i want candy
The recent debate between Ron Paul and Paul Krugman brought me to Randy Barnett again. When Ron Paul says to eliminate the Federal Reserve, then qualifies in debates how his writings don't call for an abrupt end, he seems to ignore an important power granted to the U.S. government. To persist the battle for truth and honesty and make a difference requires occasional novelty. Randy Barnett's argument that the Commerce Clause entails making commerce occur with regularity, and does not necessarily entail prohibition of certain activities, could be construed as support for the incorporation of the Federal Reserve system. The availability of liquidity does not have to begin with the elimination of constitutional money. Congress is given the power to regulate the value of coined money and fix the standard of weights and measures. If Congress is to keep the economy all steamed up, then revaluation of the currency combined with tax policy should be how that occurs. When the currency remains constitutional -- when its availability remains limited -- the government is properly bridled and the value of savings is conserved. Perhaps Krugman would consider it a red herring, but it's not insignificant that 90% silver remained in circulation after World War II, and gold was tied to the dollar. Instead of making a silver dollar smaller to compensate for population growth, we replace it with zinc? This ignores Congress' power to change the economic system in favor of a policy which is unconstitutional and results in silver holding its value while zinc does not. I can still buy more than one and a half gallons of gas for three silver dimes when in 1964 they'd buy one gallon. Give me a smaller dime and I get my gallon of gas? Always choose what's explicit before what could be inferred.
Q.E.D.
Q.E.D.