Talk:Peter Schiff: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
{{calm talk|small=yes}}
MiszaBot I (talk | contribs)
234,552 edits
Line 3: Line 3:
|archiveheader = {{talkarchivenav}}
|archiveheader = {{talkarchivenav}}
|maxarchivesize = 200k
|maxarchivesize = 200k
|counter = 2
|counter = 11
|algo = old(30d)
|algo = old(30d)
|archive = Talk:Peter Schiff/Archive %(counter)d
|archive = Talk:Peter Schiff/Archive %(counter)d
Line 39: Line 39:
<!-- templates end-->
<!-- templates end-->


== So Schiff Has no M.B.A.? ==
== Patriotism Criticism ==


I am removing the criticism that Schiff is "anti-american", because, quite frankly, it is immature and adds absolutely nothing at all of interest to the article.
--[[Special:Contributions/81.99.118.248|81.99.118.248]] ([[User talk:81.99.118.248|talk]]) 15:01, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
: Why? You could change that instead of removing i.e. "some people think that he is anti-american" and give links to youtube or articles on internet. There is a lot of criticism of Schiff... [[Special:Contributions/78.36.185.189|78.36.185.189]] ([[User talk:78.36.185.189|talk]]) 15:17, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

::The criticism of Schiff obviously has a place in the article, but that should be criticism from an economic or entrepreneurial point of view, not some dimwitted hillbillies waving the American flag calling him anti-american just because he doesn't support the administration. In fact, many would argue that being critical of the government is the most patriotic, American thing you can do. Therefore, the discussion of how patriotic/unpatriotic Peter Schiff is has no place in the wikipedia article.
[[User:Misessus|Misessus]] ([[User talk:Misessus|talk]]) 21:09, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

It is a flagrant misrepresentation of patriotism to say that if one is critical of government, he is unpatriotic. In fact, the founding fathers were patriotic precisely because they were critical--to the point of violence--of the government. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/66.60.109.74|66.60.109.74]] ([[User talk:66.60.109.74|talk]]) 15:09, 22 July 2009 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

== Related to ''The'' Schiffs? ==
Does anyone know if he and his father ([[Irwin Schiff]]) are related to the famous [[Schiff family]] (especially [[Jacob Schiff]] -- [[:Category:Schiff family]])? --[[User:Wassermann|Wassermann]] 09:53, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

== So Schiff Has no M.B.A.? ==
It would appear that Schiff has no M.B.A., no M.S. in finance, and no Ph.D. in economics. This is extremely relevant because Schiff is often on TV presenting himself as an expert on the economy who is capable of predicting trends. Obviously, a person can be correct about a trend without formal education in that area, but it is also true that you want a dentist, doctor, lawyer, etc. with formal training. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/70.44.153.18|70.44.153.18]] ([[User talk:70.44.153.18|talk]]) 00:07, 29 June 2009 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
It would appear that Schiff has no M.B.A., no M.S. in finance, and no Ph.D. in economics. This is extremely relevant because Schiff is often on TV presenting himself as an expert on the economy who is capable of predicting trends. Obviously, a person can be correct about a trend without formal education in that area, but it is also true that you want a dentist, doctor, lawyer, etc. with formal training. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/70.44.153.18|70.44.153.18]] ([[User talk:70.44.153.18|talk]]) 00:07, 29 June 2009 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->


Line 63: Line 50:


Concerning Peter Schiff's possible senate run... Is it really necessary or encyclopedia worthy to link out to a coming soon page, anyone can buy a domain name and throw a logo up. I agree if this were a working website that would be one thing but that site has not changed for 3 months. Should we remove voteschiff.com until the developer puts a serious website up? [[User:ajacreative|ajacreative]] ([[User talk:ajacreative|talk]]) 08:20, 9 March 200p (PST) <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/75.57.0.136|75.57.0.136]] ([[User talk:75.57.0.136|talk]]) </span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
Concerning Peter Schiff's possible senate run... Is it really necessary or encyclopedia worthy to link out to a coming soon page, anyone can buy a domain name and throw a logo up. I agree if this were a working website that would be one thing but that site has not changed for 3 months. Should we remove voteschiff.com until the developer puts a serious website up? [[User:ajacreative|ajacreative]] ([[User talk:ajacreative|talk]]) 08:20, 9 March 200p (PST) <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/75.57.0.136|75.57.0.136]] ([[User talk:75.57.0.136|talk]]) </span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

== Photo? ==
It would be real nice if we could get a public domain and/or fair-use photo of this guy. Perhaps it can be a still-frame off of one of his television appearances? It would really enhance the attention the article gets. [[Special:Contributions/76.171.53.59|76.171.53.59]] ([[User talk:76.171.53.59|talk]]) 15:35, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

== "Accurate" forecasts ==

This page seems to be written largely by fans of Mr. Schiff's. It notes a few cases in which market downturns coincided with his predictions, essentially making him out to be a hero. He may in fact be a hero, but it isn't Wikipedia's place to judge. So I am not sure what to do with this. I may revisit it later. [[User:Mr. Bergstrom|Mr. Bergstrom]] ([[User talk:Mr. Bergstrom|talk]]) 21:14, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
:It wouldn't be the first time Wikipedia deleted Mr. Schiff's article and ignored his opinion. If you want to add a controversy or criticism section, be my guest, but as long as reality is favoring Mr. Schiff's predictions I can't imagine you'll have much to say.--[[User:Waxsin|Waxsin]] ([[User talk:Waxsin|talk]]) 17:10, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
:It would be nice to see what he was predicting in the 90's and how that compared with reality. If someone predicts recession for 15 years, they're bound to be right at some point. Though clearly, he predicted more than just some garden variety recession. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/24.6.175.104|24.6.175.104]] ([[User talk:24.6.175.104|talk]]) 17:08, 13 November 2008 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

Nathan: I just watched the YouTube video about his predictions. I'm not really a fan of Schiff, but I can't deny that the dude was right (At least about the stuff on the YouTube video). <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/74.129.191.163|74.129.191.163]] ([[User talk:74.129.191.163|talk]]) 02:26, 26 November 2008 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

AS has been already mentioned,constantly predicting a recession will result in you being correct occasionally.It should also be pointed out that many economists saw the potential for a market melt down given the collapse of the housing market which basically meant a massive reduction in equity for the banks.Given the fact that Mr.Schiff now predicts this huge loss of money will result in hyperinflation I predict that no one will look at him as a prophet anymore. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/204.191.236.24|204.191.236.24]] ([[User talk:204.191.236.24|talk]]) 16:15, 13 December 2008 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

:<i> "Mr.Schiff now predicts this huge loss of money will result in hyperinflation"</i>. His prediction is that the <b>government response</b> to current market deleveraging will result in hyperinflation. 18:36, 12 January 2009 (UTC)Anon


This argument stems from the accusation that someone is baseless in their claims and it was coincidental that they were correct. I do not believe this was the case with Schiff because the basis of his claims have been around since 1913. His entire argument is that since the government manipulates the markets, they are going to cause problems, and they then try to postpone the problems they caused by creating more problems, proliferating the original problem (See austrian explanation of the great depression). Based on this, I do not see a valid claim that he was simply 'crying wolf constantly with the hopes of one day having a wolf show up'. He saw the wolf on the hill and is warning that there is a wolf on the hill, he has physical and historical evidence to back him up and there is, in fact, that inevitability. He also appears to give timelines for most things, including but not limited to the housing price collapse (07-08) and the (now) fact that the latter would produce a credit situation, the price of gold hitting over $1000 an ounce (08) and his current prediction that the price of gold per ounce will break $2000 by the end of this year (09). <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/76.84.48.122|76.84.48.122]] ([[User talk:76.84.48.122|talk]]) 03:23, 7 January 2009 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

::I find the constant whining about "If you keep predicting a crash you will right at some point" quite rediculous and a clear sign that some people are really disgruntled. The man wrote a damn book on the coming crash, for heaven's sake. In 2006 and 2007, he wasn't just predicting the crash, he was explaining in great detail exactly why the crash was coming, at a time when he was litterally laughed out of the debate. But he is far from alone, no Austrian economist was surprised by the crash, even though everyone else was completely dumbfounded.

::It is perfectly fine not to agree with him on everything and of course EuroPac -clients will lose money in times like these, but to try to dismiss by whining about "if you keep predicting..." is pure and simple denial and intellctually dishonest.
[[User:Misessus|Misessus]] ([[User talk:Misessus|talk]]) 21:59, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Euro-pac clients have lost a lot of money because Peter Schiff predicted the US dollar would crash so he shorted it.The dollar actually got stronger because Peter was very wrong.He also says that China and the rest of the world will decouple itself from the US.This is ridiculous because it suggests that manufacturing nations will dump their biggest clients.And his whole hyperinflation thing is simply not panning out due to the extreme lack of capital.Hyperinflation won't happen in the future either because the Federal Reserve can deflate the economy by selling securities once the economy gets going again.So Peter Schiff,much like many other people including Alan Greenspan,was right about there being a bubble.However,he was wrong in so many other ways this internet love affair between him and people who are curious about the economy is quite unwarranted. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/204.191.236.24|204.191.236.24]] ([[User talk:204.191.236.24|talk]]) 22:29, 29 March 2009 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

::It is hardly accurate to claim that Peter Schiff was "very" wrong to predict a weakening dollar, considering he invests for the long term. Bear rallies are not uncommon, but seldom long lasting, and with the Fed publicly announcing it will buy a trillion worth of T-bills, you know the dollar will weaken again, which it did. Also, when foreign creditors like China will stop lending money to the US in combination with massive budget deficits, this will surely lead to further weakened dollar. The Chinese government is already saying they don't want to lend more money to the US. So how rediculous was it really?

::The fact of the matter is that the people who came in late in 2008 and made substantial paper losses have already regained most of that those losses. And in any case, people who followed the advice of those professing the strength of the US financial system and financial institutions, US manufacturing and retail industry, US real estate industry and so forth, lost much, much more than the EuroPac -clients without any hope of ever regaining those losses.

::And just to point out what should be fairly obvious, a client that can't pay its bill (like the US consumer and the US government) is not very much of a client. It is the mystic belief that the world is dependent on US consumption that is rediculous. There 6 billion non-americans in the world who are quite able of consuming. Thus far, it seems that places like China and India have been the largest markets for everyone except the Chinese and Indians. Once they start to serve their own consumers instead of the American consumers, they'll be fine.

::Regarding hyperinflation, there is already enough dollars in the world to cause that. If any of the largest US creditors would decide to dump their dollar reserve, the hyperinflation would be a fact. To think that the Fed, the very institution who has created the actual possibility of hyperinflation, would be able to stop it is not thing short of ludicrous. Also, the extreme lack of capital is one of the things that makes the threat of hyperinflation so real, as lack of capital is the lack of savings, something common for all countries with high inflation levels. And what do you mean by "once the economy gets going"? The whole point is that the economy won't "get going" as long as government keeps interfering this way. Who do you think it is who is supposed to buy the securities to deflate the economy? Its the banks and the financial institutions who are sitting on multi trillion dollar losses right now, most of whom have been kept afloat only thanks to the printing press of the Fed. Talk about contradicting logic.

::So if I were you, I wouldn't speak too loudly about the economy and who was right and who was wrong, because clearly you don't have a clue. Your comparison between Greenspan and Schiff is ample proof of that. Greenspan was the very architect of our present crisis. He is as clueless as Bernanke, Paulson Geithner, Obama and the whole host of politicians, bureaucrats, pundits and court economists who well into 2008 said that everything was alright and that the economy had never been stronger, particularly the real estate and financial industries.
[[User:Misessus|Misessus]] ([[User talk:Misessus|talk]]) 21:05, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Well Greenspan's biggest contribution to this crisis was his push for deregulation of derivatives.Isn't Peter Schiff a big fan of deregulation?And Greenspan coined the term irrational exuberance which is the cause of bubbles.What did you think that term meant?

Peter's biggest problem seems to be that he thinks the whole world thinks like him but the fact of the matter is no one wants to dump the US dollar because the world economy very much depends on the American economy to be strong.The Chinese recognize this so it doesn't matter if Peter thinks they ought to decouple because they know what their country needs better than Peter.They are quite worried about all the jobs they have already lost so they are going to pass on Peter's advice of let it all crash so some brand new super economy can rise from the ashes.

No one is saying that the system doesn't need work but Peter's solution of let the whole thing crash and regrow is not much of a solution.Reforms are best done while the economy is strong and can handle adjustments. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/204.191.236.24|204.191.236.24]] ([[User talk:204.191.236.24|talk]]) 01:25, 3 April 2009 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

::Again, one has to be careful with what words one use and in what context. The so called deregulation of the derivatives is irrelevant compared to the hundreds of billions Greenspan injected to stave off the dot.com bubble and the artificial low interest rates he maintained for the first half of this decade. That is the main cause of today’s crisis.

::Yes, Peter Schiff is a big fan of deregulation but the kind most people mean when they (falsely) use the word. There seem to be some sort of misconception about what has taken place in the US financial market over the past few decades. The constant lamenting about “deregulated” markets is preposterous. There are over 12.000 full time federal regulators overseeing the financial markets, divided into seven different authorities, the SEC being the top dog of course. Now, it is an undeniable fact that these bureaucrats are both hopelessly incompetent and utterly corrupted (Bernie Madoff case in point), but there is no lack of neither regulators nor regulations.

::Austrians, like Peter Schiff, wants to get rid of all the special provisions that enable financials institutions to engage in fraud and counterfeiting. Mainly, the want to abolish the Fed, introduce sound money and outlaw fractional reserve banking. Do that, and the market will regulate itself. Without all the funny money and lender of last resort, none of the crazyness we have seen the last 10 or 20 years would have been possible. That is true deregulation, and that is what is needed.

::I don’t want to speculate what Greenspan meant with that phrase, but the verbal acrobatics of mainstream bureaucrats are meaningless, much like the notorious “paradox of thrift”, which of course is no paradox at all.

::“Peter thinks that the whole world thinks like him”? Where in the world did you get that idea? He’s been out in the wilderness for most of his career and he is fully aware of it, he’s pointed out that fact several times. No Austrian thinks the world thinks like him. We are all painfully aware of our minority position. Ironic though, how Austrians always get so much more attention when there’s a crisis on. That is because Austrians are always the only ones who saw it coming, and, more importantly, knew why it was coming.

::The world does not depend on the American economy being strong. That is an illusion deficit spenders and dimwitted hillbillies have created for themselves to justify their unsustainable ways of life. No one, and I do mean no one, needs a customer who empties your store but never pays the bill. Common sense should be enough to figure that one out.

::China has starting to do exactly what Peter has said they will do, decoupling themselves from the dollar. They’ve said that they won’t be buying trillions in US Treasury bill, and they have been pushing for a new reserve currency, even though they don’t need it. That is decoupling. China is the largest US creditor. Of course they are worried about the possibility of all their dollars losing value, but its far better to get out now then to wait for a complete collapse. And judging by the rhetoric coming from Beijing, they are beginning to realize that. In addition, with the US consumer utterly broke, he is no longer as attractive as he once was. And I’m fairly sure that the Chinese and others have learnt that they can’t base their economy on the consumerism of one nation. They will diversify as well, away from their former dependency on the US consumer.

::The economy isn’t strong, it is in a state of collapse! For heaven’s sake man! Look at what happened to Japan when they tried propping up zombie companies and banks. They’re well into their second lost decade. Look at what happened to the US in the 1930-ies. Better still, look at what happened to the US in the depression of 1920-1921. It was a complete crash, but the government let it crash, let the market handle it. A year or so later, the US economy was booming again.

::It’s not Peter Schiff’s solution, it isn’t even the Austrian solution, it is the market’s solution. This recession neither can nor needs to be fixed by politicians and bureaucrats. It is quite simply the market’s way of correcting decades of deficit spending financed with the printing press. It has happened hundreds if not thousands of times through the course of human history. It is economic law and it cannot be circumvented. That’s just the way it is.
::[[User:Misessus|Misessus]] ([[User talk:Misessus|talk]]) 20:24, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

:::''Austrians, like Peter Schiff, wants to get rid of all the special provisions that enable financials institutions to engage in fraud and counterfeiting. Mainly, the want to abolish the Fed, introduce sound money and outlaw fractional reserve banking. Do that, and the market will regulate itself. Without all the funny money and lender of last resort, none of the crazyness we have seen the last 10 or 20 years would have been possible. That is true deregulation, and that is what is needed.''

:::Because the market regulated itself perfectly when there was sound money and no regulation. There weren't any bank runs, panics, or depressions in the nineteenth century where there. Nuh-uh, no-way, can't be. [[User:Squiems|Squiems]] ([[User talk:Squiems|talk]]) 20:45, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

== Betting victory? ==

Shouldn't someone include his bet in 2006 and his subsequent victory against Art Laffer? [[User:Dragonlord kfb|Dragonlord kfb]] ([[User talk:Dragonlord kfb|talk]]) 07:45, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

== Wikiquote page? ==

Considering the current affairs in political economics and the amount of writing and speaking that Mr. Schiff has undertaken and ''is'' undertaking, there are some good reasons to begin collecting his quotations in a format that can be readily accessed and expanded. Could one of the Wikipedia editors please create a Wikiquote page to which this Wikepedia article can be linked? Thank you. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/71.125.131.24|71.125.131.24]] ([[User talk:71.125.131.24|talk]]) 09:01, 21 March 2009 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

== Peter Schiff is jew ==
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AHgxIioiff0 - proof <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/92.101.164.7|92.101.164.7]] ([[User talk:92.101.164.7|talk]]) 05:59, 2 May 2009 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:the only thing we can learn from this video is that his grandfather spoke [[yiddish]]. that doesn't necessarily make peter a Jew ([http://www.snopes.com/glurge/powell.asp nor his grandfather for that matter]). <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/89.139.186.176|89.139.186.176]] ([[User talk:89.139.186.176|talk]]) 16:38, 4 May 2009 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
::It was his ''first'' language his grandfather is obivously jew [[Special:Contributions/92.101.160.44|92.101.160.44]] ([[User talk:92.101.160.44|talk]]) 20:08, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

He's always referred to Jewish holidays on his radio show. Just look at his name and facial features, you dim bulb dullard. No shit he's Jewish. What's your point, by the way? Be sure to post your own ethnicity and religion, so we can all draw the "obvious conclusions" from them. [[User:VF Static|VF Static]] ([[User talk:VF Static|talk]]) 19:57, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Why information about his ethnicity was deleted? [[Special:Contributions/95.53.138.246|95.53.138.246]] ([[User talk:95.53.138.246|talk]]) 22:49, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
:It doesn't belong in the lead sentence per [[WP:MOSBIO]]. If you want to add ethnicity further into the article, do so as long as you include a reliable source. Thank you, --[[User:Threeafterthree|Tom]] [[User talk:Threeafterthree|(talk)]] 23:49, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
::http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AHgxIioiff0 - this is not a reliable source????? <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/92.101.173.168|92.101.173.168]] ([[User talk:92.101.173.168|talk]]) 00:04, 3 August 2009 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:::No it isn't. Also, didn't I say something about not going in the lead sentence? --[[User:Threeafterthree|Tom]] [[User talk:Threeafterthree|(talk)]] 00:09, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
::::Why is it not a reliable source? <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/92.101.173.168|92.101.173.168]] ([[User talk:92.101.173.168|talk]]) 02:12, 3 August 2009 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:::::youtube? Nuff said. --[[User:Threeafterthree|Tom]] [[User talk:Threeafterthree|(talk)]] 03:44, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
::::::Why is youtube not a reliable source? It's Schiff own words that his grandfather's first language is Yiddish.
:::::::Because it isn't. Are we done here or are you going to continue to vandalize this article? --[[User:Threeafterthree|Tom]] [[User talk:Threeafterthree|(talk)]] 15:34, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
::::::::If not then why there are so many links to youtube on this page? You should delete half of this article because youtube is main source for it. And I'm not vandalizing this page [[WP:MOSBIO]] is just recomendations--[[Special:Contributions/92.101.182.250|92.101.182.250]] ([[User talk:92.101.182.250|talk]]) 02:00, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
(outdent) Ah no, you are vandalizing this article at this point. MOSBIO is what it is, depending on your definition of "is" is. Please feel free to remove citations that use youtube or I would be happy to do so. --[[User:Threeafterthree|Tom]] [[User talk:Threeafterthree|(talk)]] 02:31, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
:This article is a serious mess. Must be a Ron Paul thing :), sorry guys. --[[User:Threeafterthree|Tom]] [[User talk:Threeafterthree|(talk)]] 02:49, 4 August 2009 (UTC)ps I love the title of this section, very subtle folks...like a broken leg! --[[User:Threeafterthree|Tom]] [[User talk:Threeafterthree|(talk)]] 02:51, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
It is of vital importance to add to the list at the bottom that he's an American Jew

== This article is an embarrassment to everything wikipedia stands for ==
Clearly, this article is a puff piece written by Ron Paul fanboys. There NEEDS to be mention in this article of Schiff's long history of predicting imminent financial catastrophe, his lack of any higher degree or economics training (the man is a stock broker, who goes on tv declaring himself to be an economic expert), his underperforming investment company, and the inaccuracy of his predictions for our current recession (E.g the value of the dollar, price of gold, inflation rate, and the economic performance of nations which had higher savings rate and far less debt than America, all of which are way off). Yes, he did predict the economy would go to hell right before it did, while the consensus was that this wouldn't happen (although he was far from the only person to predict our current troubles, and many others did so with far greater accuracy), and yes, the article should mention how many people who criticized him ended up eating their words. However, the current article is far too biased in his favor, and is nowhere near objective. [[User:Squiems|Squiems]] ([[User talk:Squiems|talk]]) 20:37, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
:Rather than complaining, edit the article as long as you provide reliable sources. If you are reverted, discuss you changes here and see if you can gain consensus. --[[User:Threeafterthree|Tom]] [[User talk:Threeafterthree|(talk)]] 23:51, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
It should also be mentioned down at the bottom: American Jews

==Schiff's Religious Background==

Please stop vandalizing this article with comments about Schiff's religion. WHO CARES if his family has traditionally been Jewish? Unless he is a practicing Jew, and unless he mentions it as point of pride, then mentioning that he is Jewish can only be seen as an anti-Semitic slur. Let's grow up and be civil, folks![[User:Trasel|Trasel]] ([[User talk:Trasel|talk]]) 18:06, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
:Hi Trasel, I hear ya, but including ethnicity/heritage in BLPs is pretty standard. The problem here is 1) It should NOT go in the lead sentence unless it is the reason for the person's notability(happens about .01% of the time), usually goes in a family or personal section, ect. and 2)It needs to be properly sourced. If both those things happen, then it hard to argue against inclusion. This has been a touchy subject over the years to say the least. Anyways, I appreciate your feedback and hopefully we can work this out. If not, then page protection or other remidies will need to be used. Cheers! --[[User:Threeafterthree|Tom]] [[User talk:Threeafterthree|(talk)]] 18:37, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
::As Tom said, it's not so simple. Personally, I think the [[WP:BLPCAT]] policy should apply to inclusion in the article, not just categorization, but I read the policy as only applying to categories right now. In this particular article, as Tom mentioned, there hasn't been a [[WP:RS|reliable source]], so it's easy to keep it out of the article. I think the only other option at this point in this and any other article is to go through [[WP:DR|the steps]] to gain consensus on whether it belongs in the article. [[User:Shirulashem|'''<span style="font-family:cursive;color:#2B3856">-shirulashem</span>''']]<sup>[[User talk:Shirulashem|<span style="font-family:cursive;color:#2B3856">(talk)</span>]]</sup> 18:56, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
:::http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JZi7uquwZKQ - HE SAID THAT HE IS JEWISH IN THE END OF THIS VIDEO!!!!!! IS IT STILL NOT ENOUGH?
::::in the video above he clearly states that he is Jewish and he celebrates [[rosh hashana]] - meaning he is at least partly-practicing.


== Economic views: neutrality dispute ==
== Economic views: neutrality dispute ==
Line 179: Line 60:


== Picture ==
== Picture ==

There's a lack of pictures/photographs of him. The one currently being used is of poor quality because its very grainy. There are a few at his [http://www.facebook.com/album.php?profile=1&id=20452027947 facebook page], but I don't know what license it is. Perhaps some photographs can be extracted from his [http://www.youtube.com/peterschiff youtube channel] which is under the is released under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported license. Better yet, perhaps some supporters could upload some photos. Or, maybe someone could try sending a few emails requesting some photos...(has anyone tried?)...but a single grainy photo simply doesn't suffice.[[User:Smallman12q|Smallman12q]] ([[User talk:Smallman12q|talk]]) 22:24, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
There's a lack of pictures/photographs of him. The one currently being used is of poor quality because its very grainy. There are a few at his [http://www.facebook.com/album.php?profile=1&id=20452027947 facebook page], but I don't know what license it is. Perhaps some photographs can be extracted from his [http://www.youtube.com/peterschiff youtube channel] which is under the is released under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported license. Better yet, perhaps some supporters could upload some photos. Or, maybe someone could try sending a few emails requesting some photos...(has anyone tried?)...but a single grainy photo simply doesn't suffice.[[User:Smallman12q|Smallman12q]] ([[User talk:Smallman12q|talk]]) 22:24, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

Revision as of 06:54, 20 September 2009

Template:Pbneutral

So Schiff Has no M.B.A.?

It would appear that Schiff has no M.B.A., no M.S. in finance, and no Ph.D. in economics. This is extremely relevant because Schiff is often on TV presenting himself as an expert on the economy who is capable of predicting trends. Obviously, a person can be correct about a trend without formal education in that area, but it is also true that you want a dentist, doctor, lawyer, etc. with formal training. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.44.153.18 (talk) 00:07, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Considering most if not all "certified" economists got it WRONG, Schiff's lack of so-called certifications was an advantage, not a short coming. Results are what really matter. Jakarta iron (talk) 06:18, 12 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This page starts with "is an American "economist". Can someone please delete that single word because the page won't allow me to edit it. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hfaqtor (talk • contribs) 05:28, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

VoteSchiff.com

Concerning Peter Schiff's possible senate run... Is it really necessary or encyclopedia worthy to link out to a coming soon page, anyone can buy a domain name and throw a logo up. I agree if this were a working website that would be one thing but that site has not changed for 3 months. Should we remove voteschiff.com until the developer puts a serious website up? ajacreative (talk) 08:20, 9 March 200p (PST) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.57.0.136 (talk)

Economic views: neutrality dispute

Is this section's neutrality still disputed? I read over it and it looks accurate to me. If there is no objection, I would like to remove the POV tag. Dbrisinda (talk) 03:13, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Lead

I cleaned up the lead, so as to conform to WP:LEAD. If there are any issues with my edits, feel bold and go right ahead to make the changes, but please also discuss here. ephix (talk) 17:19, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Picture

There's a lack of pictures/photographs of him. The one currently being used is of poor quality because its very grainy. There are a few at his facebook page, but I don't know what license it is. Perhaps some photographs can be extracted from his youtube channel which is under the is released under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported license. Better yet, perhaps some supporters could upload some photos. Or, maybe someone could try sending a few emails requesting some photos...(has anyone tried?)...but a single grainy photo simply doesn't suffice.Smallman12q (talk) 22:24, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Peter_Schiff&oldid=315054958"