Look at these coward Republicans in congress. When President Obama was in office, the Republicans passed a clean bill to actually repeal Obamacare. There was no replacement language. It was just flat-out repeal: everything, all the mandates, all the taxes, lock stock and barrel. They sent it up to the White House, they all voted for it, knowing that President Obama was gonna veto it. So it didn’t matter that they voted for it. It was all show. It was all for the voters. All pomp and circumstance. It wasn’t real! Now, you have the same Republican congress, and a Republican president, who potentially could sign the repeal bill, and they won’t present it! They won’t pass it! They won’t vote for it! Because they don’t really want to repeal it.
If it wasn’t for the Fed we wouldn’t have had a housing bubble, we wouldn’t have had the financial crisis, we wouldn’t even have had these problems the Fed is trying to solve but only making worse. We want real economic growth. The economy doesn’t benefit from inflated asset prices, it benefits from real capital investment, from production, from productivity, by making more consumer goods available to more people for less money. That’s progress, that’s a rising standard of living, that’s what capitalism is all about.
—  Peter Schiff
So the government taxes consumers thereby diminishing their capacity to spend, after first taxing and regulating their employers, thereby diminishing their incomes, then loans those same financially strapped consumer a portion of those tax dollars back, so they can go into debt to buy what they could have afforded to pay for in cash had the government not taxed them. The greater problem is there is no way under-employed, overly-indebted consumers will be able to repay these loans, as they are the same taxpayers the government is relying on to pick up the tap for the bad debt
—  Peter Schiff
Capitalism doesn’t work if you don’t have it, and we don’t have it. The central banks are setting the price of money the way the Soviet Union set the price of bread. We need a free market in order to have capitalism. We can’t have price fixing by the central bank […]. The Federal Reserve is diverting resources from the real economy to Wall Street, it is inflating bubbles and preventing legitimate economic growth. That is not capitalism. That’s cronyism, corporatism, fascism, whatever you want to call it, but don’t call it capitalism and don’t blame capitalism for the failures of government.
—  Peter Schiff

acelalondes replied to your post: hey-karbro asked:I was just wonde…

How do we know Anne Frank was bisexual? How old was she?

I don’t remember how old she was but she was 15 at the most considering that’s when she died, but here’s an entry from her diary:

“Sometimes, when in lie in bed at night, I have a terrible desire to feel my breasts and to listen to the rhythmic beat of my heart. I already had these kinds of feelings subconsciously before i came here, because i remember that once when i slept with a girl friend i had a strong desire to kiss her, and that i did do so. I could not help being terrible inquisitive over her body, for she had always kept it hidden from me. I asked her whether, as proof of our friendship, we should feel one another’s breasts, but she refused. I go into ecstasies every time i see the naked figure of a woman, such as Venus, for example. it strikes me as so wonderful and exquisite that i have difficulty in stopping the tears rolling down my cheeks. If only i had a girl friend. Yours, Anne”

She blatantly shows interest in girls and has shown interest in boys as well (she had a boyfriend named Peter Schiff). Interest in boys and girls? Bisexual.

Initially, Federal Reserve notes were backed 40% by gold, and they were redeemable 100% in gold and silver. If you had a twenty dollar Federal Reserve note, it was an I.O.U. for twenty dollars. It was a ‘note’, which is a debt instrument, that’s why they’re called 'Federal Reserve notes’, because it’s a debt. It’s a liability to the Federal Reserve. And what did the Federal Reserve owe you? They owed you twenty dollars. What was twenty dollars? An ounce of gold; that’s what you were owed if you owned a Federal Reserve note. What are you owed now if you have a Federal Reserve note? Nothing! What is the Federal Reserve promised to pay you for a twenty dollar bill? Nothing! Two tens? Four fives? You don’t get anything. I don’t even know why they call it a note, yes, it’s technically a liability on their balance sheet, but they’re not liable for anything. They don’t have to pay you anything. It’s not real money. It was supposed to be real money, but it isn’t anymore. It’s no different than Monopoly money.
—  Peter Schiff

“…You can mandate a minimum wage, but you can’t require anybody to actually pay it. Because ultimately, the employer decides, is it worth paying some unskilled worker $15 a hour? Now, in some cases it will be the case, in many cases, it won’t be… So all these people who are so excited about the $15 an hour minimum wage, most of them are not gonna be employed long enough to receive it… And of course, ultimately, the real movement is gonna be towards automation, towards robotics, and things like that as employers look to substitute capital, computers, technology, for ever-increasing labor costs. And, again, it’s not just that $15 an hour–it’s the workman’s comp, the disability, the social security, the liability–all the headaches that come with hiring people are eliminated if you just automate.”

-Peter Schiff

I’m Jewish. If someone doesn’t want to photograph a Jewish wedding, I don’t care. If there’s an anti-semite who doesn’t want to bake a cake for a Jew? Fine. There’s plenty of bakers who will bake me a cake, it’s no big deal. If there’s a guy that owns a bakery and he doesn’t like Jews, I’d just as soon that baker put a sign in his window, “No Jews”. Because then I know not to patronize his business. Why would I want to give money to a guy that’s an anti-semite? Now, most anti-semites, wouldn’t hang up a sign, because as much as they hate Jews, they like their money more. So, they’re not gonna refuse service to a Jew, they’re just gonna hate ‘em quietly.

Well, I’d rather get the hate out in the open so I can avoid it…

If somebody wants to discriminate against you, that’s their right. And they also have to deal with the consequences of that, which could be very severe… Imagine if you had a restaurant, and you put up a sign that said, “No Blacks, Whites Only”. How many people would actually eat in your restaurant? Hardly any.

Do I believe that somebody should have a right to open up a restaurant and put that sign up? Sure, if they want to. Let’s see if they survive.

If there is a guy that wants to put up a [sign in his] restaurant that says, “Whites Only” and there’s a bunch of whites that eat there, I don’t care. I wouldn’t want to eat with those whites. Why can’t bigots have a restaurant for themselves?

-Peter Schiff


Peter Schiff makes people realize the true cost of supporting higher wages


Peter Schiff at the UCLA economics debate

Forward from my mail

Schiff Radio
The temptation, as any self-perceived aggrieved person will attest, is to appeal to government whenever life shakes you a raw deal. Especially so for whole classes of such ostensible victims. Unfortunately, despite evidence dating back to the Paleolithic Age, not everyone’s picked up on what happens once the government agrees to help: these “beneficiaries” end up even worse off than before.

On today’s Peter Schiff Show, Peter rattled off a host of examples: more poverty after LBJ’s Great Society/War on Poverty, higher college tuition following increased government scholarships and subsidies, and more discrimination after the adoption of the Americans with Disabilities Act as well as the Civil Rights Acts. On the latter score, Peter often reminds listeners that if prospective employees are members of a “protected” class (race, disability, etc.), a lawsuit potentially awaits should they ultimately need to be fired, therefore lessening the chances they’ll be hired in the first place. This conversation came in light of news that federal contract recipients could soon become required to ensure at least seven percent of its workforce is disabled. As Peter said, there are plenty of good jobs for disabled Americans, so there’s no reason to micromanage companies selling specialized services; let the market sort out personnel decisions.

This week’s lesson: If you’re dealt a raw deal and know certain politicos would be more than happy to pander to you, do others like you – and country at large – a huge favor, and instead help yourself out.


Peter also has another busy week. A few highlights:

COLUMN: “Obama Gets Real” (
RADIO EXCLUSIVE: “Moore Hypocrisy: Big Government & Building Codes”
VIDEO: “Will Europeans announce their own QE?” (Fast Money, CNBC)
RADIO EXCLUSIVE: Schiff Radio Exclusive: “Obama’s America: Progress Is Poison”
SCHIFF REPORT: “Bank Bailout in Disguise, Jobs Data”

It should be cheaper to educate kids today, after all look at all the new technology that should make educating our children less expensive. Look at the fact that so many more kids are in school today, you’ve got more kids at the universities; the cost per pupil should be coming down. Why isn’t it? Why isn’t the free market working in education? It’s because of government. … I’m against exorbitant tuitions and that’s what happens because of student loans. Because remember, the money is going to to the schools. The kids aren’t getting the money, they’re getting the bills.

What would happen if we immediately cancelled government guaranteed student loans? Students couldn’t borrow money, would that mean that they wouldn’t go to college or that the colleges would just have empty classrooms? Of course not. The colleges would have to immediately react to this drop in demand by slashing their costs and their overheads so that they could bring tuitions down to a level where people can actually afford to go. … But because of all this government aid, because of all these student loans, the universities don’t have to do that. They don’t have to make the cuts, they don’t have to bring down costs. They can keep overcharging our kids year after year because of these programs.

I am in favour of students. What happens is the government enacts these programs and now the student loans have caused tuition prices to go through the roof and now the students think they need the loans. College is so expensive, how can I possibly go without student loans? … That’s nonsense; if the student loans would go away, the tuition will plunge. Everybody will still be able to go to college if they want to, they’re just not going to have to spend the next 20 or 30 years of their lives paying for it because it will be a lot less expensive, just like it was before the government got involved. … They create this culture of dependency because now they’ve driven costs up so much that people now think they depend on government aid to afford the services, when if the government aid wasn’t there those services would be much less expensive.
—  Peter Schiff, How government programs drive up college tuitions

Peter Schiff Taken: 1939 Discovered: 2008 In Anne Frank’s Diary Anne called Peter Schiff her “one true love.” In 1940 at the age of 11 she writes ‘Peter was the ideal boy: tall, slim and good-looking, with a serious, quiet and intelligent face. He had dark hair, beautiful brown eyes, ruddy cheeks and a nicely pointed nose. I was crazy about his smile, which made him look so boyish and mischievous.’ For more than 60 years there were no photographs known of Anne Frank’s childhood sweetheart.