When Greenspan Had A Soul

Excerpt from Gold and Economic Freedom by Alan Greenspan (1967)

"When business in the United States underwent a mild contraction in 1927, the Federal Reserve created more paper reserves in the hope of forestalling any possible bank reserve shortage. More disastrous, however, was the Federal Reserve's attempt to assist Great Britain who had been losing gold to us because the Bank of England refused to allow interest rates to rise when market forces dictated (it was politically unpalatable). The reasoning of the authorities involved was as follows: if the Federal Reserve pumped excessive paper reserves into American banks, interest rates in the United States would fall to a level comparable with those in Great Britain; this would act to stop Britain's gold loss and avoid the political embarrassment of having to raise interest rates."

"The "Fed" succeeded; it stopped the gold loss, but it nearly destroyed the economies of the world in the process. The excess credit which the Fed pumped into the economy spilled over into the stock market -- triggering a fantastic speculative boom. Belatedly, Federal Reserve officials attempted to sop up the excess reserves and finally succeeded in braking the boom. But it was too late: by 1929 the speculative imbalances had become so overwhelming that the attempt precipitated a sharp retrenching and a consequent demoralizing of business confidence. As a result, the American economy collapsed. Great Britain fared even worse, and rather than absorb the full consequences of her previous folly, she abandoned the gold standard completely in 1931, tearing asunder what remained of the fabric of confidence and inducing a world-wide series of bank failures. The world economies plunged into the Great Depression of the 1930's."

Read the full article

Civility On The Fritz

"Fury" was Fritz Lang's first American film, and Spencer Tracy's breakthrough, and it is truly remarkable. When it comes to reenacting the audacity of mob violence, I can think of few other films that paint its horror in such vivid colors. However, avoid the butchery that is the colorized version.

Making Things Clear

There seems to be some pandemic confusion about the difference between the party primaries and the general election, so let's make sense of things.

#1 The U.S. Constitution makes no provision for the role of political parties.
#2 Political parties are private entities. They do not operate de jure; various party provisos and rules are not handed down by the force of law, and they are not binding in any legal sense.
#3 No citizen of the United States has a right to vote in a party primary. It is simply a privilege allowed by, again, a private entity.

Keep this in mind, folks. We are not at the general election yet. Presidential primaries are nothing more than opinion polls intended to give the parties an estimate of support so that they can best determine which candidate has the best chance of beating the other party's candidate in November. The results of these straw polls are not binding. Primaries are simply Presidential Preference Polls, and "votes" in these polls are not legally binding. Party policy is really determined at the local and state conventions.

For example: John McCain wins 90% of the popular vote in a state's presidential preference primary. Ron Paul takes down 10% of the popular vote. Of those who actually attend the precinct meetings and participate in the county conventions, 51% are people who voted for Ron Paul, and all of them become delegates to the State convention.

Which nominee won that state? Ron Paul did. It does not matter how many people turn out to vote in the primary for a particular candidate; if those same people fail to participate in the party process that candidate has won nothing but popular opinion. In this case, Paul's supporters will be shaping party policy for that State and ultimately deciding to whom their support will go at the national convention in September. Theoretically, Paulites could introduce a resolution to unbind all delegates who were previously bound to the winner of that State's primary. This very thing has already been introduced, in Missouri; and it can happen elsewhere.

Ignore what the party elite is trying to tell you. There is nothing ill-spirited or illegitimate about these measures. The GOP is not being "invaded" by Paul supporters. They are simply participating in the process as the party's own rules allow them to do. The fact is those who show up and participate are the ones who are going to make an impact, and McCain's people haven't been showing.