Ron's
Revolution
[Insider]
Audio Available:
January
23, 2008 - 12:54 ET
GLENN:
I thought I would get Ron Paul on the phone and find out
where he stands on the economy, what the problems are with
the economy, what he thinks is coming in our future and how
he would correct it if he was President of the United
States, and he's on with us now, hello, Ron Paul.
PAUL:
Hello, nice to be with you.
GLENN:
Nice to be with you, sir. First of all, tell me what's
happening with the economy.
PAUL:
Well, it's making the correction that was inevitable due to
the malinvestment and the unbelievable debt accumulated due
to a federal reserve policy. Once they create credit out of
thin air, they cause business people, savers to do the wrong
thing and you always have to have a correction. So dealing
with the recession is very difficult because the cars with a
few years ago and we have to work our way out of this, which
means there has to be a correction.
GLENN:
Okay. If you were President of the United States, what would
you do?
PAUL:
Well, the advice would be return to the market economy.
First we would have to deregulate. We had a crisis a few
years ago, at least a supposed crisis with Enron and they
superregulated. So I would repeal certainly major portions
of the Sarbanes-Oxley. So we would argue for deregulation.
Then, of course, there should be major, major tax reform and
--
GLENN:
Hang on. Before we go into tax reform, let me just start
with Sarbanes-Oxley. I don't want to get all -- that's way
deep. So let's kind of surface skim here so we don't make
people's heads spin off their shoulders. The deregulation,
some people will say that part of the problems, for
instance, with the bonds is that these insurance companies,
they had no regulation. So they just kept insuring people
even though they didn't have the money.
PAUL:
Yeah, but that was all government, you know. When you have
the FDIC or the FHA or whatever ones. The main problem is
that we don't save money. That's where capital's supposed to
come from. Instead we print money. We create money. We call
it capital and then interest rates may be 1 or 2 or 3% and
business people think, well, there's a lot of savings going
on out there. So they do the wrong things. If interest rates
were very high, they would be more cautious but instead we
create the bubbles. People start building houses to extreme
and then they overbuild and then you have to rest in order
for the markets to catch up. And that's when the bubble
collapses, and we're in the midst of that. But government
does it in both ways, excessive credit and also pushing
money into certain areas such as housing or the financial
markets and they overprice. Then the prices have to come
down. So it's a very difficult situation, but the main goal
should be the restoration of the market economy.
GLENN:
Okay. So now, you mentioned tax cuts. Congress, both sides
of the aisle are talking now about $800 tax rebates to the
poorest people in America. I don't know about you, but I've
never seen a job created by a guy who's at the bottom of the
ladder. This seems just like a plan to get people to spend
which to me is what got us here in the first place.
PAUL:
Yeah, you are right. And all you do is you encourage
consumption and we're overdoing consumption right now. It's
not a tax rebate if you send somebody a check for $800 for
not paying taxes. That's a welfare check.
GLENN:
Thank you.
PAUL:
And that money really doesn't go to producing jobs. What you
have to do is restore the savings and encourage capital
investment. You have to eliminate taxes on capital gains and
we have to do whatever we can, get rid of the taxes, the
death tax and eliminate taxes on dividends and savings. All
these things would encourage savings and then have a market
rate for interest rates to give us the signal on whether we
should be investing or saving or spending. But that doesn't
exist anymore and that's why we have these perpetual
bubbles. I think this bubble right now that has been kept
together for quite a few years is a major problem and the
unwinding of this problem is very critical. The biggest
bubble's in the dollar bubble and now the dollar is coming
under attack. And what are they proposing? Excessive
spending, you know, deficit spending which, where are they
going to get the money? They don't have any money in
Washington. They either have to borrow from China or print
it, which means there's more inflation. Or the Federal
Reserve comes in and said, like yesterday, drastically
lowering interest rates? How do they lower interest rates?
They print a lot more money. Yesterday when they announced
that, the dollar immediately reversed itself and sharply
went down and it's the weakening of the dollar that is the
crisis that we face because everybody suffers from that. You
and I suffer because all of a sudden the dollar in that
wallet buys 80 cents worth of goods instead of a dollar's
worth. So we all get poor and we have to stop that cycle.
GLENN:
Nobody understands that, well, they say let me give $800 to
the poorest, they are really not doing that much because the
dollar is worth so little. The poorest are being hit by
inflation harder than anybody else.
PAUL:
That is exactly right. The do-good liberal who said we have
to take care of everybody -- and they are well intentioned.
The more debt they run up to give to the poor, the poorer
the people get because they cannot keep up. Take, for
instance, even Social Security recipients. Their inflation
rate might be 10 or 12% and we give them a cost of living
increase of 2%. So they're losing. And you just can't keep
that cycle going. You have to balance the budget, you have
to live within our means and then we have to restore
confidence to the dollar. So it's a major, major
undertaking. But we have to reverse it.
I
think the most immediate thing is to cut back on spending,
not increase spending, and get the money back into the hands
of the market of savers and investors and people who are
spending. But government economic planning does not work and
that's what we're coming to the realization.
GLENN:
Well, when you say government economic planning, the Fed is
not the government and the Fed just made the largest cut
that they have made since 1984. It is the first emergency
cut since right after September 11th. There's talk now that
they may cut another quarter, which is insanity. There's
just no more that you can cut unless you destroy the dollar.
What are your thoughts on the Fed?
PAUL:
Well, they are the culprit. They caused it. They caused it
by keeping interest rates artificially low. How are they
trying to solve the problem? Keeping interest rates low. For
an hour or to the markets rebounded because they're
conditioned to listen to that and they figure, oh, the
market's going to go up because interest rates are coming
down but today I predict the market's going to go down again
because that was only temporary. You cannot change the
long-term trend of the market. You can temporarily tinker
with it. You can artificially make them go up. But
eventually the market is more powerful than the Fed and the
government and the rejection of the dollar is the crisis
that we face and we face that because we create too much
money and we do that because we spend too much, both
overseas and domestically and we have to deal with this. We
have to live within our means. If we could just freeze all
spending domestically and I know we disagree on the overseas
expenditures but why do we pay for the defense of Europe and
Japan and Korea? We could save hundreds of billions of
dollars. So this is my argument and it's well received.
Yeah, why do we pay for defense of Europe?
GLENN:
Right.
PAUL:
If we could save that money, why don't we spend that money
here? Just think of all the money that would float back to
this country if all those military personnel were stationed
here spending the money in this country. We wouldn't be less
safe. I think we would be more safe.
GLENN:
I'm not necessarily, I'm not necessarily opposed to pulling
troops out of some parts of the world but I don't want to
get into that today.
PAUL:
Yeah, with he don't need to get into that today.
GLENN:
We can get into that some other time. I really want to focus
on the economy and the gold standard. You are one of the
only people that is talking about the return of the gold
standard. It was -- I mean, honestly, I mean, Ron, you know,
jeez. I don't want to sound like a conspiracy theorist but
you know what, at times I believe I am a conspiracy theorist
because there's a lot of stuff that just, if you read
history and you go back all the way to Woodrow Wilson, you
can see that the foundation was laid for one-world
government, the foundation was laid for socialism, and I
really, truly believe that these -- you know, Hillary
Clinton says she's not a liberal, she's, quote, a modern day
Progressive. Anybody who knows what a Progressive is, that
is a nightmare. It is the road to socialism.
Do
you believe that there is any intentional intent to take us
down these roads and bankrupt us because anybody with a clue
would know what's coming around the corner with Social
Security, Medicare, Medicaid and I don't know how you can
say I want to do universal healthcare as well.
PAUL:
You know, I guess there's a lot of evidence for that. It's
awfully tempting. I always try to say, well, they are doing
it out of ignorance and lack of understanding of how the
market economy works rather than saying, oh, I'd like to
bring on a Depression. I think they actually believe that
they are good managers. Alan Greenspan once told me --
because he used to be a gold standard person and he's
written very well about that in his early years. But he
says, no, he says, we central bankers have learned to make
paper money act as if it's gold. You know, they come to
believe in themselves that there is good and they can manage
as well as the market, and I told him after that, I said,
you know, if you do that, this will be the first time in all
of history that anybody could do that, you know, to make
paper money act like gold money.
You
know, you should never be embarrassed about the gold
standard because one of our most favorite Presidents, Ronald
Reagan, told me personally once, he says, you know, he says,
I'm interested in gold because, he says, if you study
history, you find out any great nation that has gotten off
the gold standard will no longer remain great. And we just
got off the gold standard totally in 1971 and if you look at
the statistics, in '71 when it comes to spending and
deficits and inflation and the value of the dollar, I mean,
they're dramatic. And I just want to make sure we wake up
before the dollar totally collapses because that is a real
tragedy if we let that happen.
GLENN:
How come Ronald Reagan didn't put us on the gold standard? I
mean, if anybody had the clout to do it, how come he didn't
do it? And if you were President, how would you propose we
would do that?
PAUL:
Well, it's not easy but what I would do is not want to close
down the Federal Reserve because that is dramatic and it
wouldn't happen. It would be chaotic, too. All I want to do
is legalize the Constitution, let you and me use gold if we
want, which means you have to remove sales taxes and capital
gains tax off gold and let it circulate just like currency
circulated around the world. So if you want to save for your
kids' education, you can put them in gold bonds and if the
dollar, if you've got, the dollar's going down more rapidly
than the price of education goes up, you could save in gold.
You could get paid in gold and if we --
GLENN:
Hang on.
PAUL:
Then paper will not be used anymore.
GLENN:
Wait a minute. But what you're proposing, you're this close
to being arrested if you -- I mean, if you went and actually
did that, they already have. The liberty dollar guys. They
have tried to arrest the guy and say, you are trying to
compete with the currency of the United States of America.
What you're talking about now, you can be arrested for.
PAUL:
Yeah. So the Constitution is being violated by law and it's
supposed to be the other way around. And this is why I used
to term this legalize the Constitution, this legalize gold
and silver which is in the Constitution. So you would have
to change the tax code. You'd have to persuade the congress
to do this, but it would be less chaotic. This is exactly
what I proposed in the early 1980s when I was on the gold
commission, competing currencies. Economists think you can
have competing currencies easier today than in the past
because the world's always have competing currencies. Just
allow gold and silver to do the same thing.
GLENN:
When you were on my program on television, you said
something that I didn't correct because I didn't -- I mean,
it sounded so outlandish but I let it go because I didn't
have the facts and you sounded so convinced of it that I
thought, hmmm, I've got to check into that and I'll correct
it the next time he's on or I'll correct it the next day.
What you said was, if we got rid of the income tax, the
Government would still take about the same amount of money
in as they had ten years ago.
PAUL:
Approximately.
GLENN:
We looked into it and it's accurate. Can you explain that
and how do we get that message out to people?
PAUL:
Well, it's just that the growth of spending is so rapid that
people don't realize that freezing budgets would be a
tremendous benefit and that's one of my proposals in my
economic reforms is just, freeze nondefense and
nonentitlement spending which would go a long way to coming
to the balance. I think $1 trillion less 10 years ago, I
think government was adequate size 10 years ago. But we have
this notion that everything that is to have perpetual
growth. Just think of our friends in the Republican party
that used to run against the Department of Education. What
did we do when we finally got in charge? We doubled the size
of the Department of Education. We create new departments.
We never slow up. Do we do anything to unwind the dependency
of the farmers on centralized planning for farmers which
pushes cost of food up? You know, it just doesn't make any
sense. The people demand change, or they did in '94 and the
year 2000, no wonder they're aggravated with us.
GLENN:
Wait, wait.
PAUL:
We need to at least freeze things without cutting anything.
GLENN:
Hang on just a second. The people demand change. Well, the
people are demanding change now so much that the voice of
the people is so clear that everybody has as their slogan or
on their little yard signs either "Change" or in
your case "Revolution." And it is -- I mean, it's
everywhere. Everybody knows we want change and yet the
people are going to the polls and they are voting for
Hillary Clinton or John McCain. How do you explain that?
PAUL:
Well, it's not easily explained but I think there's a lot of
information lacking from these people. A lot of people, you
know, you and I and others talk about, you know, the issues
and the politics of it but, you know, probably 80 or 90% of
the people feel like it's their patriotic duty to vote but
they only think about voting about two or three days before
the election. We think everybody's interested. You know, we
get on a stage and have a debate. We think, boy, everybody's
paying attention to us. 80 or 90% of the people are looking
at football games but they still feel like they have to
vote. It will be very vague information. But all I can see
is the people that support me do a lot of reading and they
know what's going on and they know what they're supporting
and they know about the economic issues and they know about
the gold standard and they know they don't like the income
tax. So that's a little bit different. And the other thing
is they always know I've voted the way I've talked and right
now there's a lot of disenchantment with people saying one
thing and doing something else.
GLENN:
Will you run as a third candidate if you done get the
nomination?
PAUL:
No, I don't want to do that. I have no plans of doing that.
This is a tough enough job right now.
GLENN:
Really? Well, why is that? You don't think -- I mean, if it
was McCain and Clinton, you don't think there would be a lot
of people going, well, jeez, I can't vote for either of
them?
PAUL:
I think it's the system that bothers me the most. You know,
the job of getting on the ballot, I probably spend millions
of dollars and half of my effort just wondering if I could
even get on the ballot. Then the debates wouldn't be
available to me and you probably wouldn't have me on your
program or something.
GLENN:
Yes, I would.
PAUL:
I wouldn't be a major party.
GLENN:
Yes, I would. Yes, I would. You know what, I'm very offended
by some of your supporters because they always say that, you
know, I won't listen to you or I won't have you. I'm
probably the guy on talk radio, mainstream talk radio that
will at least say I agree with you on a lot of things. I
just disagree with you vehemently on others.
PAUL:
And I appreciate that.
GLENN:
I mean, you know, we just -- I just happen to disagree with
you, but I respect you, sir, for your opinion. I have said
this, you know, behind your back. So let me say it to your
face. I think you are the closest we have running to a
founding father. You seem to be the only guy who has
actually read the federalist papers. So I appreciate your
efforts, sir.
PAUL:
Well, thank you very much.
GLENN:
You bet. We will talk to you again.
PAUL:
Thanks for having me.
GLENN:
You bet. Bye-bye.
Charlotte Thomson Iserbyt
Former Senior Policy Advisor
U.S. Department of Education
Former President of the Soviet Union Gorbachev said in
2000, in London: "The European Union is the New
European Soviet. " Since the North American
Union is modelled on the European Union, what would
Gorbachev call the North American Union?