All Episodes
Previous Next
March 16, 2023 - Ron Paul Liberty Report
13:42
'What Event Would You Change In History?' #AskRonPaul

Welcome to another edition of #AskRonPaul, where Dr. Paul tackles questions from...you! Today Dr. Paul discusses what event in history he would change, what to expect with bank collapses, and the easiest way to end the Ukraine war. Show Sponsor Just go to https://4Patriots.com and use code RON to get 10% off your first purchase of 4Patriots Survival Food. That’s https://4Patriots.com, use code RON.

|

Time Text
The Fall of Natural Law 00:08:28
Hello, everybody, and thank you for tuning in to the Liberty Report.
With us today, Daniel McAdams, our co-host.
Daniel, good to see you.
Good morning, Dr. Paul.
How are you this morning?
Doing well, doing well.
We still have a few problems to deal with.
A couple, yeah.
And I understand a few people have sent me a question or two.
Yeah.
Yeah, we're going to do Ask Ron Paul again.
And I'm telling you what, Dr. Paul, I put it out last night.
You know, people ask questions.
We had so many questions.
We had over 100 questions.
So it's tough to pick just a couple of them because they're all so good.
A couple of sarcastic ones, but they're generally so good.
So we picked a couple, three of them that I think kind of run the broader.
Let's hit the first one.
This is Charlie Horne.
And this is an interesting question.
He says, if you could stop one event in history, which would it be and why?
Well, mine is going to be philosophic.
And that is an event.
If you accept free market capitalism, that is an event, something like that.
So my answer will be designed through a philosophy because the one thing that I would change if we could is that the people would not give up and that they would continue to accept the whole thing about natural law.
I think the giving up of natural law.
Not many people think too much about it, but I think most people understand natural law is when a lot of people throughout all history, all the way back to Sumeria, and even the laws written back then, they recognized the fact that individuals couldn't lie, cheat, steal, and kill.
And there were severe penalties.
Matter of fact, in Sumeria, which is the original civilization, they have a lot of different penalties for acts of aggression.
And the penalties were always in silver.
So they had a silver standard back there.
But we've left that, and it's ongoing.
But there's still a lot of people in the world that believe that there is a natural law, that people know that lying and killing is not good.
And most laws are supposed to reflect that.
My problem is, what I believe is that we drifted a long way from that, and the laws do not reflect that.
The laws now reflect special interests, the banking interests, the military-industrial complex.
So they're not using natural law.
They're using what they want.
And the other thing that goes along with that, if we would not give up on natural law, then we wouldn't have this problem that when they give up on natural law, they have to substitute it with something.
And what they substitute it with is nihilism.
That is, well, if you don't have a natural law, most people still today think you shouldn't murder people.
But it's a miserable world because a lot of killing goes on.
But when there's, if you live in a society where you come around to thinking that, well, you really can't know right and wrong.
And there are some brilliant, sorry you call them philosophers that literally say that.
You guys are just playing a game.
Nobody can know what truth is, you know.
And I happen to believe that you can philosophically.
And I think that the truth is that there is a sun and there is a moon and there is some reality.
So I think that has led to a lot of trouble is the fact that they've given up on natural law and they accept the fact of there are no laws and without laws then it's invited to the woke people to come in.
Nobody knows what the law is.
Well we'll tell you what's best.
So they take over our schools and everything else.
They are the designers of everything of right and wrong and I think that principle is really where has gotten us to where we are.
Makes a lot of sense, Dr. Paul.
Well let's look at the next one.
This is something out of the headlines and this is from Brandon.
Brandon B underscore 5.
He says, Dr. Paul, do you think the collapses of Silicon Valley Bank and Signature Bank were inevitable?
What methods will the government employ to further regulate and control the banking industry?
Do you believe this will have much wider market impacts in the coming months?
Well, if you're making a bad mistake and you're not following any rules and you're not following a natural law that you're not supposed to commit crimes of fraud and deceit, which is false money, that you're going to have these problems.
And that's what we have.
No, the problems we have were inevitable because we have been able to milk this system by transferring wealth to the special interest.
And we have done amazingly well in providing wealth, but eventually it shifted to getting the wealth into the hands of special people.
And they do that because they're still trusting the money.
And they go along with the debt.
But eventually that ends.
So no, the bank failures are inevitable.
I don't know if anybody, you know, if there's a good bank examiner, they might delay it.
But that's not it.
It's the fact that all the banks, you know, in a way, are insolvent.
And that is because money gets created out of thin air and the government comes in and prints more money and bails them out.
And that makes it where people can't depend on what the government's going to do.
There's no sound rules.
And that is a real problem.
And there's sophisticated ways they do this.
I mean, the rule of reserve currency.
You know, if you and I were in business and you give me $100 and said, loan it out, and that's shared, well, that would be 100% reserve.
What if I get your $100 and loan it out to 10 people?
You know, we've expanded the money supply.
But people, well, we trust the bank and the government's going to do it.
It's a moral hazard.
The false money and the false promises.
So anytime the government comes up, even what they're doing now is promising to solve this problem.
But they're not going to be able to solve this problem because it's an insolvent system.
And that's why the inevitability of the banking system coming down like this, maybe today they've contained it a little bit, but it's not a workable system.
And a country that pretends that there's no problem, the people get poorer and some people get a lot poorer faster and they get punished and the wealthy people are able to gather up the pieces that are left.
So there's no easy way to solve that problem because the problem is fraud and counterfeiting of money.
And you can't solve that by just real smart people that know how to regulate.
So the Federal Reserve knows that what they're doing.
They don't know what interest rates should be at all.
But guess who the biggest financial regulators are?
FDIC is part of the Fed.
They expect the Fed and FDICE to regulate and bail everybody out, but they can't do it.
And It's a false promise, it's an illusion, and it is a moral hazard because then it gets so difficult.
I've seen so many people express themselves, you know.
I have this, I have this money I've saved, and I don't know whether it's going to be insured, and all this, because it's fake.
You know, there's no honesty in the money, and that's why it's vulnerable, and that's why if the crash gets, which it usually does, gets out of control, everybody rejects it, and then you have a crack-up boom, and that's what I think would be the biggest disaster for us.
Wow.
Well, before we move on to our third question for the day, I just want to remind our viewers of the sponsor of the show for this month, and that's 4patriots.com, the number 4patriots.com.
We're worried about food shortages.
They're worried in Europe, we're worried in the United States, and we should be worried about food shortages.
One thing you can do to plan ahead so that you can survive a food shortage is to make sure you have a survival kit.
Limiting the War in Ukraine 00:05:04
And that's what 4 Patriots specializes in, among other things.
You can get it for 72 hours all the way up to an entire year: breakfasts, lunches, and dinners to provide for your family in case something difficult happens.
You enter Ron for a 10% discount off your first order of delicious breakfasts, lunches, and dinners, free shipping for all orders over $97.
Again, hit RON for that 10% discount at 4Patriots.com.
And Dr. Paul, let's get back to the third one.
And this is another good question from Lloyd Brownlow Stevens.
And he asked, Dr. Paul, what would be the most practical and realistic thing Congress could do to halt the escalation in Ukraine?
What's the best case scenario?
Well, it's not complicated.
We know what it is, but politically it's not permissible.
They won't allow you to do it because even those who are turning against the war, and there's Republicans now, not very many Democrats, all of a sudden they're talking about maybe cutting back, but they keep spending the money and it keeps going.
So I think that you have to cut off the money.
You have to cut off the support.
You can't send FBI agents, CIA agents over there, special forces over there.
You can't send any weapons over there.
You can't send any advisors over there.
And do it.
If you want to give them a time for them to adjust, give them a couple weeks and tell them we're leaving.
We're leaving.
It's gradualism.
We keep moving it in.
But the gradualism has been going on since World War II.
I mean, this history of Ukraine is not just brand new.
We talk a lot about the history of Ukraine since 2014.
And that is very significant.
But we need to quit doing it.
But back to the monetary issue, that we have an empire.
It's at times very shaky.
I see cracks in our empire because eventually nations destroy their reserve currency and their empire through excessive spending and too much adventurism outside their own country.
And they extend too far and then they go bankrupt in real time.
So you could say, well, the Fed's there, they're going to print money.
Eventually, though, the market is smart enough to look at real stuff rather than what the government says, well, buy the treasury bills and we're going to print money.
We'll bail you out.
Eventually it doesn't work.
People know what it is to have honest money and they want to be protected.
So that is the political problem, but it's not an economic problem.
It's a moral problem because there's too many people who benefit.
Because if you do this, if you cut, we could cut the war and limit the cuts to Ukraine.
But somebody's going to be complaining.
Maybe the military industrial complex, they have a lot of clout, you know, and they might come in, and then they're going to talk to their congressmen.
So it's incestuous on the way it works.
And that's why knowing what to do is not too difficult.
Having the ability to do it and overcome the political obstruction from it, the politics are too strong because there are some powerful interests out there that benefit tremendously from these funds.
But it's not forever.
There's a limit and all empires end.
And some days I read what's going on and I say, where's a crack right there?
How long is it going to last?
I think there's a crack building over Ukraine.
You know, when I think back about how long we had to go to Ukraine or Korea and Vietnam and the Middle East, we stayed and stayed.
And I think right now, because the people are starting to hurt now, and enough people have talked about the issue that they're backing off and deciding, well, maybe spending that money over there is the problem.
But there was the one example of doing it suddenly that people could look at, and that is the Depression of 1921.
It was a bad depression.
I think the GDP went down 15%, and it lasted for about a year.
No bailouts.
And there was bankruptcy.
There was the liquidation.
And that's what markets want.
They want liquidation of debt so you can go back and reestablish your habits.
But they do that.
And that is what we have to do.
We have to liquidate the debt, which is politically very, very difficult, so the market will deal with it.
The market is more powerful than the politicians.
Well, Dr. Paul, I think I speak for all your viewers by saying thank you for answering the questions.
I know it's a lot of fun for you to have the interaction with our viewers.
So thanks.
Very good.
Export Selection