Dr Ron Paul now has a new bill before Congress 'Free Competition and Currency Act 2009',that will be in direct competition with the US Fed $. See http://www.ronpaul.com/ With the imminent collapse of the US Fed $, hyper inflation will see a collapse of people's savings and buying power.

The logistics of how this will operate will be interesting.Ron proposes that a number of private mints make coins with precious metals.This means that people will not put their money in the banks just to be converted to worthless Fed $ or will the banks register your coin deposits as a separate currency? Will employees be able to request payment to be made in precious metal coins?

Perhaps they could go back to the old system of money, ie using gold and silver certificates as a medium of exchange.

Two things are certain,the companies who make safes will have to ramp up production and precious metals will reach much higher levels than anyone ever dreamt of.

Arjay, I guess most people, myself included, find something like this very hard to comment on because they really don't understand the details of the US financial system or have any feeling for what Ron Paul's new bill might actually mean.

I certainly respect your interest and knowledge in this field.

Can I ask you for a response to my post about Barnaby Joyce's comments on the US and Queensland possibly defaulting on their debt: http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=3271#78371

Thanx.

*Ron proposes that a number of private mints make coins with precious metals.*

Arjay, perhaps Ron should take a trip to Europe.For of course,
nobody needs to hold their money in banknotes, if they don't trust
the sytem.

European banks commonly trade in gold coins, including American
double eagles, Indian heads etc, Swiss gold coins, German, French,
they are all purchasable. South Africa marketed alot of its gold
this way, freely purchasable by anyone. In Australia the Perth mint
sells small gold bars, for those who wish to hold gold.

So Ron seemingly wants to reinvent the wheel.

Yabby , I think that Ron is trying to make stable currency available to everyone.It is no good having just a few people with wealth having the ability to buy gold.It also gives the Fed $ some competition and they will be less able to devalue the currency by printing more of it.

Ludwig ,it is not all that complicated.Unlike the US Federal Reserve our RBA is owned by the people with basically Corporate members on it's board.Since 1913 the US Fed is comprised of a private cartel of 12 banks with Govt members on it's board.

The Fed has basically failed it's primary charter of providing a responsible money supply to the US economy.They are the cause of the GFC.That is why Ron Paul wants to END the FED and use Congress' powers to once again issue currency to the population.Ron it seems wants a number of sources in competition to keep the Fed honest.

The US $ is on the slide and this will destroy the lives and jobs of many Americans.Like us,they don't have much of a manufacturing industry.Since they rely on imports,their crashing $ will see many live in poverty.

I think in the iterium that his ideas do have as lot of merit.80% of Americans now want to audit the Fed and only a few months ago most did not know that the Fed was a private cartel of banks who are a law unto themselves.

Go to youtube and see Paul Grignons movie "Money as Debt".Over 90% of our money is created as debt via the banking system.There is a better way and all countries should be able to create their own money and not be debt slaves to the Global Reserve Banks.

Arjay, it seems that anyone in the US can go along to the US Mint
and buy coins made of various materials, or even online.

http://www.usmint.gov/mint_programs/american_eagles/index.cfm?flash=no&action=American_Eagle_Gold

*They are the cause of the GFC.*

Not so Arjay. The Fed are not the cause. The ultimate cause of
the GFC were the US people themselves, for it was they who elected
a dummy like George Bush into office, not just once, but twice.

Bush/Cheney were the ones who thought that regulation was not
required, so appointed Cox to run the SEC. The SEC became a toothless
tiger, fast asleep, as requested by the Govt.

Things like jingle mail, easy loans, etc, were all mandated by
Congress. Frankly some of those Congress members are not the
brightest little buttons around, if you watch them on Bloomberg TV.

Yes, the American public have become poorer and they only have
themselves to blame.

But of course its a human foible to not want to accept and admit
that, just blame the banks, or corporations, or anyone but yourself.

Yabby wrote:
Not so Arjay. The Fed are not the cause. The ultimate cause of
the GFC were the US people themselves

But wasn't it the US Fed that created the easy money for banks to lend to people who could ill-afford the loans they were encouraged to take in the first place?

Kind of like our government giving people who can't save huge wads of cash to get into their own homes, which in the end because of adjusted (up) interest rates and now a carbon tax will send many to the wall.

The way I see it, these banksters and their political cronies create a situation where people feel confident in borrowing more than they should or borrow at all and then the rug is pulled out from under them. They create hopes and then destroy lives, it's a terrible thing.

I guess people should be smarter than that and therefore your argument holds, but then peer pressure, clever marketing, brainwashing, keep up with the Jone's mentality, yadda, yadda blinds these fools.

So a better fiscal system where vested interest can no longer create the boom bust cycles would be in everyone's interest to achieve would it not? Ron Paul seems to think so, sadly many other leaders don't, it's a make money at any cost mentality.

Yabby ,if you read Ron Paul's proposal you would have realised that there are taxes on bullion and restrictions in many states of minting currency.The US Fed has the monopoply on the creation of money.This should not be the case.

People need small denominations for small transactions.There is no point in buying $200 coin from a bank to catch a bus.

The Fed did create this crisis just like the Great Depression using the same tactics.see "Fall of the Republic" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VebOTc-7shU This explains the whole economic debacle that is yet to play out.

RawMustard, sure, when Greenspan was in charge of the Fed, we can
say with hindsight that he kept interest rates too low for too long.

He has admitted to that, but of course its easy to be smart with
hindsight. It was not Savings Banks like Wells Fargo etc, who
got into trouble, but investment banks, which are really banks
in name only. Its like comparing NAB with Babcock and Brown, they
are quite different in nature.

The money that sloshed around America, came from all over the place,
notably China, Japan and the Middle East.

This is all quite different to Arjay's claim that the Fed caused
the GFC.

Lehman Brothers was not a savings bank, but an investment bank.
AIG, which got into the most trouble, is in fact an insurance company,
not a bank.

*People need small denominations for small transactions.*

Arjay, people already have small denominations now. They don't need
gold coins for that and as Pericles has pointed out, there is simply
not enough gold to cover all money circulating.

Your claim was that money was losing its value. My point is that
if people are concerned, they can buy all the gold coins that they
want, right now.

Fact is that the average punter with a mortgage, in fact benefits
from a bit of inflation. Given housing loans at 6.5% and inflation
at 4%, his real cost of a housing loan is only 2.5% in real terms.

As ever, puzzling ones way through Ron Paul's logic is a bit like re-reading Through the Looking Glass, only in Sanskrit.

Even when you have managed the translation process, the words still don't make sense in the real world.

The confusion begins in the second paragraph of HR4248

"This medium of exchange should satisfy certain properties: it should be durable, that is to say, it does not wear out easily"

The assumption that our existing medium of exchange somehow "wears out" is quite bizarre. Many people conduct the bulk of their financial transactions online - I know I do - and I have seen little evidence that the zeroes and ones decay in transit.

Once you get into the meat of the proposal though, it becomes clear that it is just another cry for attention, using a return to the gold standard as its hook.

Sad, really.

The confusion he causes by making public his hallucinations are evident in Arjay's observations.

>>...precious metals will reach much higher levels than anyone ever dreamt of... Ron is trying to make stable currency available to everyone<<

Oka-a-a-ay, Arjay, let's have a look at those two ideas.

If you are going to base a currency as pervasive as the US dollar in a precious metal, the demand for that precious metal will most certainly go through the roof. As soon as Ron gets his Bill through, China will buy up every nugget it can lay its hands on - we'd see $50,000 an ounce before you could blink, as the Treasuries waged economic war on each other, one to control the market price, the other trying to avoid economic disaster.

Nor does it matter what physical medium you employ, gold, silver, beryllium...

>>It is no good having just a few people with wealth having the ability to buy gold<<

But that is exactly, precisely and incontrovertibly what will happen. If you disagree with this fundamental truth, Arjay, perhaps you could describe how you would prevent it.

There isn't a snowball's chance in hell that this idiocy will "make stable currency available to everyone"

But wait, there's more.

>>Ron it seems wants a number of sources in competition to keep the Fed honest.<<

This gave rise to another Through the Looking Glass moment.

Arjay's assessment of the currency landscape often comes down to this, or a version of it.

>>Since 1913 the US Fed is comprised of a private cartel of 12 banks with Govt members on it's board.<<

This is a problem, Arjay tells us, because...

>>90% of our money is created as debt via the banking system<<

On those numbers, if we follow Arjay's plan to back money with something "tangible", 90% of the economy will disappear overnight.

Nowhere, in Ron Paul's proposal or Arjay's interpretation of it, is this given even a passing thought.

But that's so much fantasy. Real life is far more prosaic.

Here's another question for you to cogitate Arjay.

HR4248 becomes law. How does a Ron Paul bank compete with the rest of the economy, given that it has to find gold (or silver, or beryllium) before it can open its doors and lend money.

Bear in mind that HR4248 doesn't roll back the Fed, merely allows competition, and that the gold price is presently well north of $1,000.

And please, please don't use this as an excuse to blabber on about 9/11.

Pericles,you are not the font of all knowledge.The US $ will collapse and ordinary people need a currency they can rely on.The Fed continues to loan their counterfeit money to the US Govt and put the people into more debt funding Obama's socialist agendas and wars which the Fed will glading oblige since they and their cronies profit from it.

Their aim is for a World Govt under their single currency.At the last G20 meeting this was on their agenda.They want to collapse the US $ and substitute their own,which they can again steal wealth by counterfeiting.ie creating inflation by producing more currency than the economy can handle.

Nearly 80% of Americans now are aware of the Fed and want an audit.
Shouldn't the US people have the right to know where their tax payer $ have gone?It is a totally immoral and corrupt system that must come to an end.

There will be problems minting coins using precious metals but nothing compared to the hyper-inflation generated by the Fed.

JFK was in the process of issuing currency via congress when he was murdered.It can be done and the sooner the better for the US people.

Why do you think we are in a slightly better situation than the US? We own our currency under the RBA but have too many corporates on the board who manipulate currency for their own corporate gain.

Nor do I claim to be, Arjay.

>>Pericles,you are not the font of all knowledge.<<

I do however have the ability occasionally to discern my arse from my elbow, a task with which you seem frequently to have endless difficulty.

>>The US $ will collapse...<<

A "collapse" is always a possibility, of course. Although it would be strongly resisted by those to whom the US owes those many trillions of dollars.

But then you lose the plot, entirely...

>>The Fed continues to loan their counterfeit money to the US Govt and put the people into more debt... Their aim is for a World Govt under their single currency... They want to collapse the US $ and substitute their own<<

Errrr... run that past me again?

The Fed is going to engineer the collapse of the dollar so that... what? They can create another one, and make it the single currency of a World Government, that doesn't actually exist?

That's pretty wild, Arjay, even for you.

Let's assume for the sake of argument that the US dollar does "collapse". They default on their overseas debt obligations... then what?

What makes you think that any "alternate" dollar is going to have the slightest credibility? What will back it?

I know you think that all money is somehow counterfeit, but the current system is pretty well accepted across the globe. On your logic, replacing one "counterfeit" currency with another is somehow a simple exercise.

I don't get it.

Can you explain how it's done?

>>There will be problems minting coins using precious metals but nothing compared to the hyper-inflation generated by the Fed<<

I disagree. Who will issue them? Who will use them? For example, how will the US Government - a significant employer - decide which "money provider" to use to pay its staff, and on what grounds?

>>JFK was in the process of issuing currency via congress when he was murdered<<

Now you're back in conspiracy fantasy-land. You shouldn't do it, you know, it's very bad for your health.

The disappointing thing for me about OLO is that every thread seems to deteriorate into personal abuse within 2-3 pages. Play the ball not the man. Lets openly discuss the issues and try not to make personal attacks.

It's a difficult issue to work through. Let's not forget that Ron Paul is a highly qualified and awarded economist, not just a politician. He predicted that the actions of the Fed were leading to GFC, so Yabby, "its easy to be smart with hindsight" Yes that's true. But maybe we should start listening to Ron Paul, one of the few people who was smart with foresight.

I disagree with you Yabby about inflation being good for those with home loans. Your numbers are probably sound but you are not taking into account the cost of everything else rising by 4% as well. And I don't know about you but it's been a while since my pay-rise was more than 4% p.a.

I have to make a comment on blame, because I really hate people who can't take responsibility for their own actions. Yes, the banks and the Fed made money cheap and easy so are definitely responsible for "dangling the carrot" in front of the consumer. But, at the end of the day it is the responsibility of the consumer whether they can afford to take that money.
I like to use the McDonalds "do you want fries with that" analogy. Like the banks, McDonalds offer you more. If you don't want fries, can't afford fries, or don't want to get fat from eating fries, DON'T BUY THEM. If you do, accept the consequences, don't blame McDonalds.

Precious metals as an alternate currency to USD? I think along the same lines as most of the comments here, the theory of creating a more stable currency (which has long been recommended by Paul) that can't be inflated away, is probably sound, but it seems to falls apart a bit in practice.

Hey good idea, maybe Australia should get aboard. We have precious metals in abundance, or rather did have.

1997, I think, Costello decides to sell off half our gold reserves. 167 tonnes of gold for around $350 per ounce. Made us $2 billion and helped pay for his other failed investment that cost us close to $4 billion.

Today with gold at $1236 per ounce that same gold would be worth over $7 billion. Even adjusting for inflation thats a lot of bananas.

Are you sure, burbs?

>>Let's not forget that Ron Paul is a highly qualified and awarded economist<<

I know he is a Doctor of Medicine, and a qualified surgeon. But I had no idea that this extended to economics. Do you have any information that supports this?

>>He predicted that the actions of the Fed were leading to GFC<<

Yeah, sort of, I suppose. Mind you, he has been saying the same thing since the early 1970s, so it took the best part of forty years to happen. In between times, the US became a fairly potent financial force in the world, I think you will agree.

And don't forget, he wasn't alone in his predictions of fiscal doom.

There's also Barnaby Joyce.

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/sunday-telegraph/barnaby-i-predicted-the-gfc/story-e6frewt0-1225809741119

He actually has a fairly relevant degree, too. Commerce, majoring in Accountancy.

Then there was Nouriel Roubini

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/17/magazine/17pessimist-t.html

Pretty well credentialled. Economics Doctorate. Professor of Economics and International Business. Who not only predicted the generality, but also the specifics.

So forgive me if I take leave to share your view.

>>Ron Paul, one of the few people who was smart with foresight.<<

But here's something we can enthusiastically agree upon - hooray!

>>But, at the end of the day it is the responsibility of the consumer whether they can afford to take that money.<<

That's a stark contrast to the view that we are being manipulated against our will by dark forces, bent upon our enslavement.

>>Lets openly discuss the issues and try not to make personal attacks.<<

The problem is, that there are posters here who refuse to engage with the issues, but instead simply regurgitate the same nonsense, time after time.

While for the first year or so it is possible to address their lack of factual content, and ignore the massive emotional freight they carry, after a while it is simpler to direct attention to the messenger.

Who a) has not learned a single thing from previous jousts, b) has not changed a single word in the slogans put forward in lieu of argument and c) is beneath it all, fundamentally economically illiterate.

* And I don't know about you but it's been a while since my pay-rise was more than 4% p.a.*

So burbs, your salary basically keeps up with inflation. If we
stick to the 4% figure for ease of the example, after 10
years, your salary in $ terms will be 40% higher. If you made
no repayment, just paid interest, your loan would effectively be
40% less then when you borrowed it. If you sold the house, it
would be worth 40% more, all profits tax free!

Indeed its the mortgage owner who benefits from inflation. The loser
is the bank deposit holder. For the real robbers are the Govt.
They don't allow for inflation in their taxation calculations.

So if the deposit holder is being paid 5% and inflation runs
at 4%, by the time the holder has paid marginal tax of say 30% on
the full interest amount, he/she is losing money fast.

"Let's not forget that Ron Paul is a highly qualified and awarded economist"

It appears on closer examination that I may have been talking out of my arse. He has "studied" economics but I mistook that to be the formal "study" not the educate oneself version. Thanks for picking that up Pericles.

Yabby, I think we will end up having to agree to disagree.
Lets say my house/loan is worth $500K now.
I pay my interest only (6.5% on $500K over 10 years)$325K
House rises in value by 48%(taking into account the cumulative effect of inflation) when I sell it = $740K

So, I've spent $325K on interest to make a "profit" of $240K.

But, even taking interest out of the equation, where am I going to live once I've sold my house! Every other house has risen due to inflation as well so to buy an equivalent house will cost $740K now, not $500K anymore.

Where's that profit again?

The profits all in ya head. If you are worried about a carbon tax, why don't you do something about it.
Anyone that borrows $300,000 or more is going to pay back a million dollars. So if you just pay interest it would be a dead loss.
The best thing for you to do is shave off about 15 squares, of excess.
Interest rates are going up for a while yet, thank god whoever that may be.
You will crawl before you can walk.
The best business to be in is the one that doesn't cost any set up money.
If i was starting again i would be living in a modest house on the outskirts of town. With the money tradies are getting now , i would be a millionaire in 5 years.
I won't be paying any carbon tax i am self sufficient.

Your profit burbs, is in the equity that you have in your house,
which is in today's Dollar value and will more or less keep up
with inflation in real terms. Your debt meantime, is in old Dollar
value, as at the time you took out the loan. In other words, after
20 years of inflation, what you still owe would be insignicant.

Sure you have paid interest, but then you have also used the house
to live in. My point is that in real terms you have not paid
6.5% at all, more like 2.5 %. That is exactly why a bit of inflation
has benefitted you as an average punter with a mortgage.

At some point, you will be able to sell that house, as you can't
take it to the grave with you. You might buy a cheaper house
in the country, you might move into a retirement unit etc.

You might even leave it to your kids, in which case they will benefit
and can live it up at your expense, but then that is your choice.

Now if there was no inflation at all, you would in fact be paying
6.5% until the last day of the last payment, which is much
harder to do.

So my point stands.

Yabby ,house prices are over inflated as a result of easy credit manufactured by the Global Reserve Banks.It would be better that individuals were made to save 30% for a deposit before a loans is granted.This would have the double effect of less debt and keeping prices down.It is easy credit that over inflates prices.

The money does not have to be borrowed from the Global Banksters.This is a fraud.Kevin Rudd is borrowing fron China for stimulus packages so we can buy more Chinese goods.There is no productivity in it.Why borrow from those who create counterfeit money anyway?Create your own money and control inflation by measured interest rates.

The US Fed has failed in it's most basic charter,ie the responsible supply of credit.You do not reward failure by re-instating Bernanke or
keeping this most vile and corrupt institution called the US Federal Reserve.

The real problem Arjay, is that we have a shortage of houses being
built, compared to our high migrant intake. People have to live
somewhere.

Given that some states like NSW, were charging up to 100k$ per
block in fees and charges, no wonder there is a problem!

To build a house in Australia is still not expensive and given the
size of the country, land is not in short supply either.

Banks generally restrict mortgages to 30% of peoples incomes. Fact
is that people place a high value on their houses, so with high
double incomes of today, Australians have the world's largest
houses!

What you are implying is that you want Govt to interfere in the
market.

*Create your own money and control inflation by measured interest rates.*

That is exactly what the Americans did.

The US Fed certainly did not fail, the SEC and other organisations failed, Bush and Co failed.

In fact Bernanke is now largely credited with having averted a
global depression, by his actions. Had Bernanke acted differently
and not stopped the falling dominoes, you Arjay might well be
here complaining that you are broke and out of work, due to the
global depression. Yes, some US $ were created to avert a global
depression, but given the nature of the US $ as the global reserve
currency, it was a calculated risk worth taking, as the evidence
shows.

US voters however, can only blame themselves for their bad judgement
of Bush and Cheney. The US economy has paid a huge price for that
and poor old Obama has been left to clean up the mess.

Yabby. Obviously you're entitled to your opinion and what you do with your money is your business. But if it's OK with you, I'll give your financial advice a miss.
I'd be interested to catch up with you a few years down the track when you do sell your house, and find out how much money you think you've made.
Suggest you look up "profit" in the dictionary though. I think you'll find there's no profit to be made in the house you live in.

At some point, Arjay, you are going to have to admit that you and economic theory will never be best mates.

>>Why borrow from those who create counterfeit money anyway?Create your own money and control inflation by measured interest rates.<<

In what sense do we not already "create our own money", Arjay? And doesn't our Reserve Bank have the specific responsibility to keep inflation in check, through interest rates? Why do you suppose that the pundits are predicting further rises in those rates, if not to perform precisely this function?

But even more fascinating are your sweeping assertions on cause and effect.

>>It would be better that individuals were made to save 30% for a deposit before a loans is granted.This would have the double effect of less debt and keeping prices down.<<

Now you might be surprised to hear that I actually think that your proposal that a higher level of deposit required is relatively sensible, from an objective standpoint. The impact on our savings rate would be, on the whole and in the longer term, beneficial to our economy.

But where your arguments fall apart is when you try to apply your theories to the real world.

Requiring a 30% deposit would pretty much kill the first home-buyer market. This in turn would dry up supply - if no-one is buying at the entry level into the market, then no-one particularly wants to invest in building new properties.

The problem with this is good ol' supply 'n' demand theory.

As Yabby points out, demand for places to live is not falling, but increasing. And when demand moves ahead of supply, guess what happens?

Prices go up, not down.

So the people already in the housing market, who have the ability to plonk down 30% (from the proceeds of their previous house) will continue to move the market as a whole, northwards, in line with the strength of demand and weakness in supply.

The result of all this will not, as you suggest, be "less debt and keeping prices down".

But the exact opposite.

Pericles,I do not deal in economic theory,I deal in economic facts.Money only represents human potential.It is merely an oil for the interaction of human creativity and endeavour.The banksters and Wall St have turned it into a commodity/derivatives that pervert the true course of the economy.

We will never agree on issues of the Fed, because I believe in fair play and rewarding those who produce.

How can the Global Reserve Banks be the most powerful institutions on the planet when they produce nothing of tangible worth? Aye, but they do create counterfeit money from which they keep the planet in perpetual debt slavery.

In my view they are the lowest of parasitic creatures ever to frequent the universe.At least real parasites drop off host when they have had their fill.This lot are not just happy being wealthy beyond self indulgence.They want power over the entire planet.Money now means nothing to them.It is the thrill of absolute power,since they have exhausted all avenues of their own limited creativity.

They are now in the throngs of self destruction,unlike the drug addict,they are obsessed by the lust for power.

The real economic collapse has yet to play out.The stimulus packages are just amplifying and delaying the inevitable.Degrade any currency by hyper-inflation and you end up like Zimbabwe.

*How can the Global Reserve Banks be the most powerful institutions on the planet when they produce nothing of tangible worth?*

Arjay, yes we know that you hate Reserve Banks, but I remind you that
their profits, including those of the Fed, are paid to the treasury
of their respective countries. So taxpayers are the ultimate winners.

Reserve Banks do indeed play a vital role in our economies. How long
would you last, without a functioning banking service? One week or
two weeks?

Frankly if you could not pay me for the food that I produce, I would
have to let you starve :)

Nobody apart from Zimbabwe has degraded their currency like
Zimbabwe, so as it happens, they now use US $ !

Arjay, you need to pack away the emotions and keep a little bit
of reality in this debate. Otherwise the rest of the world will
simply pass you by.

Re the Global Res Banks.Part of their profits are paid to their respective Govts Yabby.Both our $ and the US $ have lost 98% of their value since 1913.To achieve this you have to increase the money supply above GDP and pop growth by more than 25 times.Who created all this inflationary money? We as individuals cannot.Govt coins about 10%, but mostly banks create it through debt via loans.Their real profits exist in the creation of inflation via the fractional reserve banking system.

If Yabby counterfeits $22 million equal to the pop of Aust,this dilutes the currency and is akin to taking one $ from every person in the country.It is called inflation, of which the banks and our Govts steal from the public via stealth taxes.

Just think about the reality.Banks on average create 25% of counterfeit money per annum,that depreciates our currency via coumpounding inflation rate of just 3.4%.

You continue to amaze me, Arjay, with your comprehensive inability to listen, or to learn.

You still insist on regurgitating the same, meaningless mantras with which you have populated many, many previous posts.

>>Both our $ and the US $ have lost 98% of their value since 1913... you have to increase the money supply above GDP and pop growth by more than 25 times... Banks on average create 25% of counterfeit money per annum<<

I, and others, have tried patiently to educate you, and gently explain that none of these three assertions actually stands a moment's scrutiny.

Unfortunately, that entire last post of yours can be used as positive and irrefutable proof that you understand nothing about economics.

Neither economic theory, nor economic facts.

And unless and until you begin to research and learn about the realities involved, you are bound to write nothing but rubbish on the topic.

Sad, but true.

Oops Arjay, I note that Bernanke has just been annointed Time's
"Man of the Year".

There goes all hope for the revolution :)

That won't come as a surprise to Arjay, Yabby.

>>Bernanke has just been annointed Time's "Man of the Year".<<

Time magazine also believes that the WTC collapse was caused by planes.

What else can you expect?

Bernanke man of the year! In whose eyes? The very criminals who caused the GFC.Obama gets the peace prize for expanding the war front.Obama is just a puppet of the banks and Wall St just like Bernanke.

The GFC is just beginning to unravel.The collapse of the US $ will demonstrate Bernanke's foibles.You cannot double the money supply via counterfeiting and expect anything else.

Real unemployment in the USA is more like 17%.This is the real indicator of economic health since it reflects business activity and confidence.The price of shares or bank profits running on cyber money means nothing.The bailouts just went into propping up Bernanke's mates.

HR 1207 is fully passed and now 80% of Americans want to audit the Fed.12 mnths ago the US people thought the Fed was the Govt.

The US people will soon need a new currency to create the stability needed to stop hyper-inflation.Let the Fed keep their monopoly money and let them suffer the consequences of their fraudulent actions.