There aren't very many people I can admire in American public life, so it is always very disappointing to see the few I do going after one another instead of working together. Donald Trump is often a classy guy. He built a hugely successful business and brand, and for that I deeply respect him. I admire his can-do attitude that allows nothing to get in the way of his vision and his dedication to absolute excellence. He is one of the few people with enough gall and fortitude to actually address our national problems. He could stare down Ben Bernanke and the Fed, saying simply 'you're fired,' and unlike Reagan or Kennedy, honestly not have to worry about follow up assassination attempts. I am always skeptical when businessmen make a move to the political arena, just look at Mitt Romney or Michael Bloomberg. But I thought because of Trump's grit and demonstrated commitment to accountability and the exceptional need for these traits in the political sphere to effectively address our problems, Trump could be an exception. He still can. But I think he's on the wrong track. I wrote him this letter after his recent interview on Newsmax.tv:
"Dear Mr. Trump:
It was with great excitement that I discovered your interview on Newsmax.tv. As a former employee of a republican congressman who shares your deep concern about our economic future, I was very interested to hear of your dedication to the economic preeminence of the United States. While the interview communicated your awareness of our national situation and I believe few others possess the personal resolve to adopt the necessary solutions, I am somewhat concerned with the focus of your solutions.
While the price of oil and the loss of our manufacturing jobs remain barriers to our own economic progress, there is much we can do on our own to address our economic conundrum. China and OPEC must eventually conform to the dictates of economic reality, but it does little good to confront our neighbors from a compromised negotiation position. China would have difficulty securing the massive dollar holdings necessary to devalue its currency, if Washington did not insist on the vast issuance of treasury bonds. Indeed, the yuan-dollar exchange rate is equally a burden to many Chinese, whose consumption of U.S. goods is restricted by a lack of purchasing power, because of our government’s commitment to supplying the Chinese central bank with hordes of treasury obligations.
Similarly, while OPEC no doubt has an impact on the price of oil, often detrimental to the short term interests of our oil dependent industries, even in absence of OPEC, the true market price of oil is impossible to determine in view of the constant manipulation of the components of the money supply by our Federal Reserve. An accurate picture of the availability of loanable resources for economic growth and a corresponding constellation of prices in the commodity markets is consistently obscured by the creation of new, fiat loanable funds by our central bank. Many projects, such as our recent massive housing bonanza, are undertaken in light of inaccurate market signals which are later revealed through an adjustment of commodity prices (often upwards) to have been based solely on the mirage of loanable funds created by a Greenspan or Bernanke. OPEC may be a problem, but a short term limitation of the availability of oil is far less detrimental to our economy than the actual waste of such resources on projects which by their very nature could not be completed given the actual array of loanable resources in absence of monetary manipulation.
Having built a web design and hosting business in high school and being involved currently in the investment management field, I am well aware of the obstacles expanding businesses face. As someone who does not currently hold a typical job, but is dependent upon my own entrepreneurial efforts for income, the regulations and taxes I face on a daily basis have allowed me little headway in my efforts. With all due respect, Mr. Trump, getting our own house in order will go a much longer way towards addressing our problems than effectively confronting our competitors. Indeed, the first people we must confront, for which I believe only you have the resolve, are those constituencies at home which benefit from our current economic morass."
This letter was written, of course, prior to Mr. Trump's recent assertion that 'Ron Paul can't get elected.' Well, Mr. Trump, it should be equally clear that America won't get on the path to prosperity without adopting Mr. Paul's policy proposals. So instead of attacking candidate Paul, why don't you outline some proposals of your own that will get us back on the road to prosperity? Outline some proposals that hold domestic policymakers, bureaucrats and politicians accountable, instead of laying all the blame at the door of foreign institutions. Is America really so weak in your view that we can't make progress without beating up China? Like Piers Morgan pointed out in your recent CNN interview, isn't your approach some kind of convoluted passive-aggressivism? Did the Egyptian people sit around and mope that America funded their dictator and military or did they stiffen up and say, "Hosni... You're fired.' Instead of countering those dedicated to effective change in your own party, shouldn't you be confronting those in our government that brazenly stand in the way of such change? Why not try to co-op the Paul youth movement by embracing their goals and praising Paul as a potential running mate?
Why not Trump-Paul 2012?