Occupy Wall Street Rant (Ron Paul Supporter)

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

[video=youtube;OeuGx8PplAo]
 
So Deception.

Long time no see.

Seen enough of Barry and not enough of Ron Paul?
 
So Deception.

Long time no see.

Seen enough of Barry and not enough of Ron Paul?

well time and circumstance changes your perspective. ron pauls speaks the truth particularly in relation to monetary policy. nevertheless, i'm still liberal on social policy and his policies on gay marriage, abortion irk me.
 
well time and circumstance changes your perspective. ron pauls speaks the truth particularly in relation to monetary policy. nevertheless, i'm still liberal on social policy and his policies on gay marriage, abortion irk me.

His stance on abortion is HIS stance on abortion. He's not likely to try and do anything about it. He was an obstetrician, FWIW. Delivered thousands of babies.

[video=youtube;QGaBAb_oS84]
 
that was a good speech. Although he started to look like that Jim Carey character from In Living Color (Fire Marshal Bill).
 
That 1st video I posted was meant to be this one:

[video=youtube;Ka1ym7S3F3w]
 
what would happen if the US went back on the Gold standard?

I'm not asking because it's a loaded question (I have no idea if it is), but because I'm curious.
 
denny- why would u float the notion of cain being pres when he's the antithesis of paul on several issues, i.e the fed, war
 
what would happen if the US went back on the Gold standard?

I'm not asking because it's a loaded question (I have no idea if it is), but because I'm curious.

i dont think there is politician outside ron paul who has advocated this so there hasnt been any serious discussion
 
what would happen if the US went back on the Gold standard?

I'm not asking because it's a loaded question (I have no idea if it is), but because I'm curious.

There would be deflation instead of inflation.
 
denny- why would u float the notion of cain being pres when he's the antithesis of paul on several issues, i.e the fed, war

My hope is that Paul wins it, of course.

I'm not a republican and won't be voting for Romney or Cain or anyone else whose been in the debates except Ron Paul or Gary Johnson.

I asked a question in a thread I started, "why not Cain?" He's pretty close to front runner status these days, the chances are as good for him as any of the rest.
 
My hope is that Paul wins it, of course.

I'm not a republican and won't be voting for Romney or Cain or anyone else whose been in the debates except Ron Paul or Gary Johnson.

I asked a question in a thread I started, "why not Cain?" He's pretty close to front runner status these days, the chances are as good for him as any of the rest.

well paul dosnt have a realistic shot of winning the nomination and probably never will in the republican party. he should run as an independent but he doesnt have ross perot money
 
why?

what are some other things that would happen? instability, stability, etc?

Consider a hypothetical economy. There are 100 dollars and $100 worth of gold. Those $100 can buy 100 things. Next year, someone makes a 101st thing. So $100 buys 101 things, each costing less than $1. Or that 101st thing has to be given away (or bartered).

Make sense?

The boom/bust cycles we have are because we have central banks and are not on the gold standard. Not exactly stable. Inflation is the enemy of anyone on a fixed income and friend to anyone owning assets.
 
Ron Paul is every bit as phony as all the others.

How else to explain his registering and running as a republican?
 
well paul dosnt have a realistic shot of winning the nomination and probably never will in the republican party. he should run as an independent but he doesnt have ross perot money

His shot of winning is considerably better than 4 years ago. I'm satisfied with PROGRESS of this kind. Liberal/Libertarian ideas didn't get heard much the tea party started talking about smaller and constitutional government.
 
Consider a hypothetical economy. There are 100 dollars and $100 worth of gold. Those $100 can buy 100 things. Next year, someone makes a 101st thing. So $100 buys 101 things, each costing less than $1. Or that 101st thing has to be given away (or bartered).

Make sense?

No, which is why it would never work in the real world.
 
His shot of winning is considerably better than 4 years ago. I'm satisfied with PROGRESS of this kind. Liberal/Libertarian ideas didn't get heard much the tea party started talking about smaller and constitutional government.

i dont get it. u acknowledge that he's not going to win and those three stooges ahead of him dont share his worldview so why doesnt just run as an independent?
 
No, which is why it would never work in the real world.

well its not that simple. for instance, gold is susceptible to wild fluctuations in price. im not an expert by any means but there are no simple solutions to avert the boom and busts.
 
i dont get it. u acknowledge that he's not going to win and those three stooges ahead of him dont share his worldview so why doesnt just run as an independent?

Maybe he will. But for now, he gets more press running as a republican.

barfo
 
another issue with going back to gold is that it is debatable if the USA still has all it's gold at fort knox. The last time there was an audit of the gold at fort knox was in 1974. Since then, nobody has been able to count or verify or even film that any gold exists. I don't know much about the situation, but there are a lot of conspiracy theorists who believe that Americas gold has been used up in backroom deals and black ops.
 
As far as Ron Paul goes, I think that for all the shit that I disagree with him about, I think this nation could benefit from 4 years of him. Actually, I agree a lot more with Gary Johnson. I am a registered Dem, and a liberal at heart, but if either of those libertarians had a real shot at getting elected, I think I would cast my vote their way. Not totally sure, I would have to do a lot of reading and debating before I was totally comfortable with that, but my gut reaction is that I would support them over any Dem.
 
No, which is why it would never work in the real world.

It worked in the real world right up until Nixon took us off the gold standard. Not coincidentally, that was the time that real wages started going down over time.
 
i dont get it. u acknowledge that he's not going to win and those three stooges ahead of him dont share his worldview so why doesnt just run as an independent?

He did run as an independent once before. He won't have as much opportunity to be heard so he runs as a republican. As a 3rd party candidate, he'd be up there with Ralph Nader in the vote count. Or should I say down there.
 
well its not that simple. for instance, gold is susceptible to wild fluctuations in price. im not an expert by any means but there are no simple solutions to avert the boom and busts.

It's not subject to wild fluctuations in price if there's a gold standard. In fact, there wouldn't be wild fluctuations in price of anything...

Consider the govt. says it will redeem 42 dollars for one ounce of gold. The price would be stuck at $42.
 
http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2011/...axes-cut-presidents-pay/?mod=google_news_blog

Ron Paul’s Economic Plan: Cut 5 Cabinet Agencies, Cut Taxes, Cut President’s Pay

GOP presidential candidate Rep. Ron Paul will unveil his economic plan Monday afternoon, calling for a lower corporate tax rate, cutting spending by $1 trillion during his first year in office and eliminating five cabinet-level agencies, including the Education Department, according to excerpts released to Washington Wire.

Mr. Paul’s “Restore America” plan calls for a drastically reduced federal government to help spur American business — a familiar theme for the Texas Republican and many of the GOP White House hopefuls. But unlike some of his Republican rivals who have released economic plans, the libertarian congressman mostly avoids the weeds of tax and trade policy, according to excerpts.

But Mr. Paul does get specific when he calls for a 10% reduction in the federal work force, while pledging to limit his presidential salary to $39,336, which his campaign says is “approximately equal to the median personal income of the American worker.” The current pay rate for commander in chief is $400,000 a year.

The Paul plan would also lower the corporate tax rate to 15% from 35%, though it is silent on personal income tax rates, which Mr. Paul would like to abolish. The congressman would end taxes on personal savings and extend “all Bush tax cuts.”

He would also allow U.S. firms to repatriate capital without additional taxes. Some lawmakers have recently proposed such legislation as a way to spur job growth. Its critics argue that a tax holiday for companies with money abroad has not historically led to domestic investment.

But the plan, at its heart, is libertarian. While promising to cut $1 trillion in spending during his first year, Mr. Paul would eliminate the Departments of Education, Commerce, Energy, Interior and Housing and Urban Development. When former Massachusetts Gov. MItt Romney unveiled his economic plan last month, he said he would submit legislation to reduce nonsecurity, discretionary spending by $20 billion.

Mr. Paul would also push for the repeal of the new health-care law, last year’s Wall Street regulations law and the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, the 2002 corporate governance law passed in response to a number of corporate scandals, including Enron.

Other proposal are more vague, and the campaign has not yet released estimates of economic growth under the plan.

Mr. Paul, who wrote the book “End the Fed,” calls for an audit of the Federal Reserve and “competing currency legislation to strengthen the dollar and stabilize inflation.” The excerpts did not provide more details on how such legislation would work.

When it comes to Social Security, Medicare and other entitlement programs, Mr. Paul wants a system that “honors our promise to our seniors and veterans, while allowing young workers to opt out.” He also wants to run Medicaid, the state-federal health care program for the poor, and “other welfare programs” through block grants to states.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top