a bit of respect., page-31

Ron Paul, Peter Schief, Jim Sinclair plus the other usual suspects are all followers of the Austrian School of Economics, the school whose members have been expecting the imminent arrival of hyperinflation for the past 5 years.

The ideology underpinning this school is to the right of the neo-liberal one and encompasses " a libertarian political philosophy that advocates anarchy in the sense of the elimination of the state in favor of individual sovereignty in a free market.[4][5] In an anarcho-capitalist society, law enforcement, courts, and all other security services would be provided by privately funded competitors rather than through taxation, AND MONEY WOULD BE PRIVATELY AND COMPETITIVELY PROVIDED IN AN OPEN MARKET."

"Hold on, say naysayers like Paul, we don't need another [FED] system. We can return to the gold standard. The amount of money in the economy would then be entrusted to the supply of gold in the world and cut down on anyone's ability to increase U.S. dollars pumped into the economy— a major criticism of the Fed's policies since the 2008" recession."

In other words, once the Fed is gone the bangsters will be issuing in a competitive market their own bank notes. But how can one be sure that they are going to back those notes with gold? Well, because if a bangster tries to back them up with potatoes then the public will not accept such notes as they obviously would be preferring the ones being issued by the bangsters covering their notes with gold. I see.

And how can we trust that they will not be tempted as now to fix the interest rates in their favor? Well,because sin a market free from gov intervention the bangdters would never be tempted to fix the rates as they would be competing between themselves to provide loans.

But the huge benefits to be derived by the people would not end there because the markets are a very efficient mechanism for the allocation of resources and a natural rate of interest would automatically emerge. A natural rate of interest, what is that? A rate that automatically would keep output at its maximum level without a whisker of unemployment. So simple, and what does the history tells us?

If history is any guide, having some sort of central bank may have been better than none. Out of 100 years of Fed control, the country has had 22 recessional years, including one depression. The 100 years before the Fed saw 44 recessions and six depressions.

http://www.cnbc.com/id/46241902