Ron Paul questions?

Freakshow

I was pretty into Ron Paul (as far as tolerating any Republican). He wants noninterventionalism (great!), not to devalue the dollar (awesome), out of Iraq (good call)... but wont his republican style free market trading ideas just result in more American job losses and Wal-Mart power???

I didn't catch on to his "lets trade with them" statements before, but now he doesn't seem so tolerable.

Am I mistaken or would that be one of the side effects if Ron Paul were in charge?

dmitry

i think part of the theory is that less regulation will help the little guy get into the market and will lower some of the costs of business that drive jobs overseas.

dontloseyourheat

I want to know how people can support a candidate that doesn't believe in evolution.

He seems to be a well educated man yet he lets his religion trump science.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6JyvkjSKMLw

eekamouse

Big corporations get tax breaks and big contracts from the government that helps squash the little guy.

You brought up Walmart:
http://www.tompaine.com/articles/2005/11/09/walmarts_tax_on_us.php
http://www.wakeupwalmart.com/community/taxpayer-intro.html
http://www.goodjobsfirst.org/pdf/wmtstudy.pdf

RP would do his best to stop all that.

eekamouse

dontloseyourheat wrote:

I want to know how people can support a candidate that doesn't believe in evolution.

He seems to be a well educated man yet he lets his religion trump science.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6JyvkjSKMLw

Oh god. Listen to his whole answer. He says it's an inappropriate question for the presidency. Which it is, and he said you know what, "I don't know that either side KNOWS the truth".

Good for him. No one can prove Macro-Evolution or God. Sorry. It's a fun topic to debate philosophically but has no place in government... like Ron said.

Freakshow

I know the original topic was economics, oh well. Here's where I think a lot of people turn to religion over science... faith over "here's where we are until more substantial evidence comes along."

Science once believed that the Earth was the center of the universe. Well, its not, and its because of science that people had to change the way they saw the universe, literally. Most people want stability, and faith, no matter how nonscientific it is, makes people feel stable. People want stability in government, in peacetime, and in the economy, why is it so ridiculous that they seek it in their everyday outlook on human origins or whatever...

Now, they don't have to be hateful homophobic bible thumping apocolyptic "there's nothing humans can do to change the divine plan" fuckwads... but I say let the folks have some stability.

Rhinocerous Surprise

You'd think a qualified doctor would know that a scientific theory isn't exactly the same as one of Sherlock Holmes' theories. Scientific theory isn't guessing about facts, it's giving us more information on facts. I was a Ron Paul supporter - from a distance, obviously - but I don't think I could support someone who waves off scientific theory because we can't prove god doesn't exist. After all, gravity's only a theory, right?

jeffbr

Rhinocerous Surprise wrote:

You'd think a qualified doctor would know that a scientific theory isn't exactly the same as one of Sherlock Holmes' theories. Scientific theory isn't guessing about facts, it's giving us more information on facts. I was a Ron Paul supporter - from a distance, obviously - but I don't think I could support someone who waves off scientific theory because we can't prove god doesn't exist. After all, gravity's only a theory, right?

Good post. I am voting for Paul. I'll be attending my caucus next Saturday to cast my ballot for him. He's the closest thing to a libertarian in the mix right now, so he'll get my vote. BUT there are sticking points like this evolution thing, and like his views on abortion. Basically, I try to look past his religious conservative side, and try to focus on his pro-liberty agenda. The good news is that someone like Paul would not use the government to force his views on you or on me unlike a Huckabilly.

Rhinocerous Surprise

jeffbr wrote:

Good post. I am voting for Paul. I'll be attending my caucus next Saturday to cast my ballot for him. He's the closest thing to a libertarian in the mix right now, so he'll get my vote. BUT there are sticking points like this evolution thing, and like his views on abortion. Basically, I try to look past his religious conservative side, and try to focus on his pro-liberty agenda. The good news is that someone like Paul would not use the government to force his views on you or on me unlike a Huckabilly.

I agree that he's pretty much the most electable candidate - he sure as hell beats out the other Republican candidates, and most of the Democrats as well. Gravel interests me, but I don't know enough about him to presume to have an informed opinion on him. The real tragedy is that neither Gravel or Paul will end up with the nomination.

Freakshow

Free market economics is a great idea that I think has worked pretty well so far, but what about things like NAFTA, did he support that?

It seems to me, (as too young of a whipper snapper lacking in real world experience who basically just goes off of what makes the most sense at the time) that if places like China are able to pay their workers 2$ a day, that makes an unfair free market where Americans lose jobs. Does Ron Paul support regulations in the trade that he is so fond of?

Again, I think with most issues he is dead on.

eekamouse

Freakshow wrote:

Free market economics is a great idea that I think has worked pretty well so far, but what about things like NAFTA, did he support that?

It seems to me, (as too young of a whipper snapper lacking in real world experience who basically just goes off of what makes the most sense at the time) that if places like China are able to pay their workers 2$ a day, that makes an unfair free market where Americans lose jobs. Does Ron Paul support regulations in the trade that he is so fond of?

Again, I think with most issues he is dead on.

Ron Paul adamantly opposed NAFTA... He views NAFTA and other agreements as "managed" trade.

http://www.fee.org/publications/the-freeman/article.asp?aid=5031

Commy

Free market ideology is slowly ruining the environment and killing our culture.

Corporations should be democratic institutions.

eekamouse

Commy wrote:

Free market ideology is slowly ruining the environment and killing our culture.

Corporations should be democratic institutions.

NAFTA is. Free trade would not. Real free trade would spur green technologies faster than any regulation would.

Commy

eekamouse wrote:

NAFTA is. Free trade would not. Real free trade would spur green technologies faster than any regulation would.

wait, NAFTA is ruiing the environment or a democratic institution?

And the lack of regulation is exactly what is destroying the environment. It is one of the reasons so many jobs have been outsourced-no environmental regulations need to be met, ie cheaper product.

And I think this a shining example of why resources in a region need to be controlled by the population that surrounds them, by the laborers who extract them. You wont' find too many people willing to dump toxic waste in their backyard, but see it happen everyday by international corporations inthird world contries with no laws guiding them.

slightofjeff

Freakshow wrote:

Am I mistaken or would that be one of the side effects if Ron Paul were in charge?

Another side effect of a Ron Paul presidency? Pigs flying.

Not to piss on anyone's parade ... but Ron Paul will never be in charge. Ron Jeremy has as good a chance as winning the next election as Ron Paul does.

So it's all a moot point.

DriftingByTheStorm

Commy wrote:

but see it happen everyday by international corporations inthird world contries with no laws guiding them.

That is a direct effect of the WTO.

Read up, you will find it is true.
The "international" laws created by World Trade Organization along with the financial policies set in place by the IMF and Worldbank are all intended to benefit SOLELY the US\European backed corporate interest at the expense of 3rd world countries and their citizens.

Laws are rewritten concerning property rights, legal recourse, environmental policy, tarrif and and preventative trade barriers (taxes and rules that insulate and economy from interfering and subsidized outside competition) ... and so forth.

It is nasty shit man, thats why people kill themselves at Anti-IMF\WTO rallys in protest!

eekamouse

Commy wrote:

wait, NAFTA is ruiing the environment or a democratic institution?

And the lack of regulation is exactly what is destroying the environment. It is one of the reasons so many jobs have been outsourced-no environmental regulations need to be met, ie cheaper product.

And I think this a shining example of why resources in a region need to be controlled by the population that surrounds them, by the laborers who extract them. You wont' find too many people willing to dump toxic waste in their backyard, but see it happen everyday by international corporations inthird world contries with no laws guiding them.

Nope. Actually strict enforcement of property rights laws would handle alot of that.

All of those evil coporations you refer to are getting tax breaks and bail outs and all kinds of bullshit from our government. That and NAFTA prevents the little guy from exporting goods to compete with these larger coporations.

Trade-wise... fuck it. Let the market decide. That doesn't mean you let them break the law. But you don't help em out or give em breaks. I trust the average small business owner's enginuity over a monolothic central govt.

eekamouse

slightofjeff wrote:

Not to piss on anyone's parade ... but Ron Paul will never be in charge.

You are right. But what happens next? All his supporters just give up, shut the fuck up, and go home and cry?

Maybe. Maybe they aren't pussies like some though.

Fuck fucking pussies.

DriftingByTheStorm

eekamouse wrote:

You are right. But what happens next? All his supporters just give up, shut the fuck up, and go home and cry?

Maybe. Maybe they aren't pussies like some though.

Fuck fucking pussies.

Yeah i am cautiously optomistic about what i see happening at ronpaulforums.

People, like the ronpaulblimp folk and many others are organizing websites, forming solid legal structures to make foundations \ platforms \ networks etc to facilitate the furtherance of the ultimate objective: dismantle the nwo-aparatus and re-secure global liberty one nation at a time ... starting with the USA!

Freakshow

Unmanaged trade sounds like good times for rich fuckers... now, I think the little guy should be able to EXport whatever he wants, what I'm worried about is what the big guy is IMporting... that shit needs to be regulated so we aren't losing jobs and so the Chinese, Indonesian, Taiwanian people aren't dirt poor. So their governments aren't allowing the companies to dump nasty shit wherever/whenever they please. If it is unmanaged then the only way green technologies will enter the market is if the majority of people are demanding it... and the majority of people can't afford to demand much. That's why Wal-Mart is doing so well. Am I mistaken or would his love affair with unmanaged trade be bad for the enviorment, the american worker, and the working conditions in devoloping nations?

I guess the reason I brought this up, besides getting answers, was to maybe, just maybe let a few people know that Ron Paul is not all good.

If I can get the right answer then I'll shut and support him (not with my vote, but with vocal respect wilst talking politics).

Thanks

DriftingByTheStorm

Freakshow wrote:

Unmanaged trade sounds like good times for rich fuckers... now, I think the little guy should be able to EXport whatever he wants, what I'm worried about is what the big guy is IMporting... that shit needs to be regulated so we aren't losing jobs and so the Chinese, Indonesian, Taiwanian people aren't dirt poor. So their governments aren't allowing the companies to dump nasty shit wherever/whenever they please. If it is unmanaged then the only way green technologies will enter the market is if the majority of people are demanding it... and the majority of people can't afford to demand much. That's why Wal-Mart is doing so well. Am I mistaken or would his love affair with unmanaged trade be bad for the enviorment, the american worker, and the working conditions in devoloping nations?

I guess the reason I brought this up, besides getting answers, was to maybe, just maybe let a few people know that Ron Paul is not all good.

If I can get the right answer then I'll shut and support him (not with my vote, but with vocal respect wilst talking politics).

Thanks

Wrong.

It is NAFTA and WTO that tear down trade barriers errected by soverign nations, including the US. Remember when we got in trouble with Canada for protecting the steel industry?

That is because we were violating our own "Free Trade" laws.

If we went back to having tarrifs and protective excises etc ... we would be in much better shape.

Like i said, it is the "Free Trade" assholes who want to reshape the laws to the benefit of faceless multinationals.

In the absence of such laws, we COULD have protective trade agreements that benefit OUR country.

And not just SOME corporations.

:(

slightofjeff

eekamouse wrote:

You are right. But what happens next? All his supporters just give up, shut the fuck up, and go home and cry?

Probably the same thing that happened to ralph nader supporters after 2000. Where were those 2 million people in 2004? Where are they now?

Commy

eekamouse wrote:

Nope. Actually strict enforcement of property rights laws would handle alot of that.

All of those evil coporations you refer to are getting tax breaks and bail outs and all kinds of bullshit from our government. That and NAFTA prevents the little guy from exporting goods to compete with these larger coporations.

Trade-wise... fuck it. Let the market decide. That doesn't mean you let them break the law. But you don't help em out or give em breaks. I trust the average small business owner's enginuity over a monolothic central govt.

Right corporatations are given handouts by gov't- it is a neoliberal construct I understand that. But this is what you get from a free market. They tried capitalism, it failed. See the great depression. the only way to keep the system alive was gov't bailouts.

Your idea of a true free market society would lead to gov't involvement anyway, its how power works. Whoever controls the resources ends up in charge, its how its always been. You may start with a free market but unregulated it will lead to massive concentrations of power, much like we are seeing today.

Their is an alternative. Democracy. We should try it sometime.

A democratic institution (gov't,corporate) would give people the power, insofar as they have meaningful participation in the decision making process.

DriftingByTheStorm

Here's some tasty nuggets about NAFTA and also CFR.

Yay Rockefeller! They are so philanthropic those guys!

Oh.
You DID catch the last part, right?

Why would he not mention that huh?
I thought the CFR was this great organization, right?
You should be proud, DICK Cheney!

:rolleyes:

sweetpotato

dontloseyourheat wrote:

I want to know how people can support a candidate that doesn't believe in evolution.

He seems to be a well educated man yet he lets his religion trump science.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6JyvkjSKMLw

see, that in a nutshell (and i use that term for a reason) is the MAIN reason i couldn't possibly support ron paul. no one who is running the most powerful nation on earth should still be in denial about evolution. it's practically a litmus test for stupidity, imo.

sweetpotato

eekamouse wrote:

...But what happens next? All his supporters just give up, shut the fuck up, and go home and cry?...

with a little luck, yep.

Im still here

dontloseyourheat wrote:

I want to know how people can support a candidate that doesn't believe in evolution.

He seems to be a well educated man yet he lets his religion trump science.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6JyvkjSKMLw

because Evolution is wrong....... that's why......

if you think we came from monkeys i feel sorry for you

Kann

sweetpotato wrote:

with a little luck, yep.

Especially the "shut the fuck up" part. Ron Paul supporters are most of the time so blinded by their faith that contradictions do not bother them much.
I understand the IMF and the WTO are your big enemies but understand this : true free trade = market rules = pure competition. Do you honestly think american workers will accept to compete with 1$/day kids in southeast asia? Free trade will do a lot but not stop the outsourcing.
As for the environment, recycling costs more money than plain dumping so without laws you can bet that corporations looking to be competitive will not ponder too much on that question.

edit : ^^ to the guy above me, things like this are definitely not helping out ron paul.

Im still here

Kann wrote:

Especially the "shut the fuck up" part. Ron Paul supporters are most of the time so blinded by their faith that contradictions do not bother them much.
I understand the IMF and the WTO are your big enemies but understand this : true free trade = market rules = pure competition. Do you honestly think american workers will accept to compete with 1$/day kids in southeast asia? Free trade will do a lot but not stop the outsourcing.
As for the environment, recycling costs more money than plain dumping so without laws you can bet that corporations looking to be competitive will not ponder too much on that question.

edit : ^^ to the guy above me, things like this are definitely not helping out ron paul.

so you actually believe we came from Monkeys

hahahahaha

Wake Up!!!!!!!!

Kann

Im still here wrote:

so you actually believe we came from Monkeys

hahahahaha

Wake Up!!!!!!!!

Before bashing evolution you should actually make an effort to understand evolution. It is quite interesting.

Im still here

Kann wrote:

Before bashing evolution you should actually make an effort to understand evolution. It is quite interesting.

I have, why don't you start with where Darwin got his money for research.....

That would be a good start for you to understand why they want you to believe it........

You picked the wrong person, I'm very educated

Try again.....