Why Do Youths Love Ron Paul’s Call for Gold?Popular Articles, Resources — By Theodore Phalan on February 14, 2012 at 8:38 AM
“Excuse me, did you say ‘Yutes‘?”
Ron Paul’s Gold Movement: Do Young Voters Care?
The following post deviates a bit from the normal fare on this blog – it’s not on youth politics per se, but the gold/fiat debate might be increasingly important to understanding some young voters. Explanation: I just spent three days at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) – a conference filled with 18 to 29 year olds – and it seemed that everywhere I turned, I bumped into gold. In less than ten minutes in the conference’s exhibition section, I collected three books/monographs (A Guide to Sound Money by Judy Shelton; The 21stCentury Gold Standard by Ralph Benko and Charles Kadlec; The True Gold Standard by Lewis E. Lehrman) and a dozen pamphlets on the merits of gold. On Thursday, I swung by one of the conference’s first break-out sessions: “The Need for a Twenty-first Century Gold Standard.”
When I asked CPAC participants what issues they cared about, “the economy” and “jobs” of course topped the list, but, bizarrely to me, “the gold standard” regularly came up as an issue of importance. This is likely due to the influence of Ron Paul – who has won the youth vote in most Republican primaries to date, and who won the past two CPAC straw polls – but, I had always envisioned Paul’s gold messaging as more of a liability than an asset (much the same way as Joe McClintock of AEI does here). Maybe not. On one level, “gold rhetoric,” could appeal to young voters because it presents a very simple solution to the question Millennials will face for the next 50 years: How to limit government spending. And on another level, “gold rhetoric” might appeal to young voters for the same reasons I named for Paul’s popularity among young voters: The return-to-the-gold-standard movement 1) can raise eyebrows, 2) is ideologically pure, 3) is contrarian, and 4) is almost surely not going to succeed any time soon.
But enough conjecture. I promised I would keep this blog rooted in data and facts. Accordingly, before I discuss the relationship between young voters and gold anymore, I’ve asked one of my economist friends – Steve Davis – to give a bit of a factual background on the subject. Take it away, Steve.
During the South Carolina primary, Newt Gingrich called for the creation of a“Commission on Gold to look at the whole concept of how do we get back to hard money.” He also declared that the Federal Reserve’s “only job is to maintain the stability of the dollar because we want a dollar to be worth thirty years from now what it is worth now because that optimizes saving and investment because people know what they are going to back.”
It is rare that conversations about hard versus fiat money are at the forefront of politics. This topic is especially absent in the minds of younger voters, magnified by the fact that we have not lived through a severe inflationary period (the last one being from 1979-1981 when annual increases in CPI were over 10%, peaking at 13.5% in 1980). However, with the Administration doubling the monetary base in 2008, gold prices doubling in the past 4 years, and Ron Paul’s consistent message of abolishing the Federal Reserve, it is likely that monetary debasement will become a hot issue. Additionally, the debate over a gold standard is not simply a monetary debate; it is a more general debate on the limits of government power. Therefore, some “intellectual ammo” is useful: …
image: www.flickr.com/will hasings