Backyard Aquaponics System

 Read all *BOLD and *UNDERLINED notes in each section before you start.

 This is my first system and I am not, in any way, shape or form and expert in Aquaponics or gardening. I am just a guy that likes to garden and has always wanted a pond.

 The above specs are based on the barrel I used. You will need to measure the container you use and adjust accordingly. If you use a 55 gallon drum that measures 23” x 37” you can pretty much follow this guide as stated.

 The barrel:

*It is important that you have one port (capped hole) on each piece of the barrel. *You should not cut through the ports!

*When cut in half you will have one port on each half.

*You can use these as a secondary drain later if need be.

*I made sure both ports were facing the same side of the system. That way I only need to remove one support leg if there is a problem or to access the drains.

*Take your time and cut along the line as best you can.

*The straighter the cut, the easier it will be to mount the barrel halves into the frame. You can pre-drill you screw holes for the frame-barrel steps. This may save your fingers as the screws take a minute to bite. (Hard lesson)

• Measure twice, cut once.
• Measure across the top and mark the center at 11.5”.
• Turn the barrel 90 degrees, measure and mark again at 11.5”. (Use the seam as a guide for the center)
• You should now have an “X” on the top of the barrel with the center point being at 11.5”.
• Use a level to trace a line from edge to edge along the mark.
• Now flip the barrel over and repeat these two steps on the bottom.
• Extend the lines over the edge onto the sides of the barrel about 1 or 2 inches.
• Lay the barrel on its side and, using the marks on the top and bottom, line up the level with these marks and trace a line along the side.
• Turn the barrel and repeat this step.
• Once you have the whole barrel split with a line, you can start to cut.
• If you are suing a sawzall or jigsaw, you will need to drill a hole in the barrel along the line to allow the blade to fit inside.

The frame:

6 – 2x4x8

1 - 1 lb box of 3” screws

1 – 1lb box of 1 5/8 screws

4 – Clamps

Grow Bed

 37L x 26W x 40H

2 @ 37” – lateral brace – f/b

For grow bed, mounts on outside of  23’s

2 @ 23” – lateral brace – l/r

 For grow bed, mounts on inside of 37’s creating a 37x26 rectangle.

6 @ 40” – Legs.

 Mounts to 23” sides – flat on the outside - three per side.

Tank

 37L x 26W x 15H

2 @ 37” – lateral brace – f/b

For grow bed, mounts on outside of  23’s

2 @ 23” – lateral brace – l/r

 For grow bed, mounts on inside of 37’s creating a 37x26 rectangle.

·         Measure twice, cut once.

·         Make your cuts based on you barrels dimensions.

·         Build you frame for the top and bottom, without the legs.

·         You should have two 37x26 rectangles. (Or you dims)

·         Slip one half of the barrel into one frame and line the top edge of the barrel up to the top of the frame. The frame and barrel edge should be as flush as you can possibly get it.

·         You will have to use some type of clamping device to hold the barrel to the frame while you put a couple screws in. I used four, two on each side, top and bottom.

·         I used 1 5/8 screws to secure the barrel to the frame.

·         Place a screw about every four inches all the way around.

·         You should screw from the inside out, the screw heads will be on the inside of the barrel.

·         Repeat these steps for the other half.

·         Attach the legs to the 26” sides of the grow bed.  You should have three per side, evenly spaced.

·         Tank frame must be screwed to the legs of the grow bed; should fit snugly inside.

·         Once the grow bed is attached you can insert the tank into the bottom of the assembly and screw it to the support legs.

·         Mark your desired height on the inside of the support legs and line the top of the tank up with them. Measure from the bottom up on the legs. Mine is set at 15” from the bottom.

·         Lay the barrel on its side again and insert the tank. (This just makes it easier.)

·         Make sure you square the legs up BEFORE you attach the tank.

*I laid the barrel on end and clamped two legs at a time to the side.

*Then I pre-drilled and screwed them to the frame.

*I pre-drilled all holes for the frame assembly.

*This decreases the chance of splitting the wood.

*It also allows for an easier counter-sink, if you are not using a tool for that.

Bell Siphon

 This depends on the outflow size you want. Bulk head or thru-hull fittings can be purchased in a range of sizes. The size I used had a 1” threaded outside diameter and a ½” threaded inside diameter.

My Bell Siphon materials:

 1 - 10” threaded PVC nipple.

 1 – 1” to ½” reducing adapter – female 1” and male ½”.

 1 – 12” stick of 3” ABS.

 1 – 12” stick of 4” ABS.

 1 – 3” Slip Cap

 1 – ½” x 12” threaded PVC nipple.

 2 – ½” threaded PVC caps.

 1 – ½” PVC close nipple (usually 1 3/8-1.5”)

 1 – ½” PVC slip tee.

 1 – Screw, size doesn’t really matter that much, but at least 1”.

 1 – PVS/ABS glue. I use “Red Hot’s” or a single application cement.

The Drain:

 The 55 gallon barrel depth will be approx 11”.  The bulk-head (BH) fitting will stick up into the grow bed approx ¼”. The adapter will be approx” 1.5” long. You will need to decide how high you want to fill your grow bed and cut the nipple off accordingly. I cut my nipple at 7” and with the fitting, the fill line is right at 9 inches. This leaves it about one inch below the top of the rock in the grow bed. You do not want the actual stem of the plants to be watered, just the roots. The adapter screws into the BH fitting and the 1” nipple screws into the adapter. Use Teflon on all threads.

The Bell:

 Cut the 3” ABS pipe about one inch longer than your combined nipple drain length. (Adapter+Nipple) Now glue the 3” cap onto the 3” ABS pipe. I put a screw with Teflon on the threads in the top of the cap to give me something to grab when pulling it out.

The Rock Guard:

 Cut the 4” ABS pipe to 10 or 11 inches. This will depend on your chosen medium (Lava rock, gravel, clay balls) depth. You want the guard to extend just above the surface of the medium, but not below. Drill several holes in the pipe as to allow the flow of water, but not rock, into the interior.

 The bell siphon works by creating a vacuum. As water fills the bell, it pushes air down and out of the nipple. As the water starts to overflow the nipple, it will pull the remaining air out of the bell and create a self sustaining siphon. However, the siphon will remain active, to some extent, until the vacuum is broken.

Pumping apparatus:

 I will not give instructions on how to set up and plumb your pump. I work for a filtration company and I have access to things you may not have so I don’t want to send you running around for things you might not be able to find at a big box store.

 Also, my pump is not submersible and requires a different piping system than a submerged one. You can see from the pictures how mine is set up. Keep in mind though; the pump I am using cost about $140.00 and has a GPH of 180 @ 5 feet.. You can get smaller submersibles for less than $50.00.

 Once your system is plumbed and your pump is running, you will need to check the water level inside of the 4” pipe after the siphon completes a drain cycle. (It will still drain, but the volume will decrease considerably. You will need to cut a notch or drill a hole into the lower section of the 3” bell, just above the waterline. I let my system flood and drain, and then once the siphon slowed, I removed the bell and drilled a small hole just above the waterline on the 3” bell. After putting the bell back into the guard I flooded the bed and verified that the siphon engaged to drain the bed and disengaged when the waterline reached the breather hole. You may have to play with this a bit. I recommend starting low and working your way up.

 The Lower Drain/Aerator:

 Cut the 12” x 1/2” PVC nipple in half, so you have two 6” pieces. Drill a few holes into one side of each nipple. I drilled six per piece for a total of 12 holes. Glue the caps onto the slip ends of each piece. Now screw the capped nipples into the ½” tee. Insert the close into the tee and screw the whole apparatus into the BH fitting outlet. You should now have a tee with 6 drains holes per side. Make sure these drain holes face down and that you use Teflon on all threads. There are many different options for the drain/aeration system and you should play with it a bit and design one that is best for your system. Fish mass vs. water volume is critical and needs to be balanced.

 Once you are done with the assembly, fill the tanks and run the system a few times, just to work out the bugs, because there will be bugs. You will need to make sure the grow bed drains faster than the pump brings water in. This may require a larger drain pipe or a ball valve on the pump out let to restrict the flow. I used a ball valve.

 I also have a small carbon bed filter in-line just after the intake. This will filter out any solids. I also have a screen over the intake to prevent large solids from passing through the pump and keep fish from getting sucked up.

 Once it was set up, I left it running for a few days then bought 10 gold fish and 20 rosy reds to condition the tank. One week after I bought the fish I had 12 left; 3 rosy reds and 9 goldfish. You should expect to lose at least half in the first week. This is not a big deal as you are just conditioning the tank and filtering the water. Once your tank is conditioned and growing bacteria, you can add plants and food fish.

 I think I have covered just about everything, but feel free to email me if you have any questions.

 The following pictures show the system set up and running with a few newly transplanted plants. I still have one support leg per side to attach, but the bones and guts are complete. In the near future, the frame will be covered partially with a nicer looking wood and stained to appease my wife. Once I have it finished I will upload pictures of the finished system.

 The video of the semi complete running system is HERE.

    

 

 

Rise Up!

“Be ye not weary in well doing, for in due season you shall reap.”

 “It does not take a majority to prevail... but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men.”

 “There is nothing more powerful than an idea whose time has come.”

What are we fighting for?
Who are we fighting for?
Who are we fighting?
Who are we supposed to be fighting?

These questions I ask myself daily.

 I find myself so utterly frustrated at the people in our campaign today. I am sitting here trying my best to contain my rage and get a handle on my emotions as I type this. For years we have known about this campaign and for years, the majority of us have supported it. Now all of a sudden, when we are winning, we decide to throw in the towel? I need to ask a great big WTF?!!!!!!!

 I read about delegates saying they are disappointed in the official campaign and that they are going to, in essence, give up. WTF?
I read about supporters bashing the campaign because they do not agree with what a spokesman has said. WTF?
I read about our people turning on each other because of dis and mis-info. WTF?

 All this over a little press release that basically reaffirmed the campaigns official and original strategy. WTF?

 Jesse Benton released a statement in which he declared that the campaign would no longer spend campaign funds in states with future primaries. Instead the campaign would focus their efforts on states that have already, or will hold caucus votes and delegate conventions.

 I see no problem with this, so what is the big deal?

 Well, the media is having a field day with it, as we all knew they would. The MSM is doing their usual cut-and-paste job on the statement and using the wording as propaganda to fit the agenda.

 Ok, again, no big deal, we knew they would. We have watched them twist our words and actions to fit their agenda. We have watched them ignore and marginalize our efforts and candidate. We have watched them outright lie to every American about this race. We have watched them convolute the information so badly that hardly an ounce of fact can be discerned from it. None of this is new so what is the big deal?

 We have fought long and hard to get to this point. We have overcome seemingly insurmountable odds and achieved goals the establishment said we could not. We have raised money to support our cause by sacrifice. We have marched on and achieved victory after victory, even in the face of or on the heels of defeat. We ARE winning so WTF is the big deal?

 The campaign has always been about the delegates. The good doctor himself has stated this many times……..many times.
It has never been about the straw votes. The good doctor has stated this many times…….many times.

 We know the voting system is rigged and not so in our favor. We know we are fighting against a corrupt government and not only political system, but party. We know that if 10,000 people vote in a beauty contest for Paul, that only, 3500 will be reported. We know the system is corrupt and rigged to support those in power.

 We know who we are supposed to be fighting and who we are fighting for, so WTF are we fighting each other?!!!
We know what we are fighting for and why we are fighting for it, so WTF are we fighting each other?

 Are we, as a group, really so fickle and simple minded that we can still, after all this truth we have found and shared, still be led by the nose on the words of the MSM? Have we really not learned anything from all of this, and from each other?

 Everyone involved in this campaign, whether you are a delegate, council member, party official, sign maker, cookie baker or half-assed blogger like me, needs to understand that this r3VOLution is not about Jesse Benton, Doug Wead, Jack Hunter, Rand Paul, Ron Paul, Barack Obama, Mitt Romney or any other person. This movement is about liberty-plain and simple.

 It is about reasserting our god given right to govern ourselves. It is about peace, sound money, limited government and a non-interventionist foreign policy. It is about ending the wars and ending the fed. It is about drinking raw milk and smoking weed if you want to, it is about people marrying whomever they want, straight or gay, it is about texting and walking, it is about personal space and privacy and it is about our children. It is about the Constitution and We the People.

 The whole world is watching us and the whole world is supporting us. What more do you need? What more can one man do for you than to open your eyes? What more can I say to encourage you? What other motivation do you need than your Life, Liberty and Property?

They said we were a fringe group. We proved we are a mass.
They said we had a ceiling of support. We blew the roof off that mother.
They said we would never win any delegates. We have the majority of delegates from several states.
They said we would never make it to the convention. We blew past the plurality of delegates required.
They said our vote would not count. We said our voice will be heard.
They said it could not be done. We are doing it every damn day.
They said we could not win. We ARE winning.

This r3VOLution will continue, with or without you.
This r3VOLution will not be televised.
This r3VOLution is growing every day.
This r3VOLution cannot be stopped.

 The fight is not over and we need to send a message that is heard loud and clear by all that would seek to oppose us, to all those in power that would seek to deny us our god-given rights, to all those that are still asleep, to all those that think and hope we have no fight left in us. Let them hear us now; let them know that we, have not yet begun to fight.

 Remain steadfast and staunch in your integrity; never give an inch, not even 1/16 of a chiggers track.
Fight like your life depends on it – because it does.

In Liberty,
 Richard Camacho

Ron Paul 2012

We and I

We, have awoken.

We, will awaken others.

Apathy no longer holds its sway.

We, will expose your media lies and bias.

We, have exposed your media lies and bias.

We, will expose your party lies and corruption.

We, have exposed your party lies and corruption.

We, will expose your election frauds.

We, have exposed your elections frauds.

We, will expose your lies and corruption.

We, have exposed your lies and corruption.

We, will occupy our town halls.

We, have occupied our town halls.

We, will occupy your elections.

We, have occupied our elections.

We, will occupy the media.

We, have occupied the media.

We, will occupy our cities.

We, have occupied our cities.

We, will occupy our hearts.

We, have occupied our own hearts.

We, will capture the attention of the people.

We, have captured the attention of the people.

We, The People, will Speak.

The People have spoken.

You, have not listened.

You, will listen.

You, do not have a choice.

We, have been bribed.

We, will no longer be bribed.

We, have been lied to.

We, will no longer accept your lies.

This, is not our debt.

We, are not in your debt.

You, are in our debt.

You, work for us, you always have and you always will.

You, are dependant on us for the very things you claim to own.

It is, in fact, you that need us.

We, do not need you.

You, own nothing.

We, own everything.

We, have pledged our lives

We, have pledged our fortunes.

We, have regained and pledged our sacred honor to this cause.

We, will reclaim our birthright.

We, will reclaim our land.

We, will reclaim our sovereignty.

We, have occupied the truth.

We, have occupied ourselves.

I, have occupied myself.

I, am already exactly where I want to be.

I, am me.

We, are coming.

Run.

The Problem with My “Crazy Uncle Ron”

Part 2 – Economic Policy

The problem with my crazy uncle is that he, actually, isn’t crazy at all.

 He gets a lot of criticism from the MSM, his coworkers and the general population for a host of things, his economic ideals seem outrageous to most, but they do resonate with a host of people, across many different backgrounds.

 I have heard a wide range of criticisms regarding Paul’s policies, everything from,

 “Ron Paul wants to send us back into the Stone Age.”

To

 “Ron Paul would allow the same banks that created the mess we are in to do anything they want.”

And my all time favorite,

 “Ron Paul wants to abolish the Federal Reserve, the IRS and repeal the 16^th amendment. The economy would collapse without the income taxes, because the government could not function without that revenue.”

 There is a plethora of disinformation, political opposition, ignorance and just plain confusion, propagated and perpetuated largely by the media and the American people’s penchant for believing everything they see and hear on TV regarding his views.

 I understand where the confusion comes from, but at the same time I do not understand where the confusion comes from. Let’s look at it from a completely objective perspective. Let’s just pretend for a brief moment that I do not support Dr. Paul, but I am trying to determine if he really is off-base with his positions. I have heard a lot about this guy running for president and I want to see what his deal is.

 We will consolidate and address just the four or five things mentioned above; the core issues and ask questions that any self-respecting American should ask concerning these things. Responsible adults are tasked with the duty to look at everything objectively to find the truth in anything. Children can be consumed by emotion because that is part of the growing process. Adults, however, cannot be consumed by emotions as that can and ultimately will lead to irrational thought processes, mistakes and the perpetuation thereof.

 It is our job to seek the truth in all things so that we in turn may pass these truths on to our children and their children. We do a great disservice to future generations when we abdicate our responsibility and accept any and all stories at face value. It is for this reason, chief among others, that I do not watch any of the MSM channels very often, nor do I rely on them for any form of reliable, unbiased news and information.

 The Idea and positions:

1.      Sound Money

2.      Zero Government intrusion or involvement in the economy

3.      Free market principles and regulations

That's a fairly accurate summation of his policies and at a glance, it doesn't really sound all that bad. Let's take a closer look at each of these and try to break them down into terms and analogies that not only myself, but also other layman can understand.

 After all, I think most Americans want a stable money supply, they think they government should stay out of the economy, among other things, because the government really only messes things up. It's like a big, lumbering elephant trying to eat those little eggs on sushi rolls with a 2x4, blindfolded and standing on an egg while the trainer shovels peanuts into the trash can.

 Most of us grew up hearing the phrase "Free Market" and believe that we actually work and consume in one. From what I have read, watched and heard over the last few years, it seems more and more like that is not the case.

Sound Money

 What is it exactly and why do we need it?

 As I understand this whole thing, Sound Money, is just that - sound. Meaning it is tied to some sort of commodity or "backed" by it, thereby reducing or preventing the opportunity for inflation to decrease its purchasing power.

 Now, it could feasibly be argued that the US Dollar is, in fact, tied to or backed by a commodity so therefore it should be shielded from inflation. As I am learning, half of this statement is a half truth. The US Dollar is tied to oil, which is why you sometimes will hear the phrase "petrodollar" but it is not actually backed by oil.

 The Dollar is tied to oil simply because the US entered into an agreement with some of the major oil producers (Saudi Arabia, etc) whereby they agreed the US Dollar would be the sole currency they would accept as payment for oil. In exchange, the US agreed that it would protect the oil fields from invasion by any other country. This is kind of complex and confusing, but in a nutshell, if you want to buy oil, you have to use US Dollars.

 The effect this had on the dollar was great and immediate. Demand for it as a currency shot up and so did the value of it.  So now, we have the US Dollar as the sole currency for buying oil, thereby granting it De Facto, so to speak, status as a reserve currency.

 Countries now had to purchase or exchange their own currencies for US Dollars if they wanted to buy oil. I'm not sure how it works exactly, but I do know that when there is a high demand for something, the cost and value of it increases.

 So, the dollar is tied loosely to oil, but that does not guarantee the value of it. The dollar can be devalued in two ways:

• If oil-producing countries decide to allow the purchase of oil in any other currency than the dollar, or a barter system or an exchange for a commodity of similar worth or value. This will cause demand to drop and with it the value of the dollar. This is called Deflation and it is happening now. Iran, China, India and Japan have entered into an agreement to purchase/sell oil where they will not use the dollar.
• Inflation. Inflation is caused when a supply of monetary instruments enter a system that already has an abundance of them in supply. It is also caused by increasing a monetary base artificially, because it is not backed by anything real therefore, no new real commodity has been introduced to support it, through the printing and introduction of monetary instruments.

 Confused yet? Don't feel bad, I was and still am. I don't want your head to explode, but now we are going to look at the half of a half-truth.

 So the dollar is tied to oil and is used as a reserve currency of the world because it is the only currency with which you can buy oil. However, it is not really backed by anything. For a monetary supply to have a commodity backing that same supply can only be increased or decreased in conjunction with the backing commodity.

 Is the dollar backed by anything? No, it is not.

 Is the dollar subject to inflation? Yes, yes it is.

Watch this.

And this also.

Read This.

 Our current money supply is a faith/demand based currency, which means two things. If demand is up for our dollars, then the value of our dollars will also be up, but if the demand falls, then...

 We have faith in our dollar because the government tells us that we should and because, well, it's been like this for so long. What the average American doesn't realize, and what I didn't for so many years is, that our dollars really are not worth anything. They have no intrinsic value and they are only as valuable as they are limited in supply.

 If a dollar can buy a cup of coffee today, because there are only 10 trillion of those dollars in the system, what do you think happens to the value of each dollar when the Federal Reserve prints another trillion or so? That's right, now that same dollars value is decreased by that same percentage of money that has been created and introduced into the system. The effects of inflation are not felt immediately, but they have a tendency to slowly creep up before they slam the dollar.

 This is what is sometimes referred to as a "loss of purchasing power."

 If a monetary supply is backed by gold, silver, land or any other valuable, permanent commodity, then it can only be increased by introducing a matching volume of the same commodity. In simple, if you have 100 tons of gold worth 100 dollars, you cannot create or introduce another 100 dollars until you find and introduce another 100 tons of gold.

 Demand and inflation are prevented from wreaking havoc on any permanent, valuable commodity backed monetary system.

 Now knowing this, I can honestly say that I am all for a gold standard monetary system for the US. I now find it completely ridiculous that we, as Americans, have accepted inflation in our monetary base and that we have and are continuing to allow our purchasing power to be decreased, literally every day.

 In the 1970's a "luxury" car cost about $3500.00

 Today a "luxury" car costs about $35000.00

 In 1913 the cost of one troy ounce of gold was less than $20.00

 Today that same ounce costs close to $2000.00

How is this acceptable?

Zero Government intrusion or involvement in the economy

This one is fairly short, because after all, there really isn't a lot of digging to be done if you want to know whether or not the government should be involved in the Economy.

 I have been looking and as of yet, I have not found a single positive thing the government has done with respect to its involvement in the economy. Really, I can't.

 They tax and over tax. They spend and over spend. They regulate and over regulate. They show preferential treatment to businesses of their friends. They removed us from the gold standard in the seventies. They waste money profusely and they created, foster and protect the Federal Reserve System that is killing our dollar.

 I now understand that the government cannot "stimulate" the economy because the government has nothing with which it can stimulate. It never really occurred to me that the government really has nothing because it produces nothing, everything they do have they have taken from the taxpayers. Therefore, in reality, they are stimulating the economy with our own money, yet we do not get to see the benefits of it because the money they took from us; they gave to their friends and the banks that are perpetuating these problems.

 "You cannot legislate the poor into freedom by legislating the industrious out of it. You don't multiply wealth by dividing it. Government cannot give anything to anybody that it doesn't first take from somebody else. Whenever somebody receives something without working for it, somebody else has to work for it without receiving. The worst thing that can happen to a nation is for half of the people to get the idea they don't have to work because somebody else will work for them, and the other half to get the idea that it does no good to work because they don't get to enjoy the fruit of their labor."

 Dr. Adrian Rogers

So now, I understand that the government should stay out of the economy completely. It should let the consumers stimulate it, should it need to be stimulated and that it should not take our money to stimulate the economies of a few banks or corporations.

Free market principles and regulations

I have already researched sound money and government involvement in the economy and so far, Paul seems to be making a lot of sense on these issues. It really is just common sense and I have a hard time understanding why or how others cannot see this.

 We need to have policies in place that protect our monetary base or money supply from inflation and deflation. It just makes sense, I don’t want to wake up tomorrow to find out that it now takes one and a half dollars to buy a cup of coffee, when yesterday, it was only one dollar. To me that’s ridiculous, and I have to call it as I see it. Someone, other than the IRS is stealing my money, that’s the only way I can rationalize it. Whether it’s the retail store or the Federal Reserve, some one is not playing fair or anything that could even be loosely referred to as fair.

 Okay, so now let’s move on to the Free Market and those principles. For the longest time I was under the impression that our economy was, in fact, a Free Market – I was wrong. You have to look at it from a realistic and objective perspective. Party lines aside, whenever the government gets involved in anything, that anything is no longer free. It’s that simple.

 What we see today is the government getting involved way too often and instituting far too over reaching and over bearing regulations upon the people that actually work in the market. It has, essentially, created a “closed” market in which certain entities garner special treatment. It’s true, just look at Halliburton, GE and Boeing. These large companies and those similar to them, get the lion’s share of government contracts, not because they are the most efficient or proficient at what they do, but because they have friends in high places.

 The free market is just that – free. It is free to regulate itself and free to operate in a true supply and demand cycle. Before I get into the specific arguments that I have heard, I just want to touch on the actual vs. artificial supply and demand cycles we see in our economy today.

 Free Market:

 If a base of consumers desires a product, then a demand is created for said product. Companies will compete and the consumer will decide what companies are successful based on the quality of the product and the value-for-dollar-exchanged it offers. When demand increases, prices are also likely to increase in the short term, simply because “everybody wants one” and the demand puts a strain on the supply of not only raw materials, but the actual supply of product being created.

 Prices will increase over the short term, but in most cases will ultimately peak and begin a decline into stabilization. They will remain stable until a newer version of the product is introduced into the market causing another increase in demand. One the older product version is no longer in such high demand; we will begin to see prices for it begin to drop, sometimes dramatically. We see this everyday on “Clearance” racks and end of the year car “Sales”. Out with the old and in with the new.

 This is the way the free market should operate. To a certain extent, it does have the illusion of operating in this fashion, but a deeper look can and will reveal the tell tale signs of government intervention and market oppression.

 Closed Market:

  This type of market is actually what we operate and consume in today, and have for some years. I think most of us don’t even bother to look deep enough at certain things and because of that, we are unable to recognize the tell-tale signs of this closed market system.

 In a closed market, the supply and demand cycle is still present, but it is, for the most part - an illusion. Demand is still a driving force behind production and consumption, but the demand is all too often artificially created or propped up by government interactions and regulations. Let’s take a look at a few examples of an artificial demand cycle created by government interaction within the market.

 A great example is the auto industry. We need look no further than the bail-outs of 2007 and 2008 to see this interference. Car companies, namely US car companies, were in bad shape. They were increasingly becoming unable to compete in the market due to foreign manufacturers producing superior products with better prices. There are three prongs to this issue of government interference and will address the most prevalent first.

 Financial dire straits

These manufacturers found themselves literally on the verge of insolvency as they had mounting debt and a consumer base that could no longer support their business. In addition to the shrinking consumer base, the general market had been, for some time, rejecting their products as inferior, resulting in an ever shrinking base of support.

 Unable to generate enough revenue to sustain the businesses they turned to the federal government for help. Public outcry was indeed great and I, myself, was among those enraged by the bail outs they received. The influx of much needed capitol by the Federal Reserve by way of government decree is one example of government interference in the market. If this truly were a free market, the unviable business would have been unable to attract private investor support and would ultimately become totally insolvent. It would have filed for bankruptcy and most likely restructured, becoming again a viable company in the after math.

 The company would have lost little to no blue collar jobs in the end and would have shed a few needless middle and upper management positions. This is the way it works in America everyday, and this is the way to should have been allowed to work in this instance. The market will force a change or correction to any industry unwilling or incapable of imposing that correction upon itself, when the market, or consumers, decide it is necessary.

 The US automakers would most likely be in a much better position than they are now and they would most likely be offering new and better products to the market. Instead, they are offering the same old bucket of bolts with fresh paint. The market isn’t buying it.

 Government sponsored union influence

The introduction of the unionized workforce was a good thing, once upon a time, but it is no longer necessary. Unions were successful and they should be given some credit and praise for influencing and bringing about changes in work place safety and overall conditions. However, the time of the union is over and it should be recognized that, while they once sought legitimate protections for their workers, they now only succeed in hampering any production advances in the majority of industries.

 When a union of workers demand safer working environments and fair pay, I have no issue with that. When a union of workers demand, dictate and hold a company or agency hostage or seek to extort monetary gains and relaxed production goals via an organized strike, I have an issue with that. Take a look at some of the union contracts for the auto industry and you will see some truly ridiculous things.

 These things range form disciplinary action to production speeds to salary and wage earnings whether or not on the job – as in lay-offs.

 I have knowledge of more than one or two outrageous things contained in SEIU’s bargaining unit contracts.

 The government sponsors these labor unions through the passage of legislation favoring these organizations and through the establishment of labor relations boards. When a union can tell a company that they cannot move their business to another state, and the government backs the union - that is an issue. When a union can tell a company, they cannot fire a worker for a reason that would be justified in a non-unionized workforce - that is an issue. “So he was only caught selling drugs at work once? Well, did he kill anybody? If he had killed someone then we would say you have to provide anger management training to him at no cost and continue to pay his normal wages while he is in training.”

Artificial Demand

 The other example of government interference and influence upon the market is the artificial demand cycle that it creates. A great example of this is the recent housing bubble and subsequent collapse. The federal government passed legislation and instructed financial institutions to relax their lending guidelines so more Americans would be able to acquire financing and purchase homes. This is all well and good, for a time, but look what it ultimately led to. The lax lending guidelines enabled people to finance homes, cars, boats, RV’s and a host of other things that they, under normal circumstances and guidelines would not have been able to finance – let alone afford.

 In essence the government allowed the banks to artificially prop up demand for homes and other consumables in a bubble of prosperity that would, ultimately burst and leave all who were exposed, in a terrible position. Artificial Demand…

 On the surface, before the bubbles pop, it’s all well and good, but what people simply don’t understand is that the Federal Reserve, with the blessing of the federal government has created and is fostering a moral hazard with respect to investing. Look at the derivatives market, who knows how much that junk is actually worth, but who cares about that. Look at what the investors made off the initial sales and how the taxpayers like you and I got the shaft when the bills came due.

  The second instance is, and has been, going on for some time. It’s real simple; take a look at any local, state or federal employee cars. It’s an interesting thing to note that they are all American made cars, meaning they are either, Chevy, Ford, GMC or…well I can’t even remember the other one. See what I mean? The demand cannot support the business so they run to the government and say, “Help us or we will go out of business” and the government obliges. In the free market, they would go out of business or be absorbed by another viable company.

 This is an artificial demand created by governments. They use our tax dollars, or borrow money from foreign governments or agents to purchase and prop up companies that the market would not purchase from or support. The auto industry is not the only industries the government does this to. Remember Solyndra?

 The other side of artificial demand and one that I really do not care to get into – because it makes me sick – is subsidies. There is so much to them and they are so prevalent that when you actually look at them – all of them – you have no other choice but to accept the fact that our market is not, a free market.

 Did you know there is an agribusiness in southern California that brings in more in government subsidies than its product is worth? What I mean is if they received no money from any government they would actually lose money every year! And they don’t even grow necessary food stuffs.

 It is true that whenever you subsidize something, you get more of it. If the government creates an artificial demand by subsidizing a particular industry or product, then there will be an increase in the supply for that product. Simply because as more and more producers become aware of the subsidy, they will want to climb aboard that gravy train. Just look at corn, cotton, soy, cars and green energy.

 The problem with subsidies is at least two fold. In addition to having serious moral and ethical problems, they also lead to a false sense of security for the industry. They create a false demand for a product that the open market, or consumers, cannot or will not sustain.

 The other issue is price setting or fixing and price deflation. Cotton producing countries have sued the US and won over unfair price advantages due to subsidizing of crops and products. When a producer receives a subsidy from the government, it essentially allows the producer to charge whatever price he wishes because he knows he will receive that check form the government to cover his “losses”. This creates an unfair advantage in the market and can and most often will lead to the loss of another market competitor that does not receive subsidies. Look to the Flood Insurance market for proof of this.

 The second part to this is when government subsidies created the artificial demand and the market does not or cannot respond to it quickly. What this does is establishes an over abundance of supply, which in turn, causes the prices of these products to decrease. The price depreciation requires that the government increase the amount of each subsidy to cover losses. It’s a self perpetuating cycle that can only be corrected when the market is given sufficient time and means to react to the problem. However, the reaction and correction is often severe or at least unlike any realistic correction a free market would impose. For an example, look at the corn-ethanol-subsidy relationship.

 A few years ago the demand for corn to produce ethanol increased dramatically due to a broadened filed of government subsidies. But here is the idiotic part; the government paid these farmers to grow corn that was ultimately made into ethanol and then added to gas. So we essentially grew a bunch of corn, and then burned it up. That caused the price of corn and corn based products to spike. Moronic…

 The ironic thing about most of this free market stuff is that I have never read any books written by Mises or Paul or any other economist. Most of the stuff I have learned, I learned from a fishing website. Talk of water rights led to the subsidy issue, which led to the demand issue, which led to the market question. All of that led to government intervention and then I took a look at our monetary policy and the fiat instrument we use.

 It is literally mind blowing when you start to actually go down into the rabbit hole. Most of this stuff I started looking into before I listened to Ron Paul. Before I watched that first youtube video at my brother’s house back in 2007, I knew about subsidies, free market principles and government intervention. I started looking more deeply because my wife and I were looking to buy our first home together.

 If we are serious when we ask ourselves questions related to the economy, then we can really only come up with answers that support Ron Paul.

Should we have sound money?

 Yes. My son can drink a gallon of milk a day. Do you know how expensive milk has become?

Should the government be involved in, try to stimulate or regulate the economy?

 No. Let me spend my money the way I see fit. Stop taking our money and giving it to you friends or spending it on things we don’t need or want.

What style of market will best benefit me and others like me?

 A free Market will be beneficial to all that operate or consume in it. The closed market that we now operate and consume in only benefits a select few and I can tell you, we the 99%, are not among them.

Should we have a truly free market?

 Yes, yes we should. Freedom is always best. Freedom is popular.

 I have since looked into quite a bit and now, honestly, I have to say - Ron Paul isn’t as crazy as they make him out to be.

The Problem with My “Crazy Uncle Ron”

Part 1 – Foreign Policy

The problem with my crazy uncle is that he, actually, isn’t crazy at all.

 He gets a lot of criticism from the MSM, his coworkers and the general population for a host of things, but I think first and foremost is his clear polar-opposite ideals concerning foreign policy. I think there is a plethora of disinformation, political opposition, ignorance and just plain confusion, propagated and perpetuated largely by the media and the American people’s penchant for believing everything they see and hear on TV regarding his views.

 I understand where the confusion comes from, but at the same time I do not understand where the confusion comes from. Let’s look at it from a completely objective perspective. Let’s just pretend for a brief moment that I do not support Dr. Paul, but I am trying to determine if he really is off-base with his positions. I have heard a lot about this guy running for president and I want to see what his deal is.

 So what exactly is/are his foreign policy position(s)?

1. We do not give aid to any foreign nation unless the people have given their approval and the house has voted for it. (Natural disasters, Humanitarian efforts)
2. We refrain from intervening in the day to day business of foreign governments.
3. We refrain from intervening in wars, whether they are internal of external, unless those wars directly affect American interests, or the safety and security of the American people.
4. We do not go to war unless attacked; waging only just wars and not wars of aggression.
5. We do not go to war unless we follow the law of our land and declare the war.
6. We outline a specific set of goals and parameters that we hope to achieve via military action.
7. We establish a set of accomplishments that will allow us to determine if and when victory has been achieved.
8. We do not rebuild those nations we have made war upon.
9. We do not rebuild nations that our allies have made war upon.
10. We do not build any nation other than our own, especially through means of violence, coercion or bribery.
11. We come home after we achieve victory.

Those 11 points are very cut, dried and simplistic in view. Objectively, I would even say that they are akin to the “Golden Rule”.

 We have rules, policies and laws regarding bullying in schools, but yet it seems we are completely apathetic with respect to bullying internationally. If you walk around punching and kicking people just because they disagree with you, sooner or later you will find yourself back into a corner by a very angry mob. In simplistic; it’s the law of nature and that’s just the way it is.

 On the surface, I am starting to think that Ron Paul is actually not all that crazy after all. His foreign policy stances are, in fact, reasonable and logical. But, I am still not convinced that I can vote for the guy…after all, the MSM seems to have it out for him. I want to look at each point a little closer and maybe ask a few reasonable questions about each one.

We do not give aid to any foreign nation unless the people have given their approval and the house has voted for it. (Natural disasters, Humanitarian efforts)

 Ok, I get that. I think America and her people have enough troubles at home, fiscally and morally, and we have a greater need to keep as much money as we can here in the states. It stands to reason that if we stop sending billions to other countries, that we may even be able to pay down the debt, or lower taxes. Both of those are good, in my opinion.

 However, I don’t want to cause any problems with struggling nations that need this money to stave off terrorists and dictatorships.

 I am trying to justify this rationality, but I have read more than a few articles and consumed information from other sources that are at odds with this logic. We gave the Pakistani government money and they were harboring Osama! We gave Egypt money and now look at them. We gave Libya money and look at them too. The list goes on and it seems the deeper I dig, the more the case for foreign aid becomes a fallacy.

 I am also finding out that the money we give to these governments rarely makes it down to the people. So the humanitarian argument has to be thrown out. So I guess, after all, we probably shouldn’t be taxing the American people to send money to foreign governments, because in the end, it doesn’t do any good. I mean if we gave one billion to a nation of 300 million, they should each receive something like three thousand dollars, but I don’t think they do. It seems to me like the government is keeping it and doing something other than helping its people.

 Hell, I’d like to have that three thousand, that’s ¾ of my sons’ yearly tuition.

We refrain from intervening in the day to day business of foreign governments.

 Well yeah, I can’t see how any rational, logical, thinking or responsible person would disagree with this. I don’t think we would like it if Russia said we couldn’t build TV’s because China needs the work and money. I think we would tell Russia to take a walk.

We refrain from intervening in wars, whether they are internal of external, unless those wars directly affect American interests, or the safety and security of the American people.

This one is also pretty reasonable and logical. If they haven’t bombed us or our property in their or any other country, we should let them sort out their own affairs. I mean, if I see two men fighting in the street, I’m not going to go and break it up. Why would I? I don’t know why they are fighting and quite frankly, it’s none of my business. They’re grown men, it’s their business. As long as they don’t get too close to my property or family, I have no interest in it, other than entertainment.

We do not go to war unless attacked; waging only just wars and not wars of aggression.

 Again, from a rational, logical perspective, I see no issue with this. I’m an adult and as an adult I understand the concept of self defense versus aggression and offense.

 If some stranger walked up to me and said, “Hey, I think I might want to punch you in the face.” I wouldn’t automatically punch him in his face, just to prevent him from punching me in my face. That’s kind of dumb.

 I might say something to the effect of; I have no issue with him and ask why he’d want to punch me. Then I’d tell him that it would not be the smartest thing to do on his part. I would try to understand his problem and get out of the situation, if possible. If not, I would ask him if he wants to go home, or to the hospital.

 It’s kind of stupid to think that it’s okay to punch a guy because he threw some words at me. I would like to think that I’m better than that and that I have better control of my emotions. It’s one thing to throw words, but throwing punches is another issue.

We do not go to war unless we follow the law of our land and declare the war.

Well, yeah I get this one too. After all, we are supposed to be a nation of laws and the supreme law of the land states that the congress, and only the congress, has the power to declare wars. It’s kind of silly to argue that we couldn’t declare the war because it would take too long, or that we had to wait until the congress was back in session. No, actually we have provision for that. Congress can be called back for emergencies and in this day and age of technology and instant gratification, they could have a declaration typed up and ready for a vote in an hour.

 The other argument, that a declaration is not needed is also a bit silly and ridiculous. The president can authorize military action in an emergency, but beyond that he has no power to declare and wage war. The war needs to be declared so everyone knows what enemy we are fighting and why. That’s fairly simple.

We outline a specific set of goals and parameters that we hope to achieve via military action.

Duh. Who doesn’t like goals? There is nothing wrong with setting goals. They help to keep the action on task and serve as morale boosting milestones. I think everyone on earth has at least one goal.

We establish a set of accomplishments that will allow us to determine if and when victory has been achieved.

Yes, again with the goals. I mean, seriously, how could we possibly tell if we have won, if we don’t even know what we are fighting for? We knew we had to kill Hitler. We knew we had to depose or kill the emperor. Kill the army to get to the leaders…simple, yet effective.

What was the purpose of the Korean War?

Look at Vietnam; why the hell were we there? What were we supposed to do? What kind of victory were we looking for?

I don’t even want to talk about the fiascos in the Middle East. Talk about a clear as mud set of goals and mission objectives. Kill all terrorists. Yes, that’s awesome! Umm…who exactly are the terrorists then?

We do not rebuild those nations we have made war upon.

We do not rebuild nations that our allies have made war upon.

We do not build any nation other than our own through means of violence, coercion or bribery.

We can lump all these together into the same category, because, in reality, they are all the same category.

 Looking at this from a layman’s perspective, from a guy that has no college education and from a guy that has only recently (last few years) started looking into this stuff, the idea of foreign nation building, is completely ridiculous, immoral, asinine, insulting, degrading, tyrannical, stupid, wasteful of lives, time and money and to put it simply, a fucking farce.

We have roads, bridges, schools, and buildings falling apart here.

We have thousands upon thousands of homeless people here.

We have families that are struggling to make ends meet here.

We have children that are born into and perpetuate poverty here.

We have people starving and eating out of trash cans here.

This sad, pathetic list goes on and on…

 The daily cost of the Iraq war is around 720 million dollars. Let’s assume that a small fraction of that daily money is for the rebuilding of that nation’s infrastructure- 20 million.

 For twenty million dollars we could pay the mortgages on one hundred, 200 thousand dollar homes – every day! Now multiply that by 30, now by 365. We could rebuild one bridge, fix countless roads, build new schools and hire more teachers and so many other things here, in America.

 What really makes me sick and pisses me off about this whole nation-building fiasco is this: We invade countries for whatever reason, then we bomb the hell out of them and destroy their infrastructure, then we borrow money from the Federal Reserve, the taxpayers and China to pay private companies hundreds of millions of dollars to rebuild the shit that we blew up….in another country!

 Me thinks we should just stop blowing shit up and start taking care of America and Americans. Rebuild this nation first.

We come home after we achieve victory.

Hell yes we should come home. Why would we keep them their? We have already completed all mission objectives. We have smashed the enemy and their ability to make war. We have waged war unequivocally and set an example of our might and dedication. We don’t need to waste our soldier’s time by keeping them in-country. They have already won and they deserve some rest, relaxation and time with their friends and families.

 Let’s let them cool off over there for a month or so, and then let’s bring them home to cool off for another month, and then they can go on their merry way with the gratitude and respect of the American people for a job well done.

 Keeping them around for years to “keep the peace” and “protect American interests” is a pile of malarkey. What interest should we have in a country that has attacked us and has been destroyed in retaliation? Should we build an embassy there? Hell no, if they want to be friends again let them take the first step and build the embassy for us.

 To be completely honest, I would feel much safer knowing there were a couple hundred thousand trained soldiers walking around the cities and towns of America.

 I have a few soldiers in my group of friends and family. Some of them are older and some of them are around my age, but all of them seem to agree on one thing, “I did my job, now I want to go home and see my family. I want a hamburger and French fries.” I think they have earned it.

  After looking at all this, asking myself question after question and trying to find a reasonable and logical example – any example or reason for that matter – to be at odds with Ron Paul’s foreign policy…I just can’t. I mean I really can’t do it. It just makes sense to me and I think when you look at all the questions, then answer them truthfully with fact based arguments, you really won’t have any reason to not support them either.

 So, in summation, my “crazy uncle Ron”, gets my vote on foreign policy as I just cannot rationalize any other perspective.

In Liberty,

 Richard Camacho