that results.

The unelected policymakers at the Fed are also the last to feel the effects of inflation, in fact, they benefit from it, as does the government as a whole. Inflation results in a rise in prices, but those who receive this new money first, such as government employees, contractors, and bankers are able to use it before prices begin to increase, while those further down the totem pole suffer price increases before they see any of this new money. By reducing the purchasing power of the dollar, the Fed's monetary policy also harms savers, encouraging reckless indebtedness and a more present-oriented pattern of consumption. Hard work and thrift are punished, so economic actors naturally respond by spending more, borrowing more, and saving less. After all, why save rapidly depreciating dollars?

We must also remember that those policymakers who exercise the most power over the economy are also the least likely to understand the effects of their policies. Chairman Bernanke and other members of the Federal Open Market Committee were convinced in mid-2008 that the economy would rebound and continue to grow through 2009, even though it was clear to many observers that we were in the midst of a severe economic crisis. Chairman Greenspan before him was known for downplaying the importance of the growing housing bubble, even while it was reaching its zenith. It remains impossible for even the brilliant minds at the Fed to achieve both the depth and breadth of knowledge necessary to enable centralized economic planning. As Friedrich von Hayek stated in his Nobel Prize address:

"The recognition of the insuperable limits to his knowledge ought indeed to teach the student of society a lesson of humility which should guard him against becoming an accomplice in men's fatal striving to control society – a striving which makes him not only a tyrant over his fellows, but which may well make him the destroyer of a civilization which no brain has designed but which has grown from the free efforts of millions of individuals."

http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul727.html

Is that "+" or "-"?

I agree completely with Jake on this one! Not positive, but I keep checking in to see what others are telling you, gives me a chuckle.

I suspect you may be in the majority, which is unfortunate imo.

What would nice is if the owners of this site would create a political section so those who lack a real life could hang there. If it's about space then I offer the Mystere section since nothing goes on there anyway. Change the name and then they'll have their own hole to hang in and it won't be on the front page of a "SAILING SITE". I think ridiculous to see this crap at the top of the page. There are plenty of places to do this. GO THERE!

Again nobody's forcing you to read and comment on this thread. Or is Pete in the room there with you twisting your arm and forcing you to read and post comment? On second thought maybe try the Mystere section. GO THERE!

It's simply a context thing. I read about this stuff but when/where I expect to read about it. All these type of discussions here usually result in is a pretty basic internet argument with two sides shouting their points at each other with no give and take. You can't even carry a logical argument past two individual posts. I would rather read about sailing here but I wouldn't care if you guys had a forum for political discussion on this site (like Sailing Anarchy had to do).

Rick,
This idea is a win/win for you. You still get the "traffic"; and the sailors who come here for sailing are isolated from this crap. Please put it in a forum that is excluded from the open forums/discussions category. Therefore, I will not get the copious crap emails in my inbox. This is because I subscribe (as many do) to email notifications for open forums/discussions, which contains the sailing content that I (and many others) seek from CatSailor.
You will fix the problem for many, and pacify Pete (edited: and Buccaneer).

Pete is a cat sailor and this is a forum for cat sailors. If you don't like Pete's topic then don't read it and start your own. No big deal mate.

I think that there are enough political issues INSIDE sailing (AC, olympics, protest rulings, etc) to keep these forums busy without having to post politics that are OUTSIDE of sailing...

I've got other resources for non-sailing topics... Maybe that blog idea has merit...?

It is a big deal and you still don't get it. It's not whether I choose to read it or not, it's I don't want it coming into my inbox. If I unsubscribe to the open forums/discussion, then I loose the sailing content. I've offered a solution that is good for everybody.