The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.
Ron Paul, The Conspiracy '08
jotate
Registered User regular
Registered User regular
The previous RP thread seems to have fallen off the board. With the recent RP derail of the Stephen Colbert thread, I think it's worthwhile to start anew.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JXfDHXpP87o
Focusing towards his monetary policy in the above video, it seems as though he's interested in moving towards some kind of dual currency. It almost sounds as though he's talking about nationalizing something along the lines of the Liberty Dollar along side the US Dollar. Giving the people an option to deal in a currency based on gold/silver or a currency maintained and fluctuated by the fed.
I'll be the first to admit that my knowledge of monetary policy is limited at best, but how reasonable is this? Does it throw a kink in the "He wants to revert to the gold standard and is therefore insane" argument? How feasible is it to allow people the choice of a gold/silver backed dollar while also relieving the fluctuations that would have previously led to major depressions?
(I'd prefer if we could leave the "doesn't matter, he's a bigot" argument for at least the second page.)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JXfDHXpP87o
Focusing towards his monetary policy in the above video, it seems as though he's interested in moving towards some kind of dual currency. It almost sounds as though he's talking about nationalizing something along the lines of the Liberty Dollar along side the US Dollar. Giving the people an option to deal in a currency based on gold/silver or a currency maintained and fluctuated by the fed.
I'll be the first to admit that my knowledge of monetary policy is limited at best, but how reasonable is this? Does it throw a kink in the "He wants to revert to the gold standard and is therefore insane" argument? How feasible is it to allow people the choice of a gold/silver backed dollar while also relieving the fluctuations that would have previously led to major depressions?
(I'd prefer if we could leave the "doesn't matter, he's a bigot" argument for at least the second page.)
jotate on
0
This discussion has been closed.
Posts
Seriously though, couldn't you just bump the old thread? Although it does seem the debate has burned itself out.
Yeah! Who needs some nanny state OSHA telling me what limbs I can and can't have ripped from my body at work? Sheer Bolshevism!
With a constantly shifting exchange rate between the two legal tenders that all businesses would have to keep track of in order to accept both?
I cannot imagine how that could possibly go wrong.
Like the Department of Education? The FDA? OSHA? Social Security? Medicare? Department of Health?
Yeah, we better get rid of those deadweight assholes pronto, huh?
As for Education, Social Security, and Medicare, yeah, those need to go too. It shouldn't be the government's job to educate the people, or make sure they put away saving for when they are older, or make sure they get medical care. As for the FDA and DoH, I'd have to look into it more before I made a decision. I know I'd at least want to scale the FDA back.
You...you really think we should go back to The Jungle (not that modern meatpacking is a fucking cakewalk or anything)?
Are you that fucking retarded.
You understand this has been tried?
You understand it went poorly?
Laws against sodomizing babies take a little freedom away too, but it doesn't follow that since a good deal of freedom is good, completely unfettered freedom is fuckawesome.
You might want to look into it, then. Also, what a collective action problem is and the disparity of power that exists between management and individual 'line' workers.
It's called "The ninteenth motherfucking century."
Familiarize yourself with it.
This is an understatement for humorous purposes, but since you don't think we need OSHA, I'm don't really trust you to catch the fucking subtlety.
I know idiot right-wingers like to fantasize about a wonderful Randian utopia where the invisible hand of the free market guides us collectively to prosperity, but it's complete fucking bullshit.
Even when society and the government prosper and benefit infinitely from people being educated, healthy, and not subsistent gerontocrats?
And yes, sodomizing babies is a freedom we don't have. It is one of the jobs of the government to take away our freedom to rape one another. We are glad to give up this freedom in exchange for being protected from others.
You are willing to let the government dictate your work conditions in exchange for not having to work in other ways to dictate them. I am not.
Edit: to respond to a bunch of you:
I know most people say "What system can we set up to get a good country?". I approach it more like this: "What is the Right, most Free way to run things?", with the outcome secondary. Not that I don't think about the outcome, but I'd rather fail the right way (not that I think we would fail) than succeed the wrong way.
I understand tat at this basic level most people disagree. This is the foundation for all of this disagreement.
That's fine. I'm sure you'll enjoy working in Liberia
By the way:
This. Is. A. Fucking. Lie.
Positive freedom and negative freedom -- if you don't know the difference, you should probably stop having opinions on things, but I'll help you out and break this shit down for you.
(1) Negative freedoms: Freedom from. These are the freedoms we're used to thinking about. Freedom from censorship, freedom from regulation, freedom from taxation.
(2) Positive freedoms: Freedom to. These are the freedoms that affect our daily lives just as much, if not moreso, and yet are not enshrined a 220 year-old document, and so people have a tendency to forget about. Freedom to get a good education. Freedom to earn a living wage. Freedom to support your family.
Or, in the case of OSHA: Freedom to not get your fucking limbs cut off at your job or at least if they do you can have some freedom to legal fucking recourse.
So. No.
You. Are. Wrong.
I swear to god read some fucking political philosophy that happened after 1800
Wasn't this a Ron Paul thread?
First off, why?
Second off, it's not really a debate so much as a statement of fact. When you get the endorsement of Stormfront, well...that pretty much says it all, doesn't it?
I guess I'm just going to end it here. I could go on but I really don't want to be the one guy that everyone else is like "wtf is this idiot talking about". To see the summation of what I was trying to say, read the edit in my last post.
Ron Paul is in favor of dismantling almost all of the federal government that doesn't involve building roads and keeping tanks off of them. He's also a gold bug and wants us to be more isolationist than Hoover. Granted the Wilsonianism that Bush has touted wasn't exactly a good idea, but our withdrawl from the WTO, United Nations, et. al. is worse in ways that words simply cannot properly explain.
Yeah, fuck those poor people who do the low-paying jobs that we need someone to perform in order for society to function who are unable to accrue the proper buying leverage to actually have any kind of choice, especially since now they don't have minimum wage! Serves them right for making all my daily conveniences possible! What fucking assholes they are.
Grammar bad you.
You're operating under the mindfuckingly false pretense that negative freedoms are the only freedoms.
You.
Are.
Wrong.
Now, you could argue that they're the only freedoms that matter, but freedoms are freedoms, and you can't say that we'd be "more free" without government.
How free were the people who worked in coal mines in the 19th century? Or the factory workers? How free can you be when you are forced to work 16 hours a day to barely be able to support your family because you grew up poor so you didn't have the freedom to get an education, so now you don't have the freedom to earn a living wage?
How fucking free are you then?
Respond to my posts.
Seriously.
You need to learn this shit. It is vital to your growth as a human being.
Don't take you ball and go home just because people were "rude" enough to point out the flaws in your ideology.
If you think they're wrong, correct them. If you can't, and you're sticking to your flawed ideology anyways, you're irrational.
WHAT!? So called "internal improvements" are unconstitutional!
Accept the standard of 25 posts per page. Neophile.
Yeah, I'm not sure how it is supposed to work.
Wait.
Let me climb into my time machine and go backwards one hundred and twenty years when bimetallism was all the rage in American politics.
Why not go all the way and accuse Ron Paul of wanting to crucify us on a cross of gold.
Even if you weren't completely misunderstanding the concept of freedom (what good is the right to freedom of the press when you don't have the freedom to learn how to read, asshole?) you are basically saying that the means justify the ends. No, I did not get that backwards. Yes, it is as retarded as it sounds.