1. The
Federal
Reserve
System
I
did
not
include
this
agency
in
my
opening
remarks
because
it
is
supposedly
fully
independent
of
the
Federal
Government.
The
very
fact
that
this
is
true
and
the
massive
power
this
agency
has
over
the
economy
just
shows
the
falsehood
that
we
are
even
a
Democratic
country.
This
agency
is
supposed
to
be
staffed
by
the
greatest
of
our
economists.
That
they
have
any
power
at
all
to
change
the
percentage
of
our
citizens
that
are
employed
means
they
violate
all
three
principals
for
which
this
country
was
founded.
Each
individual
person
who
is
unemployed
by
their
actions
has
lost
the
ability
to
control
their
life,
certainly
has
extreme
limitations
over
their
liberty,
and
it
goes
without
saying
they
are
probably
very
unhappy.
I
shouldn’t
need
to
say
more.
But
first
I
will
engage
in
a
short
critique.
In
1987
the
actions
of
one
person
Alan
Greenspan
the
chairman
of
the
fed,
single
handedly
created
the
famous
crash
of
1987.
I
can
only
give
him
credit
for
immediately
reversing
his
policy
and
saving
our
economy.
One
of
the
other
things
he
is
famous
for
is
the
statement
that
the
stock
market
in
the
1990’s
was
showing
irrational
exuberance
by
advancing
at
such
a
rate.
The
stock
market
continued
to
roar
despite
everything
he
said
or
did.
Then
he
force
fed
money
into
the
economy
before
Y2K
believing
wrongly
that
this
event
would
cause
great
economic
upheaval.
I
have
some
slight
knowledge
of
the
workings
of
the
stock
and
commodity
markets.
I
have
been
trading
them
for
forty-­‐two
years.
I
think
this
shows
this
person
had
less
knowledge
of
the
working
of
the
US
stock
market
then
the
average
investor!
His
juicing
up
the
stock
market
because
of
his
fear
of
Y2K
led
to
the
subsequent
crash
in
the
year
2000.
(Personally
I
made
a
prediction
that
the
approval
of
the
drug
Viagra
in
the
previous
year
also
would
lead
to
a
stock
market
crash.
CEO’s
whose
sex
life
had
been
revitalized
started
spending
less
time
managing
their
companies
and
more
time
with
their
mistresses!)
I
am
now
going
to
include
an
illuminating
passage
that
Alan
Greenspan
wrote
about
his
education
by
Ayn
Rand.
Rand's Influence on Alan
Greenspan
In The Age of Turbulence, Alan Greenspan describes the
influence that Ayn Rand had on his intellectual development.
Ayn Rand became a stabilizing force in my life. It hadn't
taken long for us to have a meeting of the minds -- mostly my
mind meeting hers -- and in the fifties and early sixties I

2. became a regular at the weekly gatherings at her apartment.
She was a wholly original thinker, sharply analytical, strong-
willed, highly principled, and very insistent on rationality as
the highest value. In that regard, our values were congruent -
- we agreed on the importance of mathematics and
intellectual rigor.
But she had gone far beyond that, thinking more broadly
than I had ever dared. She was a devoted Aristotelian -- the
central idea being that there exists an objective reality that is
separate from consciousness and capable of being known.
Thus she called her philosophy objectivism. And she applied
key tenets of Aristotelian ethics -- namely, that individuals
have innate nobility and that the highest duty of every
individual is to flourish by realizing that potential. Exploring
ideas with her was a remarkable course in logic and
epistemology. I was able to keep up with her most of the
time.
Rand's Collective became my first social circle outside the
university and the economics profession. I engaged in the
all-night debates and wrote spirited commentary for her
newsletter with the fervor of a young acolyte drawn to a
whole new set of ideas. Like any new convert, I tended to
frame the concepts in their starkest, simplest terms. Most
everyone sees the simple outline of an idea before complexity
and qualification set in. If we didn't, there would be nothing
to qualify, nothing to learn. It was only as contradictions
inherent in my new notions began to emerge that the fervor
receded.
One contradiction I found particularly enlightening.
According to objectivist precepts, taxation was immoral
because it allowed for government appropriation of private
property by force. Yet if taxation was wrong, how could you
reliably finance the essential functions of government,
including the protection of individuals' rights through police
power? The Randian answer, that those who rationally saw

3. the need for government would contribute voluntarily, was
inadequate. People have free will; suppose they refused?
I still found the broader philosophy of unfettered market
competition compelling, as I do to this day, but I reluctantly
began to realize that if there were qualifications to my
intellectual edifice, I couldn't argue that others should
readily accept it. [...]
Ayn Rand and I remained close until she died in 1982, and
I'm grateful for the influence she had on my life. I was
intellectually limited until I met her. All of my work had been
empirical and numbers-based, never values-oriented. I was a
talented technician, but that was all. My logical positivism
had discounted history and literature -- if you'd asked me
whether Chaucer was worth reading, I'd have said, "Don't
bother." Rand persuaded me to look at human beings, their
values, how they work, what they do and why they do it, and
how they think and why they think. This broadened my
horizons far beyond the models of economics I'd learned. I
began to study how societies form and how cultures behave,
and to realize that economics and forecasting depend on
such knowledge -- different cultures grow and create
material wealth in profoundly different ways. All of this
started for me with Ayn Rand. She introduced me to a vast
realm from which I'd shut myself off.
Ayn Rand was also my first personal hero. I studied all of
her works and novels with love and devotion. I started
reading the Fountainhead shortly before my 16th birthday. I
started reading it after dinner. I finished it at dawn on the
shores of Lake Michigan. My mind and heart were on fire. I
think I have read and reread The Fountainhead and Atlas
Shrugged at least ten times over the next three years.

4. But this passage written by Alan Greenspan is very
enlightening. His belief that the government cannot operate
without confiscatory taxes is naiveté.
Yes on the state, county and local levels I agree there is a
need for taxes. I of course believe not only will my new
constitution renew the morality of the United States Federal
Government to a government that is a champion of life,
individual rights, and as a result profound happiness. It will
also cause an economic prosperity far greater then ever
before. So taxes on a state, county and local levels will
become an ever-smaller proportion of individual wealth.
But on the federal level things are different. The United
States government owns 24% of our landmass. This asset is
totally mismanaged. It alone should produce tremendous
revenues. Also remember I am cutting the Federal
Government by at least 5 million people. That’s at least half
a trillion dollars in savings. The government has also
foolishly sold other assets that I am sorry to the people who
bought them but they are going to be confiscated if I am
elected. You will have first call to lease these assets but that
is all I will promise. Namely the entire electromagnetic
spectrum that was sold including all the television channels,
the radio channels, the cellular communications. Previous
admirations had no right to sell these precious national
assets. They should produce billions of dollars of revenue
from leasing them. Also all ports whether by land, air, or sea
that receive people or goods from other countries will have to
be confiscated by the Federal Government and leased back.
That is because they involve a direct threat to the safety and
smooth running of our country. They all need to be
universally administered. Since the government authorizes
patents and copyrights there will have to be yearly fees to pay
for that protection. The Internet was in great part created at

5. federal government expense. The power over it should
never be sold. It should also be a great source of revenue.
All nuclear power plants exist because of the Manhattan
project. They need to pay special leasing fees. I am a sorry
environmentalist; the way to get rid of fossil fuel
consumption is to expand nuclear power. Our navy under
the administration of Admiral Hyman Rickover has shown
the way to produce nuclear power safely. There is also new
technology to produce smaller nuclear power plants that
require less time to build and are just as safe. They should
be authorized and encouraged and charged fees. They can
generate tremendous Federal revenue. I am also sorry to
Panama, we built the canal. I am taking it back. Its
important to our national safety. You can share 50-5o in the
revenue. I can think of many more ways the Federal
government can earn money without taxation. And a much
smaller Federal government will be easier to fund.
I will also describe my changes to the management of our
armed forces that will not only increase our national safety
but will be far less costly.
One final note about the Federal Reserve. Ben Bernake, Alan
Grenspans intellectual heir spoke out in public in 2008 a few
months before the massive stock market crash that
everything was just hunky dory! Where do they get these
numbskulls? Get-a-stupid-economist.com that cant find
work in the private sector?
They better start working on their resume. Day one of my
administration they are fired!
I am not an economist, however “History reveals all truths!”
New quotation of Michael Fiedler

6. The history of the creation and management of a monetary
system without a real value backing of a country goes hand in
hand with governments that are out of control with
spending, deep into a recession/depression, or involved in
warfare. It is only the existence of a central monetary
authority such as the Federal Reserve that enables
governments to become completely reckless. There is a limit
to how much a government can tax its citizens before the
whole economy shuts down. There is a limit to the amount it
can borrow without raising interest rates so high that
borrowing costs get to the point they shut down the
economy. That limit becomes almost limitless with an entity
such as the FED. Look back at the history of modern
governments and you will see that this is true. Can the
federal reserve produce wealth for its citizens. Of course it
does, the amazing stock market boom of the last six years
proves that this is true. But of course you have to had
capital to invest in the stock market to enjoy that ride. The
average citizen has less net worth by about 15% compared to
2007. That doesn’t even consider how inflation has cost in
how much that net worth can actually buy in goods and
services. So what you can learn from this is that the tea party
is correct Wall Street is getting more wealthy in respect to
the average Joe. The Federal Reserve makes this happen.
It’s a byproduct of keeping our government functioning with
more and more debt. It’s just one of the tricks up the
governments sleeves to steal from its citizens.
The tax code has so many holes in it for our wealthier
citizens that you can drive a Jumbo Jet through without
ruffling the pages. The rich even get around the inheritance
taxes with complex trust schemes that the average person
cannot afford. But you should not get angry with the rich
people in our country, at least 90% probably earned what
they have. You need to get angry with our government,

7. because if we had our freedom back we would all have so
much money, that we wouldn’t be able to spend it.
All those trillions of dollars that go down the drain spent on
immoral, horribly mismanaged wars alone would be in
you’re pocket right now.
One more thing, the Federal Reserve doesn’t like deflation.
They have this weird notion that deflation goes hand in hand
with recession and depression. Does that make sense to
you? One hundred years ago it might have taken one person
8 hours to bake maybe 25 loafs of bread. But with all our
automation, it probably takes a second of time to throw a
switch on an automated bread baking system. Ingenuity
and productivity should have made our dollars worth a
hundred times what they were worth a hundred years ago.
Instead just the opposite is true. Because inflation is one of
those really sneaky things the Government does to steal
money from us without increasing taxes. Sure sometimes
our wages and investments increase in value almost as much
as inflation, but that just throws us up into a higher tax
bracket. So that’s one of the real mandates of the Fed, which
is generate more taxes for Uncle Sam and at the same time
fool all of us into thinking we are becoming wealthier!
In summation, general deflation of the cost of goods and
services logically decrease with innovation. They can also
decrease with a recession or depression. But the rewards
that we should all be benefiting by innovation are nullified by
the Federal Reserve’s manipulation of fake money to support
government policy. But if you are a student of history you
will see that there have been panics resulting in recessions
before the creation of the Federal Reserve. This is just a
natural result of human nature. People get excited when
there is an economic boom, like the Gold Rush in California.
But naturally the gold runs out and there is a bust. We don’t
need the magical thinking of a Federal Reserve that was

8. created to prevent these “busts” from occurring. We know
the Federal Reserve cannot prevent these downturns. It
often makes these “busts” worse. The Federal Reserve
cannot change fundament human behavior no matter how
brilliant they are.
“The only person who has more wisdom then someone is
everyone.” Napoleon Bone part. In this case it means let
the bust run its course, the wisdom of the many, our citizens,
not the wisdom of a handful of people in the FED will bring
the economy roaring back stronger then ever. But now
again history has proven my point, despite the FED using all
its power and even using many new methods to stimulate the
economy it has failed.