Treasury Secretary, Timothy Geithner, stated on Monday that the United States would not pursue a weak dollar in an attempt to increase exports. "It is very important for people to understand that the United States of America and no country around the world can devalue its way to prosperity, to (be) competitive," he added.
That's funny. You would think he might have made mention of this before the 2010 budget deficit hit $1.3 trillion, or before Ben Bernanke and his Federal Reserve cronies pursued "quantitative easing" (QE1) to the tune of more than $2 trillion.
Don't look now, but Bennie and the Ink-Jets are getting ready to roll out QE2. Sequels are always worse than the original, and QE1 was bad enough. These policies inherently devalue the dollar, so will the real Timothy Geithner please stand up?
The U.S. has consistently pursued a policy of devaluation coupled with redistribution in an attempt to bolster its flailing economy, and the results remain constant. The primary strategy of redistribution is executed either under the guise of "stimulus" or "quantitative easing", both of which are coupled inextricably to the effect of devaluation.
Geithner's comments regarding devaluation were probably more of a swipe at the Chinese in regards to the impending currency war. Many U.S. officials have called for China to allow the value of the Yuan to rise, believing that it is being kept artificially low to allow for cheaper exports to foreign nations.
The global economic conundrum is problematic, but sanctions are certainly not the solution. The underlying problem arises from restrictive policies here at home and methods of redistribution for the purpose of political social engineering. The U.S. and the rest of the world need to stop playing favorites, and allow productivity to prosper.
Unfortunately for the U.S., when your economy revolves around an inherently elitist monetary system, calling yourself the "land of the free" makes about as much sense as Geithner condemning devaluation on the road to prosperity.
While Fed officials are busy wrangling over how economically invasive their bond-purchasing program should be, common sense continues to bang its proverbial head against the wall - recently in the form of Peter Schiff explaining why Fed tactics are not the saving grace to our economics woes.In an October 14th interview on Fox Business, Schiff clarifies, as he has so many times before, that until our economy regains its productive capacity and quits relying primarily on consumption, we will not see economic growth.The only way to accomplish this is through deregulation of industry.Government centralization has systematically strangled the market in red tape, thereby driving productive capital to foreign soil.
Driving the value of the dollar down, also known as inflation, which is what happens when the Federal Reserve buys Treasury Bonds to keep interest-rates at artificially low levels, will make it more expensive to import goods that are not being produced in the U.S.; this will only further the assault on the wallets and pocketbooks of American consumers.The dollar’s purchasing power will drop.This strategy may be a short-term benefit to entities owing debt payments to foreign institutions, but it is not a sustainable long-term solution.Ultimately, the U.S. dollar is backed by nothing more than the American taxpayer’s ability to produce, and inflation poses a direct threat to that very requirement, as it weakens the taxpayer’s ability to purchase foreign manufactured goods in an economic landscape where industry is already shackled to the restrictions of an overbearing government here at home.
On Tuesday, Congressman Paul appeared on Fox Business to discuss tax policy, the economy, and the federal government's hostility to Americans' beliefs.
The Hill reports that Senate Democrats will once again attempt to shove the First Amendment-shredding DISCLOSE Act (a.k.a. The Establishment Protection Act) down our throats. A top spokesman for Harry Reid, Jim Manley, tweeted this afternoon that the Senate would debate DISCLOSE tomorrow, with a vote likely Thursday.
At the end of July, the liberty movement was able to hold off DISCLOSE by just one vote! We knew they would bring it back up in an attempt to catch us off guard. This is the time for the movement to stand tall in the face of statism and deal this bill a final blow.
For more information on this egregious affront to our personal liberties, visit our past blogs on the topic. This bill will force non-profits like C4L to turn over a donor list to the federal government and make it publicly available on our website. This will expose donors to "controversial" issue advocacy organizations to intimidation and harassment (every issue is controversial to someone). It would force organizations to adopt needless layers of bureaucracy in order to comply with the paperwork and filing deadlines of the new bill. It will restrict our free speech by placing vague, arbitrary restrictions on the language of our communications (even with our own members). Additionally, it further blurs the line between issue advocacy and express endorsements of a candidate, leaving the determination up to the federal government.
C4L's Kevin Brett put together the following video just before the Senate voted in July recapping the House debate and providing some insight into why the Democrats are pushing such legislation now.
~AG McCollum Defends Floridians’ Right to Preserve Healthcare Freedom in Florida Constitution~
(Orlando, FL – June 29, 2010)—The YES ON 9 Campaign applauded Florida Attorney General Bill McCollum today for his decision to defend the Amendment against a lawsuit that attempts to block it from the November ballot. Amendment 9 seeks to protect Floridians’ right to choose their own healthcare by placing that right in the state’s Constitution.
“Florida’s Constitution is a sacred document that outlines the liberties, freedoms, and fundamental rights of Floridians,” said Rep. Scott Plakon (R-Longwood.) “By defending the right of voters to place healthcare freedom in the Constitution, Attorney General McCollum is upholding a right that Floridians and people across the nation continue to demand in the face of big-government mandates.”
Amendment 9, which has already been vetted by the Florida House and Senate and approved for the ballot according to Article XI and statutory procedure, unequivocally states that no government can mandate a Floridian’s participation in a government healthcare scheme against his or her will. Under the leadership of Sen. Carey Baker (R-Eustis) and Rep. Plakon, the Florida Legislature approved the amendment and it now has over 4,000 citizen co-sponsors.
“Amendment 9 has already won broad-based support across Florida, reflecting the people’s deep distrust of the federal government’s healthcare plan,” said Sen. Baker. “Small businesses, grassroots volunteers, medical professionals, and everyday Floridians continue to express their support for healthcare freedom, and we are grateful for Attorney General McCollum’s efforts to ensure that they will have the opportunity to preserve this fundamental right in our Constitution.”
Attorney Mark Herron and Democrat operatives with ties to Organizing for America, MoveOn.org, and other liberal special interest groups filed the lawsuit in Friday. Visit the YES ON 9 Campaign at www.FLHealthcareFreedom.org for additional information.
With Congressional approval ratings at historic lows, support for term limits at all-time highs and tea partiers in the streets holding term limits signs, it seems like there is no better time to press for Congressional term limits.
What is missing so far is political leadership. But that might be changing.
For the first time since the Contract with America era we have a popular U.S. Senator, Sen. Jim DeMint of South Carolina, sponsoring a term limit amendment. He's attracted only three senate cosponsors so far and two of those are leaving the Senate, but several potential new ones are currently campaigning for a Senate seat using term limits as a leading campaign theme.
Start with Kentucky. There, Senate candidate Rand Paul - leading in the polls both against his Republican primary opponent and likely Democratic challengers - has pledged to make term limits his number one issue if elected.
"Term limits is the preeminent issue of our campaign," he said. "I will travel to Frankfort and other legislatures to try to get them to act on this issue so we have both Congress and the state legislatures working on it."
But he won't stop there.
"I will do my best to convince our presidential candidate on the GOP side to adopt the issue as well," Paul said. "I think this is vital in pushing this issue forward."
Another Senate hopeful - also leading in a Republican primary - is Florida's Marco Rubio. Rubio says he's seen term limits work when he was Speaker of the House in Florida's legislature. In fact, he was term-limited out of office. His first-hand experience has led him to believe the U.S. Congress should be term limited too.
"We should be the party of term limits," Rubio told National Review. "We should be the party that says it's not natural for any human being to serve more than half his adult life in the U.S. Congress."
Rubio, however, is so far ducking the question of whether he will actually cosponsor the DeMint bill, or just likes talking about it.
In Illinois, state senator and former Illinois GOP Chair Gilbert Baker is in a tough primary fight. He's hoping term limits put him over the top.
"We have got to return to the spirit of a citizen legislature," Baker said. "One way to get back to that, I am going to push for a two term limit in the United States Senate." To emphasize the point, Baker promised that whether he is successful or not, he personally would leave after his two terms. "Twelve years is long enough."
Other term-limits advocates include Republican Stephen Fincher, a leading candidate to succeed retiring Rep. John Tanner (D-TN) and Democrat Iraq War veteran Tommy Sowers, a long-shot candidate against Rep. Jo Ann Emerson (R-MO).
U.S. Term Limits urges all voters to ask their Congressional candidates where they stand on Sen. Jim DeMint's amendment to limit senators to two terms and representatives to three terms in office. We have to nail them down on this before the election.
Ask them and let me know. We'll make sure term limits supporters in their states know their answer.
Dr. Ron Paul's "Private Option Health Care Act" (HR 5444, introduced 5/27) has a lot to recommend it, not the least of which is the likelihood that it will seriously tick-off Big Pharma, trial lawyers, and the insurance industry. Barriers to importing FDA-approved drugs would be reduced, and health insurance could be purchased across state lines. Imagine that--something like an actual free market in pharmaceuticals and insurance coverage! The corporatists will hate it. The lawyers won't like the allowance for "negative outcomes insurance" that will threaten their bloated profits from malpractice suits.
I also appreciate the full tax-deductibility of medical expenses and the expanded possibilities for using Health Savings Accounts.
However, my admiration for Dr. Paul does not blind me to the shortcomings of this legislative answer to Obamacare. His plan is not universal. In order to get an income tax credit, it is necessary to have income! In view of the current unemployment rate (which is almost surely under-reported), that leaves an awful lot of folks out of luck and uncovered. Moreover, the plan does not eliminate the middle-man in the health-care transaction: the insurance company, which dictates treatment choices and siphons away over 30% of the health care dollar.
I've written about it, I've said it before (even to Dr. Paul's face, actually), and I'll say it again: We will continue to have a dysfunctional health care system until complete freedom of choice is restored to the consumers (the patients). The easiest way to achieve this would be through Government-issued vouchers, or medical scrip, redeemable ONLY for direct health services (or insurance, if the patient so chooses). The voucher idea could easily be incorporated into HR 5444, enhancing the bill's usefulness to out-of-work Americans, single mothers, the disabled, and so forth. The voucher feature might garner a few more votes toward the bill's passage, too.
Campaign for Liberty is a 501(c)4 lobbying organization which neither supports nor opposes candidates for public office and claims no responsibility for the actions of individuals or groups of individuals who use the Campaign for Liberty logo or name or who may claim to act as representatives of the Campaign for Liberty without prior written consent of the Campaign for Liberty. [?]
Regional Coordinator
Local Coordinator
