Tagged: Economy

Ron Paul: What If “Do Nothing” Is the Best Solution?

width="500" height="375" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/sNooRP6qLZA?fs=1&wmode=transparent&%23038;feature=oembed" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen>

Transcript

This is a rush transcript. If you notice any errors please report them using the “Help improve this post” link at the bottom of this post.

Bill Griffeth: As the major candidates prepare to square off on all the issues about the economy, let’s talk to one of the Republican hopefuls right now. We’re pleased to welcome back Congressman Ron Paul, who joins us on this “First on CNBC” interview. Welcome back, sir, it’s good to see you again.

Ron Paul: Thank you, it’s good to be with you.

Bill Griffeth: Inevitably, when candidates talk about the economy, the first thing is about jobs and what they will do to create jobs. Aren’t we at the point, though, now Congressman, after the years of things that the federal government has tried to do to create jobs – and it just hasn’t worked, we’re still at 9% unemployment here – are we at a point now where the federal government should step aside and let the jobs market grow on its own at some point, whenever it’s going to happen?

Ron Paul: Yea, but they should have done that a lot sooner, they shouldn’t have created the bubble, because it’s the bubble that caused the recession and depression and caused the unemployment. So, yes, they should have done a lot less. But now what they need to do is back off because the market wants to correct the inequities and the too much debt, and yet the politicians (the Congress as well as the href="http://www.ronpaul.com/legislation/audit-the-federal-reserve-fed-hr-459-s202/" >Federal Reserve) won’t allow that to happen, they keep propping up the bad debt. Whether it’s international debt or housing debt, our href="http://www.ronpaul.com/legislation/audit-the-federal-reserve-fed-hr-459-s202/" >Federal Reserve keeps buying the debt and holding the debt, and they keep propping this up. And as long as you do that, the correction doesn’t come, so we’ve delayed it 4 years. In a sense, that’s what Japan did and they went into the doldrums, and that’s what we’re doing. So actually I think we’ve been …

id="more-12389">Bill Griffeth: By the same token, all politicians, yourself included, wouldn’t you look like you’re neglecting your duties if you don’t try to do something to create jobs? I mean, isn’t that what happens when you get candidates together, when you get members of Congress together, when you bring them before the media? And the question inevitably comes up, “How will you create jobs, where will the jobs come from?” You can’t just say, “Well, it will happen eventually”, you have to do something, right?

Ron Paul: Yea, you have to get out of the way. We had a depression that lasted 17 years because adopted that philosophy that you had to get involved. In 1921 they got out of the way, and it was over in a year. So just to do something because politicians are supposed to do something even if it is wrong, that just compounds our problem. What if spending is the problem, that’s what I believe the real problem is; too much spending. So this is why I emphasis cutting the spending and I’ve proposed that we cut a trillion dollars out of the budget, because that’s doing something positive.

Bill Griffeth: Well, let me ask you then, with the super-committee still meeting behind closed doors, their deadline is just a few days away on the 23rd are you convinced they will be able to come up with 1.2 trillion dollars of cuts over the next 10 years?

Ron Paul: No, there’s no way, and that’s a dream. They’re not even cutting anything, they’re just cutting proposed increases that are built into the baseline. If you’re spending too much, you have to cut in reality, but no, they’re only nibbling away on the edges. They don’t ask the question, “Can we sustain a philosophy of government where we police the world and take care of everybody in the world as well as an entitlement system that is totally out of control?” They haven’t even asked that question, so nothing is going to come out of that committee, and I don’t see how very much is even going to come out of the Congress for the foreseeable future until we have a new President and a new Congress in many ways.

Bill Griffeth: What would you cut specifically then to contribute to a decline in the debt?

Ron Paul: Well, my proposal was I would eliminate 5 departments and I would cut a lot of the military expenditures that we use overseas that don’t help us. Like, why do we keep troops in Japan and South Korea and Germany and subsidize their economies? Why do we continue to fight wars that make no sense whatsoever? We’ve been in Afghanistan for 10 years, and the American people are sick and tired of this. Why do we take care of the world when we can’t even feed our people at home and give them medical care at home? So that whole philosophy has to change. Basically, I would cut a lot, but I would also go back to a baseline of 2006, and people get very nervous and ask, “You mean you would cut all the way back to 2006?”. Yes, sure, because we’re spending too much money, and the money that we spend takes it out of the economy; politicians don’t know how to spend the money, bureaucrats make a lot of money spending it. But that decisions have to be made in the economy, so I think there are very few of us in Washington, and essentially nobody else who is running for President, that really wants to cut and change the problems basically and look at monetary policy, look at foreign policy. They just want to pretend they’re doing something to say that they’re doing something, but if you’re doing the wrong thing, what good is it going to do?

Bill Griffeth: Two quick questions. One, I know you’re tired of being asked about it, but it’s incumbent upon me to ask anyway; are you going to run as an independent if you drop out of the Republican race, wouldn’t it make sense to run as a independent at some point?

Ron Paul: Well, it doesn’t make any sense to even talk about it, because right now our polls show we’re doing pretty darn well, both in Iowa and New Hampshire, and we’re striking distance, we’re in a good third place. So for me to think anything other than doing my job that people are sending me money to do, is an impossible thought, so it doesn’t even cross my mind as a possibility.

Bill Griffeth: Alright. Now let me ask you about href="http://www.ronpaul.com/misc/gold-price-chart/" >gold. Going back 30 years when I started my career, you were one of the first guys I ever heard of at an investment conference making the case for href="http://www.ronpaul.com/misc/gold-price-chart/" >gold and, of course, you talked about the href="http://www.ronpaul.com/misc/gold-price-chart/" >gold standard, but I’m not going to go there. But where do you think gold is going right now, how much higher do you think it goes, and why?

Ron Paul: Well, the question is, is how much lower is the dollar going to go in purchasing power, and I say to infinity, unless we change our ways. Because if you look at the gold-dollar at 1913 when the Fed started, we’ve lost about 98% of its value. So if we continue to do what we’re doing, it could go to infinity. It is the best measurement of the value of a currency, there’s no advantage to anybody to have a weak currency. The gold tells us that we have a weakening dollar and a weakening currency, but the whole world does, so it’s hard to sort out. So it’s going to go up a lot more, which is virtually saying the dollar has a longer way to go down on purchasing power. That’s why the middle class gets wiped out, and that is why the standard of living is going down for the people; they already know it, and that’s why there are people who are very unhappy in this country and they’d like to blame a few people for all the problems rather than looking at the philosophy of government, the monetary system and the spending, because that’s where you can find the answers to our problems.

Bill Griffeth: Congressman Paul, it’s always a pleasure to talk to you, sir, thank you for joining us.

Ron Paul: Thank you.

Related posts:

  1. href='http://www.ronpaul.com/2011-09-19/ron-paul-lets-get-real-on-jobs-stop-wasting-our-money-on-pretend-make-work-government-programs/' rel='bookmark' title='Ron Paul: Let’s Get Real on Jobs!'>Ron Paul: Let’s Get Real on Jobs! Stop Wasting America’s Money on Pretend Make-Work Government Programs by…
  2. href='http://www.ronpaul.com/2011-07-27/dr-ron-pauls-debt-cure-bring-the-troops-home-fire-useless-bureaucrats-end-entitlements/' rel='bookmark' title='Ron Paul’s Debt Solution: Bring the Troops Home, Fire Useless Bureaucrats, Phase Out Entitlements'>Ron Paul’s Debt Solution: Bring the Troops Home, Fire Useless Bureaucrats, Phase Out Entitlements Transcript Judge Napolitano: While Republicans in the House and Senate…
  3. href='http://www.ronpaul.com/2011-08-12/ron-paul-rick-perry-will-dilute-the-establishment-vote/' rel='bookmark' title='Ron Paul: Rick Perry Will Dilute the Establishment Vote'>Ron Paul: Rick Perry Will Dilute the Establishment Vote Transcript This is a rush transcript. Can you help us…

Related Posts:

Ron Paul on Fox News Sunday

width="500" height="281" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/-C71OyMM2JQ?fs=1&wmode=transparent&%23038;feature=oembed" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen>

Transcript

This is a rush transcript. If you notice any errors please report them using the “Help improve this post” link at the bottom of this post.

Chris Wallace: Several GOP presidential contenders, one candidate looks to make a move. He has the money to compete with the front runners, but does he have the message to reach enough voters? We’ll talk with Congressman Ron Paul as we continue our series of href="http://www.ronpaul.com/ronpaul2012/" >2012 One on One interviews. It’s a Fox News Sunday exclusive, all right now, on Fox News Sunday. And hello again from Fox news in Washington. The Republican presidential race intensified this week, but for all the ups and downs, one candidate has held steady, raising millions and staying within striking distance of the leaders. Continuing our href="http://www.ronpaul.com/ronpaul2012/" >2012 One on One series of interviews, we’re joined now by Texas Congressman, Ron Paul. And, Congressman, welcome back to Fox News Sunday.

Ron Paul: Thank you, it’s nice to be here.

Chris Wallace: Let’s start with the campaign, because the voting – and this is remarkable – is now less than 2 months away. I want to put up a couple of recent polls, and in the latest Des Moines Register Poll, you’re running third in Iowa, but 10 points behind Cain and Romney. In the latest Time poll, you’re running third in South Carolina by about the same margin. Now we should point out that you won the Iowa straw poll yesterday, and congratulations on that, sir. But how do you expand your support, how do you go from being a respectable third, to actually winning?

Ron Paul: Well, the one thing is, is it’s not by changing my message, because I’ve had a message that’s been the same. But the message becomes more appropriate everyday because I have talked about our monetary system, our spending, our debt. And we’re in the midst now of a sea change in the world because of this expansion of debt worldwide, and we’re on the hook for it because we have a dollar reserve standard and the American tax payer is on the hook. And it’s moving in this direction, it’s in the news every single day. We spend too much, and my message is cut spending, not raise taxes, change the opinion about what governments should do. But in my proposal, I say real spending cuts, not like the others tinkering on the edges; I want a trillion dollar cut in the first year to show that it’s spending that is the problem.

id="more-12380">Chris Wallace: Okay, we’re going to get to that in a min, and I should point out, of course, it was the Illinois straw poll, the Iowa straw poll was back in August.

Ron Paul: I’ll take both of them.

Chris Wallace: Well, there you go, you almost won the Iowa straw poll. Many conservatives say that they like your views on less spending, smaller government, adhering to the constitution. But the problem they have, the bridge too far, is foreign policy. They’re upset with what they view as isolationist views, especially when it comes to fighting the war on terror.

Ron Paul: I think that is a false charge about isolationism. Isolationism is when you put on tariffs and protectionism and you don’t want to trade with people and you don’t want to travel. And mine is the opposite, mine is really very open. But I don’t want troops around the world, because I think it hurts our national defense. By having too many troops, it helps bankrupt our country. The wars that we have been fighting were undeclared and, from my viewpoint, illegal and unconstitutional. But in the last 10 years, these foreign expenditures around the world have contributed to around 4 trillion dollars worth of our debt, so we can’t change that. But I think we’re better off served, our national security is better off by a different foreign policy, that’s my argument.

Chris Wallace: But, for instance, drones; a lot of people say that the drones have been terrifically effective, they’ve taken out a lot of the Al-Qaida leadership, it doesn’t involve putting troops on the ground, it’s cheap. As I said, it doesn’t involve a lot of manpower, and it does strike, and it’s been very deadly in its effectiveness. So why are you against drone strikes?

Ron Paul: Because I don’t agree with that assessment, I think it makes things worse. Because if you have one bad guy, and you go after him and say, “He’s the one, he’s an Al-Qaida leader, let’s kill him”. But sometimes they miss, sometimes there’s collateral damage, and every time we do that, we develop more enemies. Take, for instance, we’re dropping a lot of drone missile bombs in Pakistan and claim we’ve killed so many. But how about the innocent people who died? Nobody hears about that. This is why the people of Pakistan can’t stand our guts and why they disapprove of their own government. So we’re bombing Pakistan and trying to kill some people, making a lot of mistakes, building up our enemies, and at the same time, we’re giving billions of dollars to the government of Pakistan and we’re more or less inciting a civil war there. So I think that makes us less safe, for every one you kill, you probably create 10 new people who hate our guts and would like to do us harm.

Chris Wallace: Do you think the allegations against Herman Cain are relevant in this campaign?

Ron Paul: The allegations against his program, his liking the href="http://www.ronpaul.com/legislation/audit-the-federal-reserve-fed-hr-459-s202/" >Federal Reserve and his national sales tax? Yea, they’re very illegitimate; and his support for bail outs, those allegations are very illegitimate. Those other allegations, these problems that he had, I think the media has blown that way out of proportion. I think there are a thousand stories out on that, and I think that dilutes the real debate, because his views on foreign policy, for instance, are dramatically different than mine. He wants to expand these things and he believes in the bailouts and the href="http://www.ronpaul.com/legislation/audit-the-federal-reserve-fed-hr-459-s202/" >Federal Reserve and all this. I think that’s what we should be talking about, and I don’t like these distractions. So I don’t agree with all the concentration on that.

Chris Wallace: Let me ask you one question more about the distractions, though. Just speaking as a practical politician, do you think that they help you, do you think that they may get some of his supporters to take a second look at you?

Ron Paul: Oh, I think there’s a cycle going on here, and I don’t think that in particular. I think we’ve seen sudden surges of candidates, and then they fall off again. I think all of that is helpful to me, but not specifically because they’ve been these challenges. But I think when people get to know what Herman stands for, I think that helps me because they’re not going to say, “He’s not really for any cuts, and he’s for adding this national sales tax”. So yes, that helps me a whole lot.

Chris Wallace: Alright, let’s talk about what Ron Paul stands for, and specifically, your new plan to restore America, let’s drill down a little bit into it. Here it is: You call for cutting the federal budget, as you just said, by 1 trillion dollars, roughly 25% of the budget in the first year. You say you would balance the budget in 3 years, spending would be 15.5% of GDP in 3 years; the last time it was that low was 1951. Question: even the conservative American Enterprise Institute says those kinds of dramatic short-term cuts would send this country back into a recession.

Ron Paul: You know, that’s exactly what they said after World War II, and they cut the budget 60% and they cut taxes 30% and they released 10 million people from the military, and we finally had an economic boom for the first time since the 1920s. So no, you shouldn’t fear freedom and free markets and letting people spend the money rather than the government. You take all these resources out of the hands of the government, that doesn’t mean the money isn’t going to be spent, it means that the individuals are going to be spending. Maybe we could create an environment where people would start investing again and building automobiles and whatever they need to do. But it’s where the money is spent that is so important. It’s not like we take it away, we put it into productive use. When government spends this money, it’s non-productive; it goes into bureaucracies, it goes into regulations, it goes into subsidizing corporations that don’t deserve to be subsidized, it goes to bailing out people. No, that’s all wasteful spending, that damages the economy. You want the money to be spent by individuals and business people, not the government.

Chris Wallace: But I think we would both agree that there are some legitimate functions that government can perform that no one else can. Let me ask you about some of your cuts which maybe more controversial. Again, let’s put them on the screen. You would reduce funding for the National Institutes of Health by 23%, you would reduce funding for the Centers for Disease Control by 38%. What specific programs would you cut, Congressman?

Ron Paul: Oh, I would eventually try to wean ourselves off, because these are functions that are not properly authorized by our government.

Chris Wallace: Wait, let me just pick up on that. You don’t think that the government has a role in trying to do research to try to find answers to new diseases. For example, the Center of Disease Control, if there’s an epidemic sweeping the world?

Ron Paul: Well, if it’s international, yes, and if its people coming in, yes, we’ll have some responsibility. But when it’s R&D and how this money should be spent, unfortunately, it’s spent for political reasons rather than market reasons. So when that happens, the lobbyist come out and they lineup specially the drug companies are very much in favor of this. But the decisions are made by politicians and bureaucrats, rather than by the marketplace. But you want more R&D, you would have much more R&D and it would be better directed if investors and the market make these decisions. Because, believe me, the politicians and bureaucrats aren’t smart enough to know exactly what you should be investing in and which immunity you have to give. All these decisions are made, and when government makes a mistake, it hurts everybody. If a businessman makes a mistake in R&D, it hurts only that company. So it’s this reliability on government to make decisions that are better made in the economy, is what we had for 150 years. We don’t have this idea government has to be the vehicle for making significant economic decisions, this is rather new. And to take the individuals and corporations to make these decisions, there’s nothing wrong with that.

Chris Wallace: Let’s turn to Iran, because there is growing fear around the world. There’s going to be a new IAEA, the UN nuclear watchdog report this next week, that the country is getting closer to a “nuclear breakout”, as it’s called, where it would have all the elements, all the skills, to assemble a nuclear weapon. Would President Paul do anything to stop Iran from developing a nuclear weapon?

Ron Paul: Only by changing foreign policy and treating them differently. But the one thing that I’d caution against is some type of an overreaction. And if what you say is true – but they have been saying that for 10 years or so, so it may or may not be true, they haven’t proven it. But you’re saying they have various items and they might someday put a weapon together. See, the worst thing that could be is an overreaction and go to war over this. And this week our international relations committee passed a very, very strong sanctions bill against Iran, which means that even if any other country, even if an ally does any trading with Iran, we’re going to punish them. So when you put on strong sanctions, those are acts of war, because we did that in Iraq for 10 years and little kids died, they couldn’t get medicines and food, it led to war. So I would say, treat them differently and it would be less threatening.

Chris Wallace: When you say treat them differently …

Ron Paul: Don’t put sanctions on them.

Chris Wallace: So how are we going to persuade them not to pursue a nuclear weapon?

Ron Paul: Well, maybe offering friendship to them. I mean, didn’t we talk to the Soviets, didn’t we talk to the Chinese? They had thousands of these weapons, and we worked our way through the Cold War. I was in the military during the 1960s, and it was dangerous then, but we didn’t think, “We have to attack the Soviets”. They had capabilities, the Iranians aren’t even capable of making enough gasoline for themselves. For them to be a threat to us or to anybody in the region, I think it’s just blown out of proportion, people are anxious to use violence against the Iranians. I think it would undermine our security, I think it would be very destructive to href="http://www.ronpaul.com/tag/israel/" >Israel, because this is going to blow that place up. It is not like a changeover of government in Egypt or someplace like that, which is always a negative because they’re reacting to our foreign policy.

Chris Wallace: Finally, there is speculation – and I understand you’re running for the GOP nomination – but there is speculation that if you don’t win, you might run as a third-party independent candidate. Can you state flatly that you will support the Republican nominee in the off chance that it isn’t Ron Paul?

Ron Paul: Well, you know, probably not unless I get to talk to them and find out what they really believe in. But if they believe in expanding the wars, if they don’t believe in looking at the href="http://www.ronpaul.com/legislation/audit-the-federal-reserve-fed-hr-459-s202/" >Federal Reserve, if they don’t believe in real cuts, if they don’t believe in deregulations, and a better tax system, it would defy everything I believe in. And so therefore I would be reluctant to jump onboard and tell all the supporters that have given me trust and money, n all of a sudden I say, “All that we’ve done is for naught”, so they’ll support anybody at all because even if they disagree with everything that we do.

Chris Wallace: So does that mean that you might then consider an independent run?

Ron Paul: No, that does not mean that at all.

Chris Wallace: But would you?

Ron Paul: I have no intention of doing that, that doesn’t make any sense to me to even think about it, let alone plan to do that.

Chris Wallace: Because?

Ron Paul: Because I don’t want to do it, that’s a pretty good reason.

Chris Wallace: You answered it right there. Congressman Paul, it’s always a pleasure to talk with you, sir, thank you so much and we’ll see you on the campaign trail.

Ron Paul: Thank you, Chris.

Chris Wallace: Up next, the two Congressmen leading. I like that, “I just don’t want that do it”.

Related posts:

  1. href='http://www.ronpaul.com/2011-08-28/ron-paul-slams-fema-explains-austrian-economics-on-fox-news-sunday/' rel='bookmark' title='Ron Paul Slams FEMA & Explains Austrian Economics on Fox News Sunday'>Ron Paul Slams FEMA & Explains Austrian Economics on Fox News Sunday Transcript This is a rush transcript. If you notice any…
  2. href='http://www.ronpaul.com/2011-05-15/ron-paul-on-his-presidential-bid/' rel='bookmark' title='Ron Paul on His Presidential Bid'>Ron Paul on His Presidential Bid Date: 05/15/2011 This is a rush transcript. Can you help…
  3. href='http://www.ronpaul.com/2011-07-20/ron-paul-rein-in-government-spending-to-reduce-the-debt/' rel='bookmark' title='Ron Paul: Rein in Government Spending to Reduce the Debt'>Ron Paul: Rein in Government Spending to Reduce the Debt Transcript Chris Cotter: … but today it’s all about the…

Related Posts:

Ron Paul on the World Debt Crisis

width="500" height="281" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/JeXQTj9Q9qg?fs=1&wmode=transparent&%23038;feature=oembed" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen>

Transcript

This is a rush transcript. If you notice any errors please report them using the “Help improve this post” link at the bottom of this post.

Neil Cavuto: Republican presidential could, Ron Paul, says, “Think again”. He joins us on the phone. Congressman, your concern has always been, “We’ve got a world that’s broke, and a world that just has to wake up to that fact”, right?

Ron Paul: Right, I don’t think we’re willing to admit the truth around the world, we know where all the problems are, but the only thing they talk about is spending more money and increasing the debt. But it’s a debt crisis, and it’s worldwide. This week, our national debt crossed our GDP for the first time in its history. But the world is that way too, they have a 195 trillion dollars worth of debt, and that’s approximately what the GDP is. So, the world is literally bankrupt, and all they can say is, “Where are we going to get the money from? How are we going to bail them out?” And we’re very much involved because our banks are involved with the derivatives, protecting the banks of Europe, so that’s why they don’t want the banks to go under. But you can’t solve the problem of debt and too much spending by spending more and increasing the debt. I just don’t understand how they can believe this would work.

id="more-12382">Neil Cavuto: But would Americans be any more receptive to this painful medicine than the Italians are right now. You know, a lot of these folks singing and celebrating in Rome as we speak – we can take a peek at that again – they’re not inclined to want to accept cutbacks of any sort, even slightly raising the retirement age in Italy, which I believe is 55, they want to make it 57; it’s 52 in Greece, they want to make it 54. And they resist that in any way they can, and these Italians are resisting any adjustments in the social net in any way they can. Would we react the same way?

Ron Paul: Yea, and I think you can understand that; people become very dependent, they don’t want their allowance cut because they won’t know what to do. But the whole thing is, if we continue to do this, it will be cut. For instance, the cost of living is going up for the retired people, the standards of living is going down, so if we keep doing what we’re doing, they will be cut. And I think the government knows that, I think Bernanke knows this, but they want href="http://www.ronpaul.com/on-the-issues/fiat-money-inflation-federal-reserve/" >inflation. Certainly Paul Krugman argues this case, and they want href="http://www.ronpaul.com/on-the-issues/fiat-money-inflation-federal-reserve/" >inflation and therefore that will reduce the standard of living without saying that you have a nominal cut. But this has been around for a long time, that’s how you cut real wages when wages have to come down, because nobody will accept the nominal cut, so nobody is going to accept this. Their problem is the usual tools of spending and printing money hasn’t worked for them because the debt is so big. And just continuing to do this just makes our problems that much worse. And what I have always worried about has been that this would lead to political turmoil, and that’s what we’re witnessing today; and that will be worldwide.

Neil Cavuto: So I take it from what you’re saying, Congressman, is that you certainly, if you became President of the United States, would not be adding American moneys to either the IMF, a big international lender, or the World Bank for that matter; we are, of course, the biggest contributor to both. And when it came to bailing out a country, be it Italy or Greece, you would say no?

Ron Paul: I would say no, but what the IMF does is into the billions, but the Fed plans to spend trillions. And Bernanke was rather clear the other day: “We’re standing by, we’re watching this, and we’re ready to act so that the system doesn’t collapse”. And there will be a lot of threats and intimidations and fears, just like they did in 2008, and they will resort to bailing out. But I think the people are waking up, the rich get bailed out, the banks stay in business and the corporations get the money. But the common man, the middle class, lose their jobs and they get the disadvantage of their cost of living going up, and then they lose their houses. So the resentment is there and it’s justified. What I worry about, though, is where the blame goes. Is the blame going to go to the monetary system and the bailing out of the special interests, or will the blame go to … I don’t want them to start blaming capitalism and free markets and profits, per say.

Neil Cavuto: I was just going to say, Congressman, because you were sounding like an occupy-Wall Street there, I guess you relate more to their frustration, but not to their target. In this case, and in some of these protests this week, a lot of banks and brokerage houses and that sort of thing.

Ron Paul: Right, and I think it’s a mixed bag, I think there are some people there that are directing their attention to the href="http://www.ronpaul.com/legislation/audit-the-federal-reserve-fed-hr-459-s202/" >Federal Reserve, but there are a lot of them saying anybody who’s rich has to be taxed, and that is wrong. If you’re rich because you provide a good product for the marketplace, you should be rewarded and encouraged. But if you’re rich because you have an inside track to easy money and credit and you get bailed out and the Fed takes care of you because you’re too big to fail; people have caught on to this and that’s their anger. But the big job we have is sorting this out and blaming the bad economic policies that we’ve been putting up with for so long.

Neil Cavuto: Congressman, good, at least, hearing you again. Be well.

Ron Paul: Thank you.

Neil Cavuto: By the way, I was getting a clarification on this concert going on.

Related posts:

  1. href='http://www.ronpaul.com/2011-08-26/neil-cavuto-we-love-having-ron-paul-on-this-program/' rel='bookmark' title='Neil Cavuto: We Love Having Ron Paul On This Program'>Neil Cavuto: We Love Having Ron Paul On This Program Transcript This is a rush transcript. If you notice any…
  2. href='http://www.ronpaul.com/2011-08-30/ron-paul-on-fema-inflation-and-2012-campaign/' rel='bookmark' title='Ron Paul on FEMA, Inflation and 2012 Campaign'>Ron Paul on FEMA, Inflation and 2012 Campaign Transcript This is a rush transcript. If you notice any…
  3. href='http://www.ronpaul.com/2011-01-26/ron-paul-on-the-need-to-cut-spending/' rel='bookmark' title='Ron Paul on the Need to Cut Spending'>Ron Paul on the Need to Cut Spending Ron Paul explains why he favors cutting government spending rather…

Related Posts:

Ron Paul: We’ve Spent Way Beyond Our Means

width="500" height="281" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/ppbsKKvlQ0M?fs=1&wmode=transparent&%23038;feature=oembed" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen>

Transcript

This is a rush transcript. If you notice any errors please report them using the “Help improve this post” link at the bottom of this post.

Mika Brzezinski: Joining the table is Republican president candidate and Texas Congressman, Ron Paul. It’s good to have you on the show, sir. And Pulitzer Prize winning associate editor at the Washington Post, Bob Woodward, it’s good to see you. We were at Chris Matthew’s party last night, and Bob gave us the topics.

Joe Scarborough: He gave us the topics. He said, “You know, it’s the opposite. Usually the shows call you up and say these are the things you want to be talking about, three minutes here”.

Mika Brzezinski: Exactly, there’s a little framework of questions put together by a 23 year old producer.

Joe Scarborough: We just sort of wake up and look at the papers and say, … but Bob, last night, was ready with a laser focus on the super committee, so it’s a perfect matchup here because we’ve got Ron Paul.

Mika Brzezinski: We brought him here for you.

Joe Scarborough: A guy who has been warning about the debt, and Ron, let’s start. Before we talk about America’s debt, let’s start with Greece’s debt. It looks like a deal was made, now the Greeks seem to be rebelling against it, once again proving they don’t want to live within their means. What does it mean for the rest of us?

Ron Paul: We all face the same problem, nobody wants to admit the truth. The world is bankrupt, the system is bankrupt, it’s not viable, and we’re facing the same consequences because we spend way beyond our means and nobody wants to cut a nickel. I mean, all this talk is just talk, there aren’t any cuts. Even the proposed cuts are cuts in the future, 5 or 10 years out. So I think that if you live beyond your means, you have to live within your means, and that means you have to cut back and that’s not acceptable because too many people have become too dependent. And they’ve been taught for many, many decades that deficits really don’t matter, and this Keynesian idea that it’s always the consumer who drives the economy, which I don’t buy into. Which means that the demand is that the consumer spends more money to stimulate the economy. Well, they’re broke and they don’t have jobs and they have too many credit cards, so that can’t be the solution.

id="more-12333">Joe Scarborough: You know, Bob, the problem is this: even if the super-committee were to succeed by the low standards that we all have set for it (cutting 4 trillion dollars) now, a decade ago 4 trillion dollars would have been significant. Now, 4 trillion dollars doesn’t even pay for what we’ve spent over the last 4 years.

Bob Woodward: And they’re not even going to go there.

Joe Scarborough: And they’re not even going to go there.

Bob Woodward: They’re talking about 1.2 trillion dollars, as the Congressman points out, over 10 years. So that’s, maybe a 100 billion dollars a year. And if you get into the weeds on some of this, which I’m trying to do to answer the question, ‘How is the economy being managed and what is the nature of the jeopardy we’re in?’ Take something, you remember this from your days in Congress; farm subsidies. Okay, they talked and they said, “We can cut 29 billion dollars in farm subsidies”, and the Republicans say, “Okay, that’s a great idea, let’s do it”. And then the White House comes in and says, “No, let’s only cut farm subsidies 2% of that for rich farmers”. And so you’re talking night and day, and they’re not together on this, and you go through item after item and it gets blown up and they don’t agree on even a small bite.

Joe Scarborough: You know, one and a half trillion dollars, if that’s what they’re talking about cutting, Ron, over a decade, is such a joke, considering that last Christmas the President and the Republican Congress agreed to a plan that raised the deficit immediately, or the national debt, by an additional trillion dollars. Nobody is serious on Capitol Hill, what’s happened?

Ron Paul: Well, I don’t think you can accuse me of not being serious.

Joe Scarborough: Well, when I say nobody is serious…

Ron Paul: I think it’s so dangerous and so bad, and we’re facing something the world has never faced before, that my token effort to start off with, would be to cut a trillion dollars of real cuts in 1 year, and I think it would be helpful. And I argue this because of what we did after World War II. We cut spending by 60% and we cut taxes by 30% and we sent 10 million people into the workforce, and guess what, it finally ended the depression. People went back to work again because the changes occurred, the debt had been liquidated and we were ready to go back to work again. So you just can’t solve the problem of spending and debt with more spending and debt and the printing of money, it’s absurd and they are not changing their mind.

Bob Woodward: And the word that’s not being used here, which is the word in Greece, “Austerity”. And here everyone is talking about, “Oh, this is manageable”. It’s like when they talk about Iraq of Afghanistan and say, “Hard, but not hopeless”. But again, when you go into the numbers, time and time again, there is no agreement on the smallest things. Now, I think the campaign next year is going to get down to presidential leadership; can you manage the economy, does somebody have their hands on the steering wheel? And I think the sense people have now is, “There are no hands, or 20 hands, on the steering wheel”. And somebody has got to come up and say, “This is the plan, let’s face it”. And the public voters are not going to like the word “Austerity” but that’s where we’re headed.

Mika Brzezinski: I don’t disagree with you at all. Sam Stein, I wonder though, if that person, whoever that person is who has to say that, has to also say, “We are not going to get back to where we were”, that this is going to be a long process and unemployment is probably going to last for this-long or this-long and this is what we’re going to have to do to reboot? Who has the guts to say that, that there’s not a lot of hope in our current situation, of rectifying it to back before the bubble bursts?

Sam Stein: I would argue that, and to a certain extent he’s being criticized for it, President Obama has gone on and said this is going to be a long slog and that the economy that we once had, which was manufacturing-based, largely, was not going to be the economy that we have in the future. Let me just add a few data points to this because I think it’s worthwhile to note that, in addition to the 1.2 trillion dollars that the super-committee wants to cut, they did achieve about a 900 to a trillion dollars in cuts as part of the debt-ceiling deal in August. And, in addition to that, there is supposed to be – now we have to wait and see for this – another 1 trillion dollars in savings from drawing down the war. Those still don’t get to the crux of the matter, which is that we have a huge rising href="http://www.ronpaul.com/on-the-issues/health-care/" >healthcare costs problem in this country. But one of the ways to solve it is not simply just to cut, which is valid, but to get people back to work so that we can actually increase the tax base in this country. And one of the questions is how do you get people back to work, and does government people a role in that? Now I know where you stand on that, government probably should not play a role. But I’m wondering, in the interim, for you, would there be anything that you would be proud of supporting the government actually doing to stimulate some job growth to actually expand the tax base?

Ron Paul: The government does have a role, they ought to give us sound money, they ought to give us market interest rates, and they ought to let us spend the money. I don’t talk in terms of austerity and sacrifice because I tell the people I was with that it’s not a sacrifice for you to get your freedom back and get the market back and get you to keep your money and get you to spend your money. The people who have to sacrifice and give up are the people who have been living off the government and living off the tax payers, they don’t need any more bailouts. So it’s not a sacrifice.

Sam Stein: What can the government do, between now and let’s say 3 months, to maybe get some jobs back, is there anything that the government can do?

Ron Paul: The only thing you can do is to show the people that you’re going to change the direction of the country. But it’s not a budgetary problem, it is a philosophy problem. You can’t cut nickels and dimes from the militarism and the military budget unless you change the foreign policy. You can’t cut entitlements unless you give up on the principle of entitlement. So we have to decide whether we want to live within the confines of the constitution, or we want to continue to do what we’ve been doing, which means that the pie is shrinking and the demands are growing and the anger is increasing.

Bob Woodward: But no one really wants to bite the bullet on this. I mean, you’re talking numbers of 900 billion dollars or 1 trillion dollars cut here and so forth. If you really follow the numbers and get beyond the smoke and mirrors, a lot of those numbers are rounding errors. I mean, we now have an annual deficit of 1.6 trillion dollars, that’s in 1 year. And if you go out and say, “Well, let’s cut a little less than that in 10 years”, ….

Joe Scarborough: Those were budget caps that were set. So, Ron, it seems to be that this is your time, this should be your time as a presidential candidate. I’ve been talking about deficits and the debt since 1994 and I’ve been talking about it non-stop. But you were talking about it before I came to Congress, you’ve been talking about it after I left Congress, you’ve been talking about this for 20, 25 years. I always go back to your quote, it was actually in September of 2003, when you predicted – it’s frightening, Bob – exactly what was going to happen with Fannie and Freddy and the banks. He said this is going to create a housing bubble, it’s going to be a housing bubble that’s going to spread a virus in the entire economy, across the entire world, and when it pops, we’re in big trouble. So you’ve been predicting this coming debt crisis, why do people not come out on the campaign trail?

Ron Paul: Oh, people I talk to. The other day I had 1,200 people come out at the University of Iowa and they were enthusiastic about it. So I just think that the time has changed. You say, “Well, if this is true and they’re coming my way, why am I not at the top?” I’ll tell you what, we have a solid base, the country has changed, it’s dramatically different compared to 4 years ago. Right, just think of the success with the href="http://www.ronpaul.com/legislation/audit-the-federal-reserve-fed-hr-459-s202/" >Federal Reserve. Bernanke has to come before the people at press conferences, they’re on the defensive now. 65% of American people say we need to know how they’re passing out this credit, 15 trillion dollars worth of credit they deal out, they’re bigger than the Congress. 5 trillion dollars went to foreigners.

Joe Scarborough: Bob, you know about transparency, you know Ron has obviously been focused on the Fed for a very long time. It is extraordinary the power the Fed chairmen have behind closed doors. How did we get to a position where one of the most powerful people in the world is able act, I won’t say with impunity, but certainly without the most basic democratic checks?

Bob Woodward: Well, it’s all about money and following that money.

Joe Scarborough: By the way, does that arrangement that the Fed chief has so much power and they want to work in secret bother you?

Bob Woodward: Certainly, but there’s more and more transparency, as we know, and right now there’s not much they can do because we effectively have 0% interest rates. So their lever is gone, as you well know. So, in a sense, they’re reduced to pronouncements and press conferences and quantitative easing and so forth, which is something that is not the old interest rate- lever which really has an impact or can have an impact on the economy.

Mika Brzezinski: So Congressman, why is Herman Cain at the top of the polls?

Ron Paul: I think he’s gotten some very big show. The week where is really soared, he won a straw vote in Florida and he was on the news constantly and people felt, “Oh wow, look at that”. That same week I won a straw vote in California, and I got zero coverage.

Joe Scarborough: Why is that?

Ron Paul: I think I’m attacking the status quo like never before, I mean, the whole entitlement system. And I think there’s a lot more support out there for what I’m talking about than they realized, and they’re not going to give me a boost because I’m challenging the whole banking system, the military-industrial complex, the welfare state, our foreign policy. I want to go back to following strictly the constitution. It’s not in the cards right now, except the growing number of people is very significant. So the movement is in our direction because of this failure. You talk about the failure of the Fed, this is significant, they don’t have any cards left to play, this whole economy has no cards left to play. So this is going to be reversed, this economy is going to go to the dogs.

Bob Woodward: So are you the candidate of austerity, are you going out and saying …

Ron Paul: Well, I never said that, I’m the candidate of liberty where people have energy and incentives.

Bob Woodward: But to get there, we’re going to have a real long drought of austerity, aren’t we?

Ron Paul: No, no. The records show that when you do it, it only takes about a year. You should look at the 1921 depression, as well as what my example was of World War II. We cut it, and in a year everybody is back to work; 10 million people; 60% cut in the deficit.

Bob Woodward: You don’t want to have the campaign slogan, “Midnight in America”, you want to talk about what?

Ron Paul: The people that come to my rallies are enthusiastic, they say, “This is the most positive thing we’ve ever heard”. You know why? Because we are admitting the truth and saying there’s something seriously wrong, we have to make a difference. Because if you’re in total denial and we continue to lie to ourselves, there’s no hope. It’s sort of like getting better from cancer not admitting you have it and taking a medication. But the medication isn’t nearly as bad as they’d like to paint it to be. So it’s not a sacrifice, liberty is not a sacrifice.

Joe Scarborough: Let’s go from budget to Afghanistan, something we talk about around this table all the time. Bob, you’ve talked about it a good bit. Congressman, obviously you’ve been very concerned for a very long time with America’s ever-expanding the military state. The White House is now talking about looking into possibly drawing down in Afghanistan quicker. Can you explain why we are still in Afghanistan after a decade?

Ron Paul: There’s no sane reason for us to be there. And this drawing down in Iraq is a complete farce, they’re not drawing down. We have an embassy there that is the biggest I the world, it’s a fort for 17,000 people to be, they’re going to be contractors. We may take a few troops out and spread them around, they are going to put more troops in Kuwait, we are not vacating anything. So as long as we’re there, believe me, there is going to be incentive to kill us.

Sam Stein: Can I ask you something on that, because I’ve been to a bunch of these speeches on the trail, and usually when you get to the foreign policy section of your speech you’ll see half the crowd cheer you wildly, they go nuts. And then you see the other half of the crowd star booing. And I’m wondering if you could talk a little bit about Republican politics, with respect to foreign policy specifically, and look at the past 10 years starting with the rise of the neo-conservative link and where the Republican Party stands now, as a unit, with respect to foreign policy?

Ron Paul: I think what you’re saying is a strictly Republican meeting.

Sam Stein: Yea.

Ron Paul: See, but if I go to a campus, it’s 95%. These young people who bearing the burden and inheriting the debt, have to fight these wars. And the military, guess what, I get more money from active military duty personal, twice as much as all the other candidates, they’re sick and tired of it.

Joe Scarborough: Did you want to know, Bob, in the 2008 campaign, while you have neo-cons trashing Ron Paul because he said bring the troops home, in the last campaign and in this campaign, military members and their families gave, easily, more to Ron than anybody else because they understand the strain better than some politician or somebody in the think-tank in Washington DC. But this is a readiness issue, we’re stretching and it is expanding, ever expanding.

Bob Woodward: But at the same time, I think you have to give credit to President Obama on this, he is drawing down. Now, the question is, and lots of other Republicans say he may be doing that too fast in Iraq, that he needs some troops there as an insurance policy, and there’s a certain rational there. But the White House is on the Pentagon on spending, on getting troops out of Afghanistan and Iraq. But you’re right, Joe, we’re not taking the flag down, and no President wants to.

Joe Scarborough: We are spending 2 million dollars a week in Afghanistan. And you’re talking about college campuses, I have yet to find people outside of Washington DC, Ron, that think it makes sense for us to spend 2 billion dollars a week in Afghanistan a decade later.

Ron Paul: No, it absolutely makes no sense, and there’s no money, we’re in this huge deficit. And if we can’t cut the occupation of these countries, there’s no hope for us, let me tell you that, there’s just no hope for us. We better be willing to do it, we have to change the policy. If the design is to police the world and nation-build and solidify everybody’s borderlines, believe me, we’re doomed because we’re doing exactly what the Soviets did. We need to change our attitude, take care of our people at home. How do you get medical care at home if you’re spending all this money bombing people and then rebuilding their countries, it’s insane.

Bob Woodward: The rationale for staying in Afghanistan is to keep Al-Qaida from coming back into Afghanistan, and, as we know, Al-Qaida is has had a bad couple of years and they are going back into Afghanistan.

Ron Paul: They’re in Iraq now, they weren’t there when we went to war. So we’re only giving incentive to the Al-Qaida.

Bob Woodward: And they’re in Pakistan, you’re right.

Mika Brzezinski: Congressman Ron Paul, it was very good to have you on the set, please come back.

Joe Scarborough: Thank you, Ron, great to see you. Good luck.

Related posts:

  1. href='http://www.ronpaul.com/2011-01-20/ron-paul-well-be-safer-and-richer-if-we-bring-our-troops-home-and-change-our-foreign-policy/' rel='bookmark' title='Ron Paul: We’ll Be Safer and Richer If We Bring Our Troops Home and Change Our Foreign Policy'>Ron Paul: We’ll Be Safer and Richer If We Bring Our Troops Home and Change Our Foreign Policy Ron Paul explains why the U.S. government’s self-destructive foreign policy…
  2. href='http://www.ronpaul.com/2011-08-02/ron-paul-introduces-bill-to-cancel-americas-ficticious-1-6-trillion-debt-to-the-federal-reserve-lower-the-debt-limit-by-the-same-amount/' rel='bookmark' title='Ron Paul Introduces Bill to Cancel America’s Fictitious $1.6 Trillion Debt to the Federal Reserve & Lower the Debt Limit by the Same Amount'>Ron Paul Introduces Bill to Cancel America’s Fictitious $1.6 Trillion Debt to the Federal Reserve & Lower the Debt Limit by the Same Amount Ron Paul introduced a bill (HR 2768) that would cancel…
  3. href='http://www.ronpaul.com/2011-05-18/ron-paul-the-problem-is-corporatism-and-fiat-money-not-free-market-capitalism/' rel='bookmark' title='Ron Paul: The Problem Is Corporatism and Fiat Money, Not Free-Market Capitalism!'>Ron Paul: The Problem Is Corporatism and Fiat Money, Not Free-Market Capitalism! Date: 05/18/2011 Mika Brzezinski: Joining us now from Las Vegas….

Related Posts:

GOP Victory or Bust: Ron Paul Dismisses Third-Party Speculations

width="500" height="375" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/viSowLq3GZc?fs=1&wmode=transparent&%23038;feature=oembed" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen>

Transcript

This is a rush transcript. If you notice any errors please report them using the “Help improve this post” link at the bottom of this post.

Jason Lewis: You know, speaking of scaring big government activist on Halloween, I’ve got another thing that might scare them tonight; somebody running around dressed as President Ron Paul. That ought to scare any big-government activist. Joining us now is the Congressman from Texas and presidential candidate, who is busy surrounding the state of Iowa before January 3rd. He’s opening offices in surrounding states, one of those is Minnesota. Congressman Ron Paul joins us now, Congressman, welcome to the Jason Lewis Show.

Ron Paul: Thank you, it’s good to be with you.

Jason Lewis: You are opening offices in the Gopher State, but you’re probably circling the Hawkeye State, I imagine?

Ron Paul: Yea, we’re doing our best to be in every place we need to be, and I’m very pleased that the support has come in, financially as well as volunteers, to be able to do that. So we’re doing quite well as far as I’m concerned.

Jason Lewis: You’ll be in St. Cloud on Saturday for the big opening of the Minnesota festivities and, of course, you’ll be in and out of Iowa between now and January 3rd. There’s some good news for you, in the latest poll, the Des Moines Register Poll has Cain and Romney at the top, but the only other candidate in double digits is one Ron Paul at 12%.

Ron Paul: Yea, I’m pleased with that and, of course, it would be nicer to be a little bit higher, but one thing is we don’t have to worry about the dips. Some of the candidates come and they surge to the top and then suddenly they fade back. So I think we’re pretty secure where we are, and I think the growth will continue.

id="more-12325">Jason Lewis: What do you make of the notion that in Iowa you need a ground-game, you need an organization? You don’t just need to perform well or have a very energized base nationally, you need people on people on the ground, and you need to have some inroads. Does the Paul campaign have that in Iowa?

Ron Paul: Yes, better and ever before, and especially compared to 4 years ago. And almost winning the Ames Straw Poll was a good starter for us, because that meant we had located a lot of strong supporters and they became key to our campaign for what we’re building now. But things have been going quite well there.

Jason Lewis: Let me ask you a couple of questions you said over the weekend, I hear, that you’re not going to run as a third party or independent candidate if you do not get the GOP nomination, is that correct?

Ron Paul: Yea, that’s correct. I don’t even think about that, I’m not contemplating that in any way whatsoever.

Jason Lewis: I happen to agree with your particular foreign policy stand, I happen to believe that Taft and Reagan and really the true conservatism going back decades, was one of a neutral foreign policy and avoiding these foreign entanglements and misadventures and all of that, and we’re not going to get rid of terrorism until we get out of people’s faces. I concur with all that, I’ve been saying so. But the fact of the matter is, Congressman, does the rest of the Republican Party agree with that, and how do you get the nomination without getting over that hurdle?

Ron Paul: Well, there’s no doubt that we have to deal with that, but one thing is, things are a lot better now than they had been. Right now, if you look at the entire population of the country, 66% are saying we need to get out of Afghanistan right away, so we’re making progress on that. And I think maybe the conversion to our position won’t be so much on principle, as much as just practicality. I’ve always argued over the years that I’d win the argument for budgetary reason if nothing else, because most people are starting to realize we just can’t do this. And even those who disagree realize that when I do talk on the campaign trail and mention that we ought to be spending that money here at home instead of overseas, that gets a pretty loud applause.

Jason Lewis: Well, there’s no question that if you were running in a general election, I think the GOP is missing a golden opportunity to turn the tables on the Democrats who were so anti-war during the Bush years, and then all of a sudden had an epitome when one of their own Democratic Presidents, a la Woodrow-Wilsonesque, is leading the interventionist charge. So I think politically it’s a good idea, but I also think it’s the right thing to do. But I still don’t think the neo-conservatives within the GOP are coming onboard anytime soon, and that could be a bridge that’s pretty far.

Ron Paul: I think you’re right, but it is the challenge, and that’s why were on TV with ads trying to change people’s minds, and there’s a fertile field out there for changing people’s minds. But the big test will be in January, there’s no doubt. We’ll keep plugging along, and it’s easier to keep plugging along if you’re very confident that’s the right thing to do.

Jason Lewis: Well, you’re certainly getting more support, as over the weekend 13 troops were killed in Kabul and you got a propped up government there that can’t control the outskirts of the capital city, let alone the rest of the country. But what would you say to this? Going back a number of years, however, after 9/11 something had to be done, you supported routing the Taliban in 2001, 2002, as most of us did. But what’s wrong after that is saying, “Alright, look, we routed you, here’s the deal, however”. Because there was a great division within the Taliban as to whether to allow Al-Qaida in, that means there was support on keeping them out. “We’ll cut a deal, you can do what you want, it’s your country, but don’t ever let them in again”, and cut a deal years ago with the Taliban.

Ron Paul: Yea, and actually we did less of that, we did less of pursuing the Al-Qaida that we weren’t into nation-building and they used the whole mess as an excuse to do things they had wanted to do all along. The neo-cons have always wanted to go in there and go after Saddam Hussein. So they misplaced their efforts, and really the authority was more directed at Al-Qaida, those directly responsible for 9/11. Indirectly, obviously, Taliban had something to do with it, but the Taliban has never been dedicated to coming over here and killing us. And the reason there was more tolerance there is somewhat like their traditions and all. You know, the real training, if we were dealing with the direct people that were involved, 15 of them were Saudis, there was more justification for probably going into Saudi Arabia than there was for going into Iraq or even going into nation-building in Saudi Arabia. Some of that training with Al-Qaida occurred in Germany and Spain and then they learned how to fly airplanes in Florida. So they misdirected their efforts, I think they took advantage of it and they pursued a foreign policy that was completely detrimental to us.

Jason Lewis: Well, I will tell you this; there’s a reason that Afghanistan has been called the graveyard of empires for all these years, and the Soviet Union found that out, and I concur with you 100% on that particular issue. And I do think you’re ahead of time and I think the people are going to come around, but there’s a lot of blood and treasure being spent in the meantime. Let’s talk a little bit about domestic policy. We’re talking with Congressman Paul, presidential candidate from Texas. You also told the Manchester Union leader last week that, and you’ve been harping against the href="http://www.ronpaul.com/legislation/audit-the-federal-reserve-fed-hr-459-s202/" >Federal Reserve for quite some time. There’s no question that what happened in housing was a classic Austrian bubble, where you had too many dollars building up an asset, and once the banks extended the debt and they got nervous over the bad debt and once the prices got so high that nobody could afford them, the whole thing burst. And the goal of the Obama Administration has been to re-inflate the bubble, we need to let the market clear and housing to hit prices, I couldn’t agree with you more. But blaming this all on the Fed is a little bit, not misleading, but it misses the ball, and I want to get your reaction to this. It doesn’t miss the ball, really, but I think the fiscal side needs some scrutiny. Think about this; if you got and easy monetary policy that’s clearly far too easy, if the Fed triples its balance sheet, which it has, it’s doing so traditionally by buying government debt. If we weren’t running deficits, the federal government weren’t floating bonds year in year out, how would the Fed expand the monetary base?

Ron Paul: They could do what they just did, they brought mortgage debts.

Jason Lewis: True.

Ron Paul: They have too much leeway. But I think the connection is very important, but my argument is just a little bit different. If the Fed wasn’t there to buy the debt as the last resort, then the government couldn’t spend and couldn’t run up the debt. But interest rates would go up.

Always: Alright, hold that thought, Congressman Ron Paul, we got to take a quick break. Okay, Congressman Ron Paul has been kind enough to stick around for one last question, or actually a continuation of the previous question, and then we have to let him go. But, Congressman, we were talking about the link, the nexus, between fiscal policy and monetary policy, and the mortgage purchases were extraordinary and that is why we’ve got an asset href="http://www.ronpaul.com/on-the-issues/fiat-money-inflation-federal-reserve/" >inflation already. But traditionally, they bought T-bills, they bought special treasury bonds to expand the money supply. Well, these deficits were running, which was a fiscal phenomenon. We’re allowing them to monetize the debt, you run no deficit unless the Fed engages in an extraordinary act, which is quite transparent, how do they monetize the debt?

Ron Paul: Yea, I think they feed on themselves, my argument was, of course, that if they couldn’t buy the debt, the Congress would have to stop because the interest rates would go up real high. But the Fed uses your argument all the time, and there’s some legitimacy to the argument, and that is that it’s a congressional problem. The Fed feels obligated, that’s what they’re setup to be, the lender of last resort. So they say if Congress wouldn’t run up the debt, they wouldn’t have to do it, and there is some truth to that. But I think the whole system is bad; the Congress is irresponsible, the Fed is irresponsible. But even in the original href="http://www.ronpaul.com/legislation/audit-the-federal-reserve-fed-hr-459-s202/" >Federal Reserve Act of 1913, they were given permission to buy private securities, they never did it essentially. Maybe they did it a little bit in the depression, and they obviously did it here in 2008 and 2009. But just the principle of monetizing anybody’s debt, I think it’s economically wrong and morally wrong as well.

Jason Lewis: Last question for Congressman Ron Paul. Going to a href="http://www.ronpaul.com/misc/gold-price-chart/" >gold standard, some say, certainly monetarist would say, would be problematic. If you take a look at the price of href="http://www.ronpaul.com/misc/gold-price-chart/" >gold, it went from $300 in 2011 to $2000, or not quite $2000, at its peak here. That will be a whole lot of dollars turned in, that will be a whole lot of deflation if indeed href="http://www.ronpaul.com/misc/gold-price-chart/" >gold was moving in that direction and people in the traditional gold standard were turning in their currency. That would certainly gyrate the markets and certainly, some say, would bring about a massive spiraling deflation.

Ron Paul: Yea, when the British went back on the gold standard, there was deflation because they went back at the old standard and the old ratio. Now if we went back to the gold standard at $35/ounce or $500/ounce, that would be deflationary. But if you let the markets sat it, it might be $5000/ounce. There’s a good example of how that might work if you look at what they did after the Civil War, they went from when gold was a couple hundred dollars per ounce, they wouldn’t print greenback, they quit printing them, and the gold price went down.

Jason Lewis: You’re right, you can’t go back at $35/ounce. I’m just saying that, if in 2001 had it been $300/ounce, the current price of gold, and gold skyrockets, people are going to turn in a whole lot of dollars and you could have deflation.

Ron Paul: Well, I think the main thing is to get some stability where they either turn them in or take them out. They want to just be confident that they have a measuring rod. So people worry about whether there’s enough gold or not. The only way you have deflation is if you try to price the dollar-to-gold ratio lower than the market says it should be. But if you let the markets set it, it should go in neither direction, because there should be an insurance that the currency is backed by something, and people don’t even think about it. So you want stability rather than …

Jason Lewis: You certainly have to take the discretion out of the hands of the central bankers.

Ron Paul: Yea, for sure.

Jason Lewis: You grudgingly praised Paul Volcker in one debate, and he was the last guy that had the courage to really bring href="http://www.ronpaul.com/on-the-issues/fiat-money-inflation-federal-reserve/" >inflation out of the economy, and now the perversity of it all is, on the fiscal and monetary side, we just keep trying to reflate the bubble. And, as you pointed out, we’re in a debt crisis, and adding more debt and more fiat money is only going to make the next downdraft, the next recession that much worse. I don’t know why these people can’t see this.

Ron Paul: Yea, you wonder. We got into this by spending debt, printing money and over-regulating, so they’re trying to get out the same way. It doesn’t make any sense at all, you know?

Always: Right. Alright, Congressman, I appreciate your time today, you’ve been more than generous. Have a good event in St. Cloud, Minnesota and across the country and Iowa and good luck on the trail.

Ron Paul: Thanks a lot.

Jason Lewis: You bet. Congressman Ron Paul on Jason Lewis Show. Now we can talk a little bit about that, he’s doing quite well in Iowa, as are Herman Cain and Mitt Romney.

Related posts:

  1. href='http://www.ronpaul.com/2011-04-20/gold-is-over-1500-and-ounce-and-silver-just-broke-45-we/' rel='bookmark' title='Gold is over $1,500 and ounce and silver just broke $45.'>Gold is over $1,500 and ounce and silver just broke $45. Gold is over $1,500 and ounce and silver just broke…
  2. href='http://www.ronpaul.com/2011-08-15/today-is-the-40th-anniversary-of-ron-pauls-decision-to-go-into-politics/' rel='bookmark' title='Today Is the 40th Anniversary of Ron Paul’s Decision to Go into Politics'>Today Is the 40th Anniversary of Ron Paul’s Decision to Go into Politics On August 15th, 1971, President Richard Nixon announced the end…
  3. href='http://www.ronpaul.com/2011-08-16/ron-paul-rick-perry-is-politically-astute-on-federal-reserve-and-secession/' rel='bookmark' title='Ron Paul: Rick Perry Is “Politically Astute” on Federal Reserve and Secession'>Ron Paul: Rick Perry Is “Politically Astute” on Federal Reserve and Secession Transcript Larry Kudlow: For an exclusive interview, Texas Republican Congressman…

Related Posts:

Ron Paul: Yes, We Can Cut $1 Trillion Immediately

width="500" height="281" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/5zWgnSJHA8Q?fs=1&wmode=transparent&%23038;feature=oembed" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen>

Related posts:

  1. href='http://www.ronpaul.com/2011-10-21/ron-paul-as-president-ill-bring-the-troops-home-immediately/' rel='bookmark' title='Ron Paul: As President I’ll Bring the Troops Home Immediately!'>Ron Paul: As President I’ll Bring the Troops Home Immediately! Ron Paul delivered a powerful anti-war message to more than…
  2. href='http://www.ronpaul.com/2011-10-17/ron-pauls-plan-to-restore-america/' rel='bookmark' title='Ron Paul’s Bold Plan to Restore America, Save $1 Trillion & Balance the Budget'>Ron Paul’s Bold Plan to Restore America, Save $1 Trillion & Balance the Budget The Ron Paul 2012 Presidential Campaign announced the release of…
  3. href='http://www.ronpaul.com/2010-12-03/ron-paul-reacts-to-bernankes-9-trillion-bailout/' rel='bookmark' title='Ron Paul Reacts to Bernanke’s $9 Trillion Bailout'>Ron Paul Reacts to Bernanke’s $9 Trillion Bailout Shorty after the US Federal Reserve released data revealing trillions…

Related Posts:

Ron Paul Explains Plan to Restore America on Meet the Press

width="500" height="281" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/tDTH8lTQE7c?fs=1&wmode=transparent&%23038;feature=oembed" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen>

Related posts:

  1. href='http://www.ronpaul.com/2011-10-17/ron-pauls-plan-to-restore-america/' rel='bookmark' title='Ron Paul’s Bold Plan to Restore America, Save $1 Trillion & Balance the Budget'>Ron Paul’s Bold Plan to Restore America, Save $1 Trillion & Balance the Budget The Ron Paul 2012 Presidential Campaign announced the release of…
  2. href='http://www.ronpaul.com/2011-06-12/restore-america-now-end-the-fed-stop-the-wars-abolish-the-income-tax/' rel='bookmark' title='Restore America Now: End the Fed, Stop the Wars, Abolish the Income Tax!'>Restore America Now: End the Fed, Stop the Wars, Abolish the Income Tax! Date: 06/13/2011 The Keys to Economic Growth by Ron Paul…
  3. href='http://www.ronpaul.com/2011-09-14/ron-paul-explains-reasons-for-911/' rel='bookmark' title='Ron Paul Explains Reasons for 9/11'>Ron Paul Explains Reasons for 9/11

Related Posts:

Ron Paul: The Leader with a Plan to Solve the Financial Crisis

width="500" height="281" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/rurBVknM_G8?fs=1&wmode=transparent&%23038;feature=oembed" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen>

Transcript

Ron Paul – a visionary who predicted the financial crisis. A leader with a plan to solve it. The Paul Plan: Balance the budget, cut a trillion dollars year one. Eliminate five federal bureaucracies. End the foreign wars and nation building. Rein in the href="http://www.ronpaul.com/legislation/audit-the-federal-reserve-fed-hr-459-s202/" >Federal Reserve. Pay down the debt. Cut taxes to create jobs. Ron Paul – a plan to restore America now.

Related posts:

  1. href='http://www.ronpaul.com/2011-10-17/ron-pauls-plan-to-restore-america/' rel='bookmark' title='Ron Paul’s Bold Plan to Restore America, Save $1 Trillion & Balance the Budget'>Ron Paul’s Bold Plan to Restore America, Save $1 Trillion & Balance the Budget The Ron Paul 2012 Presidential Campaign announced the release of…
  2. href='http://www.ronpaul.com/2011-10-18/ron-paul-campaign-tops-others-in-q3-active-military-donations/' rel='bookmark' title='Ron Paul Campaign Tops Others in Q3 Active-Military Donations'>Ron Paul Campaign Tops Others in Q3 Active-Military Donations Outraises all other Republican candidates combined, outraises Obama The Ron…
  3. href='http://www.ronpaul.com/2011-08-16/new-ron-paul-tv-ad-the-one-who-can-beat-obama/' rel='bookmark' title='New Ron Paul TV Ad – “The One Who Can Beat Obama”'>New Ron Paul TV Ad – “The One Who Can Beat Obama” Ron Paul released a new 60-second TV spot this morning….

Related Posts:

Ron Paul Attacks Radical Money Printers and War Propagandists

width="500" height="375" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/ZSlWufLbrn8?fs=1&wmode=transparent&%23038;feature=oembed" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen>

Related posts:

  1. href='http://www.ronpaul.com/2010-11-19/ron-paul-attacks-tsas-porno-scanners/' rel='bookmark' title='Ron Paul Attacks TSA’s Porno-Scanners'>Ron Paul Attacks TSA’s Porno-Scanners Ron Paul appeared on CNN to argue against the current…
  2. href='http://www.ronpaul.com/2011-06-06/ron-paul-we-need-sound-money-and-a-balanced-budget/' rel='bookmark' title='Ron Paul: We Need Sound Money and a Balanced Budget!'>Ron Paul: We Need Sound Money and a Balanced Budget! Date: 06/02/2011 This is a rush transcript. Can you help…
  3. href='http://www.ronpaul.com/2011-07-18/ron-paul-allow-the-correction-stop-printing-money/' rel='bookmark' title='Ron Paul: Allow the Correction & Stop Printing Money'>Ron Paul: Allow the Correction & Stop Printing Money Transcript This is a rush transcript. Can you help us…

Related Posts:

Ron Paul: Government Is NOT a Business

width="500" height="281" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/Bq0kv4n5Yfs?fs=1&wmode=transparent&%23038;feature=oembed" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen>

by Ron Paul

Amid the din of economic nonsense being bandied about since the collapse of the housing bubble and the steep ramping up of our national debt, there has been the persistent refrain that Washington should be run more like a business. If only more business people were in charge to wield their business acumen, we would have this country in shape in no time. But is that a good solution?

Businesses seek primarily to increase their revenues and profits. Government revenue depends on taxes. Government accumulates tax money by squeezing it out of people’s productive earnings with threats of audits, fines and imprisonment. Our government already collects roughly $2.1 trillion annually from the productive taxpayers of America. We hardly need to increase our federal government’s revenues like a private business!

Businesses sell products or services to voluntary buyers, always looking to increase their market share as much as possible. But what is the federal government’s product or service? Rules, regulations, bureaucracy, paperwork, red tape, hoops to jump through, uneven protection and security from people with guns, coercion and compliance through force and confiscation of assets, militarism instead of national defense, and of course a vast welfare state. Do we need more of these government services? Hardly. In fact, we have far too many of these destructive things already.

What we need is more freedom. Freedom is the simple ability of people to live their lives as they see fit without government coercion, provided they do not initiate force or fraud against others. What we really need is a less coercive government, not more revenues.

Washington needs to stop seeing itself as a growth industry, and realize that the true function of government is to protect liberty. Washington certainly has expanded and grown and accumulated a great deal of the people’s capital for itself, but this has been at the expense of our nation’s prosperity. This trend needs to be reversed.

We don’t need yet another “jobs” bill to supposedly put the American people back to work. Politicians need to realize that, aside from outright hiring some 14 million people, government does not create jobs. The only thing government does is hinder job creation by getting in the way and consuming otherwise private resources. Therefore, the most useful thing government can do for unemployment is to “liquidate” much of what government does in the first place.

One plain example is our tax policy that encourages U.S. corporations to accumulate foreign earnings abroad rather than repatriate such earnings. Currently there is over $1 trillion of capital that companies are keeping overseas because of the 35% tax charged for bringing it back to the US. Our government literally is pushing capital and jobs overseas that could be used to hire an estimated 2.5 million people here at home.

Businesses create jobs. Government is not a business. We don’t need more stimulus or phony jobs bills. We don’t need more revenue – $2 trillion is plenty to fund the federal government annually. What we do need is a wholesale rejection of government as a central economic planner.

Related posts:

  1. href='http://www.ronpaul.com/2011-06-12/restore-america-now-end-the-fed-stop-the-wars-abolish-the-income-tax/' rel='bookmark' title='Restore America Now: End the Fed, Stop the Wars, Abolish the Income Tax!'>Restore America Now: End the Fed, Stop the Wars, Abolish the Income Tax! Date: 06/13/2011 The Keys to Economic Growth by Ron Paul…
  2. href='http://www.ronpaul.com/2010-10-27/to-create-jobs-government-should-get-out-of-the-way/' rel='bookmark' title='To Create Jobs, Government Should Get Out of the Way!'>To Create Jobs, Government Should Get Out of the Way! Date: 10/25/2010 Government and Job Creation by Ron Paul As…
  3. href='http://www.ronpaul.com/congress/hearings/' rel='bookmark' title='Hearings'>Hearings 112th Congress Ron Paul is Chairman of the House Financial…

Related Posts: