Londo_Jowo
Lifer
I don't see Trump winning the GOP nomination for President or Vice-President. Maybe Obama could kick Biden to the curb and take Trump as his VP.
Why does everyone hate the Constitution so much? You piss and moan that no one adheres to it yet when someone presents himself who is honest, has integrity and votes according to Constitutional values he is disrespected as radical and crazy. Maybe you really don't want a Constitutional republic. But at least be honest about it and stop bullshitting yourself or lead others on to believe you care anything about this nations greatest document. Don't bitch about bailouts, illegal wiretapping, torture, unjust wars or corporations being "above the law". You can't bitch because you don't dare put someone in the position to make a difference. You like being lied to. It sooths your soul to be told "I'm going to do this great thing" when running for office only to find out it wasn't what you were told during his term. Until your values change, until you value truth, honesty and integrity, you not only get what we have now but you fucking deserve it.
Hey guy, you know it's possible to like the things Ron Paul stands for that uphold Constitutional values like being against illegal wiretapping/torture/unjust wars/etc but still find him radical and crazy due to his radical and catastrophically horrible economic views that have nothing to do with the Constitution, right?
I wish we had a president who would stand against illegal warrantless wiretapping, but I'm not willing to melt the US economy to get it.
Whoozyerdaddy
Lifer
- Jun 27, 2005
- 19,216
- 1
- 61
RP is, overall, a kook.
It absolutely is his views. He hits home on a couple of hot button issues for conservatives like smaller, cheaper government and handing more power back to the states but beyond that he's kind of nuts.
No... It's his views. Specifically his economic views.
If anything it's RP that takes votes away from Huckabee. Huck leans pretty far right. If RP wasn't in the game I think Huck would do much better. He still wouldn't win but he'd make a stronger showing.
Ehhh... this sounds like RP supporter paranoia to me. He currently has the best chance to win so lets smear his reputation... Typical RP supporter crap.
I don't see how he could have lost. The R's have shown a history of handing the nom to guys because "it was their turn". Dob Dole anyone?
Umm... no. He would have won either way. RP certainly would not have. Plus if he could pull it off with that boat anchor of a veep he chose, there was NO WAY he was going to lose the nom.
Jesus... based on what poll? Every poll I've ever seen related to RP has been totally manipulated by his supporters. The polls you guys were throwing around last time were beyond ludicrous. Post a scientific poll taken by Zogby, Gallup or any other reputable organization that shows that.
Please... It's too early for all the Ron Paul bullshit to start. Besides, he's going to be overshadowed by another kook... Donald Trump... who, in my book, is just the right kind of crazy. :biggrin::thumbsup:
Last edited:
Siddhartha
Lifer
- Oct 17, 1999
- 12,505
- 3
- 81
He's a fan of the Austrian school of economics, ie: the most widely mocked school of economics there is. (they don't believe in actually proving their theories with scary numbers) Right out of the gate, you've got a guy in charge who believes in economic theories that have no basis in fact.
He wants to return to the gold standard or another commodity backed currency, which would be a horrible idea. (there's a reason why every time it's been tried every country eventually gave up on it as being unsustainable)
I could go on, but his economic ideas are transparently terrible.
Ron Paul actually doesn't want the US to return to a gold standard per se, he just wants people to be able to choose to use gold or silver if they so wished to via competing currencies etc
Its only unsustainable because the government wanted to print money and you can't print gold. In the 70s we needed money to pay for wars and more social programs without actually taxing people, so we gave up on actually backing up our money with something. What happened? Inflation, surprise!
Its only been about 40 years since the world has been on a fiat system, so I don't know where you come up with with the "every country that tries it gives up on it eventually" crap.
Depends on what your interpretation of the Constitution is and how it should be utilized going forward.
This world is dangerous, libertopian viewpoints take a very naive, archaic, and simplistic view of the world. The Constitution wasn't meant to be the whole house, it was meant to be the foundation of the house. To believe that the framers could imagine societal progress and build the entire framework for an infinite future is simply ludicrous.
Inflation in the 70s had far more to do with oil and economic manipulation through price controls than anything else.
The world has been on fiat in one form or another for over a hundred years.
"Competing currencies" is another word for chaos. A huge barrier to an efficient economy is having a currency that is unified within the country.
The current situation is transitory. The US' currency has been too high for far too long in relation to several other currencies, namely China. This is what has caused the trade imbalance and our huge drop in tax revenues and industrial economic activity. Bernanke is attempting to force the issue with QE.
Notice anything strange about this chart?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:1_RMB_to_US_dollar.svg
As the post above me states, he's more into competing currency but depending on who you talk to that could be just as bad. Regardless of what he believes, does he have Constitutional authority to change these things?
A strict adherence to libertarian ideas won't happen. You know that and so do I.
I guess you've never heard of the Weimar Republic?
Anyone who doesn't think that American society will collapse from Hyperinflation within the next 6 years has got to suffer from low IQ.
When we can't tax anymore, due to the interest being too high, do you honestly think that Congress will slash spening rather than print money to fund what can't be covered by taxation?
And I've said it once, and I'll say it again. Hard money is useless as long as there is fractional reserve banking. Fractional reserve banking is embezzlement and would be illegal in a society in which banksters weren't granted special priveleges by tyrants.
Since '94 its held around .15/.16 on the dollar? Don't really know where you're going with this though.
Kid, don't even try and debate Weimar with me. Only utter morons point to Weimar or Zimbabwe when trying to debate currency. They are wholly different situations.
The biggest issue with Weimar was that they were issuing currency to pay foreign debts without purchasing anything domestically with it. This "hot money" is what resulted in the inflation, not the debt itself, or the issuance of currency itself. That's not even to mention that Germany itself was gutted industrially by the takeover of the Saar by the French.
If you're so certain about inflation, lets bet $1,000, inflation adjusted, on it. I will put the money in an escrow account and in 6 years we'll see who wins. If it is so certain then I'm sure you'll not worry about putting the money up. We'll just have to define what "hyperinflation" is.
We can certainly tax more and we absolutely should. Taxation has nothing to do with the interest on the debt, I would love for you to explain that statement.
How is FRB "embezzlement"? FRB is a natural occurrence because all of the deposits aren't required to be on demand at all times. Requiring 100% reserves is simply moronic and simplistic in thinking.
Steeplerot
Lifer
- Mar 29, 2004
- 13,051
- 6
- 81
No matter how much you gold standard fed reserve nuts and NWO drones want Hitler to be able to rearm Germany with his gold reserves too bad. FDR slowed his shit down by adopting a modern currency and isolating him.
This is by the way where your stupid conspiracies come from, Nazi sympathizers in the 1930s wanting to help Hitler since the Versailles Treaty kept him from rebuilding without gold..you idiot conspiracy traffickers never once did look at where this old shit comes from did you?
I wish FDR was around to whack you guys upside the head with his cane for being such naive piss-poor Americans.
This is by the way where your stupid conspiracies come from, Nazi sympathizers in the 1930s wanting to help Hitler since the Versailles Treaty kept him from rebuilding without gold..you idiot conspiracy traffickers never once did look at where this old shit comes from did you?
I wish FDR was around to whack you guys upside the head with his cane for being such naive piss-poor Americans.
Last edited by a moderator:
A trade imbalance should be offset by raising and lowering currencies relative to each other. An artificially pegged currency won't appreciate if accumulating assets through the imbalance.
The interesting part of that graph that it shows exactly when China started manipulating the currency, and, if you think about the timeline, when a lot of our domestic jobs started going overseas. Trade treaties and such has almost nothing to do with the situation, it's currency.
You see, Japan faced a similar situation. How do you accumulate trade surpluses over time and still maintain a weak currency? They couldn't do it, so they faced eventual decline, the way they kept themselves out of the hole was to spend.
China's trying to do the same now. However, Bernanke is making it VERY difficult for them, if not impossible. This is why you'll see the Dollar come back. Long-term the manipulation China has been doing cannot be sustained, that is, unless they want to accumulate endless amounts of treasuries.
China also learned from Japan's mistake with investments. Japanese companies had dollars to put to work from the trade surpluses, they put it into RE like Rockefeller, only to see the values fall once the Dollar strengthened and the US turned around economically. They got fucked and declined economically. China's trying to avoid that by accumulating Treasuries but they'll fail there too, mainly because Bernanke is fucking them on that side too. Eventually they'll have to buy US assets directly, RE or whatever. They won't be able to buy companies since we'll block that. They'll start buying RE, then you'll see our construction economy take off.
What you are witnessing is not the debauchery of the Dollar, you are witnessing an economic world war.
Naturally people are bitching about the "inflation", but what's worse? The inflation today or the Chinese continuing to screw us economically until they bootstrap their economy up to a modern one? Frankly, I'm tired of them doing that.
Ron Paul, Donald Trump, Sarah Palin, Michelle Bachmann, Huckabee.
What a freak show.
None of them will be the Republican nominee.
What a freak show.
None of them will be the Republican nominee.
Londo_Jowo
Lifer
Siddhartha
Lifer
- Oct 17, 1999
- 12,505
- 3
- 81
How about Paul Ryan. He seems to be saying the kind of things that would support from the GOP base.
Last edited:
It wouldnt matter if he won POTUS or not. He'd still be surrounded by people who disagree with his ideas.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 24K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter