I am positive that the stark raving response you linked to came from this rather funny web site:

http://www.pakin.org/complaint

So it seems like a joke, perhaps...

Like all the other Ron Paul articles on Salon.

I'll sit back and see how many instances of the word "sheeple" I can count.

Also, Chris Sinnard posting in 5, 4, 3, 2...

The idea that gold has an inherent monetary value apart from what a state actually produces was discredited by the Physiocrats of the 18th Century. Our money, and presumably the money of any developed nation, is based on the value of production of goods and services, land, and the improvements thereupon.

Gold (and silver) are not wealth by themselves; the Spanish found this out the hard way earlier in the 17th century. The discovery of the rich Mexican silver mines brought fabulous wealth to Spain, allowing it to buy (yes, "buy") the best army and navy in Europe (like the Armada of 1588). The Spanish kings married the Hapsburgs, put themselves on the Imperial throne, and spent a century fighting religious wars with the rest of Europe, while the silver went to buy wheat to feed their people as they could not grow enough for themselves. When the silver mines started tanking, Spain could no longer buy enough food to feed their people AND their military commitments were way too expensive to pay for. They, like the Soviets and, increasingly, the US, were caught in the "guns vs. butter" problem because they failed to plan for the long term.

The abolition of the gold standard brought modern economies more closely in line with reality.

My understanding is that the Federal Reserve is a private agency controlled by individual banks through the Board. This Board is pretty secret, and is not a government agency.

So we have 'privatized' an essential part of our monetary controls. Whatever President Roosevelt might have thought about how it would 'remove' business control, I think it acts in favor of business.

Recent example is the lowering of credit costs to help the banks through the sub-prime losses. Also it's lack of oversight of the mortgage industry, as it was run by a disciple of Ayn Rand, an extremist capitalist, who believe con artists have a legitimate place in capitalism.

So Ron Paul calling for it's abolition is 'close' but no cigar. We need a board controlled by the legislature of the country, or better yet, by the 'interest' holders - the consumers and workers.

William Jennings Bryant.

I don't have a problem with the gold standard but there are issues. It won't prevent fiscal chicanery on the part of the gang of 535 and it does pose problems in a world where the US dollar is the reserve currency. Getting rid of the Fed would be sheer stupidity. Granted, they have failed to act appropriately in a number of instances but not having a central bank is much worse than having one that screws up every so often.

I realize that hard data going back to the 19th century is hard to come by but anecdotal evidence available in histories about the consequences of money issued by banks suggests that a lot of people lost a lot of money on worthless paper (hence the preference for specie (which we wouldn't have enough of to go around anyway)). Plus, I doubt anybody is considering the chaos that would ensue when the Fed no longer ran clearinghouses for interbank transactions (such as when I pay you from my bank and you want to put that money in your bank) or the problems that would arise when your transactions came as US dollars, Morgan-Stanley Yuan, and Citi Corp Rials.

In general, the state produces warfare, and monopolies; it is society which produces prosperity.

The problem with fiat money is that some party will benefit from tightening the money supply and other parties will benefit from loosening it. Administrators will generally pay more attention to people from the same social circles (CEOs, politicians, etc.) than to others, so even completely honest administrators will skew their policies to the advantage of the rich, and dishonest ones may manipulate supplies to benefit their associates.

The problem with the gold standard, or with bimetallism for that matter, is that people can't extract more gold as fast as they can produce other commodities. The supply of gold is more-or-less stable, while the supply of other commodities is usually increasing (oil is an exception), so the buying power of gold will usually increase just for sitting on it.

Instead of getting bogged down in a back and forth over whether the economy was more stable prior to the Fed, would there be the same reaction if Paul came out against the (hypothetical) forced monopolization of the candy bar market? What makes money such a unique commodity that it needs to be monopolized?

--Noah

i perfect my lead/tofu/popcorn into gold process? what then, ron paul?

thanks for pointing that out. i did wonder at the lack of explicit content referencing Paul. I've added a note to the post

Yes Dr. Paul, let's erase all of that with the stroke of a pen. And while we're at it let's nominate Prince Hal to be King of the Middle Ages.

Bravo!!!!!!! Great article!

Look, no working person in their right mind would ever vote for a truth telling Republican-their policies are meant to benefit the rich and impoverish the middle and working classes. So, to get elected, Republicans make up these crazy utopias that they know darn good and well they'd never implement and if they did, they know outcome would be vastly different than what they claim. “Social Security is bankrupt and we can make it much better for the working person”; "The war will cost only $50 billion and stop terrorism"; Abolishing Death Taxes will lower taxes for the middle class”; "We should have a flat tax (of maybe 10%)"; Bush said his "tax cuts will go mostly to the lower and middle class"; Just BS. I guess I can't call them lies if the speaker was smiling when talking.

Ron Paul’s story is just the craziest of the bunch. If he got his way he would abolish public education, social security, police and fire departments and sale the streets to corporations. He'd make Bangladesh look like utopia in comparison. He knows perfectly well that we were all very much worse off under the gold standard-people lost real fortunes in bank runs and lots of kids suffered from serious malnutrition here in the good old USA. But what the heck – maybe the corporation that ended up owning the street corners would still let us sale apples there. (Or maybe not. Commercial Foods may consider it unfair competition.)