Nazi Counterfeiters and the Fed

I started reading Tim Challie’s “The Discipline of Spiritual Discernment” last night. It starts out with a story about how the Nazi’s used Jewish printers to make perfect counterfeits of the British pound. Their plan was to print millions of counterfeit pounds and then introduce the new money supply into the system and they called it Operation Bernhard. They decided the most effective method would be to drop it from airplanes over Britain.
What’s the point of that you might ask? Why wouldn’t they just use it to buy stuff? The goal was not to fund their war (as a new film might lead you to believe The goal was to destroy the British economy, and the U.S. was next. How would counterfeit money destroy the British economy? Inflation. The Nazis wanted to introduce so much counterfeit money into the money supply that the British pound would be worthless. It was a fairly brilliant strategy, but they ran out of time to drop the printed counterfeits over Britain.

The reason I bring this up is because the Nazis are condemned for such an idea, but here in the homeland, the same strategy is praised as genius. The vast majority of Americans believe that the President and his minions have the power, and the duty, to manage the economy for the benefit of the people. The Federal Reserve is called upon to help in this scheme. They control the amount of money in circulation by altering the rate at which they print money and issue central bank notes.

The problem is that for some reason, people don’t see what the Nazi’s apparently did. If you just print more paper currency, you will destroy its value. Apparently its bad when Nazis do it because Nazis are evil, but its a saving grace when Bernanke does it, because the United States Government is good.

Coming Soon: Indiana Jones V: Return of the Counterfeiters
co-starring Ron Paul
A Nazi Counterfeit in the National Bank

Not so gentle reminders

Yesterday I was hit with a mighty wave of reminders of the kind of country we live in. First of all, I was standing in line for 45 minutes at the post office to mail three small packages. This alone should be a constant reminder of the socialism of America. One of the Soviet Union’s primary symbolic achievements in the advancement of socialism was the institution of their postal service.

Why do I put up with waiting 45 minutes in line? Because its cheaper to mail the small packages (media mail) through USPS than FedEx or DHL, and unfortunately my time isn’t worth very much money, so I can afford to wait in line to pay the cheaper price. But why is the USPS cheaper than the private competitors? Doesn’t that simply prove that we would all be screwed if it were left up to private businesses to charge what they want? Wikipedia states it very well:

The USPS holds a statutory monopoly on non-urgent First Class Mail, outbound U.S. international letters[3] as well the exclusive right to put mail in private mailboxes,[4] as described in the Private Express Statutes. According to a report from the Government Accountability Office, “The monopoly was created by Congress as a revenue protection measure for the Postal Service’s predecessor to enable it to fulfill its mission. It is to prevent private competitors from engaging in an activity known as “cream-skimming,” i.e., offering service on low-cost routes at prices below those of the Postal Service while leaving the Service with high-cost routes.”[3] The law that prohibits anyone except the USPS from placing mail in a private mailbox (18 U.S.C. § 1725), was also passed for the purpose of preventing loss of revenue to the post office.[3] Besides the prevention of revenue loss, the 1934 legislation was passed for another reason, the second being, “Congress sought to decrease the quantity of extraneous matter being placed in mail boxes”. Until 1979, competition in all letter mail was prohibited. However, faced with imminent legislation to exempt “urgent” letter mail from the monopoly, the Post Office decided on its own to exempt “extremely urgent” letters.[5] Competition in “extremely urgent letters” is allowed under certain conditions: The private carrier must charge at least $3 or twice the U.S. postage, whichever is greater (other stipulations, such as maximum delivery time, apply as well); or, alternatively, it may be delivered for free.[6] This is where carriers such as FedEx compete by offering overnight delivery, as well as where bicycle messengers compete for intracity mail. However, the private carrier of the urgent letters must not use the standardized mailboxes marked “U.S. Mail.” Hence, private carriers of urgent letters must either deliver packages directly to the recipient, leave them in the open near the recipient’s front door, or place them in a special box dedicated solely to that carrier (a technique commonly used by small courier and messenger services). The United States is the only country that has such a mailbox monopoly according to the American Enterprise Institute.[7]

Carriers, as well as mailers, are supposed to comply with the laws against using a competitor to mail an overnight letter that is not extremely urgent. A violation can occur at a home or a business where letters originate. But, since nonurgent letters can be mailed covertly through private carriers USPS has found it difficult to enforce. However, companies such as Bellsouth and Equifax have been investigated and fined for mailing nonurgent material through private overnight delivery services. Private carriers of overnight mail say that they do not inspect the mail of customers to determine if it the content is extremely urgent and suggest that the responsibility for ensuring that relies on the mailers themselves. Carriers do, however, have certain responsibilities under the regulations.[3]

Since the mail monopoly only applies to nonurgent letter mail, the USPS is losing a significant amount of business to their competitors in other services, who offer lower rates. For example, FedEx and others have captured 90% of the overnight mail business.[4]

During the 1830s and 1840s several entrepreneurs started their own letter mail delivery companies, with the intent of ending the postal monopoly. These included Lysander Spooner and his American Letter Mail Company,[8] Henry Wells (of Wells Fargo) and Alvin Adams. To begin with, they were financially successful. However they were forced out of business by several postal reforms leading to lower postage rates in the 1840s and 1850s as well as Congressional legislation enforcing the mail monopoly, or in the case of the Pony Express, became mail contractors.[9][10] The average price charged by the Post Office to mail a letter in 1845 was 14.5 cents, whereas the private postal systems generally charged between 5 and 6.5 cents. By 1851, the Post Office had cut their rates to 3 cents, which has been cited as the main factor in driving the private mail companies out of business. Another consequence of the rate cut was that by 1860, the formerly self-supporting Post Office depended on the Treasury for half its income.[11]

But wait, don’t you own your own mailbox? Can’t you decide who gets to use it? No.

Existing residential mailbox laws state that only authorized letter carriers may insert mail into a residential mailbox. A penalty will be imposed for anyone who is not a letter carrier and is inserting mail in the residential mailbox. It is a federal offense for tampering with the mail and a fine or possibly jail time can be the punishment for the offense. Generally, resident mailboxes are for mail use only.

However, newspapers and magazines which are sent on Sundays and national holidays can be placed in the residential mailbox if the homeowner removes them before the next mail delivery. The USPS code states that private carriers may deliver newspapers and place them in the newspaper receptacle only. The receptacle cannot touch the residential mailbox, cannot interfere with the delivery of the mail, does not extend beyond the front of the mailbox and does not display any advertising except for the name of the publication.

The USPS Domestic Mail Manual states that “no part of a mail receptacle may be used to deliver any matter not bearing postage, including items of matter placed upon, supported by, attached to, hung from, or inserted into a mail receptacle.” In other words, the mailbox may not be used for anything other than for pieces of mail with postage attached. The USPS Domestic Mail Manual goes on to states that it is a federal offense and there is a significant penalty for violating this law.

Homeowners need to be aware that even though they purchased and maintain the residential mailbox, the mailbox belongs to and is controlled by the USPS (United States Postal Service). That means that any tampering of the mailbox is a federal offense.

Its a complete scam. The USPS stays in business by outlawing competition. We lose as a result. There is absolutely no reason for the USPS to exist.

Consider these articles:

An Untouchable Monopoly
USPS Monopoly Makes No Sense
USPS Monopoly Pamphlet
Is it Time to Privatize the Postal Service?
USPS, Competitors Square off at Conference

Don’t forget about all your utility companies as well:
Deregulate the Utilities

So while I’m waiting in this atrocious line (there were three employees working at their stations with 4 stations closed for no apparent reason. this is the case every single time I have been to the post office. there was an extra employee walking around the line annoying people to make sure their packages were labeled properly, etc. I have no idea why they didn’t put her to work behind the counter to move the line faster) I decide to check the news on my phone. Here I’m presented with three more reminders, which were more obvious following the Republican debate the other night and the arrogant mockery of wise comments made by Ron Paul.

Ron Paul’s comments on the Iranian speedboats followed the response of the other candidates. They all used it as a chance to glorify America as the strongest military power in the world. Huckabee said he had no problem introducing the Iranians to the gates of hell if needed. Paul responded by urging caution. The “moderator” Brit Hume mocked Paul by claiming the other candidates supported being passive (recall Huckabee’s comments).

So I’m in the line and I read this headline:
WGulf Prankster at Issue in Iran Dispute

Then I read this headline:
3,200 Marines Prepare for Afghan Tour

Again, here is what Paul had to say:

So long as the current mentality is maintained, there will always be a reason to attack some country.

Finally, I read this headline:
Congress Likely to OK Saudi Arms Deal

WASHINGTON – The Democratic-led Congress is unlikely to block U.S. plans to sell $123 million worth of sophisticated precision-guided bomb technology to Saudi Arabia, despite concerns from some members that the systems could be used against Israel.

Once again, here was Paul’s comments before I read this story:

The Messianic Character of American Foreign Policy

Ron Paul Update

Just wanted to give everyone an update on Ron Paul.

Debate 1: May 3

Highlight Reel

According to the polls, he one that debate:

However, MSNBC didn’t bother to check their own polls. They declared Mitt Romney the winner. Ron Paul received a 38% positive vote and Mitt Romney received a 27% vote. Anyone see a problem here?

ABC News also held a poll following the debate. First, ABC DID NOT EVEN INCLUDE RON PAUL in the poll.
Supporters called and forced ABC to correct the poll. After doing so, Ron Paul won by a landslide. I can’t show you the results because they are no longer on ABC’s website.

ABC answered with the following article:
The Ron Paul Effect which claims that Ron Paul’s success in the polls is because of internet manipulation, not because anyone actually supports him.

Supporters stormed the article, posting 300 comments to the article in support of Paul. ABC RESPONDED BY DELETING THE COMMENTS.

Here is a screenshot of a users post with a total of 278 comments to the article

Here is a screenshot with the comments deleted down to 15!

Here is the digg article
Do a google search for “ron paul abc” to read more reports of the incident

Washington Post
The most coverage Ron Paul got was from a Washington Post article called Building a Better Debate which said:

IF YOU TUNED IN to the recent Republican and Democratic presidential debates, you may have had the same reaction as many viewers looking at the crowded stages: Who’s that? The Democratic debate in South Carolina featured eight candidates, while 10 crammed into the GOP debate in California last Thursday. Voters trying to sort out their presidential choices aren’t helped by debates cluttered with the likes of Mike Gravel (hint: he’s a former senator from Alaska) on the Democratic side and Ron Paul (hint: he’s a libertarian House member from Texas) among the Republicans. If the standard is that any declared candidate is entitled to a podium, we’re going to end up with even more crowded stages in 2012.

One possibility would be to allow viewers to vote off one candidate after each debate; it seems to work well for other TV programs.

Keep in mind the fact that viewers did vote, and far from voting Ron Paul off the stage, they declared him the winner. Anyone think he deserves a little more interest from the media?

Here is an article talking about the blackout. The author copied and pasted all of MSNBC’s user comments in fear that they would be deleted as well. Media Blackout of Ron Paul

Thomas E. Woods, Jr. summarized the media’s reaction to the debate and to Ron Paul in Defeat the Media Clones
I’m not eager to jump on the wagon claiming “the evil media is censoring my views,” but just read the article and decide for yourself

Here is a summary of what Ron Paul talked about in the debate:
Ron Paul and the MSNBC Debate

Debate 2: May 15

Highlight Reel

Ron Paul winning the poll again

FoxNews Video
FoxNews claims the only reason people are supporting Ron Paul in this poll is because Guiliani “slapped” him in the debate. “There’s still much more spinning to do” as the reporter says. This video also shows Ron Paul’s discussion with Sean Hannity.

Following the second debate:
Michigan GOP leader wants Paul barred from future debates

More responses to the second debate:
Ron Paul 1, Establishment 0
John McCain Withdraws; Endorses Ron Paul (SPOOF)
Why Are They Lying About Ron Paul from Accuracy in Media

Various Articles about Ron Paul:
Who Would the Founders Endorse?GREAT QUIZ YOU SHOULD TAKE
Principled Paul
Guilty Blue Pleasure
The Foreign Policy of Ron Paul
Ron Paul Said It
Ron Paul Violated the Rules
Qualification for the Job?
Giuliani’s Attack on Ron Paul Falls Flat
Do Conservatives Hate Their Own Founder?
But Who Was Right – Rudy or Ron?
Ron Paul Rocks!
From Neoconservative to Libertarian in One Year
The Neocon Reaction to Ron Paul
Conservatives and the Settling Question
Ron Paul on Blowback
War Without Consequence? Absurd.

and finally…


These are all videos of Ron Paul speaking for himself
Educating Rudy
Feisty Rep. Ron Paul Discusses Economy with Neil Cavuto
Ron Paul 0wnz the Federal Reserve
Texas Republican slams Bush “demented philosophy of conquest
Congressman Ron Paul Visits My Dorm Room
Ron Paul on CNN talking about the debate

Ron Paul also writes books:
A Foreign Policy of Freedom