|
art
Stranger
Registered: 06/15/05
Posts: 331
Last seen: 14 years, 4 months
|
Re: Ron Paul's America? [Re: Phred]
#7979251 - 02/04/08 06:53 PM (15 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
I don't really think you can make the argument that because something worked x amount of years ago it would work now. I can see how many aspects of the government are not efficient, it just seems over zealous to say that all government is bad and should be eradicated, what about the office of federal student aid? Aren't there some things that the department of education is good for?
in regards to the federal reserve, if I remember correctly before the fed our economy was extremely volatile. It seems this past half century has gone very well in terms of the economy. It is scary to think about how the economy would have reacted with the sub prime crises without a strong central bank.
I am sorry if I am "trolling" I do not mean to troll, to tell you the truth I do not even know what that means. I come to the shroomery mostly for information on mushroom hunting, and other psychedelic stuff, but with the election I have been curious about the views people have here, being that the shroomery is a very "unique" place. Outside of the shroomery I have not met hardly any Ron Paul fans, hence my questions. I have endless conversations about McCain, and Clinton, but not Ron Paul. I do not have the time to read on all of Paul's ideas. This topic covers my main concern with Ron Paul, and is something that does not seem to be at all discussed here.
|
SoY
I am the LizardKing



Registered: 06/01/06
Posts: 774
Loc: Everywhere
|
Re: Ron Paul's America? [Re: art]
#7980227 - 02/04/08 09:39 PM (15 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
afoaf said: the federal government is a useless, self-serving leviathan that appears to me to do more harm than good.

People greatly underestimate the importance and competence of state governments versus the federal government.
Edited by SoY (02/04/08 09:41 PM)
|
gettinjiggywithit
jiggy


Registered: 07/20/04
Posts: 7,469
Loc: Heart of Laughter
|
Re: Ron Paul's America? [Re: art]
#7980361 - 02/04/08 09:55 PM (15 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
This topic covers my main concern with Ron Paul, and is something that does not seem to be at all discussed here.
The Federal Reserve bank and it's ils pros/cons have been discussed to ad nauseam heights, depths and distances here in the past year and half. It pretty much wound down before you jumped in just less then 2 months ago.
In your first post here since you came back around, you asked the same questions and I saw lots of people gave you informational video links, wiki links, and graphs etc and you dismissed them all.
They wasted their time trying to help you understand because you clearly didn't want to.
Since when is wiki less credible then a shroomerites quick opinion? 
You've mostly attacked Paul and or have masked questions about him in an Critical Attack Paul form and have made it clear, you haven't done your homework and don't want to do it and don't care to review material others who have done their homework have given to you.
There is a post search feature here and it's easy to see what you've been about in this Forum since you started posting last Dec.
If you believe the Federal Reserve is doing a great job and are here to convince people of that, knock your socks off and just be honest about that.
From reading your stuff, you seem to be under the impression that the Federal Reserve is great at keeping the market stable. If you were someone not afraid of homework and research, you would know by now that Bernake admitted the Federal Reserve CAUSED the Great Depression and apologized for it.
I also saw that you were trying to argue here in PAL, that gold is philosophically worthless. Take that to P&S. Here in PAL gold is globally trading at 904.30 an ounce.
Do you understand that your Federal reserve notes are backed by credit, created out of thin air debt? Do you even know that because the money is never created to pay off the interest, that the national debt can never truly even be paid off now under this system? We are endentured slaves to this growing debt forever like it or not now.
The federal reserve system is nothing more then a THIEF of the American people and the greatest money making scam created of all time.
Do yourself a favor and at least, thoroughly read through this link before you start asking such questions again. It's an easy one to comprehend for people admittedly not to swift with economics and financial policy.
http://www.6towns.com/driving/Billions.html
Mind you, that was written when are national debt was even lower, and they never got into discussing the scam of how the centralized banks of Asia, and Europe along with ours, play with their interest rates effecting the values of their currencies in ways where they make killings on hedge funds. They can't loose because they know where the value of their currencies are going ahead of time. The market trading in currencies doesn't and gets screwed by manipulations forth coming they can not see or predict. The ways they siphon money off from us are mind boggling.
Then there is what Greenspan called the "shabby little secret of the wellfare statists" back in the 60s when he was promoting the gold standard before he sold us out and accepted the puppet job of Chair for their board, which I am sure they offered him just to shut him up.
Quote:
In the absence of the gold standard, there is no way to protect savings from confiscation through inflation. There is no safe store of value. If there were, the government would have to make its holding illegal, as was done in the case of gold. If everyone decided, for example, to convert all his bank deposits to silver or copper or any other good, and thereafter declined to accept checks as payment for goods, bank deposits would lose their purchasing power and government-created bank credit would be worthless as a claim on goods. The financial policy of the welfare state requires that there be no way for the owners of wealth to protect themselves.
This is the shabby secret of the welfare statists' tirades against gold. Deficit spending is simply a scheme for the confiscation of wealth. Gold stands in the way of this insidious process. It stands as a protector of property rights. If one grasps this, one has no difficulty in understanding the statists' antagonism toward the gold standard.
http://www.321gold.com/fed/greenspan/1966.html
Even if you dont read these links, I encourage others too.
-------------------- Ahuwale ka nane huna.
|
art
Stranger
Registered: 06/15/05
Posts: 331
Last seen: 14 years, 4 months
|
|
Again I apologize for bringing up an already discussed topic, I almost always do a search first but I really don't know how to do a search for this. I was hoping to talk about more than just the Fed. I would like to get a picture of how a complete laissez faire system would work. Not all of my questions were answered in the previous threads, most of them were just ignored. Many of the charts, and points were beside the question and proved nothing. For example the Great Depression, that was 70 years ago, it is remarkable how stable the economy has been since then...something that was not commonplace before the Fed I have also admitted that although the fed contributed to the Great Depression it was not the main reason, there were many. I don't think I have ever hidden my stance on the Fed.
The first link you provided seems to have been written in 1998. Wasn't there a budget surplus in 2001? It was George Bush that caused the deficit, not the Fed. "Prior to 1913, America was a prosperous, powerful, and growing nation, at peace with its neighbors and the envy of the world. " I am sorry but it is hard to value a document with statements like that. I will try and read the whole thing, but already I have found information which contradicts some of the other things I have read...by economists, not pastors.
Look, If I am being pedantic, and obnoxious I am really sorry. If people are sick of my viewpoints on Ron Paul then I will stop posting here. I am just fascinated by economics and politics and I feel that the best way to learn is through discussion, and teaching. Talking about these things is a great way to educate yourself. I thought it would be interesting to create a hypothetical laissez faire America, and talk about the ramifications of that.
|
Madtowntripper
Sun-Beams out of Cucumbers



Registered: 03/06/03
Posts: 21,287
Loc: The Ocean of Notions
Last seen: 5 months, 23 days
|
Re: Ron Paul's America? [Re: art]
#7980622 - 02/04/08 10:34 PM (15 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
No need to shut up.
These people have 8 bajillion threads filled with their rhetoric.
If you want to ask questions in one, that is no problem at all.
-------------------- After one comes, through contact with it's administrators, no longer to cherish greatly the law as a remedy in abuses, then the bottle becomes a sovereign means of direct action. If you cannot throw it at least you can always drink out of it. - Ernest Hemingway If it is life that you feel you are missing I can tell you where to find it. In the law courts, in business, in government. There is nothing occurring in the streets. Nothing but a dumbshow composed of the helpless and the impotent. -Cormac MacCarthy He who learns must suffer. And even in our sleep pain that cannot forget falls drop by drop upon the heart, and in our own despair, against our will, comes wisdom to us by the awful grace of God. - Aeschylus
|
art
Stranger
Registered: 06/15/05
Posts: 331
Last seen: 14 years, 4 months
|
|
thank you
|
Cubie
Moderator




Registered: 01/11/08
Posts: 8,840
Loc: Down the rabbit hole...
Last seen: 11 years, 8 months
|
|
Were just a big passionate movement.
|
Poid
Shroomery's #1 Spellir




Registered: 02/04/08
Posts: 40,372
Loc: SF Bay Area
|
Re: Ron Paul's America? [Re: art]
#7980841 - 02/04/08 11:16 PM (15 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
It's sad to see that there are human beings who can't conceive alternative paradigms, and as a result, have the audacity to ridicule such notions.
Please don't ridicule others.
|
Madtowntripper
Sun-Beams out of Cucumbers



Registered: 03/06/03
Posts: 21,287
Loc: The Ocean of Notions
Last seen: 5 months, 23 days
|
Re: Ron Paul's America? [Re: Poid]
#7980890 - 02/04/08 11:28 PM (15 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
Hi, welcome to the Politics Forum.
-------------------- After one comes, through contact with it's administrators, no longer to cherish greatly the law as a remedy in abuses, then the bottle becomes a sovereign means of direct action. If you cannot throw it at least you can always drink out of it. - Ernest Hemingway If it is life that you feel you are missing I can tell you where to find it. In the law courts, in business, in government. There is nothing occurring in the streets. Nothing but a dumbshow composed of the helpless and the impotent. -Cormac MacCarthy He who learns must suffer. And even in our sleep pain that cannot forget falls drop by drop upon the heart, and in our own despair, against our will, comes wisdom to us by the awful grace of God. - Aeschylus
|
Smackshadow
It's Time for Wild Speculation


Registered: 09/27/05
Posts: 575
Last seen: 19 days, 10 hours
|
Re: Ron Paul's America? [Re: Poid]
#7980933 - 02/04/08 11:38 PM (15 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
1. IRS was created in the earlier part of the last century. america had existed just fine without it for years. it was also implemented after failing to receive the required votes to make it constitutional.
That is absurd read the 16th amendment. The IRS is a government agency doing the business expressly stated in our amended constitution. More over our country wasn't doing just fine with out it. In fact do the the regressive taxation imposed by flat taxes there was major and devastating economic consequences.
Quote:
2. the dept. of education is unconstitutional. education is one of those rights reserved to the states. the federal gov't messing with schools has led to awesome policies such as the No child left behind act which punishes poorer schools and rewards already rich ones. fair huh
I have a great many concerns about the policies of the dept. of education. I might even say that it does need to be reduced in size. However the idea that it is unconstitutional is bogus. If the federal government is spending money on state run programs then the fed. government is well within its rights to set standards for the recipients of that money. Thus they need an agency to monitor those issues.
Quote:
3. the fed was created so the federal gov't could spend more money. if you don't actually need to have wealth (ie gold) you can just print all the money you need. the explosion of the federal gov'ts size can be traced back to the time when we decided to switch out currency to funny money and to tax the people via the IRS
No that is simply not true. Read about Alexander Hamilton and his central bank. It was created when we still had a gold standard. It was crushed by Andrew Jackson, but was later brought back as the Federal Reserve. Though I/We can point to several major economic disasters that occurred under the Fed's watch. I can think of many more that happened before it was re-created. More over the Federal reserve is not the sole determiner of the value of the dollar. A majority part of it's worth is set by the free market in a variety of currency exchanges. I could go on but I am sure most of what I have to say has been covered else where.
-------------------- The trouble with fighting for human freedom is that one spends most of one's time defending scoundrels. For it is against scoundrels that oppressive laws are first aimed, and oppression must be stopped at the beginning if it is to be stopped at all. ~H. L. Mencken~
|
bonnahoo
A Friend



Registered: 03/06/06
Posts: 371
|
Is it time for a Revolution? [Re: Phred]
#7981008 - 02/05/08 12:01 AM (15 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
I was thinking if Ron Paul doesnt win, I think its time for a serious revolution. I mean there are plenty of people that can get involved and help do something like this. I can tell you right now that if McCain gets in, this country is gonna go down the shit hole even farther.
|
Coaster
Baʿal



Registered: 05/22/06
Posts: 33,501
Loc: Deep in the Valley
Last seen: 12 years, 3 months
|
Re: Is it time for a Revolution? [Re: bonnahoo]
#7981026 - 02/05/08 12:05 AM (15 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
mccain will not get in
--------------------
|
BrainChemistry
Captain Obvious



Registered: 06/19/07
Posts: 3,657
Loc: Mountains of N. America
Last seen: 10 years, 5 days
|
Re: Is it time for a Revolution? [Re: bonnahoo]
#7981054 - 02/05/08 12:10 AM (15 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
I think a change is coming whether Ron Paul gets voted into office or not. Our economy is on the decline, and more and more government institutions are getting bad rap from the population. Reform is the wave of the future, we just have to get all these fricken baby boomers out of office.
-------------------- Word to your mom.
|
Cubie
Moderator




Registered: 01/11/08
Posts: 8,840
Loc: Down the rabbit hole...
Last seen: 11 years, 8 months
|
Re: Is it time for a Revolution? [Re: Coaster]
#7981060 - 02/05/08 12:12 AM (15 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
I'm down for the revolution
|
BrainChemistry
Captain Obvious



Registered: 06/19/07
Posts: 3,657
Loc: Mountains of N. America
Last seen: 10 years, 5 days
|
Re: Is it time for a Revolution? [Re: Cubie]
#7981113 - 02/05/08 12:23 AM (15 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
Vive le resistance!
-------------------- Word to your mom.
|
Smackshadow
It's Time for Wild Speculation


Registered: 09/27/05
Posts: 575
Last seen: 19 days, 10 hours
|
|
"Liberals talk of the revolution like Conservatives talk about the rapture."
-------------------- The trouble with fighting for human freedom is that one spends most of one's time defending scoundrels. For it is against scoundrels that oppressive laws are first aimed, and oppression must be stopped at the beginning if it is to be stopped at all. ~H. L. Mencken~
|
Cubie
Moderator




Registered: 01/11/08
Posts: 8,840
Loc: Down the rabbit hole...
Last seen: 11 years, 8 months
|
Re: Is it time for a Revolution? [Re: Smackshadow]
#7981146 - 02/05/08 12:33 AM (15 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
Them fukers have had us locked the fuck down since 1968.
|
fireworks_god
Sexy.Butt.McDanger



Registered: 03/12/02
Posts: 24,855
Loc: Pandurn
Last seen: 1 year, 12 days
|
Re: Ron Paul's America? [Re: Smackshadow]
#7981374 - 02/05/08 02:23 AM (15 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Smackshadow said: That is absurd read the 16th amendment. The IRS is a government agency doing the business expressly stated in our amended constitution. More over our country wasn't doing just fine with out it. In fact do the the regressive taxation imposed by flat taxes there was major and devastating economic consequences.
Yes, but it isn't necessary to have federal income taxes when federal spending is limited. Most of our overseas expenditures are unnecessary. The idea that we should sacrifice the prosperity and well-being of our own country in order to promote prosperity and well-being across this planet by maintaining forces in hundreds of countries, spending billions meddling in internal affairs of other nations, and billions more subsidizing dictatorships is one that belies the nature of reality and the guiding principle of self-interest (unless you have an enormous ego that dictates that everything has to do with you and that you're some kind of God, which I think the United States is pretty guilty of ).
I think it demonstrates the height of our lunacy when we refuse to stop subsdizing Israel because they our only ally in the Middle East, and that the need our protection, but then we send three times the resources to their neighbors, billions in funds and weapons, while simultaneously, allegedly promoting democracy and freedom in Iraq through war while we invest billions in a military dictator in Pakistan who overthrew an elected government. Bill Hicks had routines about this back when Bush Sr. was President, you know? "Pick up the gun!" Support Saddam, take him out, support Osama, take him out, support Muscharef, take him out... 
The idea that the federal government needs the federal income tax is the real issue. The fact is that it doesn't if the federal government spent in accordance with the lack of its existence. We the people could decide its time to stop allowing the federal government to supercede state rights and tax us directly. The notion that it is necessary to have our income taxed by the federal government needs to be dispelled.
Quote:
If the federal government is spending money on state run programs then the fed. government is well within its rights to set standards for the recipients of that money. Thus they need an agency to monitor those issues.
I believe there is an inherent problem in this. The federal government directly taxes the American people in order to have this money to offer the state governments in the first place, and then it creates a bureaucracy to regulate the apportioning of this money. If the federal government did not take this money directly from the American people's income, then the states would not need to be dependent upon the money the federal government took from its people.
What you state is all very true, but we should be questioning if it should be happening in the first place. The whole process serves as a detriment to the education of the American people because it wastes resources and supercedes the rights of the states. The idea that schools should be held accountable to federal bureaucrats is ridiculuous. The federal state does not need to exist like this in order for individuals to receive proper education. It really has nothing to do with education and everything to do with power and control. Parents and the educational system should have the power, as they are the ones who have the responsibility for the education and the children receiving it. With local and state government, people have the power to take care of education. The federal government is not necessary, and its role is detrimental.
Quote:
No that is simply not true. Read about Alexander Hamilton and his central bank. It was created when we still had a gold standard. It was crushed by Andrew Jackson, but was later brought back as the Federal Reserve.
Thus the irony of Andrew Jackson making his appearance on the $20 bill... central bankers have a dark sense of humor, it would seem.
Quote:
Though I/We can point to several major economic disasters that occurred under the Fed's watch. I can think of many more that happened before it was re-created. More over the Federal reserve is not the sole determiner of the value of the dollar. A majority part of it's worth is set by the free market in a variety of currency exchanges. I could go on but I am sure most of what I have to say has been covered else where.
Exactly, depressions existed before the Federal Reserve and while we were on a gold standard. I think the main problem with the Federal Reserve itself isn't the fact that it exists, but simply the severe lack of oversight it is given. I don't really think that only using gold and silver as currency could work, but I do recognize the value of keeping some weight to a currency, as well as competing currencies.
The real thing to blame in all of this is American hegemony. Anyone who thought this could be continued in perpetuity is the problem. Mostly it is the federal government to blame, but the true responsibility lies with the American people. Its hard to place blame though, because mostly its simply a gradual movement that people become conditioned to, the people and the government itself. Its all due to a lack of awareness. People are quick to dismiss Ron Paul and his chances, but all he truly represents is realization of what is occuring. He has said himself that it isn't about himself (he was reluctant to run in the first place), but has stated that he is a conduit for this awareness.
We can't spend forever, we can't borrow forever, and we can't print forever. We can't exert our influence over the rest of the world like this forever because of the nature of reality. It takes energy to do so and our problems at home have resulted because of how much energy we put into the problems on the other side of the planet. Of course, the reality is that, one way or the other, it will stop. It already has begun to. The more conditions here in this country worsen, the more the people will demand that we pull ourselves back within our borders. The fact that Ron Paul has received so much support is a testament to how fast this is happening.
The rest of the world is more than ready to take care of itself, as we've made them all rich through our subsidization and trying to take care of all of their problems for them. China, India, and Russia will surpass the United States as world powers, and Europe is strong, stable, and will benefit from the growth of these other nations. Even Africa will likely benefit from China investing in it.
--------------------
If I should die this very moment I wouldn't fear For I've never known completeness Like being here Wrapped in the warmth of you Loving every breath of you
|
Smackshadow
It's Time for Wild Speculation


Registered: 09/27/05
Posts: 575
Last seen: 19 days, 10 hours
|
|
I am not going to disagree with you that the USA is spending way to much money on what I consider pointless endeavors. However, I do disagree with you that the IRS and the income tax should be kept. If we want to lower our spending then let us make the hard decisions first. Cut spending to the military industrial complex. Cut spending on the war on drugs. Cut half of the spending on our criminal justice system. Pay down the national debt. Then if we have huge revenue left over cut taxes.
But if we are going to cut taxes, lets cut sales tax first, then property tax second. Then lets lower income tax.
As for education I believe that the federal should be involved to an extent. They should help set minimum standards for school, give block grants to struggling institutions, and test (at least to some extent) that our schools are preforming well. Why do I believe this? Because in order to limit the barriers of entry to segments of the labor market, we need at least some standardization of education.
-------------------- The trouble with fighting for human freedom is that one spends most of one's time defending scoundrels. For it is against scoundrels that oppressive laws are first aimed, and oppression must be stopped at the beginning if it is to be stopped at all. ~H. L. Mencken~
|
djnoktirnal
Ponderer



Registered: 04/26/06
Posts: 195
Loc: the psychabyss
Last seen: 9 months, 2 days
|
Re: Ron Paul's America? [Re: Minstrel]
#7982050 - 02/05/08 10:24 AM (15 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
you are right on. But it is hard to convince those getting free money. Hell, it's hard for me, knowing by voting for ron paul i am voting against the grants i get for school. but i know that he is right, even if it means no more free money. The thing is, with real money and less taxes and less inflation, and less regulation ie more freedom and less government, i probably wouldn't need the handout to go to school. end the welfare-police-political campaign based economy. taxes should be on consumption, not production. a strong economy produces goods and services and sells them to the world, an economy that bases its success on how much money we are borrowing and spending, and spending, is destined to fail. every notice that the more money we spend, the better they say the economy is doing? VOTE RON PAUL
-------------------- WWJDWWMD's? What Would Jesus Do With Weapons of Mass Destruction?
 
Edited by djnoktirnal (02/05/08 10:30 AM)
|
|