On August 17 2011 12:48 SpeaKEaSY wrote: Ron Paul 2012 dot com y'all
Not only do his policies make sense, but as an added bonus, if he wins we get to see all the big government fascists cry and weep about how they're going to miss getting shafted by their tyrannical government
On August 17 2011 14:42 cfoy3 wrote: @Romantic Yes but federal reserves intensify it by taking the fear out of the market place. You say properly regulate it, however too often what should be the proper regulation is ignored because of politics or because we only what "proper" is in hindsight. I think fractional reserve banking is evil and I think a return to the gold standard is neccessary to prevent it from happening. It rests on a algebraic inequality you can not pay back prinicipal plus interest with just prinicipal. We need to reinstill fear and risk in banks so that they will not lend unscruplusly to people who have no hope of paying it back.
I'm not convinced you understand half the words you try to use...
When you have a non-fiat currency, you have the very real and devastating danger of currency deflation. When that happens, guess what people don't do... SPEND. When you're not spending, it freezes up the engine that is the economy. If your money is constantly worth less than it was a moment ago, your best option is to put it to use as something other than just being money. If you're a complete moron, you'll sit on your money and complain how each dollar isn't worth as much.
On August 17 2011 11:47 cfoy3 wrote: Heres a crazy thought. How about we try and go back to a time when he didn't ask our Congress to pass every major bill and wait endless for them. Lets go back to when the state legislatures controlled almost all of our affairs. There is a right way to do things. We can not expect to elect people from all these different walks of life to a building where they will magically come up with the perfect one size fits all approach. Look at the health care law. Its too expensive and even worse it wrong on two moral levels-1.)I do not think the government has the right to force me to pay for anything. 2.)I also do not think the federal government should tell the states how to fix these problems. Look at massachusetts, now I think the law was terrible but they did not need the federal government to get involved. They did it themselves and more importantly they wanted it. You can not force people to do things they do not want to do without some sort of blow back.
In essence this is the issue with American politics though.
So many people view the government as some kind of external entity with their own agenda rather than representatives of the people.
@aksfjh Of course deflation is bad and that is why you can not go back to the gold standard all at once. You have to slowly wean yourself into it. What happened during the great depression is hoover tried to force deflation to happen by forcing us back to the gold standard. That is a terrible idea and one rejected by austrians.
Keynesian is a great theory, and half of it works in practice, but the other equally-important side of the coin, that requires the government to increase taxes and reduce spending during periods of economic growth, has not been exercised once in the 60 some-odd years since its adoptation. It's far too tempting to keep spending and run on low taxes during periods of economic stability/growth and so long as we keep doing it, it will keep coming back and biting us all in the ass while continuing to generate enormous levels of debt. It's getting to the point where we need a Constitutional amendment to implement the damned thing, because I don't see politicians running on a campaign of responsibility and being able to fulfill the bargain any time soon.
Not to mention the current political theatre of 'I'd rather watch the country burn than compromise with my opponents' that's just going to drag us all down with it. It's a fucking poison. It's stalling progress and starting to open a rift of non-communication between one half of the country and the other.
On August 17 2011 14:27 Perihelion wrote: Ron Paul is the only candidate more frightening than Bachmann.
Pretty much, seeing as how much the internet folks seem to support him.
My mind is blown. Obama has to fix the worst financial crisis in history after 8 horrible years in less than 4? That shit is going to take a long time. Hell, I am not even satisified with Obama, but he sure as hell is the best you got, especially in this insane political climate were Bachmann or Paul are actually considered candidates.
Vote Obama, and after Obama is done Clinton twice (if she runs). By that time the problems Bush (and B. Clinton to an extend) might be fixed. If you vote GOP again it is only going downhill further and it is going to take even more time to fix.
On August 18 2011 01:46 Bibdy wrote: Keynesian is a great theory, and half of it works in practice, but the other equally-important side of the coin, that requires the government to increase taxes and reduce spending during periods of economic growth, has not been exercised once in the 60 some-odd years since its adoptation. It's far too tempting to keep spending and run on low taxes during periods of economic stability/growth and so long as we keep doing it, it will keep coming back and biting us all in the ass while continuing to generate enormous levels of debt. It's getting to the point where we need a Constitutional amendment to implement the damned thing, because I don't see politicians running on a campaign of responsibility and being able to fulfill the bargain any time soon.
Not to mention the current political theatre of 'I'd rather watch the country burn than compromise with my opponents' that's just going to drag us all down with it. It's a fucking poison. It's stalling progress and starting to open a rift of non-communication between one half of the country and the other.
I've heard economists talk about the idea of requiring the budget to be balanced over the course of the business cycle. Great in theory; unfortunately I don't think there's any way to implement it.
Alternatively a balanced budget amendment that only applies when unemployment is less than a certain percent, or GDP per cap growth is greater than some floor value, might help.
Either its capitalism or socialism. I don't think a mix of both is very sustainable on the long term. I also think financial inequality is way too high.
On August 17 2011 14:27 Perihelion wrote: Ron Paul is the only candidate more frightening than Bachmann.
Pretty much, seeing as how much the internet folks seem to support him.
My mind is blown. Obama has to fix the worst financial crisis in history after 8 horrible years in less than 4? That shit is going to take a long time. Hell, I am not even satisified with Obama, but he sure as hell is the best you got, especially in this insane political climate were Bachmann or Paul are actually considered candidates.
Vote Obama, and after Obama is done Clinton twice (if she runs). By that time the problems Bush (and B. Clinton to an extend) might be fixed. If you vote GOP again it is only going downhill further and it is going to take even more time to fix.
How does that solve anything? From your statement, you think we should expand government more and continue on with wars that are costing our country trillions of dollars. We should continue to bail out giant corporations that fail. Only hindering the middle and lower class by making us pay for it. How does that fix things?
I'm voting Paul even if he's an independent candidate. I changed from an independent voter to republican just to vote in the primary. I've followed the man since 2007 and he's the only person that will end America's policing of the world. That is the thing I want most. I'm tired of fighting other countries battles. I was never for the war in Iraq or Afghanistan. I don't want to invade Iran. I'm not for the fight in Libya. I'm tired of my civil liberties being stripped away to protect me. I'm tired of a drug war that is beyond an EPIC FAIL. I want real change. Ron Paul is the only person I see that offers real change.
On August 17 2011 14:27 Perihelion wrote: Ron Paul is the only candidate more frightening than Bachmann.
Pretty much, seeing as how much the internet folks seem to support him.
My mind is blown. Obama has to fix the worst financial crisis in history after 8 horrible years in less than 4? That shit is going to take a long time. Hell, I am not even satisified with Obama, but he sure as hell is the best you got, especially in this insane political climate were Bachmann or Paul are actually considered candidates.
Vote Obama, and after Obama is done Clinton twice (if she runs). By that time the problems Bush (and B. Clinton to an extend) might be fixed. If you vote GOP again it is only going downhill further and it is going to take even more time to fix.
How does that solve anything? From your statement, you think we should expand government more and continue on with wars that are costing our country trillions of dollars. We should continue to bail out giant corporations that fail. Only hindering the middle and lower class by making us pay for it. How does that fix things?
I'm voting Paul even if he's an independent candidate. I changed from an independent voter to republican just to vote in the primary. I've followed the man since 2007 and he's the only person that will end America's policing of the world. That is the thing I want most. I'm tired of fighting other countries battles. I was never for the war in Iraq or Afghanistan. I don't want to invade Iran. I'm not for the fight in Libya. I'm tired of my civil liberties being stripped away to protect me. I'm tired of a drug war that is beyond an EPIC FAIL. I want real change. Ron Paul is the only person I see that offers real change.
Almost all of those problems was caused or perpetuated by Republicans. Even the expanding government part. Getting out of wars isn't as simple as "I don't want to be here anymore, I'll just get up and leave." as much as I wish it could be like that. And I do agree Obama screwed up with the bailout.
Now someone has to fix it and from the Republican's track record, they can only make it worse. Even though the Democrats aren't perfect, they are much more responsible.
Also I'm not 100% positive, but I heard there would be a 3rd option of sorts in every state in the next general election...
On August 17 2011 16:39 liepzig wrote: Ron Paul is the only viable candidate. Everyone else is either insane, dishonest, or just downright sleazy (*cough* Rick Perry). Also, I have a degree in Economics, have published in an international economics journal, and am about to start my Masters degree, so it's not like I don't know what I'm talking about. His ideas are a tad extreme, but at least they are grounded in sound economic logic. Everyone else simply believes that God and Am-uur-ican Exceptionalism will pull the country out of this mess.
And thanks for the Iranian video, it was highly enlightening. I'm Christian myself, but having lived in America for the past few years, I've become afraid of the Evangelical movement. These people think that they know better than everyone else, and they want everyone else in the world to be like them. If you put someone like that in the White House, expect many more Iraqs and Afghanistans.
I have a doctorate in economics, and this one time I was out to drinks with both Friedman and Keynes (who cant hold is liquor btw) and they both agreed that I was right on how economics work.
Ron Paul has frequently been called a nut-job by both major political parties, but to me, he seems like he's the only guy crazy enough to actually get shit done in the White House.
On August 17 2011 14:27 Perihelion wrote: Ron Paul is the only candidate more frightening than Bachmann.
Pretty much, seeing as how much the internet folks seem to support him.
My mind is blown. Obama has to fix the worst financial crisis in history after 8 horrible years in less than 4? That shit is going to take a long time. Hell, I am not even satisified with Obama, but he sure as hell is the best you got, especially in this insane political climate were Bachmann or Paul are actually considered candidates.
Vote Obama, and after Obama is done Clinton twice (if she runs). By that time the problems Bush (and B. Clinton to an extend) might be fixed. If you vote GOP again it is only going downhill further and it is going to take even more time to fix.
How does that solve anything? From your statement, you think we should expand government more and continue on with wars that are costing our country trillions of dollars. We should continue to bail out giant corporations that fail. Only hindering the middle and lower class by making us pay for it. How does that fix things?
I'm voting Paul even if he's an independent candidate. I changed from an independent voter to republican just to vote in the primary. I've followed the man since 2007 and he's the only person that will end America's policing of the world. That is the thing I want most. I'm tired of fighting other countries battles. I was never for the war in Iraq or Afghanistan. I don't want to invade Iran. I'm not for the fight in Libya. I'm tired of my civil liberties being stripped away to protect me. I'm tired of a drug war that is beyond an EPIC FAIL. I want real change. Ron Paul is the only person I see that offers real change.
Almost all of those problems was caused or perpetuated by Republicans. Even the expanding government part. Getting out of wars isn't as simple as "I don't want to be here anymore, I'll just get up and leave." as much as I wish it could be like that. And I do agree Obama screwed up with the bailout.
Now someone has to fix it and from the Republican's track record, they can only make it worse. Even though the Democrats aren't perfect, they are much more responsible.
Also I'm not 100% positive, but I heard there would be a 3rd option of sorts in every state in the next general election...
Obama didn't do the bank bailout, Bush did at the end of 2008. Although it is kind of splitting hairs because Obama or McCain would have gone along with it anyway, and the culture of making the rich richer hasn't even been dented since he took office. I don't blame him for our awful system, he didn't create it. Those that do blame him act as if the country was born in 2009. I was just hoping he would change it, which has not happened and probably won't. Republicans do have a terrible track record, they lowered taxes on the rich while expanding government, going to war, enacting medicare part D, and using the threat of terrorism to scare us into giving up civil liberties. A credible "fiscally conservative party that cares about freedom" they are not. But my beef is with the neo-cons. Ron Paul fought them tooth and nail on war and expanding government. He is the real conservative and the only one with real ideas that will go anywhere. I do not lump him in with other Republicans, and many Democrats feel that way too. He has enormous appeal in the general election.
On August 17 2011 12:48 SpeaKEaSY wrote: Ron Paul 2012 dot com y'all
Not only do his policies make sense, but as an added bonus, if he wins we get to see all the big government fascists cry and weep about how they're going to miss getting shafted by their tyrannical government
"It advocates the creation of a totalitarian single-party state that seeks the mass mobilization of a nation through indoctrination, physical education, and family policy including eugenics."
Sounds like the United States to me.
Single party state? Check. Compulsory education? Check. Culture of contraception and abortion targeted at minorities? Check.
Ron Paul is one of the few candidates that actually votes the same way he campaigns. If nothing else, give him credit for his honesty. He sticks with his principles no matter what, which is more than I can say for any of the other candidates.
I actually supported Obama because I thought he was going to reduce our involvement in wars overseas. Since then we have only increased our presence in the Middle East. Ron Paul says he wants to reduce our involvement, too. Only I actually believe what he says, because he votes the same way he speaks.
FOX News specifically ignores Ron Paul updates. He speaks softly and carries a big stick, not like conservatives who follow the ebb and flow of Republican "its better for me now" philosophy.
EPT
