Monday, August 12, 2013

#47 Paul Drockton Quotes – 8-11-13


Sometimes one can learn a lot from someone's quotes. On 9 July [2013] I had occasion to speak with Paul Drockton and really must have made an embarrassing impression as to my knowledge the said episode of his show was never rebroadcast. Some of my colleagues said that this demonstrated the duplicity of Republic Broadcasting (RBN) and that I shouldn't bother listening to them ever again. But I am not as young or impatient and though it is far from perfect, RBN serves a valuable purpose.

We'll discuss the issues of that night's exchange probably right along with Paul's quotes. But I want it understood from the outset that on most matters I would probably be in agreement with Paul Drockton (and would certainly recommend him if one is interested in acquiring any gold or silver). But as is often the case, where one may differ with a possible friend, it is far better to have it out in the open, rather than to seek the illusion of compromises, for there can't be any on the road to truth, which we remind our readers, is the ultimate authority, whatever it turns out to be. Below, the blue will be quotes by Paul Drockton. My comments will be in black.

Correction, Crash or Collapse? - Source [18 June 2014: No longer available.] 

A Correction is made when something is trying to get back on course. A crash occurs when something fails to get back on course. A Collapse is the result of multiple corrections leading to multiple crashes while ignoring the proper course.

Technical talk concerning securities, to indicate something that is supposed to be corrected by ... policies and activities largely sanctioned by the Austrian economists. To us they are of the same coin as the Keynesians, both public relations campaigns run by the same people, with hundreds of years of history behind one [15th century] and a few hundred years experience [18th century] for the other, the intentions of both to gain and control your money. The professional world of banking and finance knows nothing else.

But another observation is contained in Paul's words; the potential investment customer (someone who wants to make something on his money without having to do something himself to earn it), is led to believe by his stock broker that certain realities regarding securities trading are “proper courses” all by themselves, as they believe that the market is clean and runs according to natural laws, when as all the world should long since have begun to recognize, it isn't and doesn't.

The problem with a House of Cards is that it is made of paper. The difference between our economy and a House of Cards is that the cards use a higher quality of paper.

Drockton (and many like him, he's not the only one out there) would very much like everyone to trade in whatever government “scrips and slugs” they might be carrying around for his clunky precious metals pieces. He has never indicated to me on any of his programmes that he understands money at all the way E. C. Riegel or I have and quite frankly if you don't see it our way, you're going to lose. Drockton has nothing new to offer and his solution is still controlled by people in far away offices in cities far from where anyone else lives. They determine what a piece of gold or silver is worth in exchange, not he or I. That was just one question Drockton failed to answer correctly, when he should have been agreeing with me. I'll repeat it then: the prices of all precious metals are set by people who claim to own more of it than anyone else and they live and work in London and New York among other places.

How much is an ounce of gold worth?
Worth in what?
How about in dollars?
Well, it depends on the value of dollars.

And we know that dollars (and all other government issued money) will automatically lose value, because all government money is issued by people who have no business issuing it; the governments. Paul Drockton and a lot of other people out there keep saying that fiat currencies are what cause inflation when in fact government spending does. It is the fact that all currencies are government issued that matters not whether they are created by “fiat.” If the government decided to issue its own unbacked notes, they would be unbacked because the government has nothing to sell that anyone wants to buy, it would not matter if their money were backed by gold or silver, that would not limit their issue. The Constitution IN ERROR allowed the government to BORROW MONEY and that's what they have done and will do until they are unable to do so.

But if precious metals have been such a safe bet, why have the prices of gold and silver been falling since March, if not before that? Who is to say that gold will not be a lot cheaper next year than it is right now and in spite of this that everything else will be rising in price? If the people in London and New York want to close down the precious metals markets or make it difficult to buy or sell precious metals at any prices other than theirs, and they have and so they can, then what are Drockton's customers getting when they buy precious metals except an asset with diminishing value (at least in the short term) or at least one that is determined by other than normal market factors? ... and after this we still think most people should be owning some gold and silver.

The Best time to leave a Burning Building is Before the fire starts.

Take the hint. We agree here. Get out of the stock and bond markets and stay out!

Fascism is when Big Banks and Corporations use Big Government and Big Media to steal your stuff. Communism is when they use your neighbour.

Clever, but the reasons the latter are able to use your neighbour is that the “Soviets” have made normal situations into life or death desperations because no statist, whether socialist light or hard line commie, knows what the hell they're doing when it comes to running any business and are oblivious to the obvious lessons of “too big to fail;” that indeed there are limits to size that effect efficiencies and responsibilities to scale for every human enterprise. Smaller is better and redundancy and competition enhance freedom and give more people more responsibility where it needs to be exercised, in each local situation. By the way, democracy actually reduces freedom, meaningful freedom for each individual. Who cares about the freedom of groups?

Money isn't the root of all evil. Evil is the root of all evil.

Yes, we agree and our blog is intended largely to counter this widespread notion. However Paul, it is less easy to love one's “scrips and slugs” than shiny pieces of precious metals and it was the “love of money” that was the root of all evil, and as you probably know already, no organized evil is likely without money. Go back and read your Bible and take a good hard look at what the good book teaches regarding gold. Take in particular a look at Exodus 32:9 where it is recorded that Israel's sin in worshipping a golden calf caused the Almighty to consider destroying them and starting over with Moses! God did not make gold to be admired. The real purpose of money, to measure value, is best suited to the least valuable and least likely to be worshipped of any substance. Money is only the yardstick and nothing more.

The Psychopaths decided to give America back to Mexico after the Americans decided it wasn't worth fighting over.

Except that it wasn't something decided just yesterday. The psychopaths, using their extra money, bought time enough to run a long term project to dumb down the American public to accept what they had decided to do a long time ago, to give America (or a large part of it) back to Mexico.

The Federal Reserve masquerades as a government entity with an eye on the common good, when in fact, it is a private corporation bent on destroying both the common and the good.

... and the present American Federal government masquerades as a constitutional republic. Why anyone in their right mind would think that returning the money issuing function to a Treasury department within this government makes any more sense, should be placed on notice that those of us in the hinterlands (whether they be the graveyard suburbs or graveyard cities) no longer have any faith in ANY government to serve the common good, as we are awake to who has always run things from behind the scenes for their own profits and benefit, not ours.

Mass surveillance is necessary only when you run out of things to steal.

Now, all they want to know is how best to herd us. They still imagine that they can and will. So far history has pretty much proved them right.

A Pessimist bets on Gold, a Realist bets on Silver. Betting on Paper gives Optimists a bad name everywhere.

These once again reference securities markets vs. precious metals. Drockton might believe (as do I) that ultimately precious metals prices will climb and not come back down. But neither of us controls the money, so determining just how and when that might happen is not possible for any but the insiders.

An Opportunist exploits the weaknesses of others. A Global Corporation does it for a hefty profit.

We have characterized selfishness, in order to get a useful definition, as specifically the deliberate taking advantage of others for personal gain. But sometimes someone sees potential value in what someone else discards as trash. If the person who acquires another's trash makes more out of it than the originator, we would consider that entrepreneurial rather than opportunistic. An entrepreneur by the way is just French for businessman.

Meanwhile, even if they may have started this way, no mature corporation serves any other purpose but to enrich its officers and shareholders. Actually making, growing or doing something for a living is a secondary consideration. If they want to become more profitable, they just scale back and raise prices. They assume the monopoly position they have gives them time to reap profits before anyone can fill the void. At certain scales, nobody can or would, so they have the market to themselves. But if any corporation had to deal with full liabilities to its customers, employees and frankly to anyone they put out of business, since this was accomplished though unfair advantages granted by some state, none of them would be in existence. Corporations are statist supported dinosaurs that should rightfully go extinct.

The Fed will stop printing money when they run out of trees.

There are all kinds of ways of being smug, Paul; saying something that sounds important but is actually irrelevant. The Fed will print money or allow more digits on a bank's electronic memory (that requires no additional trees, Paul) as long as it suits their purposes and that is all. They have a monopoly. If it suits them they will cause fewer ... monetary tokens to be produced and circulate. If the Treasury gets the job of running our money, they will have a monopoly. But as the government has grown in size it has become, by fiat of nature, more inefficient (it wasn't efficient to begin with) and irresponsible (it was always that too). The real issues Paul are who gets the money the Fed creates and we know that most of it goes to whomever the government says, since they are the biggest buyer in this economy (as many governments are in theirs around the globe). You or I do not decide who gets that money. THAT my friend is the issue and nothing else.

Some men who fight organized religion recognize the true motives of the wolves in sheep's clothing. Men who fight organized religion on behalf of big government or corporations merely work for a different set of wolves.

Agreed. While we're at it we recommend getting out of these organizations and beginning to think of alternative ways of living for ourselves and our children and grand children, something far beyond the commercial cultural wasteland of the present age. We are aware of the jeers and discount them, recognizing that under all of them lies the implied threat of violence. The prepared among us will counter any overt violence, as we shall remind any detractors, this is not Russia and will not behave as they did after 1917 (since most were disarmed they were slaughtered as animals by the tens of millions!) despite how much high fructose corn syrup and other poisons they may seek to impose upon us.

If I had a paper dollar for every time someone used the word money, I still would have nothing.

Wrong Paul, don't be an idiot! As long as someone will take your paper, or digital money, it will still buy something and THAT is what you will end up with, whether it turns out to be worth less than the same thing a week, a month or a year ago. The theme you're trying to strike is that saving up any of THEIR money is going to mean that it will never keep up in value with inflation (caused entirely by government spending) and will buy less in the future than it does now. But you can certainly not claim that your silver or gold ounce buys today what it did back on ... 2 November 2011, because they do not and there is no guarantee that they will buy more next year because neither you nor I control the prices of these things.

Real wealth is measured in Troy Ounces.

NO IT IS NOT! Real wealth is measured in the income it generates, period. End of story! No gold or silver qualifies, unless you are one of the rare few who rent their precious metals, therefore they aren't wealth AT ALL. Your saying so over and over and over again is not going to change reality. Gold and silver do not produce income therefore they are NOT wealth, period, end of story!!!

The best place to donate to those bent on destroying our country is Wall Street.

Well, you could perhaps give your money away to some fool foundation and that would perhaps be worse, but what Paul is saying here is what we say; you will lose your money on Wall Street because it isn't set up to benefit the little guy AT ALL. Therefore get out and stay out!

Cities are built on manufacturing. When you send your manufacturing overseas you are building another country's cities at the expense of your own.

There used to be other reasons for cities to be where they were, long before there was any manufacturing. Perhaps those reasons will succeed again, but America would have to return to the way it was back in the 1880's. We think it's headed there anyway. As for our outsourcing and offshoring, that was the inevitable result of allowing “too big to fail” rather than “letting nature take its course.” As we've seen, and shall continue to see, the unwinding of the American Empire should reveal the extent to which we have allowed government and corporate hubris to determine national directions, rather than the millions of simultaneous decisions made by each individual at every local level in the economy.

Free Trade is another word for Treason.

Among one of the more pathetic and idiotic remarks Paul made to me that night back on 9 July was “we don't need trade.” Now, I really don't think he intended on saying this, so I'll give him the benefit of the doubt. Paul and I would agree that we don't need “Free Trade” the way it has been conducted, again solely for the benefit of the bigs at the expense of everyone else. What we need is to recognize that nature imposes its own limitations and when certain ventures have state licencing, can get away with dodging any responsibility for anything they do, and can enforce a ridiculous expectation for riches for doing absolutely nothing requiring any effort, etc. while at the same time grinding down members of the labour force, who according to them aren't worth paying more than is absolutely necessary to feed them (Ayn Rand and her ilk think this way), sooner or later the injustices of these situations will result in failures and when the bigs fail they bring a lot down with them. They should have failed sooner. However we can and would do better without them as whether these institutions were designed to produce anything or not, at present they are merely enriching the few at the expense of the many.

Mohandas K Ghandi had a philosophical plank called Swadeshi. Briefly stated, this was “that spirit in us which restricts us to the use and service of our immediate surroundings to the exclusion of the more remote.” This meant that he regarded as sinful a local person's refusal to buy locally before considering buying from someone in a distant location. Americans used to feel this way, but financial pressures changed their thinking. Of course some things cannot be had just anywhere and they must be purchased from where they are produced. You may notice all kinds of coercive tactics being discussed by governments and think tanks, especially those connected to the United Nations, to restore some notion of only certain localities being allowed to grow or produce certain things. This is an age old strategy to make every locality interdependent rather than independent in the cause of political, social and economic control by and for the elites and for no other reasonable purpose. We are against all of this, every last bit of it, because it is coercive and benefits the few who do relatively nothing for their “take” or is it “rake?”

Here are Ghandi's 7 Deadly Sins. See which ones we are as a world currently committing: 

Wealth without Work
Pleasure without Conscience
Science without Humanity
Knowledge without Character
Politics without Principle
Commerce without Morality
Worship without Sacrifice 

Now that I've expressed some differences, perhaps we can find a basis for working together. We see how Solomon caused silver and gold to become as the stones on the ground, how he was able to lower the prices of better goods, by causing them to be produced through encouragement and TRADE. One thing he did not do is make gold and silver the basis of trade relying on interest paid to those who fraudulently created bad notes representing gold and silver they did not have; the original Ponzi scheme at the heart of the present banking model. That was the Babylonian contribution that has been our bane ever since.

Rothbard lied, and his followers continue to LIE, that gold and silver were freely chosen by our markets and would be again if there weren't any paper (or digital) substitutes. There is no volunteerism possible within this paradigm. If I write too many checks, eventually they bounce and that's the end of it, while the government gets to write all the bad checks it wants, right now out beyond $16 billion [No, $16 TRILLION!] and nobody sees what's wrong with this. It isn't the material of which money is made that matters AT ALL Paul. It's who gets to issue the money that matters and it's the only thing that matters. Why can't “the smartest patriot in America” get it?

David Burton
venlead2013@aol.com

No comments:

Post a Comment