I had an interesting read of this one. I learned several things. I was convinced of many of the points that Ron Paul made, others not so much.
In essence what I understood was that Ron Paul claims that the system of fiat monopoly and the unethical standards of direction and leadership of the Fed is the root cause of pretty much all of America's economic woes - these include the housing bubble, all bubbles before that, the following depression and all of the ones before that. The argument made is fairly easy to grasp, i.e. inflationary monetary policy provides false sense of security to participants in an economy and just perpetuates a cycle of boom and busts.
One of the points that hit home with me, was the lack of oversight with which the fed acts. I am not convinced that government oversight would somehow fix all the problems, but still, the fact that an institution that is supposed to behave in the best interest of the people, is shrouded in secrecy and lacks any transparancy.
Ron Paul goes to some length to explain some of his libertarian views as well. I found the idea of the sanctity of personal freedoms very appealing. In that sense, I found myself seeing the problem of too much governmental power and the degree to which statism limits personal liberties. Not to mention that the people in government are corrupt and are influenced by special interest groups. What I lacked clarity on was the alternatives to big government. Big governments arise from the need of the majority to be given security blankets. I am not sure if I understand how we can circumvent this fundamental issue of democracy. i.e. How do we address poverty and hunger and the desperate circumstances of the severely dispossessed and uphold personal liberties at the same time? To me those two seem to be at irreconcilable odds.
He goes on to say that the powers vested in the fed are un-constitutional . Although I was convinced of this argument, I am not sure that in itself it is a morally strong one. That would imply that the constitution dictates a doctrine that is perfectly moral. Or a template of "perfect economy" , for that matter.
In any case, I would like to summarize:
I see that low interest rates can spawn speculative behavior leading to unrealistic prices of assets and subsequent realizations of the speculative nature can lead to precipitous drops.
I feel that certain personal liberties are sacrosanct and should not be held hostage to the whims of the masses. However, I am certain that in the entire history of humanity, these boundaries of personal liberties have been drawn, encroached and re-drawn.
I am still not sure what exactly happened in 2008.
I felt that Ron Paul does not present a balanced view. i.e. he does not criticize the gold standard at all. He presents it as a solution for all. This I find far-fetched.
I will probably go on to read either the work of an economist from the "Austrian School" to further deepen my understanding of Ron Paul's position or perhaps read Paul Krugman to get a Keynesian POV. At least, I understand that, those schools of thought are in direct constrast to each other ( at least in parts)...
In essence what I understood was that Ron Paul claims that the system of fiat monopoly and the unethical standards of direction and leadership of the Fed is the root cause of pretty much all of America's economic woes - these include the housing bubble, all bubbles before that, the following depression and all of the ones before that. The argument made is fairly easy to grasp, i.e. inflationary monetary policy provides false sense of security to participants in an economy and just perpetuates a cycle of boom and busts.
One of the points that hit home with me, was the lack of oversight with which the fed acts. I am not convinced that government oversight would somehow fix all the problems, but still, the fact that an institution that is supposed to behave in the best interest of the people, is shrouded in secrecy and lacks any transparancy.
Ron Paul goes to some length to explain some of his libertarian views as well. I found the idea of the sanctity of personal freedoms very appealing. In that sense, I found myself seeing the problem of too much governmental power and the degree to which statism limits personal liberties. Not to mention that the people in government are corrupt and are influenced by special interest groups. What I lacked clarity on was the alternatives to big government. Big governments arise from the need of the majority to be given security blankets. I am not sure if I understand how we can circumvent this fundamental issue of democracy. i.e. How do we address poverty and hunger and the desperate circumstances of the severely dispossessed and uphold personal liberties at the same time? To me those two seem to be at irreconcilable odds.
He goes on to say that the powers vested in the fed are un-constitutional . Although I was convinced of this argument, I am not sure that in itself it is a morally strong one. That would imply that the constitution dictates a doctrine that is perfectly moral. Or a template of "perfect economy" , for that matter.
In any case, I would like to summarize:
I see that low interest rates can spawn speculative behavior leading to unrealistic prices of assets and subsequent realizations of the speculative nature can lead to precipitous drops.
I feel that certain personal liberties are sacrosanct and should not be held hostage to the whims of the masses. However, I am certain that in the entire history of humanity, these boundaries of personal liberties have been drawn, encroached and re-drawn.
I am still not sure what exactly happened in 2008.
I felt that Ron Paul does not present a balanced view. i.e. he does not criticize the gold standard at all. He presents it as a solution for all. This I find far-fetched.
I will probably go on to read either the work of an economist from the "Austrian School" to further deepen my understanding of Ron Paul's position or perhaps read Paul Krugman to get a Keynesian POV. At least, I understand that, those schools of thought are in direct constrast to each other ( at least in parts)...
No comments:
Post a Comment