End The Fed

I very much enjoyed this book and I wonder if it might make a profound contribution to humanity. I know that sounds both very lofty and improbable. But I can't help but believe that this country would change dramatically, and for the better, if the electorate were familiar with just the basic information provided in this book. Ron Paul tackles a complex subject with much success. IMO, he provides a compelling, reasonably complete overview of the role of central banks generally, their deeply flawed history and role managing money and economies, and consequences to the very nature of government and citizens' well being.These are lofty, important topics, but Ron Paul manages to describe the Fed and it's many profound impacts on our lives, and he supports the connections he makes with compelling reasoning. Even if the book receives little attention, and so fails to build a large consensus for change, readers will benefit personally from a deeper understanding of our flawed banking system and it's likely impact on both government and the economy. These topics, so carefully addressed by Paul, truly are fundamental to our lives. They should follow math and science in school curriculum.I'd offer a few more details of my perspective of his book:End the Fed is very readable: I got through it on a couple cross-country flights. In my mind, the book is geared toward relative beginners, but folks with a good familiarity with the Fed and it's history, and it's basic functions, should greatly appreciate the content too. I would think some of the material he quotes from former Fed governors would interest even experts on the subject. He mostly avoids charts/math if that's a bugaboo for you, and I personally had no problem with any assumptions of basic knowledge made in the book. While I've personally never considered Ron Paul to be eloquent or particularly clear in his speech, I think this book is extraordinarily well written and edited: it is clear, concise, and compelling.Readers unfamiliar with or wary of Paul or the topic might wonder if the book is partisan or politically biased. It's an important concern, because as Paul illustrates, the Fed is inextricably connected to government. My view on this issue was very favorable. Paul is a self-described Libertarian, and he includes a chapter entitled, The Libertarian Case <against the Fed>. Further, throughout the book, Paul is straightforward in his respect for and belief in free markets and voluntary exchange.However, I personally found no partisan bias against Democrats or favoring Republicans in this book. Paul weaves together a fairly complete, if basic (and I swear very interesting) history of central banking and monetary policy in the U.S. He properly gives credit, good or bad, where it is due. Andrew Jackson (father of the modern Democratic party) is properly credited with terminating the charter of this country's second central bank, at great personal cost to him. And while Woodrow Wilson and a Democratic congress is credited with chartering the current Fed, Paul takes care to describe the many years of lobbying of money interests that finally resulted in passage of the act. Nixon's decision to renege on Bretton Woods and close the gold window in 1971 is well described, along with the profound negative consequences to this country.I'm trying to be brief here, and in any case my point is simple: Paul covers a lot of ground and does so with credibility. While I'm no expert on the subject, I've read several historical books on the topic and I think Paul's treatment is accurate and unbiased. This book is not kind to Democrats or Republicans, but neither is it unfair. The book does compellingly attack our established banking system; since that system has been well developed and supported by both parties, their roles are impugned accordingly. But the emphasis of the book is more pedagogical than political, and is generally more uplifting than a simple indictment of a flawed system. Paul provides a well-reasoned voice for all citizens, liberal and conservative, Republican and Democrat, against a corrupt money system. The book is anti-establishment, but it is even handed, and importantly, it is constructive.It's hard to conjure up a shortcoming when you're generally so impressed with a book. To complain about any single aspect improperly raises its importance. Nevertheless, I'll offer one issue where I'd like to have seen more detail. Paul provides almost no detail into structured finance, and the role it played in this current downturn. His chapter entitled, The Current Mess, is reasonable, but it is far from complete. Since he included some details while excluding others, I'm troubled by the result, but only modestly so. In his defense, the chapter really places the downturn into historic perspective, as a predictable consequence of a fatally flawed banking system. But to give mention to the Community Reinvention Act or Equal Credit Opportunity Act, while ignoring MBS's and CDO's, and the fortune Wall Street made packaging fraudulent debt, is on it's face silly. But Paul is no apologist; he states plainly that "Wall Street... wants protection from downturns and cares little about truly free markets". Further, an honest accounting of Wall Street's roles in this debacle is not damning to Paul's thesis. He makes this point over and over in his book: the moral hazard created by the Fed enables all sorts of reckless behavior, including that led by bankers.As a final equivocation, I'd offer that a reasonable treatment of just Wall Street's role in this debacle, setting aside government, the Fed, and discussions of regulatory failure and moral hazard, etc., would fill a book itself. So my complaint becomes almost trivial: if you're going to spend a couple paragraphs describing failures of a liberal policy, be sure to write a couple more adjacent to them drawing a picture of how Wall Street profited immensely from it. As an aside, I've read only a few of the very many books available that focus on Wall Street's specific role in bringing on the credit crisis, but I can confidently recommend Charles Morris's Trillion Dollar Meltdown. It was one of the first available, and compares favorably on both readability and detail. While Paul provides a wonderful introduction into the big picture framework that underpins where we find ourselves, he stops short of some detail that I think is important to consideration of today's problems. Specific to our current unfolding debacle, Morris answers the question of "how", while Ron Paul addresses the bigger question of "why".In summary, I think Paul has done a great service by authoring End the Fed. I hope it's widely read and that it helps to create a thirst for more knowledge in this area. The quality of our government, and more importantly of our lives, depends very much on the topics he tackles.

Never before have I read a book that starts out by stating, "Why you should care"; but that is exactly what Dr. Paul does with "END THE FED". He explains that the Federal Reserve has been given almost absolute power, unchecked of course, over the entire economy with little concern from Congress. Not only does Congress not care about the power of the Federal Reserve, they encourage the Fed to continue involving itself in the economy. "The Federal Reserve System must be challenged," Paul writes, "Ultimately it needs to be eliminated...No single institution in society should have power this immense. in fact, I believe that freedom itself is at stake in this struggle."Dr. Paul continues by telling of the creation of, as G. Edward Griffin calls it, "The Creature From Jekyll Island". Which, most libertarians are aware, was formed by a small group of powerful bankers who had convinced the government that a "central bank was needed to stabilize the currency." Something the Fed has failed to do in nearly 100 years, thanks in part to fractional reserve banking, fiat currency and artificial manipulation of interest rates. A "dollar" is now worth approximately 5% of it's value in 1913, when the Fed was created; does that sound like a "stabilized currency" to you? It doesn't sound very stable to me, either. Devaluing a currency, as the Fed has done, is nothing less than fraud; just as adding water to a gallon of milk is fraud. Something Dr. Paul learned about early in life working on the family dairy.Aside from his work on the family dairy, he credits a job with the Pittsburgh Press as helping him become interested in coin collecting. With coin collecting helping him understand the value of money. This led him later to study Mises, Hayek, Murray Rothbard, Hans F. Sennholz and Austrian Economics. it was his study of Austrian Economics along with Richard Nixon's "We're all Keynesian, now"statement and the removal of the Gold Standard that led him to become involved with politics.Before going into details of his involvement with the Gold Commission and his interactions with Fed Chairmen; Dr. Paul spends a chapter explaining how central banks, all central banks not just the Fed, enable, encourage and fund wars, both legal and illegal, just and unjust. For the most part, all countries throughout history have been limited in how wars are financed; mainly due to have commodity based currencies. But, thanks to the advent of central banking, a government could just turn to the bank and request a large sum of money to fund whatever perceived evil lurked around the corner. The bank complies and expands the currency, reaping the benefits, and passing the cost on to the "little guy" or even worse, a future generation.During the final days of President Carter's administration, a bill that was co-authored by Ron Paul and Jesse Helms was signed into law creating the Gold Commission. Possibly the most significant action of the Commission was a recommendation that Congress authorize the US Mint to mint a gold coin. The Congress actually authorized 4 coins; 1 ounce, ½ ounce, ¼ ounce and 1/10 ounce. These coins were minted with a legal tender face value, which has only compounded the problems associated with legal tender laws, which need to be repealed as much as the Fed needs to be abolished.If the first third of the book was good, the last two-thirds is great!Dr. Paul goes into detail, with transcripts of conversations he's had with both Alan Greenspan and Ben Bernanke. Of the two, at least Greenspan understands, or knows, the arguments for a Gold Standard. Yet, somehow, has lost the knowledge he had in the 1960's when he wrote an essay titled "Gold and Economic Freedom."After writing about his "Conversations with Greenspan" and "...Bernanke"; he explains why Congress should be interested in monetary policy. One reason being that bad money and unjust taxation, including inflation, encourage the "black-market". "By destroying money and fueling the growth of the state," Paul writes, "the institution of a central bank is the biggest generator of underground criminal activity ever."He goes on to explain "the current mess" and the Fed's "solution" of throwing more money into the market as being similar to "adding more poison to a poisoned patient amounts to a cure." And, "the current path is prolonging and extending the pain - while causing a slow death dressed up in fancy clothes.""Why End The Fed?" Dr. Paul explains, "The Federal Reserve should be abolished because it is immoral, unconstitutional, impractical, promotes bad economics and undermines liberty. its destructive nature makes it tool of tyrannical government." The Fed has caused more "bubbles" than would have ever happened had a free market system of competing commodity-based currencies been in existence. In fact, inflation would be mostly non-existent without the Fed.In the final chapters, Dr. Paul gives a Philosophical, Constitutional, Economic and Libertarian Case for abolishing the Fed. While each of these arguments is slightly different, they are also very similar. In short: The Fed creates inflation; inflation steals wealth from anyone who had saved some of their earnings; theft is illegal, immoral, and unjust. I'm reminded of a quote from Frederic Bastiat, "When law and morality contradict each other, the citizen has the cruel alternative of either losing his moral sense or losing his respect for the law. These two evils are of equal consequence, and it would be difficult for a person to choose between them."In the end, Dr. Ron Paul explains "The Way Out." But, in an effort to not play the role of "spoiler" I will refrain from giving any details and end the same way Dr. Paul was greeted by 10,000 people when his "Rally for the Republic" speech began, with hopes that one day we can..."END THE FED! END THE FED! END THE FED!"

prompt delivery, despite the overseas delivery.

アメリカの素晴らしいところはやはりこういう人がいることだと思う。

Firstly, it is worth taking your time with this book as Dr. Paul is coming from a perspective few of us are likely to have been educated in, and it contains many important truths on one of the most complex topics in economics and the world generally. I would also advise keeping an open mind as the aforementioned prevalent attitude in education conditions our instinct towards believing it is essential for a small coterie of experts to have discretionary control over the money supply, and thus the entire economy.As this is just a review I will state as simply as possible how Dr. Paul piercingly questions the current system, and the positive answers and alternatives he provides. Also, the latter point many neglect and simply criticise - a true strength of Dr. Paul.How is it free market capitalism if central banks bail out large corporations, removing competition, profit - loss incentives and instituting moral hazard?How will the ordinary person react when they have worked and saved, yet quantitative easing causes asset price inflation, putting home ownership out of their reach?How can a small coterie, of even the smartest experts have the knowledge to 'run' the economy, which consists of billions of people and micro-economic processes?Does central banking not necessitate political corruption and special interests feeding at the government trough, thus undermining the strength of the economy?Fostering self-reliance, entrepreneurship and independent kindness is the true moral solution.Ending fiat currency prevents money supply inflation and excessive debt (monetising the debt), and therefore war without applicable taxation.The Austrian School business cycle theory thoroughly explains how central banks cause the boom - bust cycle, and how we can avoid the worst of this.I would recommend this book to people of all nationalities and political and economic stripes. Dr. Paul also has an affable prose style: he reminds me of the old prospector in a western who's the one good guy in town, and warns the hero (all of us as citizens) about the crooked sheriff/ and or town establishment.

It is my greatest regret that there is no obvious Ron Paul type figure on the British political scene. Dr Paul is a genuine and sincere man, who unlike almost all other politicos, seems to actually care more for his country and its people than for his own enrichment.`End the Fed' explains how the bank was created and the fundamental problems with fiat money and the obvious inflation that is created. It's an easy and frankly astounding read and if you don't fully understand what money is and how it is created you owe it to yourself to read this book. There are few things more important, especially in an era when our own government has created £200B out of thin air.For a fictional account of this theory of economics and politics, you may want to try this Single Acts of TyrannySingle Acts of Tyranny

I borrowed this book from a colleague soon after its publication as he kept referencing it, especially the title, End The Fed. It was a quick read and it had to be, Wall Street was always busy and never less so when the turbulence of the Great Recession was still about. As a financial professional with exposure to the gold industry on all levels it was polarizing. I do not believe gold is the best way to stabilize a currency, but the author sincerely does, but he struggles to support this with hard data. He provides many references to errors of others in the past, he never admits to any errors of his own (sound familiar?) and wants the dollar to be both the leading currency, but not the strongest. He tries hard at times to stress how money corrupts, but honestly a six year old at school will learn that pretty quickly by observing his or her peers. So why did I buy this book, why read again? Well, I have more time having retired and I wanted a reality check given how the US is bulging its own balance sheet and extending its debt beyond any prior record. I still question gold's effectiveness and how this is the remedy when there is so much sitting above ground in official and unofficial store. Okay, I am a gold bear and laugh every time I see some mint trying to sell you a pretty coin as a sound investment, but the more serious message of this book, criticizing the bail out of banks (and autos, which are really just a financing business for a product we over pay for) is not valid. The US got its financial services industry back in shape. Ignore the research and economic calls, pay attention to the actions: chief loan officers are not extending unlimited credit cards, bulging mortgages or expanding their own balance sheets like it was 2007. Americans are happy to live within their means with modest real rates, European nations still have failing banks in their care, they have negative rates, so the opportunity to actually grow a business for all not the few is simply not happening. I say read this book, but read many other economic case studies and you will soon find a place for this brief story of Ron Paul's fantasy. This record does not rely on hard evidence, it blurs the facts and levels blame on everyone else... but himself. As an experienced congressman I expect nothing less, but never lose sight that this is a politician speaking to you. The same politician that backed too many young people into a college education and a mountain of debt so many will never emerge from. Great tradespeople do not require a six figure debt to keep our homes, offices and commercial properties working, you do not need to sacrifice four years to learn how to sell a second hand car. Ron, you're wrong