Ron Paul

The place to discuss everything but soccer
User avatar
AKsoldier
First Team
First Team
Posts: 4142
Joined: Tue Nov 18, 2003 6:50 pm
Location: Chicago

Post by AKsoldier » Sun Dec 11, 2011 12:47 am

Anyone watch the debate tonight?

Ron Paul did a great job. Here are some highlights.

http://ronpaulflix.com/2011/12/ron-paul ... c-10-2011/
Image
Bog. Honor. Ojczyzna

User avatar
umbro2914
Posts: 285
Joined: Sat Sep 05, 2009 11:30 am
Location: New Jersey :/

Post by umbro2914 » Sun Dec 11, 2011 3:30 pm

he was phenomenal! And he is really picking up a lot of support / momentum.
Did you see Perry and Romney pandering to him at the end? Amazing.
A first in Iowa is certainly within reach!

Hetman
Youth Team
Youth Team
Posts: 1247
Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2010 9:33 pm

Post by Hetman » Sun Dec 11, 2011 4:59 pm

he won't win, he has no chance. even if he got the nomination obama would easily beat him. americans will elect poor leaders, but thankfully never a crazy ayn rand acolyte like him.

User avatar
umbro2914
Posts: 285
Joined: Sat Sep 05, 2009 11:30 am
Location: New Jersey :/

Post by umbro2914 » Sun Dec 11, 2011 5:22 pm

Hetman wrote:he won't win, he has no chance. even if he got the nomination obama would easily beat him. americans will elect poor leaders, but thankfully never a crazy ayn rand acolyte like him.
hmm thats why he polls higher than obama with independents. People like truth, and Paul gives them that.

User avatar
AKsoldier
First Team
First Team
Posts: 4142
Joined: Tue Nov 18, 2003 6:50 pm
Location: Chicago

Post by AKsoldier » Mon Dec 19, 2011 12:18 pm

Over $ 4 million raised during the weekend, and now Paul is leading in Iowa.
Great weekend to say the least.

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main ... -iowa.html

Paul 23% (+2)
Romney 20% (+4)
Gingrich 14% (-8)
Bachmann 10% (-1)
Perry 10% (+1)
Santorum 10% (+2)
Huntsman 4% (-1)
Johnson 2% (+1)
Image
Bog. Honor. Ojczyzna

User avatar
TheWhiteDreamsOfLife
Posts: 351
Joined: Tue Jan 05, 2010 8:11 pm
Location: Osoyoos BC/Edmonton AB

Post by TheWhiteDreamsOfLife » Tue Dec 20, 2011 1:39 am

AKsoldier wrote:Over $ 4 million raised during the weekend, and now Paul is leading in Iowa.
Great weekend to say the least.

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main ... -iowa.html

Paul 23% (+2)
Romney 20% (+4)
Gingrich 14% (-8)
Bachmann 10% (-1)
Perry 10% (+1)
Santorum 10% (+2)
Huntsman 4% (-1)
Johnson 2% (+1)
One thing I don't get is why is Gary Johnson getting those two percent. He is so similar to Ron Paul, and stands no change of wining. Ron Paul could use those two percent!

User avatar
AKsoldier
First Team
First Team
Posts: 4142
Joined: Tue Nov 18, 2003 6:50 pm
Location: Chicago

Post by AKsoldier » Tue Dec 20, 2011 10:33 am

WhiteDreamsofLife- I think that's whats going to happen anyway.

Here is an interesting article concerning America's economy and how bad things are. Here are a few excerpts.

http://news.yahoo.com/50-facts-u-econom ... 04459.html

"Even though most Americans have become very frustrated with this economy, the reality is that the vast majority of them still have no idea just how bad our economic decline has been or how much trouble we are going to be in if we don’t make dramatic changes immediately,” writes The Economic Collapse (TEC).

If the number of Americans that “wanted jobs” was the same today as it was back in 2007, the “official” unemployment rate put out by the U.S. government would be up to 11 percent.

If you can believe it, the median price of a home in Detroit is now just $6000.

According to a study that was just released, CEO pay at America’s biggest companies rose by 36.5 percent in just one recent 12 month period.

the heart of our economic problems is the Federal Reserve. The Federal Reserve is a perpetual debt machine, it has almost completely destroyed the value of the U.S. dollar and it has an absolutely nightmarish track record of incompetence. If the Federal Reserve system had never been created, the U.S. economy would be in far better shape. The federal government needs to shut down the Federal Reserve and start issuing currency that is not debt-based.

“Hopefully next year more Americans than ever will wake up, because 2012 is going to represent a huge turning point for this country,” TEC writes.
Image
Bog. Honor. Ojczyzna

User avatar
TheWhiteStarArmy
First Team
First Team
Posts: 4206
Joined: Tue Nov 18, 2003 7:30 am
Location: Here and there

Post by TheWhiteStarArmy » Tue Dec 20, 2011 2:56 pm

And there are other views on the economy as well, some that put into doubt Paul's claims
So here we are, three years later. How’s it going? Inflation has fluctuated, but, at the end of the day, consumer prices have risen just 4.5 percent, meaning an average annual inflation rate of only 1.5 percent. Who could have predicted that printing so much money would cause so little inflation? Well, I could. And did. And so did others who understood the Keynesian economics Mr. Paul reviles. But Mr. Paul’s supporters continue to claim, somehow, that he has been right about everything.

Still, while the original proponents of the doctrine won’t ever admit that they were wrong — my experience is that nobody in the political world ever admits to having been wrong about anything — you might think that having been so completely off-base about something so central to their belief system would have caused the Austrians to lose popularity, even within the G.O.P. After all, as recently as the Bush years, many Republicans were all for printing money when the economy slumps. “Aggressive monetary policy can reduce the depth of a recession,” declared the 2004 Economic Report of the President.

What has happened instead, however, is that hard-money doctrine and paranoia about inflation have taken over the party, even as the predicted inflation keeps failing to materialize. For example, in February, Representative Paul Ryan, who is somewhat inexplicably regarded as the party’s deep thinker on matters economic, harangued Mr. Bernanke on how terrible it is to “debase” a currency and pointed to a rise in commodity prices in late 2010 and early 2011 as evidence that inflation was finally coming. Commodity prices have plunged since then, but there is no sign that Mr. Ryan or anyone else is having second thoughts.

Now, it’s still very unlikely that Ron Paul will become president. But, as I said, his economic doctrine has, in effect, become the official G.O.P. line, despite having been proved utterly wrong by events. And what will happen if that doctrine actually ends up being put into action? Great Depression, here we come.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/16/opini ... dness.html
Image

User avatar
AKsoldier
First Team
First Team
Posts: 4142
Joined: Tue Nov 18, 2003 6:50 pm
Location: Chicago

Post by AKsoldier » Tue Dec 20, 2011 4:27 pm

You post an article written by Paul Krugman, a liberal Keynesian economist. Of course he will say whatever he can to try to paint the picture that "everything is alright", especially since our government has been implementing Keynesian policies. I would like to see him "debunk" or explain at least half of the 50 things from the article I posted.

Here's a good quick video explaining the differences between Keynesian and Austrian ( Hayek) economics.

http://www.fox19.com/story/16014096/rea ... s-vs-hayek
Image
Bog. Honor. Ojczyzna

User avatar
umbro2914
Posts: 285
Joined: Sat Sep 05, 2009 11:30 am
Location: New Jersey :/

Post by umbro2914 » Fri Dec 23, 2011 1:54 am

Krugman is the chief priest at the church of the federal reserve. He is a big believer/supporter/defender of the Keynesian/fed system. Of course he's going to criticise Ron Paul, who is a critic of the current fed system.

WhiteDreams - I assume whoever at this point is still supporting Gary Johnson has some irreconcilable issue with Paul, because everyone else that already supports these ideas realizes that Paul's chances are a million times better than Garys. They most likely are firmly pro-choice, or have an issue with Ron's immigration stance, leading them to support GJ who differs from Paul on those issues.
Cant wait till Ron wins Iowa :D

User avatar
TheWhiteStarArmy
First Team
First Team
Posts: 4206
Joined: Tue Nov 18, 2003 7:30 am
Location: Here and there

Post by TheWhiteStarArmy » Fri Dec 23, 2011 5:18 pm

AKsoldier wrote:You post an article written by Paul Krugman, a liberal Keynesian economist. Of course he will say whatever he can to try to paint the picture that "everything is alright", especially since our government has been implementing Keynesian policies. I would like to see him "debunk" or explain at least half of the 50 things from the article I posted.

Here's a good quick video explaining the differences between Keynesian and Austrian ( Hayek) economics.

http://www.fox19.com/story/16014096/rea ... s-vs-hayek
I'd be willing to guarantee he could debunk those things. He's an expert economist. Just because you don't agree with him doesn't mean that he's not qualified. I'd be willing to be he knows a lot more about economics than either you or I do.

I know the differences between Keynesian and Austrian economics. I think, along with lots of economists, that going to Austrian economics would lead to an even worse recession.
Image

Pan Borkowski
First Team
First Team
Posts: 5143
Joined: Tue Nov 18, 2003 9:27 am
Contact:

Post by Pan Borkowski » Fri Dec 23, 2011 6:37 pm

TheWhiteStarArmy wrote:I think, along with lots of economists, that going to Austrian economics would lead to an even worse recession.
Haha.... no.

And I have to agree with AKSolider, Krugman (as well as most Keynesian economists) are just out of touch with reality.

Hetman
Youth Team
Youth Team
Posts: 1247
Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2010 9:33 pm

Post by Hetman » Fri Dec 23, 2011 7:52 pm

Pan Borkowski wrote:
TheWhiteStarArmy wrote:I think, along with lots of economists, that going to Austrian economics would lead to an even worse recession.
Haha.... no.

And I have to agree with AKSolider, Krugman (as well as most Keynesian economists) are just out of touch with reality.
Actually Keynesian economists like Krugman, Delong etc. predicted the effects of the financial crisis to a tee. They have been 100% right on inflation, interest rates, exchange rates, employment, commodity prices, QE, austerity policies, and Europe's dilemma.

If you hold people like Schiff, Paul, Murphy on their predictions for what would be the world now, it's laughable. I love Murphy's response. When no hyperinflation and collapse of the dollar came, his retort was that if everyone saw the world like he did then it would have happened. :lol:
that's austrian economics in a nutshell. they don't believe in models, statistics, empirical research. it's just a libertarian wet dream. where only gold is money and anything public is inherently evil. i love when Ron Paul's dumb son Rand basically said universal health care is slavery for doctors. :lol: these people live in a fantasy world.

Austrian economics is a religion/cult. you have to believe certain principles no matter what. Keynesian economics has evolved hugely since Keynes. No Keynesian even really believes most of what Keynes did. Massive research was done after him and some theories survived and others didn't. Friedman's monetarism quashed most of the reasons for stimulus and so did the 70s. The only reason for stimulus that was left was a great depression scenario where it worked, and which repeated itself in 2008. Trouble is everyone forgot what ended the depression.

User avatar
AKsoldier
First Team
First Team
Posts: 4142
Joined: Tue Nov 18, 2003 6:50 pm
Location: Chicago

Post by AKsoldier » Sat Dec 24, 2011 12:07 pm

Hetman wrote:
Pan Borkowski wrote:
TheWhiteStarArmy wrote:I think, along with lots of economists, that going to Austrian economics would lead to an even worse recession.
Haha.... no.

And I have to agree with AKSolider, Krugman (as well as most Keynesian economists) are just out of touch with reality.
Actually Keynesian economists like Krugman, Delong etc. predicted the effects of the financial crisis to a tee. They have been 100% right on inflation, interest rates, exchange rates, employment, commodity prices, QE, austerity policies, and Europe's dilemma.

If you hold people like Schiff, Paul, Murphy on their predictions for what would be the world now, it's laughable. I love Murphy's response. When no hyperinflation and collapse of the dollar came, his retort was that if everyone saw the world like he did then it would have happened. :lol:
that's austrian economics in a nutshell. they don't believe in models, statistics, empirical research. it's just a libertarian wet dream. where only gold is money and anything public is inherently evil. i love when Ron Paul's dumb son Rand basically said universal health care is slavery for doctors. :lol: these people live in a fantasy world.

Austrian economics is a religion/cult. you have to believe certain principles no matter what. Keynesian economics has evolved hugely since Keynes. No Keynesian even really believes most of what Keynes did. Massive research was done after him and some theories survived and others didn't. Friedman's monetarism quashed most of the reasons for stimulus and so did the 70s. The only reason for stimulus that was left was a great depression scenario where it worked, and which repeated itself in 2008. Trouble is everyone forgot what ended the depression.


Watch this video and then tell me who, "lives in a fantasy world" and "is laughable". The head of the Fed Bernanke (a Keynesian) was completely CLUELESS in regards to the housing crisis, yet the "laughable" Schiff was right about the housing crisis.

Also, I encourage you to read Meltdown: A Free-Market Look at Why the Stock Market Collapsed, the Economy Tanked, and Government Bailouts Will Make Things Worse by Thomas Woods. http://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/meltdow ... omas+woods

Hopefully it will help open up your eyes.
Last edited by AKsoldier on Sat Dec 24, 2011 5:11 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Image
Bog. Honor. Ojczyzna

User avatar
AKsoldier
First Team
First Team
Posts: 4142
Joined: Tue Nov 18, 2003 6:50 pm
Location: Chicago

Post by AKsoldier » Sat Dec 24, 2011 5:10 pm

dp
Image
Bog. Honor. Ojczyzna

Hetman
Youth Team
Youth Team
Posts: 1247
Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2010 9:33 pm

Post by Hetman » Sun Dec 25, 2011 9:30 am

I would have to write way too much to explain things to you. I'll just say a few things.

There's a reason why Austrian "Economics" is not taught at any reputable school in the US or in the world. It's simply bunk. It's politics, not science.

Economics is a social science which is vastly complex. Take the housing bubble. There is not one big factor that caused it, but multiple things. Wall street compensation makes traders seek short term profits over long term viability. The ratings agencies are paid by sellers of debt/instruments not buyers. The FED kept interest rates too low for too long, but even when they did raise them long term rates barely moved, why? Well because the world is awash with savings, which ultimately go to where there are investment opportunities, the US. This means Americans can borrow too much. The rest of the world actually wants this status quo. The Chinese don't want their currency to appreciate or other developing nations, Germany and Japan don't want to import more than they export. These global imbalances are serious long term problems, but all nations don't want to do the necessary changes. Also deregulation in the 70s and 90s took away the safety valves from banking and led to shadow banking. The government didn't know how dangerous all this was until it was way too late. Further the private sector is too leveraged. If you thought the government was bad, think again. The tax structure and lax regulation has made big institutions take on too much debt. This had led to systemic risk, where one bank goes down the whole economy goes as well. All these problems have to be resolved and it ain't easy. There are others issues as well. All these things contribute to a bad system.

The solution isn't to end the FED. Even though Bernanke didn't see the bubble coming, having a FED made sure the second great depression didn't happen. Going back to the gold standard is ridiculous because that changed cause it was not sustainable and collapses. Bubbles are social phenomena that have existed longer than paper money and will unfortunately always exist. As long as people keep forgetting history and saying " this time is different". People should have common sense that owning houses or stocks wouldn't make you rich. But that won't go away, for the same reasons every year some jackass will make millions on a get rich quick book.

Also you need to learn what Keynesian means. First off most main stream economists aren't even Keynesian. You act as if it's Keynesian (academics) vs. Austrians (righteous fringe). The spectrum of economic views is vast. You'll hardly ever find a majority of economists agreeing on much. There was a vast amount of economists for and against stimulus, for and against the bush tax cuts, etc. Also you act and as if only Austrians saw the crisis, which is not true. Krugman predicted the bubble, but most notably Roubini and Schiller with brilliant analysis. I bet you didn't know that Keynes was largely against big government spending unless there was a big crisis. In his view the government should build surpluses in good times to have around for bad times.

The real issues are complex. Some simple mantras by extreme right wingers will not solve things. I highly suggest you look into the philosophy behind austrian economics or the extreme free market fervour. People like Ayn Rand and Murray Rothbard are nuts and most people don't want to live this their idealized societies.

User avatar
AKsoldier
First Team
First Team
Posts: 4142
Joined: Tue Nov 18, 2003 6:50 pm
Location: Chicago

Post by AKsoldier » Sun Dec 25, 2011 5:00 pm

Hetman, I appreciate your response without any insults or name calling.

IMO, the US government is on a UNSUSTAINABLE path of debt. Also, I prefer "smaller" government and to let the free market/private sector dictate. Look at the United States Postal Service compared to FedEx or UPS.

I guess we can agree to disagree though.
Image
Bog. Honor. Ojczyzna

Hetman
Youth Team
Youth Team
Posts: 1247
Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2010 9:33 pm

Post by Hetman » Sun Dec 25, 2011 6:01 pm

AKsoldier wrote:Hetman, I appreciate your response without any insults or name calling.

IMO, the US government is on a UNSUSTAINABLE path of debt. Also, I prefer "smaller" government and to let the free market/private sector dictate. Look at the United States Postal Service compared to FedEx or UPS.

I guess we can agree to disagree though.
I prefer smaller govt as well, but that's a complicated debate. It's hard to define what small government is. I for example would prefer privatizing public schools, the government gives every one choice (the govt would pay for whatever school you go to). Parents would send their kids to the best schools and those schools would get the most resources. Best way to hold teachers accountable and get rid of a useless bureaucracy. However making healthcare public to me is the best way of getting rid of the private bureacracy in healthcare. Ironically the govt can do healthcare better than the private sector cause healthcare inherently has about every market failure imaginable. Taxes should ideally be low, but the problem with smaller govt is that it doesn't solve the problem of private tyrannies. Obviously the govt can be one as well, but at least with a proper govt it can work for us. That is not the case with private concentrations of power. If you don't have a govt to combat them you can be quite screwed.

Oh well. I agree with a fair bit of what Paul says, like the drug war, military spending, foreign policy, but just about everything else scares me though :lol:.

User avatar
AKsoldier
First Team
First Team
Posts: 4142
Joined: Tue Nov 18, 2003 6:50 pm
Location: Chicago

Post by AKsoldier » Tue Dec 27, 2011 11:14 am

Hetman wrote:
AKsoldier wrote:Hetman, I appreciate your response without any insults or name calling.

IMO, the US government is on a UNSUSTAINABLE path of debt. Also, I prefer "smaller" government and to let the free market/private sector dictate. Look at the United States Postal Service compared to FedEx or UPS.

I guess we can agree to disagree though.
I prefer smaller govt as well, but that's a complicated debate. It's hard to define what small government is. I for example would prefer privatizing public schools, the government gives every one choice (the govt would pay for whatever school you go to). Parents would send their kids to the best schools and those schools would get the most resources. Best way to hold teachers accountable and get rid of a useless bureaucracy. However making healthcare public to me is the best way of getting rid of the private bureacracy in healthcare. Ironically the govt can do healthcare better than the private sector cause healthcare inherently has about every market failure imaginable. Taxes should ideally be low, but the problem with smaller govt is that it doesn't solve the problem of private tyrannies. Obviously the govt can be one as well, but at least with a proper govt it can work for us. That is not the case with private concentrations of power. If you don't have a govt to combat them you can be quite screwed.

Oh well. I agree with a fair bit of what Paul says, like the drug war, military spending, foreign policy, but just about everything else scares me though :lol:.
Were slowly but surely turning you into a Ron Paul supporter :D

All kidding aside, what candidate are you planning on voting for in 2012?
Image
Bog. Honor. Ojczyzna

User avatar
AKsoldier
First Team
First Team
Posts: 4142
Joined: Tue Nov 18, 2003 6:50 pm
Location: Chicago

Post by AKsoldier » Sun Jan 08, 2012 1:30 pm

I was away on vacation to Cancun so I couldn't post, but Ron Paul got a respectable 3rd place with around 21% of the vote in the Iowa caucus. I was disappointed at first but reminded myself that this is a marathon and not a sprint. The New Hampshire primaries are coming up and I'm hoping for a solid second place finish. Here are some Ron Paul highlights from yesterday's debate.

Image
Bog. Honor. Ojczyzna

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 4 guests