Today U.S. gold futures touched upon several records and leveled out above $1,000 an ounce, as the American dollar hit more record lows against foreign currency. This article from the Wall Street Journal looks at the crude oil figures. Here is a write-up from Reuters. Financial speculators suggest investors want precious metals that can support their portfolios better than the waning U.S. economy.
Of course, this news contains special interest for Ron Paul enthusiasts. The hegemony of the dollar in this credit-based economy and the gold standard have been key issues in the Paul platform, in the current presidential campaign as well as during his time in the congress. Mainstream press coverage of these financial rumblings still leaves the question of whether the county is in a recession up for debate. Congressman Paul has been directing attention to the growingly obvious recession for some time.
In response to today’s gold news, an essay by Paul was posted on his official campaign site. Dated April 23, 2006 and entitled “What the price of gold is telling us,” the article explores the history behind the events making today’s headlines. To quote the executive summary:
“One of the characteristics of commodity money-- one that originated naturally in the marketplace-- is that it must serve as a store of value. Gold and silver meet that test-- paper does not. Because of this profound difference, the incentive and wisdom of holding emergency funds in the form of gold becomes attractive when the official currency is being devalued. It’s more attractive than trying to save wealth in the form of a fiat currency, even when earning some nominal interest. The lack of earned interest on gold is not a problem once people realize the purchasing power of their currency is declining faster than the interest rates they might earn. The purchasing power of gold can rise even faster than increases in the cost of living.”
You can read the entire piece here.
John McCain’s anointment as presidential nominee shoo-in by the Republican Party meant that the news coverage of the campaign would shift its focus from the remaining Republican contenders to the Hillary and Obama battle royal. In discussing the presidential race with others I have found that many people are puzzled by Paul’s continuing campaign as a GOP contender, which seems to them like a painfully prolonged kamikaze bombing run. Some are struck by Paul’s apparent tenacity in what they perceive as a hopeless enterprise. Clearly McCain will represent the Republicans in the coming election; Paul’s pledge to be present at the party’s national convention seems futile, even more so than initiating a third party candidacy.
At this juncture I think it is safe to say that Paul is more concerned with retaining his seat in congress than with nabbing the White House. However, I look forward to the Republican National Convention in September (surprisingly not on the 11th, but right before). Something in my gut is telling me that Paul will make good on his promise to have his brand of libertarian ideals represented. If nothing else, it should make for some good TV.
My point is, taking the White House was never the goal of the Paul campaign. The cause is about ideals and ideologies, and in that sense Ron Paul has already won. See this piece from op-ed news for related sentiment. I will return to this important point sometime in the future.
Until next time, keep going for The Gold (literally now)!
No comments:
Post a Comment