Dude, not sharing your opinion is not the same as being stupid and uneducated. And you are very good at presenting your opinions in a way that doesnt make anyone want to stop up and listen.
My simple question was innocent enough. I have personally put myself into deep debt as I bought an apartment. How is that fundamentally different from the state owing money to external sources?
And as others have pointed out, it's not something inherent in the fiat system that you have a tremendous deficit. That's all policy from your current government.
A response without CAPS and 7 !!!!! after every sentecne would be much appreciated.
Peace
Dan
You guys keep beating me down with ludicrous responses that continualy miss the boat. At some point (granted, lately that point is increasingly early in discussion) i just lose it.
Look, you want to understand why the country is in massive debt, you have to understand that the debt is traded for the creation of money. What makes it all the more obscene is that it is not traded for existing money representing existing wealth (ie, gold backed currency has worth because someone mined the gold, and the dollar is exchangeable for that gold, so the wealth exists, someone mined it) ... but instead of trading bonds for existing wealth ... ASKING you as a citizen ... "please mr. citizen, give me some of your hard earned wealth, here is a bond, i promise to pay you back." ... instead of doing that ... the government goes to the Federal Reserve and basicaly says ... here is a bond, give me money, the people promise to pay it back ... and the money that is printed up comes out of your pocket (in)directly, as when the money supply is increased, the value of the dollar in your pocket goes down.
What don't you understand about that? Does This Chart Help You Understand What Happens when the Government gets to just PRINT money? That is the value of YOUR dollar. Ever declining, because the govenrment is ever printing more of them! How bout THIS chart? ... are you starting to understand that it isn't about how much GOLD is in the world, it's about how many DOLLARS are in the world. The supply of gold will never expand or contract at anywhere near the rate that the US Government can print more worthless paper, thus stealing wealth from you!
You can say it is the spending that is the problem.
But if they couldn't just print up the money, then they couldn't just spend it.
That is truth.
And so long as they can just print it up, they will.
You can't stop that.
You can NOT stop that.
If I was to smile and I held out my hand
If I opened it now would you not understand?
You guys keep beating me down with ludicrous responses that continualy miss the boat. At some point (granted, lately that point is increasingly early in discussion) i just lose it.
Look, you want to understand why the country is in massive debt, you have to understand that the debt is traded for the creation of money. What makes it all the more obscene is that it is not traded for existing money representing existing wealth (ie, gold backed currency has worth because someone mined the gold, and the dollar is exchangeable for that gold, so the wealth exists, someone mined it) ... but instead of trading bonds for existing wealth ... ASKING you as a citizen ... "please mr. citizen, give me some of your hard earned wealth, here is a bond, i promise to pay you back." ... instead of doing that ... the government goes to the Federal Reserve and basicaly says ... here is a bond, give me money, the people promise to pay it back ... and the money that is printed up comes out of your pocket (in)directly, as when the money supply is increased, the value of the dollar in your pocket goes down.
What don't you understand about that? Does This Chart Help You Understand What Happens when the Government gets to just PRINT money? That is the value of YOUR dollar. Ever declining, because the govenrment is ever printing more of them! How bout THIS chart? ... are you starting to understand that it isn't about how much GOLD is in the world, it's about how many DOLLARS are in the world. The supply of gold will never expand or contract at anywhere near the rate that the US Government can print more worthless paper, thus stealing wealth from you!
You can say it is the spending that is the problem.
But if they couldn't just print up the money, then they couldn't just spend it.
That is truth.
And so long as they can just print it up, they will.
You can't stop that.
You can NOT stop that.
They could still borrow though. They could still spend just as much and take more from the citizens than they already do. The Government will find a way to spend more and more money as long as people consider their tax returns a nice little bonus and tax cuts a government expense.
Printing the money is not the issue here. Spending the money in the first place is the issue.
Look, I think people should stop bashing this guy for his use of capitalization. I don't see it as him being condescending or anything, I just see it as a stressing of points. When people talk they stress the important syllables. When people debate, they stress the important points. This is something he is obviously very passionate about and I find it more enjoyable reading something that has feeling to it than reading something that is dry and going to make me fall asleep.
I don't know, maybe he really is being arrogant, I just don't see it that way.
They could still borrow though. They could still spend just as much and take more from the citizens than they already do.
NO THEY COULD NOT!
You don't fucking understand it Floyd. And i'm not being a dick. You just flat out don't fucking understand it.
IF there is NO FIAT MONEY, the government CAN NOT just spend at will. It must accquire ASSET BACKED WEALTH from some source ... and it would have to be either extracted as a TAX (to which the people, if faced with a tax to the tune of the inflation they have experienced over the last 50 years, WOULD REBEL AGAINST, and VOTE OUT THE PEOPLE WHO ENACTED IT!) ... or they would have to go to the free market and OBTAIN IT IN EXCHANGE FOR BONDS! But the money they would be receiving in exchange would be EXISTING wealth, BACKED BY A COMMODITY THAT REQUIRED EFFORT TO PRODUCE!
Again. I have spelled this out about 5 times now, and you are still wondering why i am getting "mouthy" with you.
Go back and read the posts and THINK, for goddsake.
You don't fucking understand it Floyd. And i'm not being a dick. You just flat out don't fucking understand it.
IF there is NO FIAT MONEY, the government CAN NOT just spend at will. It must accquire ASSET BACKED WEALTH from some source ... and it would have to be either extracted as a TAX (to which the people, if faced with a tax to the tune of the inflation they have experienced over the last 50 years, WOULD REBEL AGAINST, and VOTE OUT THE PEOPLE WHO ENACTED IT!) ... or they would have to go to the free market and OBTAIN IT IN EXCHANGE FOR BONDS! But the money they would be receiving in exchange would be EXISTING wealth, BACKED BY A COMMODITY THAT REQUIRED EFFORT TO PRODUCE!
Again. I have spelled this out about 5 times now, and you are still wondering why i am getting "mouthy" with you.
Go back and read the posts and THINK, for goddsake.
YES IT IS.
IF THEY DIDN'T HAVE THE MONEY TO SPEND, THEY COULD NOT SPEND IT!
Duh!
They don't have the money now and they are spending it, not because they can print it, but because the average American citizen doesn't really consider the money taken out of their checks as income. And the average American citizen wouldn't care too much if the money held from each check increased either because nobody sees that money in the first place. This is brought on by a government willing to spend the money and a population eager to fund everything that makes them feel good.
I thought about it and I disagree. I'm sorry to not be as good of a person as you. Will you ever forgive me for not being able to reach your lofty status?
Britain ran huge deficits in the 1700s and 1800s under a gold standard. The United States ran a deficit every year in the 1800s under a gold standard.
In fact, you could argue that it is EASIER for a government to run a deficit under the gold standard because the long term price stability and lower interest rates.
1) RP wants to make Gold etc a "competing" currency, not completely replace the existing currency system.
2) RP wants transparency of the Fed first, most probably followed by vast reform or possibly disolving it all together.
3) His main point is this overseas expenditure bullshit. You know what, if I had balls I would withhold my taxes until we brought every last troop home. http://www.orlandosentinel.com/entertainment/orl-bk-snipes020108,0,6084571.story
4) He has REPEATEDLY stated you can't do any of these things over night. Some actual fucking debate on this in the major media would be nice for a change. Fucking pieces of shit.
5) Part of this whack job view by some of his critics is Dr. Paul's fault as well as his campaigns. If they were a bit more clear about Dr. Paul's plan (available on his website), then I don't think people would be so alarmist. Of course the main stream media takes a good portion of the blame there also. And the fact that most people on Earth are fucking retards anyway.
6) How in fuck did we vote GW back in office a second time?
1) RP wants to make Gold etc a "competing" currency, not completely replace the existing currency system.
2) RP wants transparency of the Fed first, most probably followed by vast reform or possibly disolving it all together.
3) His main point is this overseas expenditure bullshit. You know what, if I had balls I would withhold my taxes until we brought every last troop home. http://www.orlandosentinel.com/entertainment/orl-bk-snipes020108,0,6084571.story
4) He has REPEATEDLY stated you can't do any of these things over night. Some actual fucking debate on this in the major media would be nice for a change. Fucking pieces of shit.
5) Part of this whack job view by some of his critics is Dr. Paul's fault as well as his campaigns. If they were a bit more clear about Dr. Paul's plan (available on his website), then I don't think people would be so alarmist. Of course the main stream media takes a good portion of the blame there also. And the fact that most people on Earth are fucking retards anyway.
I actually agree with most of these points and have seen Congressman Paul state this in the past.
They don't have the money now and they are spending it, not because they can print it, but because the average American citizen doesn't really consider the money taken out of their checks as income. And the average American citizen wouldn't care too much if the money held from each check increased either because nobody sees that money in the first place. This is brought on by a government willing to spend the money and a population eager to fund everything that makes them feel good.
I thought about it and I disagree. I'm sorry to not be as good of a person as you. Will you ever forgive me for not being able to reach your lofty status?
What do you mean they don't have it? Of COURSE they have the money.
That's how they get the debt!
They have an AGREEMENT with the Federal Reserve.
THEY CREATED IT.
IT GETS TO CREATE MONEY
THEY GET TO HAVE THE MONEY
IT GETS TO KEEP THE INTEREST (the interest on ALL THE MONEY IN THE WORLD!)
???
They DO have the money.
They made IT so IT could Create MONEY.
IT could care less about the governments "Debt", as long as it stays REALLY BIG! Because if it stays really big, that means there is LOTS AND LOTS of money ... AND there is LOTS AND LOTS OF INTEREST to be paid, which means LOTS AND LOTS OF TAX must be taken from YOU to pay for THEM to have lots and lots of money.
And every time THEY want more $$$, they just print it, and it comes OUT OF YOUR POCKET.
See the graph of the dollar again.
What is there not to agree with?
If the government wants to print fiat money, it should at LEAST have the decency not to LISCENCE THE RIGHTS TO A PRIVATE CORPORATION, thus selling you and me to it ... in order to pay uncle sam's bills!
The Constution gives Congress the right to coin the nations currency for a reason, so there would BE NO INTEREST charged on it even if they were stupid enough to make paper money.
But per the constitution, the states are to only make gold and silver legal tender ... so something is already starting to not add up!
:(
If I was to smile and I held out my hand
If I opened it now would you not understand?
1:45: Anderson The Fucking Doucherocket Says: "I PROMISE you, I FUCKING PROMISE YOU WILL HAVE A CHANCE TO RESPOND" ... did Ron EVER get that chance? NO FUCKING WAY.
3:00 -- Huckabee was asked a question about his stance on abortion, Anderson then says, "i want to go down the line and get a response from the rest of the candidates" ... DID RON PAUL SOUND LIKE HE WAS ANYWHERE NEAR DONE???
McCain went on IMMEDIATELY after that to SAY THE EXACT SAME THING RON PAUL WAS SAYING about strict constitutional interpretation ... and he talked for about A MINUTE AND THIRTY SECONDS at least!
Ron Paul got what ..> FIVE SECONDS? ONE SENTENCE?
ONE GODDAMN SENTENCE !?!?!
This debate was TWO HOURS LONG. THE LONGEST DEBATE YET ... and there were FOUR CANDIDATES ... the fewest number of any debate yet ...
RON PAULS TIME TO SPEAK?
LOWER THAN MOST OF THE OTHER DEBATES.
HUH ??????????????????????????????
drifting- do you READ your posts before you click "submit"??? talk about the rantings of a total fanatic. good fucking grief. even if you had a point that i was interested in, the way you express yourself is so self-absorbed and irritating, i'd have no interest in reading it at all. you just sound like you're talking to yourself. you do yourself a disservice everytime you post.
"Ladies and gentlemen, the President of the United States, Barack Obama."
"Obama's main opponent in this election on November 4th (was) not John McCain, it (was) ignorance."~Michael Moore
"i'm feeling kinda righteous right now. with my badass motherfuckin' ukulele!"
~ed, 8/7
You guys keep beating me down with ludicrous responses that continualy miss the boat. At some point (granted, lately that point is increasingly early in discussion) i just lose it.
Look, you want to understand why the country is in massive debt, you have to understand that the debt is traded for the creation of money. What makes it all the more obscene is that it is not traded for existing money representing existing wealth (ie, gold backed currency has worth because someone mined the gold, and the dollar is exchangeable for that gold, so the wealth exists, someone mined it) ... but instead of trading bonds for existing wealth ... ASKING you as a citizen ... "please mr. citizen, give me some of your hard earned wealth, here is a bond, i promise to pay you back." ... instead of doing that ... the government goes to the Federal Reserve and basicaly says ... here is a bond, give me money, the people promise to pay it back ... and the money that is printed up comes out of your pocket (in)directly, as when the money supply is increased, the value of the dollar in your pocket goes down.
What don't you understand about that? Does This Chart Help You Understand What Happens when the Government gets to just PRINT money? That is the value of YOUR dollar. Ever declining, because the govenrment is ever printing more of them! How bout THIS chart? ... are you starting to understand that it isn't about how much GOLD is in the world, it's about how many DOLLARS are in the world. The supply of gold will never expand or contract at anywhere near the rate that the US Government can print more worthless paper, thus stealing wealth from you!
You can say it is the spending that is the problem.
But if they couldn't just print up the money, then they couldn't just spend it.
That is truth.
And so long as they can just print it up, they will.
You can't stop that.
You can NOT stop that.
Thank you. I learned more of what your position is from this post alone, than from the last 2 weeks of posting combined.
But it still seems to me that the problem of what you are describing are not so much the monetary system, but unhindered, rampant spending on your government's behalf. The government, if so inclined, can always manipulate the system. Even gold standard goes back to a state's reserves of gold to back it, and are you telling me that there are no ways to manipulate it if they would want to? They couldn't manipulate it in the current way, of course, but manipulation are still very possible. The operative problem being your government, not the system which they abuse. And as such, changing the system does not adress the problem.
As for how terrible the fiat system is, I guess it can be regarded as "extra tax", but as long as most things are adjusted for inflation (which they are over here at least), you dont really lose that much anyway. And any monetary system is fundamentally built on trust in the institution that controls it. If the system isn't trusted anymore, it breaks down, no matter what backs it. If it really is to be regarded as an extra tax, it doesnt bother nor hinder me very much. There are a lot of taxes direct and indirect around me all the time, and it bothers me none, as I tend to look at what I get for it. As such I have no interest in whether the tax level is truly/arguably 30 or 60% of my income, but rather see what my income gets me.
But for clarification, how would you introduce a gold standard without totally crashing the entire economy as it is, and what steps would you take towards making sure that the system can't at all be manipulated? And why is it practically bad, not just theoretically and philosophically bad. Just how are we so worse off in real lived life with the current system, what can't we do because of it? No quotes from founding fathers here, draw it down to the experienced level. If you can provide decent answers to these witout yelling, I might be iterested in listening more.
Peace
Dan
"YOU [humans] NEED TO BELIEVE IN THINGS THAT AREN'T TRUE. HOW ELSE CAN THEY BECOME?" - Death
"Every judgment teeters on the brink of error. To claim absolute knowledge is to become monstrous. Knowledge is an unending adventure at the edge of uncertainty." - Frank Herbert, Dune, 1965
drifting- do you READ your posts before you click "submit"??? talk about the rantings of a total fanatic. good fucking grief. even if you had a point that i was interested in, the way you express yourself is so self-absorbed and irritating, i'd have no interest in reading it at all. you just sound like you're talking to yourself. you do yourself a disservice everytime you post.
People get frustrated when they try to explain things to people who cant comprehend shit.
A gold standard doesnt matter anymore cause our countries gold was robbed by the bankers. Guess we will have to suffer and then rebuild another shit empire again.
Ron Paul has got some fantastic ideas, and every time I have seen him talk (which is not often due to a lack of media coverage -- an issue stressed with many an expletive and exclamation marks in this thread) I have been impressed.
But, here are my very simple questions about him becoming president. How can his ideas, which while very interesting in a theoretical way, be implemented in today’s world? We live in a society that for better or worse has moved down a path. If we take Dr. Pauls ideas, and make the widespread and huge changes that he suggests, how much chaos would this cause? Additionally, how would his ideas ever mesh with a congress, judiciary and millions of Americans who do not share his ideas? Finally, while his ideas sound impressive in the long run, would they be incredibly detrimental in the short run during the change over period? Without logical successors wanting to continue his ideas, would it simply be a one-term (maybe 2 term) presidency that is down the drain because it would all change back after he leaves office?
I think he has an interesting message and I would like to hear more from him, but realistically... could he ever actually be president? Or, would it cause chaos in the US and the world when his ideas are implemented?
Portland 98; Charlotte 00; Greensboro 00; Raleigh 03; Bristow 03; Asheville 04; Toronto 05; Sydney x 3 06; Newcastle 06; San Diego 09
Comments
You guys keep beating me down with ludicrous responses that continualy miss the boat. At some point (granted, lately that point is increasingly early in discussion) i just lose it.
Look, you want to understand why the country is in massive debt, you have to understand that the debt is traded for the creation of money. What makes it all the more obscene is that it is not traded for existing money representing existing wealth (ie, gold backed currency has worth because someone mined the gold, and the dollar is exchangeable for that gold, so the wealth exists, someone mined it) ... but instead of trading bonds for existing wealth ... ASKING you as a citizen ... "please mr. citizen, give me some of your hard earned wealth, here is a bond, i promise to pay you back." ... instead of doing that ... the government goes to the Federal Reserve and basicaly says ... here is a bond, give me money, the people promise to pay it back ... and the money that is printed up comes out of your pocket (in)directly, as when the money supply is increased, the value of the dollar in your pocket goes down.
What don't you understand about that?
Does This Chart Help You Understand What Happens when the Government gets to just PRINT money? That is the value of YOUR dollar. Ever declining, because the govenrment is ever printing more of them! How bout THIS chart? ... are you starting to understand that it isn't about how much GOLD is in the world, it's about how many DOLLARS are in the world. The supply of gold will never expand or contract at anywhere near the rate that the US Government can print more worthless paper, thus stealing wealth from you!
You can say it is the spending that is the problem.
But if they couldn't just print up the money, then they couldn't just spend it.
That is truth.
And so long as they can just print it up, they will.
You can't stop that.
You can NOT stop that.
If I opened it now would you not understand?
They could still borrow though. They could still spend just as much and take more from the citizens than they already do. The Government will find a way to spend more and more money as long as people consider their tax returns a nice little bonus and tax cuts a government expense.
Printing the money is not the issue here. Spending the money in the first place is the issue.
I don't know, maybe he really is being arrogant, I just don't see it that way.
NO THEY COULD NOT!
You don't fucking understand it Floyd. And i'm not being a dick. You just flat out don't fucking understand it.
IF there is NO FIAT MONEY, the government CAN NOT just spend at will. It must accquire ASSET BACKED WEALTH from some source ... and it would have to be either extracted as a TAX (to which the people, if faced with a tax to the tune of the inflation they have experienced over the last 50 years, WOULD REBEL AGAINST, and VOTE OUT THE PEOPLE WHO ENACTED IT!) ... or they would have to go to the free market and OBTAIN IT IN EXCHANGE FOR BONDS! But the money they would be receiving in exchange would be EXISTING wealth, BACKED BY A COMMODITY THAT REQUIRED EFFORT TO PRODUCE!
Again. I have spelled this out about 5 times now, and you are still wondering why i am getting "mouthy" with you.
Go back and read the posts and THINK, for goddsake.
YES IT IS.
IF THEY DIDN'T HAVE THE MONEY TO SPEND, THEY COULD NOT SPEND IT!
Duh!
If I opened it now would you not understand?
They don't have the money now and they are spending it, not because they can print it, but because the average American citizen doesn't really consider the money taken out of their checks as income. And the average American citizen wouldn't care too much if the money held from each check increased either because nobody sees that money in the first place. This is brought on by a government willing to spend the money and a population eager to fund everything that makes them feel good.
I thought about it and I disagree. I'm sorry to not be as good of a person as you. Will you ever forgive me for not being able to reach your lofty status?
In fact, you could argue that it is EASIER for a government to run a deficit under the gold standard because the long term price stability and lower interest rates.
1) RP wants to make Gold etc a "competing" currency, not completely replace the existing currency system.
2) RP wants transparency of the Fed first, most probably followed by vast reform or possibly disolving it all together.
3) His main point is this overseas expenditure bullshit. You know what, if I had balls I would withhold my taxes until we brought every last troop home. http://www.orlandosentinel.com/entertainment/orl-bk-snipes020108,0,6084571.story
4) He has REPEATEDLY stated you can't do any of these things over night. Some actual fucking debate on this in the major media would be nice for a change. Fucking pieces of shit.
5) Part of this whack job view by some of his critics is Dr. Paul's fault as well as his campaigns. If they were a bit more clear about Dr. Paul's plan (available on his website), then I don't think people would be so alarmist. Of course the main stream media takes a good portion of the blame there also. And the fact that most people on Earth are fucking retards anyway.
6) How in fuck did we vote GW back in office a second time?
I actually agree with most of these points and have seen Congressman Paul state this in the past.
Also, you are right on point with #5 there.
What do you mean they don't have it? Of COURSE they have the money.
That's how they get the debt!
They have an AGREEMENT with the Federal Reserve.
THEY CREATED IT.
IT GETS TO CREATE MONEY
THEY GET TO HAVE THE MONEY
IT GETS TO KEEP THE INTEREST (the interest on ALL THE MONEY IN THE WORLD!)
???
They DO have the money.
They made IT so IT could Create MONEY.
IT could care less about the governments "Debt", as long as it stays REALLY BIG! Because if it stays really big, that means there is LOTS AND LOTS of money ... AND there is LOTS AND LOTS OF INTEREST to be paid, which means LOTS AND LOTS OF TAX must be taken from YOU to pay for THEM to have lots and lots of money.
And every time THEY want more $$$, they just print it, and it comes OUT OF YOUR POCKET.
See the graph of the dollar again.
What is there not to agree with?
If the government wants to print fiat money, it should at LEAST have the decency not to LISCENCE THE RIGHTS TO A PRIVATE CORPORATION, thus selling you and me to it ... in order to pay uncle sam's bills!
The Constution gives Congress the right to coin the nations currency for a reason, so there would BE NO INTEREST charged on it even if they were stupid enough to make paper money.
But per the constitution, the states are to only make gold and silver legal tender ... so something is already starting to not add up!
:(
If I opened it now would you not understand?
drifting- do you READ your posts before you click "submit"??? talk about the rantings of a total fanatic. good fucking grief. even if you had a point that i was interested in, the way you express yourself is so self-absorbed and irritating, i'd have no interest in reading it at all. you just sound like you're talking to yourself. you do yourself a disservice everytime you post.
"Obama's main opponent in this election on November 4th (was) not John McCain, it (was) ignorance."~Michael Moore
"i'm feeling kinda righteous right now. with my badass motherfuckin' ukulele!"
~ed, 8/7
Thank you. I learned more of what your position is from this post alone, than from the last 2 weeks of posting combined.
But it still seems to me that the problem of what you are describing are not so much the monetary system, but unhindered, rampant spending on your government's behalf. The government, if so inclined, can always manipulate the system. Even gold standard goes back to a state's reserves of gold to back it, and are you telling me that there are no ways to manipulate it if they would want to? They couldn't manipulate it in the current way, of course, but manipulation are still very possible. The operative problem being your government, not the system which they abuse. And as such, changing the system does not adress the problem.
As for how terrible the fiat system is, I guess it can be regarded as "extra tax", but as long as most things are adjusted for inflation (which they are over here at least), you dont really lose that much anyway. And any monetary system is fundamentally built on trust in the institution that controls it. If the system isn't trusted anymore, it breaks down, no matter what backs it. If it really is to be regarded as an extra tax, it doesnt bother nor hinder me very much. There are a lot of taxes direct and indirect around me all the time, and it bothers me none, as I tend to look at what I get for it. As such I have no interest in whether the tax level is truly/arguably 30 or 60% of my income, but rather see what my income gets me.
But for clarification, how would you introduce a gold standard without totally crashing the entire economy as it is, and what steps would you take towards making sure that the system can't at all be manipulated? And why is it practically bad, not just theoretically and philosophically bad. Just how are we so worse off in real lived life with the current system, what can't we do because of it? No quotes from founding fathers here, draw it down to the experienced level. If you can provide decent answers to these witout yelling, I might be iterested in listening more.
Peace
Dan
"Every judgment teeters on the brink of error. To claim absolute knowledge is to become monstrous. Knowledge is an unending adventure at the edge of uncertainty." - Frank Herbert, Dune, 1965
A gold standard doesnt matter anymore cause our countries gold was robbed by the bankers. Guess we will have to suffer and then rebuild another shit empire again.
But, here are my very simple questions about him becoming president. How can his ideas, which while very interesting in a theoretical way, be implemented in today’s world? We live in a society that for better or worse has moved down a path. If we take Dr. Pauls ideas, and make the widespread and huge changes that he suggests, how much chaos would this cause? Additionally, how would his ideas ever mesh with a congress, judiciary and millions of Americans who do not share his ideas? Finally, while his ideas sound impressive in the long run, would they be incredibly detrimental in the short run during the change over period? Without logical successors wanting to continue his ideas, would it simply be a one-term (maybe 2 term) presidency that is down the drain because it would all change back after he leaves office?
I think he has an interesting message and I would like to hear more from him, but realistically... could he ever actually be president? Or, would it cause chaos in the US and the world when his ideas are implemented?