patrick.net
An Antidote to Corporate Media
1,197,086 comments by 14,097 users - AmericanKulak, just_passing_through, mell, Onvacation online now
invite responseComments 1 - 6 of 6 Search these comments
How can Dr. Paul actually assume that all players will play a fair game?
That's the key problem with what is coming out of the GOP. Out of one side of their mouth, they talk about small, limited government, while out of the other side of their mouth, they want to legislate all of the personal choices we make.
it seems they want a small, impotent government when it comes to wealthy multinational corporations, but when it comes to the individual american, they want an in your face, instrusive, violate your privacy kind of government.
It's crazy, I never thought I'd see the day when the GOP advocated for more government regulation of marriage, marijuana, sex, education, etc...
Vicente
2011 Dec 23, 3:58am
Ron Paul is no different than the rest of the GOP.
He's ALL TALK about freedom and liberty and personal decisions and states rights.
But then you look at his HR 2533 "Sanctity of Life Act" introduced in 2009, where clearly he wants to get the Federal foot in the door of declaring life to begin at conception. How does that fit with all his high talk about maximum personal liberty? It doesn't and he's a stinking hypocrite. Personally having spent 20+ in Libertarian circles myself, this sort of GOP faker ticks me off even worse than regular GOP.
HousingWatcher
2011 Dec 23, 8:58am
Prepare for the upcoming Race War! Send cash ASAP to 800-RON-PAUL. Hurry before it is tooo late!
Huntington Moneyworth III, Esq
2011 Dec 23, 10:48am
Ron Paul didn't write these. I did while he was giving me fallatio. Get your facts straight.
FortWayne
2011 Dec 23, 11:08am
Why don't you write him l, I'm sure he can explain it to you. Because many of his proposals do get misinterpreted by media.
Our current system is not a fair game, just see bailouts. He wants to change it so feds don't go around picking winners and losers like they do now.
uomo_senza_nome
2011 Dec 23, 2:30pm
Why don't you write him l, I'm sure he can explain it to you.
I've read enough to understand Austrian economics, which Dr. Paul favors very strongly. I think his answers to the woeful economy is the Austrian prescription so to speak, which will ensure monetary contraction and a severe recession.
Because many of his proposals do get misinterpreted by media.
LOL, they don't even get represented by the media, they just totally ignore him. He's too consistent and as far as that aspect is concerned, he is a misfit in a party of liars and cheats.
Our current system is not a fair game, just see bailouts.
Yes, I understand it is capitalism without failure, which is the worst form of capitalism. But capitalism itself has a fundamental problem, in that you can never have a fair game.
He wants to change it so feds don't go around picking winners and losers like they do now.
Yeah, the problem is it's just him. The rest of his party leave him high and dry when it comes to principles.
Given the amount of Ron Paul supporting threads, I thought I'd start one stating why one may not be a fan of Dr. Paul's philosophy.
I'll try and articulate the reasons that I think I understand, reading several threads/articles and understanding different POV's.
1. Too much ideology and as a result, he doesn't accept practicality.
For instance, the country is in too much debt. He keeps hammering this point and he claims he'll cut a trillion dollars.
Great! But what about all the people in those departments who'll lose their jobs? The economy is already undergoing a terrible, painful labor reallocation from the housing bubble. Can we really afford more people competing in the private sector? Wouldn't such a drastic spending cut really jolt up the unemployment rate? How long would this short-medium term pain last? How long will it take for the "free market" to correct?
2. All this harping about too much debt misses one crucial point (which is the other side of the same coin): too much wealth in too few hands.
Please consider this article: http://squashpractice.wordpress.com/2011/09/12/debt-distraction/
If there is too much debt that cannot be serviced, there's also too much wealth that's not really circulating and looking to extract more rent.
This is the problem of wealth inequality and the after-effect of Reaganism.
By favoring a policy of a stronger dollar, wouldn't he actually end up benefiting the wealthy as opposed to the middle class? The middle class households cannot deleverage less painfully without more dollars in their hands. How would Dr. Paul's policy actually help the debtors (which is majority of the country anyway)?
A strong dollar is happening in the medium term no matter what (given Euro, Yen are all going to the crapper ahead of dollar), so Dr. Paul's strong dollar would be pro-cyclical fiscal policy which would make a recession even worse.
3. Small Government because of over regulation.
LOL. We don't have a honest monetary system. Even if we had one, without regulation -- the system will devolve into anarchy.
http://www.goldstockbull.com/articles/capitalism-needs-regulation-max-keiser-correct-libertarians-mistaken/
Dr. Paul's dogmatism is too much that he won't acknowledge that we actually need Glass-Steagall.
A free market can never be a fair market, since people with too much money are notoriously unfair players in such a system. How can Dr. Paul actually assume that all players will play a fair game? There are issues where practicality trumps ideology; I wouldn't expect Dr. Paul to change his position because he's ideologically too consistent . So I think the powerless would still continue to remain screwed, because majority of the politicians do not possess the same level of consistency as Dr. Paul. Private enterprises need not possess integrity when it comes to cut-throat profits.
I love the man's foreign policy, but on domestic issues -- there seems to be enough reasonable arguments why one may not be that big of a fan.
#housing