What the heck have I been doing?and was it worth it?

Best. Candidate. Ever.

There is still some talk of a third-party Ron Paul run, an idea I favor, although he has pretty much ruled it out. He is right to concentrate on his house seat, mostly to keep his ideas in play. One divided by four hundred thirty six is not much but it's not zero.

The calculus changes considerably if Paul (and/or Walter Jones) loses his House primary. There will then be exactly zero Constitutional Republicans in power nationally. The system has already won; however the Ron Paul candidacy was “worth” the expense, in that

a. it messed up the script for the primary charade only being open to pre-approved candidates.
b. completely exposed the corruption of the MSM being in on the charade
c. re-introduced the concept of the Constitution as law that applies directly to our biggest problems, war and the economy, a concept that may prove useful in the near future.
d. took out Rudy, although he was able to lateral the 911 whistle to McCain
e. gave the Republicans the last possible benefit-of-doubt: they blew it.
f. showed how a gentleman conducts himself.

If he loses the House primary, he will be free of any imaginary debt to the Republican Party, or perceived duty to his donors and volunteers.  He could easily justify retiring, having done more in either of his careers than most men do in one.  I'd like to see another moneybomb as a thank you/retirement gesture.  If it were big enough it might tempt someone into one more tilt at the windmill, before the damned thing shakes itself apart.

Bob Barr - Good Enough for Government Work

From Antiwar Blog:

(Ex. Congressman) Bob "Barr is rumored to be considering a Libertarian Party run for President this November. The LP nominating convention will be held in late May." I was a big fan of Congressional Republicans circa. 1995, not so much by circa 2000. My impression was that he was one of the few that didn't get all gooey when they were no longer in opposition. I'm not sure if he was beaten at some point or he just quit and if he did, more power to him. In any case he would make a better president than anyone running, ERP. Speaking of whom,

Ron Paul's House primary is in two weeks, according to his page
(give him $50.00 while you're there)

If, God forbid, he lost the primary, how would that effect the overall equation?
Would anyone care that he almost promised that he wouldn't run as a third party candidate? I wouldn't mind seeing Paul/Barr on both Lib and Const. tickets, but I could live with Barr/(Paul Craig) Roberts. (for instance)

It's somewhat unlikely that a third party might win, and that the most likely outcome is to help elect the democrat; Okay by me. I fail to see how one liberal Senator could be worse than another, and there is a (very) faint chance that Obama might (three-and-a-half years, like Nixon) pull out of Iraq. Besides, they will be out of money and probably in a depression. McCain needs to lose because he will be able continue Bush's policies without effective opposition. A Democrat will not.

Last One Out that can figure out how, Get the Lights

From a comment over at Half-Sigma:

"...why is a Depression necessarily bad? If you're intelligent, you've already paid off your house and have enough money to live off for the next decade. It's not my problem if most people can't save a dime and live off credit.
I don't think it would be a bad thing to see useless bankers jumping from windows and pompous Lexus-renting suburbanites in soup lines. I think the US deserves a depression."

Really. Unless you own stock in Goldman, why should you give a shit if it collapsed. We're screwed when they manipulate the interest rate, blued when they inflate the money supply and tattood when they bail out the (supposedly) private institutions that fail, and if you don't like it - "Dude, don't you love your fellow countryman?" That's the real reason the GOP hates us Paultards; nobody likes a smart-ass, especially when he's right about every goddam detail.

The Fed was sold to us as a way to prevent bank panics; depositors not being able to get their savings out. What savings? We have net negative savings because we already earn less in interest than inflation and the entire system depends on the government loaning money to the banks at even lower rates. Why shouldn't we eliminate the middle man and just borrow directly from the government? Better yet, why shouldn't we all just have government jobs and pensions with free healthcare and broadband so we can telecommute, and then get bailed out if we still can't make ends meet after we get our stimulus rebate and mortgage moratorium?

What's really mystifying is that there enough Americans smart enough to fill out the loan forms.
Schmucks

A bit more on Gold Leasing

A very good explanation of central bank gold leasing, with some good charts.  I can't say I really understand the mechanism, but it seems to back up my theory that they were using it to manipulate the price.

money (pun intended) quote:

"To conclude, this final graph signals incredible stress in the financial sector in its efforts to control gold prices. The low overall rates imply that the official sector is hemorrhaging gold but that this situation cannot continue for too much longer. In short, this final graph signals the death of leasing just a surely as an EKG like this would signal the death of a critically ill patient."

Note that this is from about two years ago.  It would be nice to see a more recent chart, but I suspect that it's still pretty much flat-lined due to the sky-rocketing gold price.  So even though it's at historic highs ($927/oz) today, I'm very tempted to cash out my lame money-market IRA, (my last interest rate was 1.2%) buy coins and bury 'em in the garden, especially since they just dropped the interest rate 50 points and the dow went up about 30.  Storms a' comin', pa.

A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Forex

I tried to do a little research a while back when the price of gold went down from about $400/ounce to about $250 and stayed there for quite a while. I assumed it was being somehow manipulated to prop up the dollar (that's right, I am a conspiracy buff). I got nowhere, though because somewhere (circa 1995?) some countries {cough, Israel, cough} stopped reporting their reserves AND something called gold leasing began, or at least began to be reported.

In my admittedly very dim understanding of leasing, it is a tool that is used by governments to count as reserves gold that it does not actually hold. Whether it is physically in some other place or gone to the private sector, I can only speculate. I'll spare you my half-baked theories, but it is interesting to note that European reported holdings have decreased substantially while only those of Spain(!), Russia and Kazakhstan have increased. I'm thinking that the net decrease in reported holding could account for the temporary lowering in the dollar price of gold (greater supply leading to lower price leading to increased demand and higher price on the private market). All I can show for it is a well-scratched head. Perhaps someone with more intellectual horsepower... MM?

It's also interesting that there is no wiki entry for gold leasing. Spooky. And why did they cancel "The Lone Gunmen" just when it started to get good?

Finance for Dummies

I've never owned any stocks and I barely even know what a bond is (except bail bonds - ahem) but I got up early enough yesterday to watch the tsunami hit CNBC when futures were down 400 points. Pure schadenfreude bliss, watching the talking heads panic and curse Bernanke and even accuse each other for not seeing it coming. As IOZ said "I love the smell of market corrections in the morning. It smells like victory."

I'd stand in a bread-line all day if I could see Cramer crying every morning and brokers jumping out windows, screaming "Oh, no! I can't live like everyone else. Ahhhh!" So the "Plunge (haha) Protection Team" stepped up and the Dow ended up 300 today. Can you say "bear trap". I also like "dead cat bounce". Ambrose Bierce could have said panics are God's way of teaching proles finance.

I've wondered if the government started buying enough equities to bring the market along, and it works, then what? If they sold it would have to be gradually or else it would just as likely work in reverse. What if they made a bundle? Tax rebates? Options? My brain is too tiny.

The striking writers might as well just go back to work; they couldn't possibly beat this stuff. I'm getting up early again tomorrow. I never thought I'd enjoy reality tv.