Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Click Here if you want to upgrade your account
If you were able to post but cannot do so now, send an email to admin at raypeatforum dot com and include your username and we will fix that right up for you.
montmorency said:I don't know who Edward Griffin is, but Bill Still's views on money seem pretty sound to me.
For a different, but related (UK) approach, have a look at PositiveMoney dot org .
The problem is not Fiat money, but that the ability to create our money supply has been given to unelected, unaccountable bankers.
montmorency said:I don't know who Edward Griffin is
Still claims that, because bankers have operated a gigantic monetary scam for hundreds of years, it is time to break their grip over our lives and establish a fair and honest monetary system. We could not agree more on that point. But then, in the tradition of Greider and Stinnett, he attempts to lead us to a non-solution. [b]He claims that we should take this power from the bankers and give it to the politicians, because they are chosen by the people and, therefore, can be trusted[/b].
In my view, this is the most naïve concept since Adolph Hitler won the elections in Austria as “the man you can trust.” We must not forget that politicians gave this monopoly to the bankers in the first place. Politicians continue to cooperate with the system in all of its corruption. Politicians derive huge benefits from this system and repeatedly place their careers above the public good. Politicians vote the bills that spend more than comes in from taxes and thereby create that hidden tax called inflation. Politicians write the laws that take away our liberty in the name of fighting terrorism or crime or drugs. It is the height of folly to design a plan of monetary reform based on the assumed wisdom and incorruptibility of politicians.
If this morning we were to give politicians the right to create money out of nothing, by noon they would be swarmed by lobbyists from the banking industry, and by nightfall, most of them would have sold their souls. Nothing would change except appearances. The only solution that the power brokers fear is a system that does not allow bankers OR politicians to manipulate the money supply – and the only system that prevents that is one based on something of tangible value, something that, itself, cannot be created out of nothing. The only way to remove the temptation from both bankers AND politicians is to restrain them with a money system that is backed 100% by precious metal. Period! And all the half-truths about Talley Sticks and Greenbacks and Ben Franklin quotes cannot change that.
4peatssake said:I have no pony is this race but to be fair, Still does have a rebuttal to Griffith's criticism of him and his views.
Bill Still refutes G. Edward Griffin on Economics
Griffin:Lincoln’s issuance of fiat money, called Greenbacks in violation of the Constitution, once again was presented as an act of statesmanship.
Still:I wonder what part of the Constitution Mr. Griffin is referring to here? Article 1, section 8 clearly says that Congress alone should
create the money
and "regulate the Value thereof….”
Wouldn't regulating the value thereof mean the Congress should be in control of the quantity?
Congress shall have the power to coin money and regulate the value thereof.
You bet he is. Making sure everyone keeps fighting among themselves so no real change is ever possible.burtlancast said:As they say, the devil is in the details.
j. said:montmorency said:I don't know who Edward Griffin is, but Bill Still's views on money seem pretty sound to me.
For a different, but related (UK) approach, have a look at PositiveMoney dot org .
The problem is not Fiat money, but that the ability to create our money supply has been given to unelected, unaccountable bankers.
So increasing the money supply democratically is ok?
Stealing when approved by majorities is ok?
montmorency said:I have no idea what you mean by this. I don't approve of stealing by anyone. If you can point to where I approved of stealing, then I will eat whatever humble pie you serve me.
montmorency said:If the money supply needs to be increased, according to the needs of the real economy, then yes, let it be increased, in order to serve the will of the people, as expressed by democratic means.
montmorency said:It's not really practical to use gold and silver nowadays, even if it were advisable from a money supply point of view, which I happen to think it isn't.