Why do people like Ron Paul?

Not really, no. You've clearly got some resentment issues, maybe you're one of those people who worked your whole life and is resentful about those who haven't. But isn't that your problem more than theirs? You're probably a baby boomer, so i'll forgive you for that as you can't help it. You've got a good life with enough food and water, electricity and a car - whatever improves with Ron Paul in power i'm sure you'll find something to be hysterical about in the future, whether it's not having enough fuel for your hovercraft or the foreigners playing frisbee on your street.

 

The problem is that the neo-liberal ideas that are espoused by right wing libertarians such as Ron Paul are the cause of many, if not most, of the problems currently afflicting the US today.

For example that is the reason why “the United States is completely broke” and if you don’t stop following flawed neo-liberal thinking it is likely to get worse.

Try reading – Utopia no Keynes
http://www.hipforums.com/newforums/showthread.php?t=328353

 

Ron Paul is a racist douchebag PERIOD

 

How exactly is he racist, may I ask?

 

Ron Paul has nothing to do with why the US is broke. Check his voting records and watch videos of him speaking, especially ones in which he berates the current money handlers' course of actions, there are several of these going quite far back. Honestly, he is the only guy making ANY sense AT ALL when talking about reforms to the economy. The economy sure as hell needs reforms and he's the only guy with a shot at presidency who's talking about them.

He talks about the free market in terms of a real free market, not the joke we have now. Big business obviously needs to be controlled, in fact he'd do away with the IRS and would probably try and take the fed down (back and to the left) and they're two of the biggest businesses in America. I believe his policies state strict regulation on the financial sectors and certainly some decent outlines of the power large corporations are allowed to wield.

You been watching Fox news or something? Even they don't call him racist... Trolling? If you really think he's racist then you obviously don't know anything about him. His foreign policy is by far the most humane amongst the big players and that alone makes him the least racist person running.

 

no I dont watch Fox why dont watch this and then someone will come by to help you remove ur head from ur ass
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=de_CSuJCsfY"]Ron Paul's Racist Quotes - YouTube

 

The above video by the Young Turks is very interesting. I know Ron did not write the stuff that they mentioned he did take responsibility for it. There is a video of him talking about it and saying that it was wrong to not keep a more watchful eye on what was being published in his name. He has written several books. In the books that he pens he never says anything racist. I am a person of more than one race and he is the only candidate that none of m non white selves rises up about. I accept his explanation of what happened and his apology. I found a quote from one of his books I believe this is what he really feels about racism:


“Racism is simply an ugly form of collectivism, the mindset that views humans strictly as members of groups rather than individuals . . . By encouraging Americans to adopt a group mentality, the advocates of so-called “diversity” actually perpetuate racism. Their obsession with racial group identity is inherently racists . . . we should understand that racism will endure until we stop thinking in terms of groups and begin thinking in terms of individual liberty.”
~Ron Paul

PS
He won the California straw poll and i know it really pissed off the republican party that their golden boys did not come out on top.

 

Mustlivelife

LOL, a ‘real free market’ that would strictly regulated?

Please read Free market = plutocratic tyranny
http://www.hipforums.com/newforums/showthread.php?t=353336&f=36

It begins – “There is an argument that has been set out here several times that corporatism comes about because the market isn’t free enough.

I’d say, don’t get fooled again.

The reality is that any move toward free market principles strengthens the hands of wealth and if that route continues to be taken wealth gets strong enough to corrupt the system to its own wishes.”

I say, don’t get fooled again.

 

I like a lot of what he supports, like legalizing pot, ending the Patriot Act, auditing the Fed, ending the war, etc etc. However, with some of the other stuff, cutting social security, cutting corporate taxes, cutting welfare, mass privatization, etc I feel like I'd be compromising too many of my views to support him. I don't care how honest or consistent his voting record is. He's an idealogue, and idealogues base all their decisions on ideology, not how their actions will affect and destabilize peoples lives on a real level. I'd rather vote for Kucinich to be honest.

I think representative democracies flawed, because the majority of people are always compromising their own interests when voting. They try to approximate a given candidate's positions to their own, but the guy they elect is always going to hold views they disagree with. ...unless the voter is a complete brain dead moron following a personality cult figure anyway. Plus, they outright break campaign promises that get people to vote for them. I really don't think representative democracy works. Its there to give us the illusion of freedom and choice.

 

He does not want to cut SSI for people already dependent on it and he would not throw welfare recipients out in the street. He is way smarter than that. He wants to end corporate welfare that is way different than the welfare individuals get on.


Ron Paul believes the loss of our individual freedoms has a great bearing on what is happening with the economy.

The federal reserve has been ripping the people off big time and he want to get the money back to the people it was stolen from you and me not rich bankers, executives, wall street big shots. He wants to restore the constitution and our rights.

I think the worst thing about Ron Paul is he does not try to sugar coat our problems so when he taalks about what is going on along side of someone promising the sun and moon of course most people do not want to face the truth when someone else is offering a trip to the moon. He has good solutions but the media is not going to report it. Because the war mongering rich elitist would not last long under his administration.

 

Yo

Dependent on it?

Try reading - Free market = Plutocratic Tyranny
http://www.hipforums.com/newforums/showthread.php?t=353336&f=36

As in?

But he is a neo-liberal so while he might say that his ideas would not help wealth his ideology would seem to contradict that.

In what way?

What are these ‘good solutions’?

Why?

 

All of you ragging Ron Paul's idea of a free market.. Watch the latest episode of The Daily Show with Ron Paul.. Basically Stewart goes to Paul "Well how do you think this will help or differ from what's going on now" and Paul at least doesn't try to completely sell Stewart on the idea but basically he goes "whats happening right now is not working so why not try something different"... People may not like Paul's ideas but at least he has stood by them his whole political career.. he does not flip flop and he tells it like it is.. his platform has not changed from that of 04/08.. The only difference this time around is Paul has a lot more funding and supporters than times past.. on that note... Paul/Kucinich 2012!

 

I believe he wants to starve the beast and clear the debt of the people. In essence give the people back their money that has been stolen. Ending the wars would cut the government spending by very huge amounts. Old folks on SSI will not be cut off I just want to repeat that. He wants to give value back to our dollar. Our dollar is worth about 4 cents right now if you cannot understand that it is the value of our money cause much of the problem and why that is you won't understand what's wrong. It is not all that hard to understand

 

Yo

Can you please explain clearly rather speak cryptically?

How?

Which people?

Where is the money to come from?

I agree

Which implies some are to be ‘cut off’.

How?

Please explain because that’s not very clear?

 

It's not very clearly written, but obviously he's referring to inflation, which is a direct result of the Federal Reserve printing money out of nothing, with no backing. The fact you don't get this is a bit alarming, but not all that surprising since you never address the real issues and instead repeat party line rhetoric put out by socialist groups and those which champion big government.

 

Rat

First I’d point out that you have long supported the neo-liberal ideas that caused the financial crisis.

It is hard to get out of a hole so the best thing is to not fall into the hole in the first place. The problem was that neo-liberalism leads inevitably to a hole. And what is worse is that neo-liberalism makes the hole deeper and harder to get out of and doesn’t have any viable or realistic method of dealing with such a crisis.

(try readinq Utopia no just Keynes
http://www.hipforums.com/newforums/showthread.php?t=328353)

And then I’d point out that you haven’t got a clue what to do to make things better beyond talking about some vague future utopia when things will be all better….

But ok you want to talk about this so here we go, this is how I see it.

I presume you are talking about the process of quantitative easing the printing or these days the electronic production of money.

Now this is a policy championed by that doyen of the neo-liberals and the free marketeer’s – Milton Friedman. The basic idea seems to be that in a financial dip new money could be pumped into the financial system until the ‘free market’ recovered and then the money could be slowly withdrawn. It didn’t work for Japan in the 1990’s and I don’t think it has worked anywhere else were the problem has been anything more than a mild dip.

Keynes and many Keynesians are not such supporters of quantitative easing and Keynes even warned against its use, in . He seems to have seen it as a not very effective short term stop gap to give time so that other more effective solutions could be put in place such as getting wages back into the system, through direct government investment in an economy.

*

The problem is that there is an ideological belief that the ‘free market’ would and should be the recovery method and that this is not a mild financial dip but a full blown financial crisis.

They are pumping money into the system in the hope that the ‘free market’ will whirl to action. The problem is that the financial sector was so far in debt that it is not investing into the economy it is recapitalising itself the quantitative easing money is not going into the hands of the people but into the vaults of the banks. It is the same in Europe the money been given to such places as Greece are not going into the hands of the Greek people but into the vaults of French and German banks.

Yes just printing money over and over isn’t a good idea but it is right wing neo-liberal ideology that is at the root of the problem.

 

If the dollar were compared to gold we can see how the value of the dollar has gone down. In 1970 an ounce of gold was valued at $35. Now an ounce of gold cost $2000.

When an ounce of gold was valued @ $35 per ounce premium coffee could be bought for 89 cents a "pound". Now 13 ounces of yucky coffee cost $4-$5 and the good stuff cost at least $8 or more this is because of inflation, devaluing the currency or, some even call it the hidden tax on debt.

During the 20's people could support a family on $10 per week because our currency was worth more back then. Our dollar is worth less now that it was during the depression.

The money that is being printed is debt money it has negative value. Even if minimum wage was raised to $20 ph it still would not be enough because the value of the currency would go down as wages went up. We are in a bad state.

Money does not motivate me the way it does others so I kinda feel more detached about it than most people. I like to watch numbers though. During the 80's and 90's I began to see changes in the numbers. When Bush jr took office the numbers thing I was seeing told me that the economy was going to crash. That is when I started looking at government to see who was fighting it and who was playing it. Ron Paul was the only one fighting it. More and more people began seeing changes that were harmful and started looking for someone in Washington who was fighting like me they saw Ron Paul up there fighting this tremendous battle all by himself as we watched and learned more about the man we could see that the problem with the economy is some what of a moral problem. The elite rich have been actually sucking our worth as people. I wonder if the elitist are really human some times.

Now most humans on the planet are feeling the pain of devalued currency. From my calculations if this economy can indeed be fixed in favor of the people Ron Paul will be the one to fix it. It is catastrophic and world wide and it is going down. We will see what happens it is very interesting indeed.

 

Yo

Average annual earnings in the US in 1920 was in the range of $688 to$1236

Which works out at about 13 to 23 dollars a week.

So $10 a week would be most to half a person’s wages and then there would be rent/mortgage etc - so in fact it doesn’t sound so good.

*

It seems to me that being tied into a gold standard is foolhardy if not dangerous. Why would you want it beyond Ron Paul saying it would be good?

I mean inflation is bad but deflation could be worse.

In short, you don't get anything out of a gold standard that you didn't bring with you. If your government is a credible steward of the money supply, you don't need it; and if it isn't, it won't be able to stay on it long anyway. (See Argentina's dollar peg). Meanwhile, the limitations on the government's ability to respond to fiscal crises, the necessity of defending against speculative attacks in times of crises, and the possibility of independent changes in the relative price of gold, make your economy more unstable. It's a terrible idea, which is why there are so few economists willing to raise their voices in support of it.
http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2007/09/there-apos-s-gold-in-them-thar-standards/1858/

 

Keynes was a fascist in tight with the same elite group pushing his policies today. Keynesian-influenced minds are what brought us the banker bailouts, most of which went for foreign private banks and did NOTHING to help the economy. Keynesism is inflationary economics and the belief that economic problems can be solved simply by printing up more money and flooding the markets with fiat liquidity that creates artificial bubbles. (Of course Keynes and his buddies knew what the REAL purpose of doing this was, which had nothing to do with solving economic problems but rather creating them.) Keynes was a member of the elite Royal Institute for International Affairs at Chatham House, and was good friend of the Federal Reserve bankers, with connections including Lord Rothschild himself.

Funny you should mention Keynes, because I just noticed the other day that if you go to YouTube and search for "John Maynard Keynes", the video I made back in 2009, titled John Maynard Keynes and Economic Fascism, is the 7th video return on the first page. The response I got was mostly positive, though some would agree with you and resorted to name calling.

 

Rat


Nice rant – but you haven’t actually put up any rational argument but instead just hinting that Keynes was a part of you conspiracy theory fantasies.




*