I Can't Believe This Was On Fox

guerilla said:
Concern trolling
Click to expand...

Nice. I can always count on you to make me lol, even at my own expense, which is fine.

In this instance I was building on the "what if's" in thread consistent fashion stating that it is possible that the Republican establishment allows this type of support for Paul because he is derailing conservatives in order to get their preferred moderate, Romney, through the primaries.

It's a plausible explanation, they will give just enough exposure and credibility to Paul to lure the hard right to forget the others and cast a vote for him, just to split the vote enough for Romney to win. Paul is like the new Perot in many ways.

You can note, that my last sentence was a capitulation that even I am beginning to like Paul more, on some issues, and that means that many others are falling for him because they are not thinking of some of his less desirable positions.
 


This one's even better:

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Vv-tskCDvU]We the People vs. Mitt Romney - YouTube[/ame]

It's a full 5 minutes of Dr. Paul worship!
 
Fiver said:
I'm amazed that this piece aired on Fox Business as it doesn't sound like the usual propaganda and lies that you'd hear on Fox News.
Click to expand...

he's right, except in his conclusions. ron paul isn't the answer - no politician is. if you're going to maintain the present socioeconomic system, sortition and plebescites, both with fitness tests (literacy, intelligence, logical reasoning, critical thinking and issue awareness), are about the only workable solution.

i like ron paul in general, mind you, although why he's making such a big deal about abolishing the epa when it is the best example of something a federal government can do better than individual states and regulation that's actually necessary is entirely beyond me.

-p
 
lukep said:
Sadly the american public is so far past too stupid that I'd sooner suspect their pets of seeing through this charade than the american viewers themselves. :(
Click to expand...

this.

with that said, i've often wondered why you can advocate complete freedom (which requires complete responsibility) in the face of the fact that people who can't tie their own shoelaces can't possibly exercise enough judgement to achieve that responsibility benchmark. mind you, i have the same problem as an anarchist ;)

-p
 
paulieg said:
i like ron paul in general, mind you, although why he's making such a big deal about abolishing the epa when it is the best example of something a federal government can do better than individual states and regulation that's actually necessary is entirely beyond me.

-p
Click to expand...

paulieg said:
this.

with that said, i've often wondered why you can advocate complete freedom (which requires complete responsibility) in the face of the fact that people who can't tie their own shoelaces can't possibly exercise enough judgement to achieve that responsibility benchmark. mind you, i have the same problem as an anarchist ;)

-p
Click to expand...
Learn economics.
 
lukep said:
This one's even better:

We the People vs. Mitt Romney - YouTube

It's a full 5 minutes of Dr. Paul worship!
Click to expand...

Is this not a furtherance of the establishment to divide the vote and ensure a Romney victory - go ahead LukeP - see this conspiracy its right in front of you.

I really am not certain our economy can handle a "Paul Shock" unless he limited his impact to smaller government and decreased regulations. Imagine the power vaccuums created internationally if he pulls out, will he be gradual? How many would die in the resultant power grab?

We can say to audit the Fed, but to be honest, the resulting economic chaos will take another 10 years to sort out, 10 years of misery for those that are already hurt in this recession - yes, the poor will be hit hardest.

The result of Paul could very well be a fiscally sound yet prudent economy where everyone has a lower standard of living and is in essence living through austerity measures when a more measured approach, limiting and or eliminating growth in spending for a set number of years could have a more gradual impact that can be absorbed without sacrificing productivity or standard of living ad of course keeping the floating fiat currency we now have, not trying to go back to a gold standard knowing very well the finite supply can never feul the growth of a 16T$ economy.
 
REIMktg said:
The result of Paul could very well be a fiscally sound yet prudent economy where everyone has a lower standard of living and is in essence living through austerity measures when a more measured approach, limiting and or eliminating growth in spending for a set number of years could have a more gradual impact that can be absorbed without sacrificing productivity or standard of living ad of course keeping the floating fiat currency we now have, not trying to go back to a gold standard knowing very well the finite supply can never feul the growth of a 16T$ economy.
Click to expand...
This ^^ is a good example of why people should learn economics.
 
REIMktg said:
Is this not a furtherance of the establishment to divide the vote and ensure a Romney victory - go ahead LukeP - see this conspiracy its right in front of you.

I really am not certain our economy can handle a "Paul Shock" unless he limited his impact to smaller government and decreased regulations. Imagine the power vaccuums created internationally if he pulls out, will he be gradual? How many would die in the resultant power grab?

We can say to audit the Fed, but to be honest, the resulting economic chaos will take another 10 years to sort out, 10 years of misery for those that are already hurt in this recession - yes, the poor will be hit hardest.

The result of Paul could very well be a fiscally sound yet prudent economy where everyone has a lower standard of living and is in essence living through austerity measures when a more measured approach, limiting and or eliminating growth in spending for a set number of years could have a more gradual impact that can be absorbed without sacrificing productivity or standard of living ad of course keeping the floating fiat currency we now have, not trying to go back to a gold standard knowing very well the finite supply can never feul the growth of a 16T$ economy.
Click to expand...

quadruplefacepalm.jpg
 
That initial video is awesome. It's the same reason why I get extremely frustrated when people talk about someone being "unelectable", because it may be the only chance you have at actually voting. The illusion of choice is a horrible thing.

Bobby
 
guerilla said:
Learn economics.
Click to expand...

i have and despite what randroids think, the invisible hand of the free market doesn't solve every single practical problem with their ideology. it took regulation to stop tens of thousands of workers dying in unsafe factories every year and stop every company with industrial waste dumping it in the river. the facts (as in history) shows that in the absence of minimum wage laws, a race to the bottom ensues in a capitalist industrial economy (not a free market economy, mind you, that hasn't been tried). today, the state of delaware has bad air quality because states upwind of it insist on running dirty coal-powered electricity generation facilities and, for all their efforts, they can't do a damn thing - air and water cross state lines, zomg. the overarching theme here being that any actor acting to maximize short-term financial gain will externalize any and all costs possible and the marketplace can't discourage that behaviour because consumers, even if they were inclined to vote with their dollars, can't and/or won't research the behaviour of every actor involved in the production of every good and service.

it may very well be possible to have a free society with a free-market, rather than capitalist, economy where these issues are easily addressable. indeed, as an anarchist, that is my hope. no one, as of right now, knows what that could look like and indeed can't - it would, for one, require rolling back division of labour and capital creation through artificial scarcity create through an award of property rights beyond those conferred by the homesteading axiom. these two things are so central to the development of our civilization after feudalism that we have very little concept of what life could be like without them and how we could achieve the same standards of living in their absence. keeping what we've got now, removing all regulation and hoping the invisible hand will somehow sort everything out shows an ignorance of facts, reality and history (in no particular order).

-p
 
REIMktg said:
Is this not a furtherance of the establishment to divide the vote and ensure a Romney victory - go ahead LukeP - see this conspiracy its right in front of you.

I really am not certain our economy can handle a "Paul Shock" unless he limited his impact to smaller government and decreased regulations. Imagine the power vaccuums created internationally if he pulls out, will he be gradual? How many would die in the resultant power grab?

We can say to audit the Fed, but to be honest, the resulting economic chaos will take another 10 years to sort out, 10 years of misery for those that are already hurt in this recession - yes, the poor will be hit hardest.

The result of Paul could very well be a fiscally sound yet prudent economy where everyone has a lower standard of living and is in essence living through austerity measures when a more measured approach, limiting and or eliminating growth in spending for a set number of years could have a more gradual impact that can be absorbed without sacrificing productivity or standard of living ad of course keeping the floating fiat currency we now have, not trying to go back to a gold standard knowing very well the finite supply can never feul the growth of a 16T$ economy.
Click to expand...

yeah, it would get bad, but that's what deleveraging and market corrections do. valuing nominal growth over prudent monetary policy is what got us here in the first place, time to pay the piper imo. the sooner we do it the better - if you think it's painful now, imagine how painful it will be once it becomes the only option. with that said, it couldn't happen now - congress wouldn't vote for it and even if it did, there would either be a coup or a revolution as a necessary consequence of such a quick drop in living standards.

as far as the gold standard goes, it's a non-starter which anyone with half a brain will tell you, unless you revise it to use nominal gold and then we're back to a fiat currency in another guise. in any case, it is entirely unnecessary - prudent monetary policy can be achieved without it and if, as i and many others hold, governments can not be trusted to have the discipline required all that is needed is the removal of the state monopoly on the issuance of instruments of value exchange.

-p
 
lukep said:
Ruh-roh...

popcorn.gif
Click to expand...

care to answer any of my critiques? still looking for an american-style libertarian to do it in an intelligible fashion (as in not 'learn economics' or 'read atlas shrugged'). you folks really have trouble dealing with questions raised by people well versed in anarchist thought

-p
 
@ guerilla & yuckystuff - I do understand why you do not understand my point. But you are going from theory and I from real world implications. Changes can be made gradually that will not ruin the lives of the masses. Sudden changes and the resulting consequences destroy lives while the economy "adjusts" and quite frankly - I do not want to destroy lives for the greater good. You throw a guy out of work or have him underemployed for 4-10 years, well, that can screw his live, ruin his kids high school years and future or even cause increased strife, divorce, even suicide all for changes that could have been made more gradual.

@paulieg - I do not believe in the gold standard although likely for different reasons. In the end - it will not work. As far as sucking it up, well that type of sudden shock is not necessary, we can, in spite what others say, cut back spending to a few years back, limit growth, stabilize business expectations, reduce regulations and grow right out of the current problems.
 
paulieg said:
as far as the gold standard goes, it's a non-starter which anyone with half a brain will tell you, unless you revise it to use nominal gold and then we're back to a fiat currency in another guise.
Click to expand...

REIMktg said:
@paulieg - I do not believe in the gold standard although likely for different reasons. In the end - it will not work.
Click to expand...


This gold standard issue is not even applicable. Once in a while I see it rehashed here on this board, I'm not sure why.

Nobody is looking to go back to the gold standard. Ron Paul wants free competition in currencies.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom