Forum Post: Ron Paul is an IDIOT! This is why.
Posted 13 years ago on Oct. 14, 2011, 10:21 p.m. EST by flamingliberal
(138)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
Ron Paul always says, well we didn't use to have this or that and we were ok w/o it. Well, by that logic, the Aztecs didn't have crop insurance, health insurance, EPA, or unemployment insurance and guess where their empire is, its extinct.
Ron Paul only appeals to white middle class youth who hate homosexuals, black people and pretty much every minority and believe that the poor cause their own poverty, and think that these controversial opinions plus a reading of Ayn Rand makes them smart. And they think that these qualities will make them the next libertarian entrepreneur (note:there are no libertarian entrepreneurs and there never will be) even though they will spend the rest of their lives stuck in their parent's basement, writing angry, stupid crap on the internet. Oh wait, they will bring their political ads to rallies and riots, even though the riot doesn't have anything to do with Ron Paul and his stupidity. This is the only moment they get any sunlight.
I agree. Ron Paul has some strong and partially correct criticism of the financialization, the FED, corruption in government and the industrial-military complex, he is against foreign wars etc. Yet, his overall position is precisely that of ( an idealization of ) the small town entrepreneur who made it from nothing to something, which is the complete exception nowadays and applies only to very few people. With his radical libertarian view he arrives at complete delusional ideas about how a society is going to provide healthcare: Namely not at all. If you can't afford it, you either have to find a gentle merciful soul to help (he recommends himself I suppose) or suffer and die. This model may work for a small town in "better-off" parts of Texas - but try it in a mega city. There, without some societal plan to take care of the "downtrodden" and all people out of luck, you're road-kill. Ron Paul's plans are a good fit for a town like Tombstone, Arizona, 19th century.
Ron Paul would have us all go back to a time when everybody had to support themselves, no matter what, no excuses. Of course, typical of people like him, he no doubt excuses his family, relatives and friends and no doubt, if you looked into and could do the research, you would find that his family has benefited from govt. handouts in all kinds of ways from tax breaks, subsidies, insurance, loans, etc. It is extremely common of politicians to claim to have convictions about something but when investigated, the reality is totally contradicted. Typical hypocrite.
Ron Paul does not advocate that everybody has to "support themselves" he just says it shouldn't be up to government. Its a distinction you would know if you ever listened to the guy speak.
Hey, isn't that a good idea "support yourself", keep what you earn. America was once a very productive, and very generous nation. Imagine that, instead of having Uncle Sam reach down your pockets to pay for all these "programs" and "wars" we could keep the fruits of our labor, and give to those whose cause we choose worthy. Maybe you are right, I am probably too dumb to decide who I wish to help with my donations. Maybe the government(being as efficient and honest as they are) would do a better job choosing where my money should be spent.
I have a problem with 'who we choose worthy'.
It's not that anyone is too dumb to choose, but rather there would be so many individual criteria and prejudices that it would be ineffective as a whole and at least semi corrupt on all levels.
I'll use the debacle of the questioning of Ron Paul on the injured middle class wage earner who choose not to insure.
To be fair it was an extremely unfair question in the way it was phrased.
Define good wage. Define the expenses this middle class wage earner has, not the debt, the expenses. Cover transportation, savings, housing, utilities, responsibilities to family, to extended family (parents). Then maybe it would have been a fair question.
But the assumption was made that there was expendable income which was not assigned to health coverage. The key word is expendable.
I truly get tired of so many political debates or any debate for that matter ending up being either a bash Ron Paul or promote Ron Paul. When there is so much passion devoted to one candidate, it makes me want to look to find where the bodies are buried.
A 35 year politician has compromised over and over or he would not be a 35 year politician. To claim otherwise is unworthy of even being entered into a debate.
What I mean by "who we choose worthy" is saying that at one time we as americans did not count on the federal government for help. If we were in need, there are hundreds of charities and thousands of churches that we could turn to for help, and all of those are funded out of generousity, not force. We as a people have been very generous and compasionate to almost any and all righteous causes. I would much rather have independent organizations running programs to help people get back on their feet, than government programs that are abused and wasteful. At least then I choose if my money is better with this organization or that one. Competition is a good thing, even with nonprofit groups, if one does a better job than I should be allowed to donate to it. But this whole entitlement thing is ridiculous. I don't owe you anything and neither does the government, at the same time, neither of us should owe the government more than what we have agreed to, and believe me if you ask americans, we would not be spending billions on endless war, trillions on bailouts, hell even the income tax was never ratified. It is an illegal tax that you get punished if you don't pay. True, ask an IRS agent to show you the law that states you have to pay an income tax. They can't, it doesn't exist.
I noticed, typical of those who do not want a serious conversation, that you ignored the rest of my post which referenced the tendency of those who propose this kind of stuff to, ultimately, be hypocrites and accept what they can get although the public might not know of it. If you research Ron Paul's proposals, I will bet you 1 million dollars that he has benefited from and taken tons of money from the federal govt. as has his family. It's the same with all conservatives, they talk the talk but do not walk the walk. The most classic example and one for the Hypocrites Hall of Fame was Reagan talking about living responsibly and then tripling the national debt while in office. Here's the reality. Capitalism as it was poorly practice prior to the Great Depression (i.e. the tendency toward cheating and hence not playing by the rules...Insider Trading, Derivative Trading, Monopoly Practices and many other egregious offenses) collapsed and to ultimately prevent revolution or rebellion or Fascism, the U.S. became to recognize that, like in all modern nations, the govt. had to intervene to help the poor and working classes as the system was totally rigged to only work for the Capitalists and those who inherited wealth. The "programs' that you deride and so easily dismiss help and protect the citizens and the purpose of govt. is to do exactly that. There undoubtedly are abuses like in anything. In fact, the Corporations and wealthy so regularly abused the system that they are the prime recipients of most of the benefits. 10% of the country owns nearly 90% of the wealth. It is said that 500 families own more thatn 25-50% of the rest of the population together.
I want my million dollars. Ron Paul has never taken "tons" of money form the government. He sends a portion of his congressional budget back to the Treasury every year, the only one to do so. He does not participate in the lucrative congressional pension. He has never voted to raise his pay. Also if you would give him a real chance an open your mind just a little you would realize that all of what you have just said may be wrong and its that mindset the MSM is pushing on you. The Great Depression happened after the creation of the Federal Reserve in 1913 and it is still the problem with our economy. Also he is the only one running that will bring our troops home and end these needless wars. I see a draft coming soon as we now seek "UN Inspectors" to go into Iran, Its a story we have all heard before. We will have troops in Iran with in a year if we do not open our eyes. Our dollar will continue to decline and wages will stay the same as gas and food go up. Also these corprations would not have the power they do today over our government and would not get away with what they have in the past.
I like Ron Paul but he will not even be the candidate for the Republicans. So, what is he going to do, start a Third party. I like to be realisitc.
Ron Paul believes in local decisions, not government rule. Sure, he has his own opinion about how he wants his state to be ran, and he is free to own those values and opinions. His main point is that keeping the decision within your state means more control over your personal freedoms and not the chaotic lost coins of the federal income tax. Auditing the Fed shouldn't be such a big deal, right? He has been fighting for that audit for quite some time, and finally last year achieved a "partial" audit. Why not a full audit? He wants you to control your money, and opposed to popular believe, believes in many of the social services we have, however he realizes we can't afford them. Check out his website and listen to him. If we bring the troops home we can begin to spend our money where we wish. But while we protest in the streets of cities without a clear outlined objective, do you know how much hegemony is exploding currently? Obama just released 100 troops in Africa, has exercised the use of drones, and now is turning up the tension with Iran- in addition to entering the longest war in American history. I support Ron Paul, he wants to have local control. He wants to end the war. That's the bottom line.
An interesting point, and within the context you created, a good one. However, if we are to be honest with ourselves, this is a tad vague and a rather large leap. Nonetheless, thank you for posting, and keep sharing and communicating with others. It is what RP would want you to do I am sure. :)
http://www.smashwords.com/books/view/94223
good concise critique. my critique relates to his grounds for belief in libertarianism. does he look at the empirical evidence and then decide that the libertarian solution makes the most sense? or does he derive his policy beliefs from the philosophical tenets of libertarianism? if the latter, he must be the Jesus of policy since he obviously has the answers to all of our problems
At least watch this and keep before you let fox cnn and msnbc make up your mind for you.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uc0T1kMc1d4&feature=share
he also warned of potential terrorist attacks before 9/11 happened.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GDAWs32CwqM
ugh...don't have cable, I just watch mediaite. And I have zero respect for Herman Cain's economic views. I only have mildly more respect for Ron Paul's faith in Austrian Business Cycle Theory and the Austrian School of economics. While Hayek and Mises were bright guys, they also shunned empiricism and statistical tools, both of which are essential to exploring the frontiers of social science
Thanks for the civil debate anyway - that was his what if speech he gave to congress.
ironically most people drive pickup like him
states are owned by corporate sponsors to do their bidding. They appoint a corporae bully to do just that, bully the people and only represent the wishes of the rich. The fed is the referee, but as you can see they even own the fed now. That is why we are in the situation we are right now.
Ron Paul gets a lot of his appeal because of his awesome Foreign Policy (basically "WTF america, of course they hate you and are trying to blow your troops up, you killed there family!") and good ideas about stopping corruption and stuff... HOWEVER HIs economics are scary, he believes the banks should govern themselves and that regulations need to ALL go away.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&v=uNbmNmoDxyo To all who think Ron Paul doesn't want to help the poor with medical aid and other aid. This video is Ron Paul at work in congress. Please watch before you post.
Ron Paul is on the record saying that Social Security and Medicare, are "unconstitutional",both programs are good and necessary social contracts required for a civilized world . Some of Ron Pauls ideas like those about corporate corruption are good, and he is to be commended for at least walking his talk, but he far too polarized in his views and cannot grasp the fact that human beings are not only individuals but social creatures also that need both a cohesive social structure as well as protection of individual liberties.
That isn't the platform he uses. He uses that as an example to show why we don't need what people assume we do. The platform positions is based on a respect for individual liberty and adherence to the Constitution.
wait. if only the aztecs had health insurance they'd be alive today? interesting.
hey any of you dudes want to come crash on my couch? we're the gateway to Northern Arizona and we make pretty good pancakes. We have a daughter, her name is Raylee. we are desert libertarians.
hi. i don't want to directly contradict you but i'm a ron paul supporter and i like people 602-903-2050
He has many impractical ideas. Expects people to always do the right thing. One good idea he has is to stop attacking other countries. That does make sense though.
the aztecs didn't outsource their businesses too. i think they would have survived if they did that.
our economy sucks and china's doesn't because people work fucking hard in china.
watch this documentary for some insight: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=J2Nmk8ZmLqY
We need this work ethic in the states. Ron Paul wants to create a government that will bring the productivity back to the US. Vote for Ron Paul if you want the drastic changes necessary to bring the productivity back to the US and create the economy we had in the 50's and 60's where the ratio between median wage and media home price was much better (http://efinancedirectory.com/articles/The_Dangerous_Disconnect_Between_Home_Prices_and_Fundamentals.html)
This is the economy my grandfather had when he bought is nice 4 bedroom Springfield, MA home for $27,000 with money he saved up working at the post office for 5 years.
The monetary system is screwed in this country. It's the reason home prices are so expensive and it's the reason college tuition is ridiculous. Ron Paul is the only candidate talking about real solutions to these problems.
We were productive in the 50's and 60's because our main competitors (i.e. Japan, Germany, China) were pretty much flattened from WWII
The federal reserve and the goverment are the couse of the problem here,and ron paul and dennis kucinich are the only 2 honest people in goverment now days is not hard to see, let hope we dont get hijaks,Democracy Now!, is funded by the Rockefeller Foundation. Coincidence? Another funding source to be converned about is The Ford Foundation, a cover operation for CIA sponsored projects-including disinformation.
Great logic
This post is incredibly naive. I'm new to these forums, so it's hard to tell if people are trolls or are just that stupid. Are you serious?
[Deleted]
haha you posted this on the wrong thread
You are so right. I should vote for whoever the mainstream media tells me to. The government has done such a good job with the economy, education, crime, drugs, foreign policy and health care. I only wish they could feed me, teach me, give me a job, pick my religion and wipe my butt too.
Ron Paul is the only candidate with a chance that is NOT paid for and groomed by the BIG BUSINESS/BANKS/MEDIA/OIL/SPECIAL INTERESTS. He has a proven track record of voting with the constitution to limit the power of government, lower taxes, and keep personal freedoms.
snore. Ron Paul is an idiot. His policies would tie up the courts in law suits.
Flamingliberal is a flaming idiot.
Many more people will come to your side when you are proactive (for “new” Business & Government solutions), instead of reactive (against “old” Business & Government solutions), which is why what we most immediately need is a comprehensive “new” strategy that implements all our various socioeconomic demands at the same time, regardless of party, and although I'm all in favor of taking down today's ineffective and inefficient Top 10% Management System of Business & Government, there's only one way to do it – by fighting bankers as bankers ourselves; that is, using a Focused Direct Democracy organized according to our current Occupations & Generations. Consequently, I have posted a 1-page Summary of the Strategically Weighted Policies, Organizational Operating Structures, and Tactical Investment Procedures necessary to do this at:
http://getsatisfaction.com/americanselect/topics/on_strategic_legal_policy_organizational_operational_structures_tactical_investment_procedures
Join
http://finance.groups.yahoo.com/group/StrategicInternationalSystems/
because we need 100,000 “support clicks” at AmericansElect.org to support a Presidential Candidate -- such as any given political opportunist you'd like to draft -- in support of the above bank-focused platform.
Most importantly, remember, as cited in the first link above, that as Bank Owner-Voters in your 1 of 48 "new" Business Investment Groups (or "new" Congressional Committees) you become the "new" Congress replacing the "old" Congress according to your current Occupation & Generation, called a Focused Direct Democracy.
Therefore, any Candidate (or Leader) therein, regardless of party, is a straw man, a puppet; it's the STRATEGY – the sequence of steps – that the people organize themselves under, in Military Internet Formation of their Individual Purchasing & Group Investment Power, that's important. In this, sequence is key.
Why? Because there are Natural Social Laws – in mathematical sequence – that are just like Natural Physical Laws, such as the Law of Gravity. You must follow those Natural Social Laws or the result will be Injustice, War, etc.
The FIRST step in Natural Social Law is to CONTROL the Banks as Bank Owner-Voters. If you do not, you will inevitably be UNJUSTLY EXPLOITED by the Top 10% Management Group of Business & Government who have a Legitimate Profit Motive, just like you, to do so.
Consequently, you have no choice but to become Candidates (or Leaders) yourselves as Bank Owner-Voters according to your current Occupation & Generation.
So please JOIN the 2nd link so we can make our support clicks at AmericansElect.org when called for, at exactly the right time, by an e-mail from that group, in support of the above the bank-focused platform in the 1st link. If so, then you will see and feel how your goals can be accomplished within the above strategy as a “new” Candidate (or Leader) of your Occupation & Generation.
I don't know why people think that regulations can solve the problem when they don't even look at the to the cause. Let me educate you on the errors of your ways. The excess money and credit created by the federal reserve that would not have existed under pure market conditions caused all the mess we have with the banks today. With bills the government passed forced banks to give out loans called "sub-prime loans" that they would not have other wised given. The root of the problem is central planing and the notion that 15 people in the fed can control our entire economy.
Agreed, which is why you DECENTRALIZE banking by thoroughly educating the Bottom 90% of Workers to become Bank Owner-Voters over the near future, for "the people" cannot DELETE a thing, such as "excess money credit", BEFORE "the people" CONTROL a thing, right?
agreed
You're comparing modern economics in a highly-technological, modern world to the Aztec society?
I have a feeling things are bit more exhaustive nowadays.
You're an Idiot!