gdp's Comments

Ludwig von Mises Institute : Can Anarcho-Capitalism Work? - Llewellyn H. Rockwell Jr. - Mises Daily

Mon, 17 Nov 2014 22:37:24 +0000

Don, I think you smoked to much doobie during the sixties. Go into rehab and maybe then you will be able to respond to criticism to your bazarre thoughts. Of course we could all be wrong and didn't understand that you are an alien that has traveled back in time and our minds have not evolved enough to comprehend your gibberish.

Ludwig von Mises Institute : Why The Theory of Money and Credit Is More important Than Ever - Richard M. Ebeling - Mises Daily

Sat, 8 Nov 2014 23:31:39 +0000

It is now apparent that there might have been no World War without the Federal Reserve System. A strange sequence of events, none of which were accidental, had occurred. Without Theodore Roosevelt’s "Bull Moose" candidacy, the popular President Taft would have been reelected, and Woodrow Wilson would have returned to obscurity.* If Wilson had not been elected, we might have had no Federal Reserve Act, and World War One could have been avoided. The European nations had been led to maintain large standing armies as the policy of the central banks which dictated their governmental decisions. In April, 1887, the Quarterly Journal of Economics had pointed out: "A detailed revue of the public debts of Europe shows interest and sinking fund payments of $5,343 million annually (five and one-third billion). M. Neymarck’s conclusion is much like Mr.Atkinson’s. The finances of Europe are so involved that the governments may ask whether war,with all its terrible chances, is not preferable to the maintenance of such a precarious and costlypeace.

Ludwig von Mises Institute : Why The Theory of Money and Credit Is More important Than Ever - Richard M. Ebeling - Mises Daily

Sat, 8 Nov 2014 23:14:34 +0000

Henry Morgenthau, American Ambassador to Turkey was asked why the US intended to make war in Germany. "We Americans," replied Morgenthau, speaking for the group of Harlem real estate operators of which he was the head, "are going to war for a moral principle." J.P. Morgan received the proceeds of the First Liberty Loan to pay off $400,000,000 which he advanced to Great Britain at the outset of the war. To cover this loan, $68,000,000 in notes had been issued under the provisions of the Aldrich-Vreeland Act for issuing notes against securities, the only time this provision was employed. The notes were retired as soon as the Federal Reserve Banks began operation, and replaced by Federal Reserve Notes. The Germans, English and French wer all about bankrupt because they had spend money on their war materials and standing armies. The war would not have started to continued without the Federal Reserve bankers supplying the credit and monies needed.

Ludwig von Mises Institute : How Wilson and the Fed Extended the Great War - Brendan Brown - Mises Daily

Sat, 8 Nov 2014 21:40:08 +0000

You nailed it.

Ludwig von Mises Institute : Why The Theory of Money and Credit Is More important Than Ever - Richard M. Ebeling - Mises Daily

Sat, 8 Nov 2014 21:34:16 +0000

That was my understanding. And yes I do agree with Noah that both the politicans and the banksters are parasites. I also believe that the banksters hold the upper hand right now.

Ludwig von Mises Institute : Why The Theory of Money and Credit Is More important Than Ever - Richard M. Ebeling - Mises Daily

Sat, 8 Nov 2014 16:40:06 +0000

I thought the banksters ran the Federal Reserve? It is supposed to be an institution separate from the Federal Government. What real authority does the Federal Government have over the Fed?

Ludwig von Mises Institute : How Wilson and the Fed Extended the Great War - Brendan Brown - Mises Daily

Tue, 4 Nov 2014 19:59:42 +0000

I really don't know what mistakes you are referring? The Federal Reserve knew exactly what they were doing. The banksters owned Wilson and were making money on the war. Read about the secret meeting on Jekyll Island that outlined the plan to create the fed with the banksters in control.

Ludwig von Mises Institute : American Tariffs and Wars From the Revolution to the Depression - James Bovard - Mises Daily

Sat, 1 Nov 2014 17:35:06 +0000

Mr. Bovard, I have not seen before the splitting of the reasons why the southern states seceded. You say: After seven Southern states seceded — over slavery — Republicans in Congress rushed to enact a prohibitive tariff bill even before Lincoln took office. And then this: and six more states seceded after the Morrill tariff bill was enacted and after Lincoln mobilized troops in response to the Fort Sumter episode. Then this: Abraham Lincoln campaigned on a promise to boost tariffs — a key factor in helping him carry Pennsylvania and win the presidency in 1860. But Lincoln’s tariff agitation further alienated Southern states and convinced many Southerners that they would be sacrificial animals for Northern industrialists. It looks like the tariffs were the primary reason for both groups to secede, unless there is information to the contrary.

Ludwig von Mises Institute : Do We Need a Lender of Last Resort? - Nicolás Cachanosky - Mises Daily

Sun, 26 Oct 2014 20:41:30 +0000

Rothbard, in "The Discovery of Money" agreed with this: As a summary of the national banking era, we can agree with John Klein that The financial panics of 1873, 1884, 1893, and 1907 were in large part an outgrowth of . . . reserve pyramiding and excessive deposit creation by reserve city and central reserve city banks. These panics were triggered by the currency drains that took place in periods of relative prosperity when banks were loaned up.

Ludwig von Mises Institute : Do We Need a Lender of Last Resort? - Nicolás Cachanosky - Mises Daily

Fri, 24 Oct 2014 15:12:14 +0000

Bullion Committee’-1810 ‘The most detailed knowledge of the actual trade of a country, combined with the profound Science in all the principles of Money and circulation, would not enable any man or set of men to adjust, and keep always adjusted, the right proportion of circulating medium in a country to the wants of trade.’ Report of the Select Committee of the House of Commons 1810 The ‘Bullion Committee’ of 1810 realised the virtual impossibility of the United Kingdom remaining off the gold standard when the war with the French had concluded. It realised a simple truth: that no ‘man or set of men’ could provide the appropriate amount of money for an economy. And thus it has been true ever since that central bankers, when freed from any form of monetary anchor, have created the wrong amount of money. All we have to decide is which side of wrong are they on --- too much or too little? Market movements now clearly indicate that the answer is too little.

Ludwig von Mises Institute : Do We Need a Lender of Last Resort? - Nicolás Cachanosky - Mises Daily

Fri, 24 Oct 2014 03:12:07 +0000

You have a hard time understanding what Mullins was writing about. He was not offering economy theory he was revealing the political and International Bankers shady dealings in establishing the Federal Reserve Act. Quit trying to make it out as an economic treatise. We learn about the players and non-transparency of the power grabbers. As for what constitutes a "Scholarly Work" it is up to a wide range of opinion. Let's take a couple of examples: Henry Hazlitt, "Failure of the New Economics." VS John M. Keynes, "General Theory." Now I would consider Hazlitt's total debunking of Keynes General Theory a scholarly work. Would you? Benjamin Anderson "The Value of Money." VS Irving Fisher, Purchasing Power of Money." I certainly believe Anderson ate his lunch. As for a scholarly work I also look to Vera C. Smith, "The Rationale of Central Banking and the Free Banking Alternative." See here Chapter 11: http://www.econlib.org/library/LFBooks/SmithV/smv... 11

Ludwig von Mises Institute : Do We Need a Lender of Last Resort? - Nicolás Cachanosky - Mises Daily

Thu, 23 Oct 2014 00:38:06 +0000

"Mullins and Griffin are not scholarly works. They had very little knowledge of monetary theory and never discussed the real issues prior to 1913. Rather, they wanted to write a conspiracy thriller about wealthy Jewish bankers...." You have a way that assumes people on this website are like the idealogues that frequent the NY Times and the mainstream media. People who frequent this site are well read and this is probably the reason your reception is not what you wished. Ezra Pound did financially support the writing of the book and he wanted Mullins to not turn it into a boring economic treatise. Mullins and Ezra were not looking for a "Scholarly work", whatever that means. What they were looking to do is tell a factual account of what occured. I would think people can read the book and determine by viewing the sources given and make a determination on what is fact and fiction. If you read the book you concluded it to be a conspiracy theory with no merit. I beg to differ. So much research went into this book. It is an eye opener.

Ludwig von Mises Institute : Do We Need a Lender of Last Resort? - Nicolás Cachanosky - Mises Daily

Wed, 22 Oct 2014 16:31:38 +0000

You said, The Mullins/Griffin/Jekyll Island story is very one-sided and historically unsound, just to make it look like a vast conspiracy. If this is the case, please supply evidence to support your position. I would think that all on this website would like to see the sources. The Mullins book gives numerous and very detailed sources in his notes.. As far as I know there has never been a direct response to the book refuting what was written. If there is please show what formed your opinion above. As for people voting you down I wouldn't get to concerned. We all get voted down from time to time.

Ludwig von Mises Institute : Do We Need a Lender of Last Resort? - Nicolás Cachanosky - Mises Daily

Tue, 21 Oct 2014 16:46:04 +0000

I wouldn't listen to anything that Warburg has to say. After all, would you listen to the wolf in the hen-house. Warburg was the architect of the Federal Reserve Act. Murray Rothbard is the man to refer to when talking about the pre-federal reserve act days and up to its passing congress. Murray's, The Case against The Fed. Here is the link, Mises.org/daily/3480#chap19. Chapter 19 speaks to the culmination at Jekyll Island. If you don't know about Jekyll Island and Wartburg's contribution then please read what Murray has to say. Also, I strongly suggest you read, The Secrets of the Federal Reserve by Eustace Mullins. This book connects all the dots and goes into great detail how the international bankers finally got their wish. It comments on the panics of 1873, 1893 and 1907 were the result of international bankers operations in London. You might also want to learn why Teddy Roosevelt entered the presidential race with Taft and Wilson, which Wilson won because of the split vote for the Republicans. Also, the mastermind behind Warburg and the Senator Aldrich Plan was Baron Alfred Rothschild of London. Put simply, the Federal Reserve was created by banksters for banksters. Follow the money.

Ludwig von Mises Institute : Four Reasons the Bernanke-Yellen Asset-Price Inflation May Be Nearing Its End - Joseph T. Salerno -

Fri, 17 Oct 2014 17:32:20 +0000

Phase three of the inflation is the ultimate runaway stage: the collapse of the currency. The public takes panicky flight from the money into real values, into any commodity whatever. The public's psychology is not simply to buy now rather than later but to buy anything immediately. The public's demand for cash balances hurtles toward zero. It is government policy until phase three then the public and their psychology takes over.

Ludwig von Mises Institute : How Much is Obama\'s War on ISIS Going to Cost? - Daniel McAdams - Mises Daily

Wed, 15 Oct 2014 01:43:56 +0000

It's the banksters from the London connection.

Ludwig von Mises Institute : Five Lessons Learned from the Scottish Referendum - Ryan McMaken - Mises Daily

Sat, 20 Sep 2014 19:50:21 +0000

Roddy, you communicated your point. You never need to apologize for indicating the racist Lincoln and his total disregard for the constitution.

Ludwig von Mises Institute : Böhm-Bawerk: Austrian Economist Who Said “No” to Big Government - Richard M. Ebelin

Thu, 11 Sep 2014 18:40:41 +0000

You will get no argument from me on that.

Ludwig von Mises Institute : Böhm-Bawerk: Austrian Economist Who Said “No” to Big Government - Richard M. Ebelin

Wed, 10 Sep 2014 20:35:22 +0000

I believe the distinction is made between being a libertarian or a neo-conservative. Even though Murray was an Anarcho-capitalist his political philosophy was libertarian. Where Rothbard, and probably Hoppe differ from Hayek is not in economics but in political philosophy. I personally bought Hayek's Constitution of Liberty when is first was published. I must say I agree with Rothbard. A person of such great economic stature could come out and endorse a long list of government actions. This is probably the reason for the disagreement between Rothbard, Hoppe and other libertarians.

Ludwig von Mises Institute : Böhm-Bawerk: Austrian Economist Who Said “No” to Big Government - Richard M. Ebelin

Wed, 10 Sep 2014 20:25:13 +0000

Rothbard commenting on Hayek's Constitution of Liberty in his book The Ethics of Liberty. "Thus, we see that Hayek’s Constitution of Liberty can in no sense provide the criteria or the groundwork for a system of individual liberty. In addition to the deeply flawed definitions of “coercion,” a fundamental flaw in Hayek’s theory of individual rights, as Hamowy points out, is that they do not stem from a moral theory or from “some independent nongovernmental social arrangement,” but instead flow from government itself. For Hayek government—and its rule—of law creates rights, rather than ratifies or defends them. It is no wonder that, in the course of his book, Hayek comes to endorse a long list of government actions clearly invasive of the rights and liberties of the individual citizens".