Category Archives: Ron Paul

NEW APPROACH NEEDED

This weeks expected House vote to add more sanctions on Russia, Iran, and North Korea is a prime example of how little thought goes into U.S. foreign policy. Sanctions have become kind of an automatic action the U.S. government takes when it simply doesnt know what else to do.

No matter what the problem, no matter where on earth it occurs, the answer from Washington is always sanctions. Sanctions are supposed to force governments to change policies and do what Washington tells them or face the wrath of their people. So the goal of sanctions is to make life as miserable as possible for civilians so they will try to overthrow their governments. Foreign leaders and the elites do not suffer under sanctions. This policy would be immoral even if it did work, but it does not.

Why is Congress so eager for more sanctions on Russia? The neocons and the media have designated Russia as the official enemy and the military industrial complex and other special interests want to continue getting rich terrifying Americans into believing the propaganda.

Why, just weeks after the White House affirmed that Iran is abiding by its obligations under the nuclear treaty, does Congress pass additional sanctions anyway? Washington blames Iran for destabilizing Syria and Iraq by helping them fight ISIS and al-Qaeda. Does this make any sense at all?

When is the last time Iran committed a terrorist act on our soil? It hasnt. Yet we learned from the declassified 28 pages of the Congressional 9/11 report that Saudi Arabia was deeply involved in the 2001 attacks against Washington and New York. Who has funded al-Qaeda and ISIS in Syria for years? Saudi Arabia. Yet no one is talking about sanctions against that country. This is because sanctions are not about our security. They are about politics and special interests.

Why is Congress poised to add yet more sanctions on North Korea? Do they want the North Korean people to suffer more than they are already suffering? North Koreas GDP is half that of Vermont the U.S. state with the lowest GDP! Does anyone believe they are about to invade us? There is much talk about North Koreas ballistic missile program, but little talk about 30,000 U.S. troops and weapons on North Koreas border. For Washington, its never a threat if we do it to the other guy.

Heres an alternative to doing the same thing over and over: Lets take U.S. troops out of North Korea after 70 years. The new South Korean president has proposed military talks with North Korea to try and reduce tensions. We should get out of the way and let them solve their own problems. If Iran and Russia want to fight ISIS and al-Qaeda at the invitation of their ally, Syria, why stand in the way? We cant run the world. We are out of money.

President Donald Trump was elected to pursue a new kind of foreign policy. If he means what he said on the campaign trail, he will veto this foolish sanctions bill and begin dismantling neocon control of his administration.

Ron Paulis a former U.S. Congressman from Texas and the leader of the pro-liberty, pro-free market movement in the United States. His weekly column reprinted with permission can be foundhere.

Got something youd like to say in response to one of our stories? In addition to our always lively comments section (below), please feel free to submit your own guest column or letter to the editor via-email HERE or via our tip-line HERE

Banner via iStock

See more here:
Ron Paul: Donald Trump Should Veto Sanctions Bill - FITSNews

Jonah Goldberg

The greatest trick any politician can pull off is to get his self-interest and his principles in perfect alignment. As Thomas More observed in Robert Bolts A Man for All Seasons, If we lived in a State where virtue was profitable, common sense would make us good, and greed would make us saintly.

Which brings me to Sen. Rand Paul, the GOPs would-be Man for All Seasons. Paul emerged from the smoldering debris of the Republican health care reform train wreck as a figure of high libertarian principle, the shining no vote on any compromise that came short of full repeal.

Look, this is what we ran on for four elections, Paul told Neil Cavuto of Fox News. Republicans ran four times and won every time on repeal ObamaCare, and now theyre going to vote to keep it. Disappointing.

I found many of Pauls arguments and complaints entirely persuasive on the merits. But there have been times when I had to wonder if the merits were all that was driving him.

Was it just a coincidence that the bill was terribly unpopular in his home state of Kentucky, where more than one in five Kentuckians are on Medicaid?

This is the problem. When touting your principles is a politically expedient way of avoiding accountability, its hard to tell whether principles or expedience is in the drivers seat. But not impossible.

Paul learned politics on the knee of his father, Ron Paul, a longtime Texas congressman and irrepressible presidential candidate. In the House, the elder Paul earned the nickname Dr. No because he voted against nearly everything on the grounds that it wasnt constitutional or libertarian enough.

Im absolutely for free trade, more so than any other member of the House, he told National Reviews John Miller in 2007. But Im against managed trade.

So Paul opposed the Central American Free Trade Agreement and all other trade deals, not on Trumpian protectionist grounds but in service to his higher libertarian conscience, which, in a brilliant pas de deux, landed him in the protectionist position anyway.

Ron Paul loved earmarks. Hed cram pork for his district into must-pass spending bills like an overstuffed burrito and then vote against them in the name of purity, often boasting that he never approved an earmark or a spending bill.

In 2006, Republicans proposed legislation to slow the growth of entitlements by $40 billion over five years. Democrats, as usual, screamed bloody murder about Republican heartlessness and voted against it. And so did Ron Paul on the grounds the reform didnt go far enough. Man, that sounds familiar.

Now I cant say for sure that Rand Paul is carrying on the family tradition. He is different than his dad in many ways.

And yet: Every time health care proceedings moved one step in Pauls direction, he seemed to move one step back. Sen. Ted Cruz offered an amendment that would open up the market for more flexible and affordable plans, like Paul wanted. No good, Paul told Foxs Chris Wallace. Those plans would still be in the context of the ObamaCare mandates.

My idea always was to replace it with freedom, legalize choice, legalize inexpensive insurance, allow people to join associations to buy their insurance, Paul said.

Sounds good. Except a provision for exempting associations from ObamaCare mandates was already in the bill.

Paul insists hes sympathetic to the GOPs plight and its need to avoid a midterm catastrophe. (It would look awful if the party did nothing on health care at all.) His solution? Just repeal ObamaCare now and work on a replacement later. I still think the entire 52 of us could get together on a more narrow, clean repeal, he told Wallace.

That sounds like a constructive idea, grounded in principle.

And yet: Thats what GOP leaders wanted to do back in January. And one senator more than any other fought to stop them, and even successfully lobbied the White House to change course and do repeal-and-replace simultaneously. Guess who?

If Congress fails to vote on a replacement at the same time as repeal, Paul wrote back then, the repealers risk assuming the blame for the continued unraveling of ObamaCare. For mark my words, ObamaCare will continue to unravel and wreak havoc for years to come.

In the wake of the Senate bills collapse this week, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell says hes all for a clean repeal, and so does Rand Paul. For now.

Jonah Goldberg is an editor-at-large of National Review Online. Contact him at JonahsColumn@aol.com.

Go here to see the original:
Goldberg: Health care's 'Dr. No' - Peoria Journal Star

The greatest trick any politician can pull off is to get his self-interest and his principles in perfect alignment. As Thomas More observed in Robert Bolts A Man for All Seasons, If we lived in a State where virtue was profitable, common sense would make us good, and greed would make us saintly.

Which brings me to Sen. Rand Paul, the GOPs would-be Man for All Seasons. Paul has managed to make his opposition to the GOPs healthcare bill a matter of high libertarian principle. The fact that the bill is terribly unpopular in his home state of Kentucky where more than 1 out of 5 Kentuckians are on Medicaid is apparently just a coincidence.

Indeed, it seems like whenever I turn on the news, hes explaining why the GOPs healthcare efforts are disappointing. Look, this is what we ran on for four elections. Republicans ran four times and won every time on repeal Obamacare, he told Fox News Neil Cavuto, and now they're going to vote to keep it. Disappointing.

Principles, meet self-interest.

But is Pauls idealism really whats driving him, or is that just a convenient excuse for doing whats politically expedient? Its tough to say.

Paul learned politics on the knee of his father, Ron Paul, a longtime Texas congressman and irrepressible presidential candidate. In the House, the elder Paul earned the nickname Dr. No because he voted against nearly everything on the grounds that it wasnt constitutional or libertarian enough. The fusion of cynicism and idealism was so complete, it was impossible to tell where one began and the other ended.

Im absolutely for free trade, more so than any other member of the House, he told National Reviews John Miller in 2007. But Im against managed trade. So he opposed the Central American Free Trade Agreement, and all other trade deals, not on Trumpian protectionist grounds but in service to his higher libertarian conscience which, in a brilliant pas de deux landed him in the protectionist position anyway.

Ron Paul loved earmarks. Hed cram pork for his district in must-pass spending bills like an overstuffed burrito and then vote against them in the name of purity, often boasting that he never approved an earmark or a spending bill.

In 2006, Republicans proposed legislation to slow the growth of entitlements by $40 billion over five years. Democrats screamed bloody murder about Republican heartlessness and voted against it. So did Ron Paul on the grounds the reform didnt go far enough.

Now I cant say for sure that Rand Paul is carrying on the family tradition.

And yet: Every time healthcare proceedings move one step in Pauls direction, he seems to move one step back. Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas offered an amendment that would open up the market for more flexible and affordable plans, like Paul wants. No good, he told Foxs Chris Wallace. Those plans are still in the context of the Obamacare mandates.

My idea always was to replace it with freedom, legalize choice, legalize inexpensive insurance, allow people to join associations to buy their insurance.

Sounds good. Except a provision for exempting associations from Obamacare mandates is already in the bill.

Paul insists hes sympathetic to the GOPs plight and its need to avoid a midterm catastrophe. (It would look awful if the party did nothing on healthcare at all.) His solution? Just repeal Obamacare now, and work on a replacement later. I still think the entire 52 of us can get together on a more narrow, clean repeal, he told Wallace.

That sounds like a constructive idea, grounded in principle.

Oddly, thats what the GOP leadership wanted to do back in January.

And one senator more than any other fought to stop them and even lobbied the White House successfully to change course. Guess who?

If Congress fails to vote on a replacement at the same time as repeal, Paul wrote, the repealers risk assuming the blame for the continued unraveling of Obamacare. For mark my words, Obamacare will continue to unravel and wreak havoc for years to come.

Thats true, particularly, if Paul stays true to his principles.

jgoldberg@latimescolumnists.com

Follow the Opinion section on Twitter @latimesopinion or Facebook

ALSO

Why the Supreme Court needs 18-year term limits

California needs to keep its ballots spin-free

If someone tells you your kid's teacher would be better off with a 401(k) than a pension, don't believe it

Read more:
Is Rand Paul's opposition to the GOP health bill principled, or cynical ... - Los Angeles Times

THIS ISNT MAKING U.S. SAFE

On Fridaythe U.S. House overwhelmingly approved a massive increase in military spending, passing a $696 billion National Defense Authorization bill for 2018. President Donald Trumps request already included a huge fifty or so billion dollar spending increase, but the Republican-led House found even that to be far too small. They added another $30 billion to the bill for good measure. Even President Trump, in his official statement, expressed some concern over spending in the House-passed bill.

According to the already weak limitations on military spending increases in the 2011 sequestration law, the base military budget for 2018 would be $72 billion more than allowed.

Dont worry, theyll find a way to get around that!

The big explosion in military spending comes as the US is planning to dramatically increase its military actions overseas. The president is expected to send thousands more troops back to Afghanistan, the longest war in U.S. history. After nearly 16 years, the Taliban controls more territory than at anytime since the initial American invasion and ISIS is seeping into the cracks created by constant U.S. military action in the country.

The Pentagon and Defense Secretary James Mattis are already telling us that even when ISIS is finally defeated in Iraq, the U.S. military doesnt dare end its occupation of the country again. Look for a very expensive array of permanent U.S. military bases throughout the country. So much for our 2003 invasion creating a stable democracy, as the neocons promised.

In Syria, the United States has currently established at least eight military bases even though it has no permission to do so from the Syrian government nor does it have a UN resolution authorizing the U.S. military presence there. Pentagon officials have made it clear they will continue to occupy Syrian territory even after ISIS is defeated, to stabilize the region.

And lets not forget that Washington is planning to send the U.S. military back to Libya, another American intervention we were promised would be stabilizing but that turned out to be a disaster.

Also, the drone wars continue in Somalia and elsewhere, as does the U.S. participation in Saudi Arabias horrific two year war on impoverished Yemen.

President Trump often makes encouraging statements suggesting that he shares some of our non-interventionist views. For example while Congress was shoveling billions into an already bloated military budget last week, President Trump said that he did not want to spent trillions more dollars in the Middle East where we get nothing for our efforts. Hed rather fix roads here in the U.S., he said. The only reason we are there, he said, was to get rid of terrorists, after which we can focus on our problems at home.

Unfortunately President Trump seems to be incapable of understanding that it is U.S. intervention and occupation of foreign countries that creates instability and feeds terrorism. Continuing to do the same thing for more than 17 years more U.S. bombs to stabilize the Middle East and expecting different results is hardly a sensible foreign policy. It is insanity. Until he realizes that our military empire is the source of rather than the solution to our problems, we will continue to wildly spend on our military empire until the dollar collapses and we are brought to our knees. Then what?

Ron Paulis a former U.S. Congressman from Texas and the leader of the pro-liberty, pro-free market movement in the United States. His weekly column reprinted with permission can be foundhere.

Got something youd like to say in response to one of our stories? In addition to our always lively comments section (below), please feel free to submit your own guest column or letter to the editor via-email HERE or via our tip-line HERE

Banner via iStock

Here is the original post:
Ron Paul: Big Military Budget Threatens America | FITSNews - FITSNews

Ron Paul Yellow Sr. AberdeenNews.com Fort Yates, N.D.: Funeral arrangements for Ron Paul Yellow Sr. age 71 of rural Fort Yates, ND are pending with Oster Funeral Home of Mobridge, SD. Ron Yellow Sr. passed away on July 16, 2017 at his home in Fort Yates, ND.

See the rest here:
Ron Paul Yellow Sr. - AberdeenNews.com

The real enemies are the banks and the government, as it always has been.

Going cashless is never the answer for consumers and business owners. The only entities benefiting from such a move are the local government and the banks. Cash is a form of financial freedom, something most of us will never see again. Ron Paul feels a cashless society is equal to an authoritarian power grab. An interesting take on things, that much is evident.

People with more than two peas for a brain know the economy is failing. Especially the dollar-based monetary system, as it is under serious threat. Ron Paul feels the same way and doesnt agree with Janet Yellens assurances. Especially the promise of how we will not see another financial crisis in our lifetime is absolutely ridiculous. Ron Paul feels the next crisis could happen in August of this year, for all we know. A very bold statement that wont sit too well with the economic powers.

Interestingly enough, Ron Paul is trying to drive a point home. More specifically, he feels central bankers are always wrong. While there is some merit to such statements, it is not a popular train of thought. Then again, the ongoing war on cash seems to hint at the trouble which will befall us all. More specifically, if banks weed out cash, consumers and enterprises will be even more reliant on them. That is something everyone should try to avoid.

Then again, there are also reasons to turn cash into something else. Right now, cash isnt a safe store of value by any means. Ron Paul feels buying gold, stockpiling provisions, and potentially even buying Bitcoin is the right way forward. The longer the next financial crisis stays away, the bigger the hit will be. Now is the time to prepare for the worst, as it will happen eventually. Those unprepared for such a situation will find themselves in a world of trouble.

It is remarkable to see Ron Paul is so outspoken about the looming crisis. In his opinion, authoritarians want to cling to power. This means weeding out cash is the number one priority right now. A cashless society will not work the way authoritarians envision it, though. People will lose confidence and revert to other means of payment in the end. Cash is not the enemy here, that much is evident. The real enemies are the banks and the government, as it always has been. Ron Paul is quite convinced things will turn sour soon. Only time will tell if hes right.

Header image courtesy of Shutterstock

See the rest here:
Ron Pauls Feels the war on Cash is an Authoritarian Power Grab - newsBTC

Hot in Libertarian news right now is previous presidential nominee Austin Petersen switching to the Republican Party to announce his run for the U.S. Senate in Missouri.

Petersen distinguished himself from other candidates in the party by being the only firm anti-abortionist and putting a focus on working within the confines of the Constitution, as well as appearing on conservative leaning talk shows. He wrote a letter to the public which was published by the Kansas City Star on why he made the change.

kA 4=2DDlQA`QmkDA2? 4=2DDlQD`Qmx? 9:D =6EE6C[ 96 DE2E6D E92E 27E6C A6CD@?2==J 2D<:?8 7@FC E9@FD2?5 @7 9:D DFAA@CE6CD[ 96 7@F?5 E92E ?:?6EJ 6:89E A6C46?E @7 E96> D2:5 E96J H@F=5 DE:== G@E6 7@C 9:> :7 96 492?865 A2CE:6D] qFE E96 C62= C62D@? 7@C E96 492?86 😀 9:D A2DD:@? 7@C {:36CEJ 2?5 C682:?:?8 >2?J @7 E96 =:36CE:6D H6 92G6 =@DE 2?5 2C6 =@D:?8] %9@F89 E96 #6AF3=:42? !2CEJ 92D AC@G6? E96>D6=G6D 4@==64E:G6=J :?6AE W:7 ?@E FEE6C=J >2=762D2?EX[ 96 92D E2<6? E96 C@FE6 #@? !2F= 9:>D6=7 H6?E[ 7C@> {:36CE2C:2? !C6D:56?E:2= ?@>:?66 E@ #6AF3=:42? 4@?8C6DD:@?2= 42?5:52E6[ H9:49 D66>D =:<6 2 A2E9 96 H2D >62?E E@ 7@==@H 92G:?8 H@C<65 @? !2F=D 42>A2:8?D 2?5 82:?:?8 6IA6C:6?46 😕 9@H E@ 9:>D6=7]kDA2? 4=2DDlQpAA=64@?G6CE65DA246Qmk^DA2?m tIA6C:6?46 H9:49[ 😕 @?=J 6:89E 52JD 27E6C 9:D 2??@F?46>6?[E 2:565 E@ C2:D:?8 @G6C @?6 9F?5C65 E9@FD2?5 5@==2CD 😕 5@?2E:@?D 7C@> 9:D 7C665@> ?:?;2D[ 2D 96 42==D E96>]k^DA2?mk^Am

kA 4=2DDlQA`QmkDA2? 4=2DDlQD`Qm&?56CDE2?523=J[ E96 25G2?E286D @7 DH:E49:?8 E@ E96 #6AF3=:42? !2CEJ @FEH6:89 E96 5:D25G2?E286D] w6 H:== 92G6 2 8C62E6C 2F5:6?46 2?5 A@E6?E:2==J 2 =@E >@C6 7F?5:?8[ =:EE=6 E@ ?@ D2>6 A2CEJ 5:D28C66>6?E @? 9:D 23@CE:@? DE2?46[ 2?5 4@?G6?:6?E 2FE@>2E:4 C6AF3=:42? G@E6D Wx 42? E6== J@F =@J2=EJ G@E:?8 3J =:36CE2C:2?D 😀 ?@E 4@>>@?[ E96C6 😀 >F49 AC:56 😕 36:?8 :?7@C>65X] $E:== E96 5:D25G2?E286D 2C6 EC@F3=:?8]kDA2? 4=2DDlQpAA=64@?G6CE65DA246Qmk^DA2?mk^DA2?mk^Am

kA 4=2DDlQA`QmkDA2? 4=2DDlQD`Qm|@DE {:36CE2C:2?D AC@>@E6 E96 :562 @7 DAC625:?8 {:36CEJ E9C@F89 2?J G6?F6[ E96 C62D@? H6C6 {:36CE2C:2?D 😀 3642FD6 E96 6DE23=:D9>6?E A2CE:6D AC6G6?E 2?J C62= 492?86 7C@> 92AA6?:?8 H:E9:? E96:C C2?2?J 4@?D:56C E96 =625:?8 G@:46 2?5 4C62E@C @7 E96 >@56C? {:36CEJ >@G6>6?E]kDA2? 4=2DDlQpAA=64@?G6CE65DA246Qmk^DA2?mk^DA2?mk^Am

kA 4=2DDlQA`QmkDA2? 4=2DDlQD`Qmw6 H2D 23=6 E@ 4C62E6 2 7@CF> 2?5 :?7@C> A6@A=6 @? E96 D:?:DE6C 24E:@?D @7 @FC 8@G6C?>6?E[ 3FE 96 4@F=5 ?@E 24EF2==J :?:E:2E6 492?86 😕 4@?8C6DD 2=@?6[ 2?5 9:D D@? #2?5 !2F= 😀 G6CJ >F49 😕 E96 D2>6 D:EF2E:@? E@52J] %96J 46CE2:?=J 92G6 C646:G65 =:EE=6 DFAA@CE 7C@> E96:C @H? A2CEJ]k^DA2?mk^Am

kA 4=2DDlQA`QmkDA2? 4=2DDlQD`Qmw2G:?8 E2=<65 E@ !6E6CD6? >JD6=7[ :ED 62DJ E@ AC65:4E 9:D DE2?46 @? 2?J DF3;64E[ ;FDE C625 E96 r@?DE:EFE:@? 2?5 J@F== 7:?5 :E] x7 :ED ?@E E96C6[ :ED ?@E E96 7656C2= 8@G6C?>6?ED A=246] x 2AA=2F5 9:> 2D 2 r@?DE:EFE:@?2=:DE 2?5 2> 46CE2:? :E H@F=5?E >2EE6C H92E A2CEJ 96 H2D :?[ 96 H@F=5 7@==@H :E E@ E96 7F==6DE[ H:E9@FE 2?J C6G:D:@? @C EH:DE:?8 :E E@ 72G@C 2? 286?52]kDA2? 4=2DDlQpAA=64@?G6CE65DA246Qmk^DA2?mk^DA2?mk^Am

kA 4=2DDlQA`QmkDA2? 4=2DDlQD`QmpD 7@C 9:D 23@CE:@? DE2?46[ x 7:?5 :E 2 5:77:4F=E DF3;64E E@ E24<=6 2?5 EFC? :?E@ 6?7@C4623=6 =2HD[ 6G6? E9@F89 x A6CD@?2==J 28C66 H:E9 9:> E92E F?3@C? 49:=5C6? 2C6 6G6CJ 3:E 2D 2=:G6 2D E9@D6 2=C625J 3@C?] Wx7 H6 7@F?5 6G6? D:?8=6 46==65 @C82?:D>D @? 2?@E96C A=2?6E[ H6 H@F=5 DH@@? @G6C E96 5:D4@G6CJ @7 =:76 @FED:56 @7 t2CE9[ D@ H9J 5@?E H6 8:G6 E96 D2>6 4@?D:56C2E:@? E@ F?3@C? 4=F>AD @7 46==DnX tG6? D@[ H6C6 x 2 |:DD@FC:2? x H@F=5 46CE2:?=J G@E6 7@C 9:> 6G6? 2D 2 C6AF3=:42? 2?5 D9@F=5 96 >2<6 :E :?E@ @77:46 x> DFC6 96 H:== >2<6 H6== @? 9:D AC@>:D6D @7 AC@>@E:?8 {:36CEJ 56DA:E6 H92E6G6C AC6DDFC6D 96 >:89E 7246 7C@> 9:D ?6H A2CEJ] yFDE 2D #@? !2F= :C@?:42==J 3C@F89E >@C6 A6@A=6 E@ E96 {:36CE2C:2? !2CEJ E92? 96 5:5 9:D @H? 😕 E96 #6AF3=:42?[ x 36=:6G6 !6E6CD6? H:== =:<6=J 5@ E96 D2>6]k^DA2?mk^Am

kA 4=2DDlQA`QmkDA2? 4=2DDlQD`Qmw:D G:D:@? 7@C 2? p>6C:42 H96C6 82J >2CC:65 4@FA=6D 42? 5676?5 E96:C >2C:;F2?2 7:6=5D H:E9 7F==J 2FE@>2E:4 >249:?6 8F?D 😀 @?6 x 9@A6 E@ D66 4@>6 E@ 7CF:E:@?[ D@ pFDE:?[ x H:D9 J@F 2== E96 36DE 😕 >2<:?8 :E 92AA6?]k^DA2?mk^Am

kA 4=2DDlQAaQmk^Am

kA 4=2DDlQAbQmkDA2? 4=2DDlQD`Qmk6>m#@DD {6@?6 😀 E96 492:C>2? @7 E96 vF252=FA6 r@F?EJ {:36CE2C:2? !2CEJ]k^6>mk^DA2?mk^Am

Go here to see the original:
LEONE: Switch to GOP follows Ron Paul's path - Seguin Gazette-Enterprise

Former Congressman Ron Paul (R-Texas) said President Trumps proposed import tariff on foreign steel is simply immoral.

It should be immoral to prohibit people from buying stuff where they want to. In a free society, youre supposed to protect that not interfere with that, Paul told FOX Business Kennedy.

The European Union (EU) has threatened to retaliate the Trump administrations proposed import tariff on foreign steel, by creating an import tariff for bourbon.

Theres a downside, there [are] repercussions from [imposing tariffs] and they retaliate and put taxes and prohibitions on our products, which is what theyre hinting at right now, he said.

However Paul believes the solution does not need to come from managed trade agreements.

The bilateral agreements make more senseif we would have an agreement on lumbers, say with Canada, and nobody else is interfering, it should be worked out and maybe there would be a time where you really would have free trade across the borders that touch your country, he said.

Continued here:
Ron Paul calls steel import tariff 'immoral' - Fox Business

Federal Reserve Chair Janet Yellen recently predicted that, thanks to the regulations implemented after the 2008 market meltdown, America would not experience another economic crisis in our lifetimes. Yellens statement should send shivers down our spines, as there are few more reliable signals of an impending recession, or worse, than when so-called "experts" proclaim that we are in an era of unending prosperity.

For instance, in the years leading up to the 2008 market meltdown, then-Fed Chair Ben Bernanke repeatedly denied the existence of a housing bubble. In February 2007, Bernanke not only denied that sluggishness in the housing market would affect the general economy, but predicted that the economy would expand in 2007 and 2008. Of course, instead of years of economic growth, 2007 and 2008 were marked by a market meltdown whose effects are still being felt.

Yellens happy talk ignores a number of signs that the economy is on the verge of another crisis. In recent months, the U.S. has experienced a decline in economic growth and the value of the dollar. The only economic statistic showing a positive trend is the unemployment rate and that is only because the official unemployment rate does not count those who have given up looking for work. The real unemployment rate is at least 50 percent higher than the manipulated official rate.

A recent Treasury Department reports called for rolling back of bank regulations could further destabilize the economy. This seems counterintuitive, as rolling back regulations usually contributes to economic growth. However, rolling back bank regulations without ending subsidies like deposit insurance that create a moral hazard that incentivizes banks to engage in risky business practices could cause banks to resume the unsound lending practices that were a major contributor to the growth, and collapse, of the housing bubble.

The U.S. economy is already faced with several bubbles that could implode at any time. These include bubbles in student loans and automobiles sales, and even another housing bubble. The most dangerous of these bubbles is the government bubble caused by excessive spending. According to a 2016 study by the Mercatus Center, at least four states could soon join Puerto Rico and Illinois in facing bankruptcy.

Of course, the mother of all government bubbles is the federal spending bubble. Despite claims of both defenders and critics of the presidents budget, neither President Trump nor the Republican Congress have any plans for, or interest in, reducing spending in any area. Even the so-called cuts in Medicare and other entitlement programs that have generated such hysterics are not real cuts, but reductions in the rate of growth.

Some fiscal conservatives are praising the administrations proposal to finance transportation spending via government bonds. However, the people will eventually have to pay for these bonds either directly through income taxes or indirectly through the inflation tax. Government-issued bonds harm the economy by diverting investment capital away from the private sector to the mixed economy controlled by politicians, bureaucrats, and crony capitalists.

If Congress continues to increase spending and the Federal Reserve continues to facilitate that spending by monetizing the debt, Americans will face an economic crisis more severe than the Great Depression. The crisis will likely result from a rejection of the dollar as the worlds reserve currency. Those of us who know the truth must redouble our efforts to ensure a peaceful transition away from the Keynesian system of welfare, warfare, and fiat currency to a society of peace, prosperity, and liberty.

Ron Paul is a physician, author, and former Republican congressman. Paul also is a two-time Republican presidential candidate, and the presidential nominee of the Libertarian Party in the 1988 U.S. presidential election. His latest book is Swords into Plowshares." For more of Ron Paul's reports, Go Here Now.

Cagle Syndicate

Follow this link:
Yellen Ignores Signs Of Economic Crisis - Newsmax

Bruce Finley wasnt always interested in politics in fact, he once thought of politics and government as terrible, boring, uninteresting and unengaging.

That is no longer the case, as Finley has made his name as arguably Norfolks biggest outspoken critic of tax-increment financing.

Finley often attends Norfolk City Council meetings, particularly those that feature proposals relating to tax-increment financing (TIF) on the agenda. He regards TIF as a tax break for the wealthy and a handout for the purpose of getting them to improve their property.

TIF is used by the city council to take advantage of the downside of using property taxes in order to selectively pick winners and losers in the local economy, raise property taxes and look really good in the public's eye, Finley said. This fulfills most of the things the city council wants as long as the public never looks under the surface, or checks under the hood, or tries to understand how things really work.

Of course, there are other perspectives of TIF, too including that it is about the only tool a city or county can offer to help spur development and economic growth, which leads to increased property valuation and increased property tax revenue.

Finley doesnt reserve his criticism for TIF alone.

Direct confiscatory taxes like property taxes and income taxes were illegal until we passed the 16th Amendment, Finley said. We literally implemented one of Karl Marx's 10 planks of Communism right out of his Communist Manifesto as an amendment to our Constitution, and no one even talks about it.

Finleys views on TIF and other forms of taxation are heavily influenced by Ron Paul, a former presidential candidate and Republican congressman from Texas who is now a member of the Libertarian Party.

Finley, however, considers himself a political independent.

George Washington included in his farewell address a great discussion about political parties that is still very relevant today, Finley said. He points out that the spirit of party is the worst enemy of the many monarchies of his time, but an elective government with parties is not immune to becoming a frightful despotism.

While Finley has libertarian leanings, he is not a supporter of the party itself.

Libertarian Party politics are in direct violation of much of their libertarian views and principles as they covet such funding so strongly instead of opposing it when it clearly selectively supports the growth of two parties over all others, Finley said. This is a perfect example of money dictating the party's position instead of the party expressing the views of those it is meant to represent.

Besides Ron Paul, Finley cites George Washington, James Madison, Thomas Paine and Benjamin Franklin as inspirations for his political views.

They have done the most to teach me about what goes into the science of government design, Finley said. The Founding Fathers sought to teach us all everything there is to know about what makes a good government that serves the people well and what makes a bad government that seeks to rule the people and control every aspect of their lives.

Finleys interest in politics and government was spurred by a pair of events. One was his discovery of many online sources of information about the subject.

Once I started searching on the internet and getting my news from there, I was able to find ultra-informative articles every day that I could really sink my teeth into that had more cited sources than you can shake a stick at. Being able to click a linked cited source and instantly read it really is amazing when it comes to informative news and discussion, he said.

Another was the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012, which contained provisions authorizing the indefinite military detention of civilians, including American citizens, without habeas corpus or due process.

(That was) what convinced me that I needed to commit to getting 100 percent active and involved, Finley said. It is my duty to my country, and all the people of the world, to help get people more informed to defend what should be universal rights and liberty everywhere.

Finley sees excessive taxation and the 2012 authorization act as examples of erosions on rights and civil liberties driven by big government and big business. He also refers to the corporate-government-banking collusion as a cancer.

Without our rights, we cannot protect ourselves from the corruption of big government, Finley said. This leads to big business and corporations lobbying for and buying up government power so that they can use it to destroy their competition in the marketplace and set up trusts between themselves and other collaborative monopolies to increase their profits as much as possible.

Finley also is opposed to recent trade deals, such as the North American Free Trade Agreement, the Trans-Pacific Partnership and the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, which led to the creation of the World Trade Organization.

One-sided trade deals ... cripple our economy by making the markets extremely unfair for us, Finley said. How can we compete with the Chinese de-industrializing sweat shop slave goods when our businesses are forced to pay our workers a minimum wage?

At the end of the day, Finley would like to see other citizens getting more involved with local government.

People don't really bother to do their duty to hold their government accountable for its actions when they have an OK house, a nice family and a job that pays the bills with a football-game distraction on their TV, Finley said. How do we get them informed and involved?

Follow this link:
Norfolkan finds inspiration from Ron Paul, Founding Fathers - Norfolk Daily News