Great Clip of Harry Browne From 1970

[MediumTex]

There was another three minute clip from this interview posted a while back, but this is a ten minute clip of a different segment, and it's really outstanding.

Note the pompous dope in the middle.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jK01aLsKw7w

[craigr]

Outstanding.

[Reub]

Mr. Browne was as impressive as ever!

The other guy was a pompous ass who actually compared gold to peanuts.

Looking back at it, we know who was right.

[moda0306]

That was really something.

I don't think I've ever seen such arrogance on display as his opponent.  He seemed to have no direction or clarity to what he was trying to say, either.

And imagine HB 10 years later, then having to put his ego on check and rethink the inflationary narrative. 

[SteveGo]

I believe the pompous guy was Eliot Janeway. As I remember him he was always pompous, and wrong about as often as he was right. Pretty much like any main stream economic/political pundit today. The fact that he generally went out of his way to be snarky, made him silghtly more interesting, but not much.

[Lone Wolf]

Great clip.  The two combatants here are just not in the same weight class.

I found it very difficult to decode the middle guy's meandering nonsense.  If he had (as promised) a point to make, he kept it well-hidden.  (If only I could conceal my "peanut-like" gold bullion so well.)

[AdamA]

That is a great clip.  More than the actual discussion content, I like some of HB's side comments.  "I didn't say we, I said the government."  "Now he's not only an economist, but also a psychiatrist and a mind reader." 

I think such distinctions were probably just as important to HB as the topic being discussed. 

[moda0306]

Great clip.  The two combatants here are just not in the same weight class.

I found it very difficult to decode the middle guy's meandering nonsense.  If he had (as promised) a point to make, he kept it well-hidden.  (If only I could conceal my "peanut-like" gold bullion so well.)

I know LW!!... he seemed like a cremudgeonly old man who is mad because he can't organize nor articulate his thoughts, and the frustration with that makes his presentation even worse.... it almost seemed unfair.  I had no idea what he was actually trying to say.... maybe something about government price-setting being relatively benign in nature, not really affecting anything in the markets... especially for an item that isn't commonly traded or used any more... but I'm just guessing here.

[Gumby]

Great clip.  The two combatants here are just not in the same weight class.

I found it very difficult to decode the middle guy's meandering nonsense.  If he had (as promised) a point to make, he kept it well-hidden.  (If only I could conceal my "peanut-like" gold bullion so well.)

I know LW!!... he seemed like a cremudgeonly old man who is mad because he can't organize nor articulate his thoughts, and the frustration with that makes his presentation even worse.... it almost seemed unfair.  I had no idea what he was actually trying to say.... maybe something about government price-setting being relatively benign in nature, not really affecting anything in the markets... especially for an item that isn't commonly traded or used any more... but I'm just guessing here.

The middle guy was Eliot Janeway. He kept talking over HB. Definitely not cool. Even William F. Buckley, Jr seemed a bit annoyed. But, HB kept his composure very well.

[Alanw]

Eliot Janeway was overmatched in the debate arena and knew it.  The only way he could compete was to talk in nonsensical circles so HB never had a chance to fully respond. 

[PP67]

All I could think of as I watched the clip was how much Harry Browne looked like Chevy Chase...

[HB Reader]

Janeway's reaction is a classic example of trying to "shoot the messenger" who brings you an uncomfortable truth -- i.e., the US dollar was grossly overvalued and the Bretton Woods system couldn't survive.   HB ran into this reaction all the time in the 1970s, at least until it became clear later in the decade that he had been right.

What particularly seemed to inflame many "mainstream" people in the 1970's was his suggestion that you have a physical retreat, or at least a well-considered disaster plan, in the event of a SHTF scenario.  Even though he only devoted a few pages to the possibility in each of his books, many reviewers and commentators reacted as if the central theme of his writings was the upcoming end of western civilization.  I think a lot of them (like Janeway) just didn't like hearing "disruptive" ideas of any kind, but knew they couldn't refute the main themes of his books.  He finally stopped discussing the topic altogether because it became such a distraction and, in any case, he was not "predicting" such an outcome -- merely pointing out it was a possibility.  He also freely admitted that he was not an expert on the subject of retreats.

                 

[craigr]

I always found it funny that if you own gold mainstream economists and politicians will tell you its not necessary. This, when many major central banks and governments have their own gold reserves.

Then they will make fun of people for having something like a retreat (don't have one myself but don't find the idea of a "vacation home" away from major cities a bad idea). Yet every major government has exactly the same thing for high level officials and bureaucrats in terms of bunkers and backup facilities scattered around.

[MediumTex]

I always found it funny that if you own gold mainstream economists and politicians will tell you its not necessary. This, when many major central banks and governments have their own gold reserves.

Then they will make fun of people for having something like a retreat (don't have one myself but don't find the idea of a "vacation home" away from major cities a bad idea). Yet every major government has exactly the same thing for high level officials and bureaucrats in terms of bunkers and backup facilities scattered around.

...and U.S. citizens are discouraged from having secret offshore accounts, while the U.S. government is engaged in endless secret activities all over the world.

The common retort is that the U.S. government engages in secret activities to protect U.S. citizens, but isn't that why the U.S. citizen would want a foreign account in the first place--i.e., to protect himself?  Why would it be okay for the government to protect me by using a certain tool or practice, but not okay for me to protect myself using the exact same tool or practice?

It's a funny thing once you start to look at it in this way.

[AdamA]

...and U.S. citizens are discouraged from having secret offshore accounts, while the U.S. government is engaged in endless secret activities all over the world.

Speaking of...I received the following in an email from my accountant today.

For the second consecutive year, the IRS has reopened its Offshore Voluntary Disclosure Program or OVDP. Many taxpayers unknowingly violate federal tax laws by failing to report income from foreign accounts or assets.

I love the use of the word "voluntary" in this "program."