Yes, Dave, Bob Barr is everything Ron Paul should have been but wasn't.

Ha ha ha!

So Ron Paul should have been a flip-flopping statist who voted many times for more government, and then needed a libertarian "revelation" to realize that what he did was wrong?

Ha ha ha!

Don't get me wrong, to the extent that Bob Barr is looking out for my freedom, then I definitely support him to that extent, but comparing Bob Barr to Ron Paul is like comparing Dave Nalle to Ludwig Von Mises.

Perhaps Dave can direct us to some of Bob Barr's scholarship on monetary economics? Certainly, since he's everything Ron Paul should have been but wasn't, then he certainly ought to have some opinions on the subject - right?

Perhaps Dave thinks that monetary economics isn't important right now?

Again, Dave Nalle is not being serious with his comment comparing Barr to Paul; he's either joking, or more likely, he's just a sick statist who can no longer perceive reality even when it's right in front of him.

So Ron Paul should have been a flip-flopping statist who voted many times for more government, and then needed a libertarian "revelation" to realize that what he did was wrong?

No, Ron Paul should have been someone who operated based on reason rather than fanaticism and bigotry and who has the wisdom to change and mature and learn from exeprience rather than being a knee-jerk ideologue.

Don't get me wrong, to the extent that Bob Barr is looking out for my freedom, then I definitely support him to that extent, but comparing Bob Barr to Ron Paul is like comparing Dave Nalle to Ludwig Von Mises.

Please, please, don't compare me to Von Mises. I think his simplistic view of economics is laughable.

Perhaps Dave can direct us to some of Bob Barr's scholarship on monetary economics? Certainly, since he's everything Ron Paul should have been but wasn't, then he certainly ought to have some opinions on the subject - right?

And he certainly does. Rational ones, not just idiotic endorsement of the gold standard. You can read a brief statement on his website. From what I'm reading it looks like he wants to put the Fed under review and find a better way to handle monetary policy. Seems reasonable to me.

Perhaps Dave thinks that monetary economics isn't important right now?

I think it's very important. It's especially important not to get scared by the current situation and run to retarded solutions like a gold standard.

Dave

"I think I managed to lay down a brand of bullshit complex enough that there's a fair chance that his NPR-addled brain won't figure out that I was sarcastically deriding his efforts until after he puts me in the film, unless he happens to read this article."

You're not supposed to share this stuff until after it happens.

I know, Matt. And if he does an egoscan he'll find the article. But I wanted my report to be complete and don't feel much like revisiting it until sometime well down the road. Suspense is overrated.

Dave

Ha ha.

Yes, Dave, by all means, let's put the fed "under review"

And certainly we should "find a better way to handle monetary policy."

These detailed specifics and bold policy moves from Bob Barr's website are blowing my mind, ha ha ha!

I'm glad you came clean with your rejection of libertarianism Dave.

You have now rejected, (and please don't try to weasel out of it) the teachings of these fellows.

Jefferson "could barely balance his checkbook compared with Hamilton"

Ron Paul "fanatic; paranoid; bigoted;" (and too many other pejoratives to list)

Von Mises "laughably simplistic"

***

After rejecting these people, what tattered dead-ends of libertarian scholarship are left for you to claim kinship with, Dave?

The great minds at Cato? Rothbard founded Cato, was a student of Von Mises, and you have rejected both.

Reason? hahahaha.

Friedman? - His monetarism is the basis for our current failing system and policies. He never objected to a fiat money system, and neither do you.

You are both wrong.

Read the link I left you with Richard Fisher's speech.

Learn something for once.

#1, 5: Interesting application of "Ha-ha."

Dave,sounds like if the organizers would have set up next to a porno convention they could have had some over flow traffic.

That guy with the t-short about conservatives. Yeah, him. Something tells me he'll never find the truth to anything.

t-shirt

Tom, I already read Fisher's speech. I commented on it and how it didn't support your claims.

And I never said I didn't support Jefferson's ideas on civil liberties, just not his disastrous financial mismanagement.

And yes, I'm a Friedman fan. Sorry. The current system has not failed, it has been mismanaged. What you are saying is that because a drunk crashes his car we should ban all cars, rather than put the drunk in jail. Ridiculous.

And BTW, Ron Paul is not a libertarian, so rejecting him and rejecting libertarianism are hardly the same thing.

Dave

Go ahead Dave, dig yourself deeper.

Now "Ron Paul is not a libertarian"?

Now you must really be off your meds, LOL

Yes Dave, and more government doesn't mean less freedom, and you are so very very wise. Yeah, we've heard it all, dude, so nothing surprises any more.

Look Dave, (though I know you aren't really listening, because you cannot face reality - I just do this because someone has to) I like David Boaz and I cut my teeth on his book "Libertarianism - A Primer", but history shows it is the Austrians, Thomas Jefferson and Ron Paul whose predictions have come true - not Milton Friedman's.

You cannot have a long-term stable system built out of paper. The reason is that real goods and real services are naturally scarce, and limited, while the paper to pay for them is not and can never be, as long as human nature exists. Please note, Dave, that human nature precludes allowing a laptop computer or a clever horse to set interest rates at 2% a year with no further human involvement.

Real central bankers do not do it that way, and they never have, and they never will. Because they are human.

An imbalance always develops between the limited real economy and the unlimited paper economy, with the latter NATURALLY outpacing the former, and eventually damaging it beyond repair.

History shows that only the gold and/or silver based systems survive for hundreds of years. And they weren't all primitive systems either. We had a tremendous amount of world trade going on prior to WW1, which was financed with bills and gold out of London. There was no Fed, and no inflation.

Sure, some banks failed, but that still happened after the Fed, worse in fact, and it's still happening now. The point that Friedman didn't get, is that he didn't support a free market in money, like he should have. The issue is using force to control people and make them use the paper money.

Long term, it just doesn't work. And now the problem, the instability, the unsustainability is global in scope. Unlike the last time in the 30's, there will be nowhere to run, nowhere to hide from the "mismanagement"

How did it happen?

In large part due to idiots like Dave Nalle

You have finally proved that you are a statist Dave, with this classic Nalle-apropism


***

"The current system has not failed, it has been mismanaged."

Dave Nalle

***

Earth to Dave

Earth To Dave

Come in Dave

Dave, darling, bubby, nobody

but NOBODY

EVER

SAYS A STUPID THING LIKE THAT

UNLESS THEY ARE A LIBERAL DEMOCRAT STATIST

OR SOME OTHER GARDEN-VARIETY STATIST.

Statists never admit their failures, they just blame someone and move on, usually making the state bigger as they go.

That's exactly what's happening now - with the Fed being given more powers, and fannie and freddie being bailed out, against the interests of the U.S. taxpayers.

Meanwhile, Denial Dave still distributes his drivel, for so long as there is one suckup left who believes him.

Look Dave, (though I know you aren't really listening, because you cannot face reality

More like I don't see the point of arguing with someone who just spouds ad hominems and strawman arguments.

- I just do this because someone has to) I like David Boaz and I cut my teeth on his book "Libertarianism - A Primer", but history shows it is the Austrians, Thomas Jefferson and Ron Paul whose predictions have come true - not Milton Friedman's.

And Ron Paul does not subscribe to the basic principles which motivated ANY of those libertarians.

I like Friedman and I don't think he's been proven wrong, but I also agree with Jefferson and even Von Mises on many other issues.

You cannot have a long-term stable system built out of paper. The reason is that real goods and real services are naturally scarce, and limited, while the paper to pay for them is not and can never be, as long as human nature exists. Please note, Dave, that human nature precludes allowing a laptop computer or a clever horse to set interest rates at 2% a year with no further human involvement.

But our system is NOT based on paper. That's a ridiculous statement which suggests you have no idea what you're talking about. Even when we were on a gold standard we used paper currency. The fact that what our currency is now based on is primarily the ability of the US government to generate revenue to fulfill its obligations is just as real as gold is, so long as the government and the economy remain viable.

An imbalance always develops between the limited real economy and the unlimited paper economy, with the latter NATURALLY outpacing the former, and eventually damaging it beyond repair.

But creating that sort of a problem is a conscious choice, which requires the Fed to print too much money. It does not HAVE to choose to do that. It could cut back the currency in circulation and control the situation, or cut it back even more and create the same kind of financial crisis a gold standard would create.

History shows that only the gold and/or silver based systems survive for hundreds of years. And they weren't all primitive systems either. We had a tremendous amount of world trade going on prior to WW1, which was financed with bills and gold out of London.

No pure gold or silver based system has survived for more than 15 years in a modern, credit-based economy. Their effect is too restricting. It caused the depression and the series of mini-crashes before it.

There was no Fed, and no inflation.

Ah, I see you're both ignorant and insane. There was no inflation prior to the creation of the Fed? Where do you get silly ideas like this? Ever hear of the Panic of 1858 or of 1873 or of 1893? All of those were preceded by extended periods of inflation.

Sure, some banks failed, but that still happened after the Fed, worse in fact, and it's still happening now.

Some banks failed? Do you realize how many banks actually failed during the depression, a crisis caused by the gold standard?

The point that Friedman didn't get, is that he didn't support a free market in money, like he should have. The issue is using force to control people and make them use the paper money.

For the record, Bob Barr DOES support a free market in money. So do I. I think that there's nothing wrong with issuing private gold or silver based currency. See my previous articles on NorFed. I think that's a good way to address the concerns of those who don't believe in paper money.

Long term, it just doesn't work. And now the problem, the instability, the unsustainability is global in scope. Unlike the last time in the 30's, there will be nowhere to run, nowhere to hide from the "mismanagement"

The scope of the problem is hardly as large as you suggest. Bringing it under control would take a few simple policy changes which will likely be forced on the next administration.

And the rest is just drivel and personal attacks.

Dave

Hey Dave, long article, short insight huh?

Just kidding. But I actually planned to attend Nutroots Nation this summer. But after Kos banned me and the fee was as high as eagle droppings I thought that was enough money to get me to Hollywood and back, and so it was.

But too bad you missed Gore. I tuned into this article to see what your take on old Al was, but you had none to share. I would have probably missed him too.

I'll let you know next time I get to Austin for an event. Are you going to any of the conventions?

Heloise