Dan Kone
Well-Known Member
I don't know what you mean by "proof". But his political platform is pretty clear. He supports unconditional free trade and free market economics. The proof is that he's said so.I am in no way a anybody supporter as of now, but I do wonder if there is any proof against him just as I would love some proof for him. I have one request gentlemen let's stay adult about this not saying anyone isn't I just hate when it turns into an insult fest with no real knowledge, I am interested in both sides opinions.
Here's proof of his financial deregulation stance. This is from a letter he wrote in response to the bill Gramm-Leech-Bliley, which is the financial deregulation bill which repealed Great Depression Era regulations on banks, allowing banks to gamble on Wall St and become too big to fail, resulting in the financial crash and bail outs.
So there you go. Ron Paul supports dangerous and reckless financial deregulation measures.The better alternative is to repeal privacy busting government regulations. The same approach applies to Glass-Steagall and S. 900. Why not just repeal the offending regulation? In the banking committee, I offered an amendment to do just that. My main reasons for voting against this bill are the expansion of the taxpayer liability and the introduction of even more regulations. The entire multi-hundred page S. 900 that reregulates rather than deregulates the financial sector could be replaced with a simple one-page bill.
Here is the proof Ron Paul supports free trade. He's talking about his opposition to NAFTA, but he's not apposing it due to the job loss it causes, but because it doesn't go far enough. He wants total and complete free trade.
[video=youtube;prtR-h8oKqU]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=prtR-h8oKqU&feature=player_embedded#![/video]
Free trade in combination with the deregulation of the financial services industry is responsible for much of the economic injustice, unemployment, stagnate worker wages, and the rise of the 1% that we have today. It's dangerous and I could never support any candidate for president who holds these values.
When it comes to fiscal issues, Ron Paul clearly lives in a bubble, only hearing what he wants to hear. He supports a very extreme version of right wing capitalism that most credible economists consider laughable. His ideas sound very appealing, but if you really stop and think about them.
Other than that I think he's pretty good on most social issues. But the damage he would do to the American people would be immeasurable. He would destroy the middle class. There would be a two class system with the ultra wealthy, and everyone else working poor. Socioeconomic mobility would come to an end. I know he appeals to a lot of people because he wants to legalize bud, but is that really worth the destruction of our middle class? I don't think so. Some things are more important than bud.