Peter Schiff has come out and said that government should not be in control of it’s own currency. Besides being unconstitutional here in the US, this statement of Peter’s begs the question: Whom exactly does Mr Schiff think should be in control of our currency?

Control of the currency is either public or private. If Peter Schiff maintains that government control of the currency is bad, then he’s advocating for private control of the currency. Our private banks already have too much influence over our currency, giving them more is a recipie for pure Plutocracy… even worse than our present highly corrupted situation.

Here’s a transcript of the relevant portion of dialog on CNBC:
Peter Schiff vs James Galbraith on deficits, 27 Apr 2010 (youtube)

Peter Schiff: Nobody was talking about Greece’s problems six months ago. All of a sudden it’s a problem. The United States is the next Greece. We’re going up the food chain in sovereign credit. We are the worst offenders. We own the most amount of money to the most people all around the world. We have this giant credit bubble. And when it began to burst in 2008, we didn’t solve the problem. We made it worse. We have a much bigger problem in the years ahead when the US Government bubble bursts.

James Galbraith: The difference between the United States and Greece is that Greece is a member of the EURO. Greece has to fund itself in a currency which it cannot not control. The United States is in full control of it’s own currency.

Peter Schiff: And that’s the problem.

James Galbraith: We can have some problems, I’m not saying that we’ve solved all economic problems. I’m saying that financing the Government of the United States is not one of the problems that we face.

Peter Schiff: Sure it is. See, the fact that Greece cannot print money is a good thing. The fact that we can print money to repudiate our debts with inflation. That’s not a good thing. Anybody who’s holding US government bonds, basically what you’re saying is "it’s ok, the Government’s gonna print a bunch of money, you’re gonna get paid".

James Galbraith: As I said before, if the markets were seriously worried about the prospect of inflation, they would not have a 4.5% rate on long term bonds.

Peter Schiff: They’re wrong.

James Galbraith: If the markets are wrong then you shouldn’t be paying attention to them at all.

And on a related note, Damon Vrabel made an important point about Peter Schiff’s politics on Max Keiser’s RT show. Mr. Vrabel pointed out that government is the only avenue of attack which we have for fixing our broken system. By attacking government, Mr Schiff is trying to kill our only hope.

Keep in mind that there’s a difference between attacking the institutions of government and attacking our dime a dozen politicians for hire. We do need our institutions of government, our current set of politicians on the other hand… we can certainly give every one of them the boot if they continue to refuse to implement needed reforms.

Damon Vrabel on RT with Max Keiser (youtube)

"We are going to have to apply our political power to the government.

This is where I disagree with Peter Schiff. A guy like Peter Schiff is sort of stuck in the Austrian framework which hasn’t existed for 30 to 50 years. Where there’s a divide between public and private sector. Today all money in the private sector comes from public sector debt. So it’s a Wallstreet empire system controlling both public and private sectors. So by attacking government, he’s attacking the only hope we really have of changing the system.

A lot of blood, sweat and tears was spilled over establishing our government system. It must be important. We need a Republic form of government in order to have a balance between human rights and power.

We need to return to that system. We put a lot of effort into that. So by attacking that, Peter Schiff is really killing our only hope."

Peter Schiff has been given a lot of airtime on mainstream networks over the last couple years and that’s troublesome. Troublesome because he’s been showcased as an "alternative point of view" to most of the expert clowns that mainstream media brings on thier shows. Compared to most of them, he sounds sensible, a rockstar even, but that’s just because most of the bauble heads are incredibly ridiculous.

It’s as if mainstream media is running a "Choose Your Oligarch" game show: Mr Teabagger! Come on down! You are the next contestant on the Price is High. Mr Teabagger, which Oligarch will you pick? Peter Schiff! Vanessa, show Mr Teabagger what is behind Peter Schiff. Plutocracy! And it comes with a free lifetime supply of poverty and turtle wax.

To be fair to the teabaggers, I’d point out that it’s a trick question. Presenting a set of false choices to choose from is the norm for our mainstream networks.

I hope teabaggers step away from the Schiff, because his idea’s are not only unconstitutional, they are bad news. Mr Schiff isn’t against banker rule, he’s just wants a different set of bankers running the show. It’s a bit like booting Bernanke out of his FED chair and replacing him with Jamie Dimon. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.