First of all, I sympathize with many things that Ron Paul says about the Federal Reserve and about predatory banker behaviour. But the bankers will win the battle and Ron Paul may even help them. First we need to look at what Ron Paul actually believes:
1. He is for allowing the big banks to fail, to be unwound, and for other options to take their place.
2. He is for deregulation.
3. He encourages savings and a reduction of debt.
4. He is for cutting government spending, but unlike Paul Ryan, he wants foreign involvement cut more.
1. As for allowing the big banks to fail, this is not unlike the view of the late Bill Seidman, who suggested that we could do an S & L style Resolution Trust Corporation (RTC) for all the big banks. He saw no reason this could not be done with the big banks. But the problem is, this will never be done. The bankers are in charge, and if they can saddle the Irish with massive bailout taxation, they can do what they want with the United States as well. That is why mainstreet media says that Ron Paul is a fringe candidate. Mainstreet media supports the cartel.
2. Regarding deregulation, Ron Paul actually plays into the hands of the big bankers, who want the cartel casino operating at full speed. They know there will be bailouts, so deregulation just gives the cartel a licence to gamble.
3. Ron Paul encourages savings and the reduction of debt. Of course, savings at the highest income levels was mixed with easy money to create the massive ponzi housing bubble. So, savings is needed at the level of mainstreet more than at the highest income levels. And that savings can’t be used to gamble.
4. Ryan wants to cut debt in order to create another housing bubble. He wants to do this on the backs of the poor and the elderly. I don’t believe Ron Paul wants this. He just wants to get the military/industrial/financial cabal under control. That is a good thing. But it is unlikely to occur.
Ron Paul voted against Ryan’s plan to end medicare. I think he would rather take a look at international and military waste first. And that is why I like him a whole lot more than I do Paul Ryan. Ryan wants a ponzi housing scheme to kickstart a financial boom, after the big retraction a massive budget cut would cause.
But as to Ron Paul helping the bankers, it is because deregulation cannot be achieved without the threat of bank resolution. Since the threat of bank dismantling and resolution is a real long shot, deregulation actually plays into the hands of the bankers, and allows the casino to grow bigger and more powerful. Paul would get the deregulation, but not likely the threat of taming the TBTF banks.The banks will threaten the existence of the 30 year mortgage. That will cause TBTF to remain.
Ron Paul defends the dollar, gives people the chance to have some purchasing power, and seeks to allow market forces determine house prices. With the decline of wages, in a world economy, allowing the housing market to be free would be crucial to prosperity.
As far as dealing with housing ponzi behaviour, Ron Paul wants banks to operate ethically, without giving people mortgages that they cannot repay. I very much agree with that and would like to see more people walk away strategically from mortgages. This is not legal or financial advice, but if people would walk away in greater numbers, bankers would fear the public and fear offering mortgages that are not sustainable. As long as bankers think that they can get away with bad lending behaviour, the Fed will try to restart securitization and fund all sorts of things with faulty mortgages. Ron Paul opposes this behaviour, both in the past and going forward.
If this opposition to securitization-gone-wild causes the press to call Ron Paul “fringe”, then I am proud to be fringe. Unfortunately, since Ryan has more power than Ron Paul, I probably will vote Democratic, even though I am an independent. I just know Paul is surrounded by many, many unscrupulous Republicans who are more dangerous than the Democrats any day. Ron Paul is just outnumbered by the cabal. The Democrats, who are equally guilty of the original ponzi housing scheme, did try to regulate the casino with the Volcker Rule, but no one came to their assistance on the other side. That could prove to be a massive mistake.