Revolutionary Politics

Schiff's speech is accurate and robust. His main selling point appears to be the need for the market to correct.

Now I've been seeing a lot of intermingling between economics and the political. The link between the two appears more concerned about the size of the state and its fiscal responsibility than anything else. Of course libertarian and progressives and neo-cons are different, as are the impacts of their policies. Yet despite similarities in the neo-cons' approach and libertarians', there remains a massive void on the role of the state in the marketplace–neo-cons want free markets when it suits their security state aspirations, and defends the investor class at the expense of the proletariat. Despite their spending proclivity, progressives have been more restrained (although Clinton wasn't a prog.)

Schiff and his no-nonsense conclusions transcend politics, although I'm sure many will read him as a free marketeer. Ironically, it was the libertarian economists who predicted the current crisis, with Schiff at their front. The reasons for the collapse are really quite transparent. I don't know if we can blame them on political philosophies, being that the two parties appear to be one, the War Party. In this regard the libertarians do offer a political alternative with the potential for real change. (If indeed economic influences our condition and our politics, the forthcoming crisis will bring a well-deserved boost to the appeal of non-traditional parties, the libertarians only being one. Communists and the like will also receive a better audience.

Neither party seems capable of challenging the fiat money status quo, with the Fed in charge of our money. In this sense, economics do matter more than political positions, but the intercourse of human history has been a thoroughly political exercise, limited by the bounds of economic conditions, which libertarians care deeply about. [See my blog, jbpeebles.blogspot.com]

By jbpeebles on Oct 5, 2009

From a straight economic perspective Mr schiff is right on the mark and is able to express his thoughts in a very understandable way. Unfortunately the U.S. and global economic situation has evolved more through design than by mistake, which accounts for the seemingly ludicrous decisions and policies that have been made for many decades. Trying to understand these happenings requires much deligent research into the history of the involved people and events leading up to date, as this goes beyond politics and economics. I also have to disagree with Mr Schiff on the Feds not having an exit strategy. I think we are seeing the exit strategy being formed now in the shape of an International Reserve Bank. I believe the people that will be in control of the new reserve currency bank will be the same ones that control the current Federal Reserve. The misconception by most is that the Feds actually want to correct the economic problems and they are just somehow, too ignorant or close to the problem to understand it. I believe what we are witnessing at this time is the largest power grab in the history of mankind taking place, with the wealth and power of the U.S. being deliberately siphoned off into obscurity.

By Paul999 on Oct 4, 2009

Isn't it funny how the day after Q3 ended and the media princes and princesses were skipping round the Maypole caroling "the best quarterly performance since 1998"!. Only to have it begin the inevitable, perhaps the worst in history, decline the next day.

Of course, in their hyperventilated stupor from all those gleeful stanzas of "Happy happy, joy joy", they neglected to mention the really big news: it was the dollars worst performance since it's inception.

The equity market is not trading on the prospects of the issuers of the underlying. The stock market is now betting the dollar will collapse.

Last week, the FED's "so so" legal eagle, Alvarez, testified the mission of the FED was to tweak monetary policy to keep unemployment and interest rates low. Let's see, real unemployment is pushing 20% and credit card rates are 30%. By all measures the FED has failed and 80% of Americana is demanding to know why. Poor Mr Alvarez, despite his best efforts to assure that more than a few legal "outs" and fall backs would be in the record, perjured himself in answering a direct question from congressman Grayson:

Grayson: Does the FED manipulate markets?
Alvarez: No.

Providing failed PONZI schemes with negative interest rate loans with out any payment schedule or promise to repay in order to inflate the balance sheet of wall street crime syndicate deemed to big to fail is , pure and simple, market manipulation. Had the FED not counterfeited truckloads of dollars to ship to these criminal enterprises, the value of their underlying stock would have collapsed to zero. Instead, it advances through the "best quarter since 1998" and in the same period the dollar falls through the floor.

If that ain't market manipulation then birds have lips. I guess all sorts of crimes will become acts of humanity. Instead of murder, it will be called "putting them out of their misery". I wonder if the bathroom butlers and boy lovers beholding to the pimps running the brothels on K-Street and Z-Street are starting to feel miserable?

By Cad Avre on Oct 4, 2009

Reason that Bush/Barenaked got us into this mess,was very necessary for the invasions Fg/Iran.The Americans being saps for a short good time party with cheap money. Most obtuse Americans got the cheap high for awhile and now too stupid to admit it or do something constructive–hang the basturds :^/

By Geo1671 on Oct 4, 2009