Ron Paul Has A Legit Shot.

[Sure Shot]

[youtube]prtR-h8oKqU[/youtube]

 

[Sure Shot]

What's wrong with having a publicly controlled paper based currency?

Say we switch to gold. In theory if a big enough gold find was discovered, that could cause financial collapse due to sudden devaluation of our currency. Is it really necessary to tie our financial future that because more or less valuable due to circumstances outside our control? I agree that an organization accountable to no one shouldn't be in charge of our money, but why not just replace the fed with a currency the public controls.

Do you think the ability to control our currency that comes with paper money is useless? It can be used to our advantage. Having gold money can be a huge disadvantage.

Well since gold is such a heavy element it always continues deeper on it's travel to the center of the Earth.
In fact all Gold ever mined in human history is about a 25 meter cube.
The world produces a cube of gold that is about 4.3 meters (about 14 feet) on each side every year.
In other words, all of the gold produced worldwide in one year could just about fit in the average person's living room!
It takes an asteroid or a supernova to create the radiant energy needed to create gold.
We've done it with some little super nuke oven, but it only makes like a microgram or something to that effect.
Gold is a solid value and has been for all recorded history. It's only when you relate it to FIAT currency, the picture blurs.

 

[Dan Kone]

Well since gold is such a heavy element it always continues deeper on it's travel to the center of the Earth.
In fact all Gold ever mined in human history is about a 25' cube.

That can't be true. I think all the gold around rappers necks would be larger than that.

The world produces a cube of gold that is about 4.3 meters (about 14 feet) on each side every year.

The world produces several tons of gold a year. That doesn't seem right.

• 
  Gold is a solid value and has been for all recorded history.​

  ​

• 
  ​

Gold prices go up and down on their own constantly. If our currency was tied to it, our economy would do the same. That's not a good thing.

 

[Sure Shot]

That can't be true. I think all the gold around rappers necks would be larger than that.



The world produces several tons of gold a year. That doesn't seem right.

• Gold is a solid value and has been for all recorded history.​

  
  
  ​

Gold prices go up and down on their own constantly. If our currency was tied to it, our economy would do the same.

Typo, I corrected it. 25 meter cube.
Gold is F#ing heavy! 1 years cube weighs 3,110,420 pounds!
Our currency goes up and down effecting it's power to buy gold!

 

[tryingtogrow89]

Because free trade is responsible for much of our job loss/outsourcing problems, it lowers US worker wages, and increased economic inequality globally. The people who really benefit from free trade are the top 0.05%. The wealthy elites.

Economic regulations on the financial services industry are necessary to prevent Wall St from ass raping us.

So I like to keep my money and I don't want to get ass raped. Good reason right?

Doesn't seem like our regulation has stopped wall st from raping us so go on...
Further more how can you say that about the free market? what are you basing that off of?

 

[tryingtogrow89]

First off, do all of Ron Pauls views have to do with "God given rights" and "human sovereignty?" The answer: NO

Secondly, not everyone has to view the natural civil human rights as "God given" in order to respect them. God didn't give me shit. Our society that was created by the great minds of James Madison, Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, George Washington, Alexander Hamilton, and many more of the nations founding fathers. THEY were the ones who respected what it meant to be a human in a civilized and equal society. I credit THEM. Not "God."

I absolutely despise when people try to use religious bullshit in an intellectual argument. Fucking irks me.

Believe me im not religious but saying "god given rights" is saying natural rights of being alive, and being a libertarian is based on those ideas and i dont thinks those are sided views. No i think sided views are things like tyranny and oppressive forceful governing of any kind, but just because philosophically liberty and freedom are anti force =opposite of tyranny, and having property rights, that can hardly be called a sided view IMO.

 

[Sure Shot]

The "free trade" market needs tariffs to keep slave labor goods off our shores and to promote consumption of local goods.

 

[sync0s]

Believe me im not religious but saying "god given rights" is saying natural rights of being alive, and being a libertarian is based on those ideas and i dont thinks those are sided views.

You aren't entitled to anything simply because you are alive. THAT is a libertarian based philosophy.

No i think sided views are things like tyranny and oppressive forceful governing of any kind, but just because philosophically liberty and freedom are anti force =opposite of tyranny, and having property rights, that can hardly be called a sided view IMO.

Am I the only one that doesn't understand what in the world you just said? Sounds to me like you just tried to make the case as to how a sided view is the same thing, essentially, as a partisan issue.

 

[tryingtogrow89]

You aren't entitled to anything simply because you are alive. THAT is a libertarian based philosophy.



Am I the only one that doesn't understand what in the world you just said? Sounds to me like you just tried to make the case as to how a sided view is the same thing, essentially, as a partisan issue.

No, lets remember how the conversation began, your reading way to far into it.
It could have been a great example though had we stayed on topic.

 

[deprave]

Just reading the last couple of post, We are kind of mixing a few things up here understandably it common and legitimate. I believed your referring to Natural Rights while one is referring to Natural Law, neither being exclusive to libertarians or necessarily an inherent property of, although it is commonly shared, the philosophy has been around since around 10 AD...one example of this is the silver rule, "treat others as you wish to be treated"(paraphrasing)..

Natural Rights confused with Thomas Jefferson and the Declaration of Independence - Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of happiness which is actually Natural Law. (this is debatable due to uniqueness of said document)

Natural law is often conflated with common law, the two are distinct in that natural law is a view that certain rights or values are inherent in or universally cognizable by virtue of human reason or human nature, while common law is the legal tradition whereby certain rights or values are legally cognizable by virtue of judicial recognition or articulation. This is often incorrectly being present in the United States Declaration of Independence and Constitution. However, Natural rights are rights not contingent upon the laws, customs, or beliefs of any particular culture or government, and therefore universal and inalienable, without a document or not.

So we can understand the miscommunication.

This is one of the major points where religion or spirituality collide with philosophy, the most major one being of course free will. This is also a major point me as an agnostic. Free Will being as it is and Natural rights being at the core of spirituality is something that makes me lean a little more toward the prophets and think..they had some really important things to teach us....there is much more then this but these two things are pretty major for me.

As far as the Libertarian perspective I think you could actually argue that Natural Law could actually be an anti-libertarian view DEPENDING on the laws, it most definitely WOULDN'T be anti-state or anarchist view regardless and would definitely be a right or conservative view also, Natural rights however is most definitely a libertarian view and also a liberal view.

 

[Sure Shot]

[youtube]44KifdsrMu4[/youtube]

 

[Canna Sylvan]

Because free trade is responsible for much of our job loss/outsourcing problems, it lowers US worker wages, and increased economic inequality globally. The people who really benefit from free trade are the top 0.05%. The wealthy elites.

Economic regulations on the financial services industry are necessary to prevent Wall St from ass raping us.

So I like to keep my money and I don't want to get ass raped. Good reason right?

It's not wall st who's raping us, it's government. Government allows the existance of fictional people called corporations. You don't keep your money, politicians and stock holders do, who at most only lose money. But not even then, since government bails them out. Government doesn't care if you have a job. The policians only care about money, and those regulations and tarrifs only give them more. The people get the bill, the government and government welfare state corporations funnel the money to themselves.

Corn syrup, considered a luxury item in all countries. It's production is a waste. But because of government intervention, sugar sources all other countries use is nearly impossible. How is giving corn farming welfare corporations fair?

Rent control prevents fair current prices of a transaction. The rich hoard the properties and promotes illegal secondary markets to deal at unfair prices because there is now an artificial supply reduction.

Cigarette taxes are so high, inner city gang cartels import cigarettes from the caribbean and sell them in the poor neighborhoods with fake cigatette tax stamps. This in turn calls for more waste by the actions of what would be the unneeded ATF. Just like what happened with alcohol prohibition.

Government isn't saving you, it just promotes underground activities, which it just looks the other way until it gains an advantage, uses you as an example, or you didn't bribe enough.

This so called crony capitalism has nothing to do with real capitalism or free trade. The very government you cheerleader for is the cause of why occupy wall street exists. Yet you all still haven't learned your lesson. You want to give the leviathan more control. That it's just the current regulations aren't the correct ones. The correct ones will just find new ways to circumvent, bribe and funnel to a new master. The end result will be the same.

 

[Dan Kone]

The very government you cheerleader for is the cause of why occupy wall street exists. Yet you all still haven't learned your lesson. You want to give the leviathan more control. That it's just the current regulations aren't the correct ones. The correct ones will just find new ways to circumvent, bribe and funnel to a new master. The end result will be the same.

I'm aware of all that. But to me, that's a reason to fix the system, not throw it out entirely. By throwing it out you only let corporations have their way due to the fact they are the only ones with power left standing.

 

[Canna Sylvan]

I'm aware of all that. But to me, that's a reason to fix the system, not throw it out entirely. By throwing it out you only let corporations have their way due to the fact they are the only ones with power left standing.

My solution is to start over. In business it's called a sunk cost. Sometimes changing the parameters doesn't. Corporations are a major part of the problem. The solution is to pretend it's the 1700s again and start from scratch knowing what we know now. We keep freedom of speech but add yelling fire when there's no fire doesn't count, etc. We make it an actual ammendment the government is the only one who owns money and lends it out, no Fed. We now have instant communication, computers, and other technology that wasn't there in the 1700s. The concept of atheism wasn't well known, at the very least it was deism. Not only must there be freedom of religion, but freedom from it too.

There is nothing wrong with capitalism, just the illegal activities associated with buying off legislators to allow their horrors even though it's illegal. Allow people to and only people, not paper people like corporations, etc. Monitor only, don't take over. No dumping, price fixing, collusion, etc. These lead to syndicates and other diseases which aren't part of free markets and free trade. Government is always a disease, in some cases certain people benefit and other times are ass raped as you put it.

 

[tryingtogrow89]

[youtube]4d2_qDKFNZI&feature=g-u&context=G216f1c2FUAAAAAAAFAA[/youtube]
[youtube]PjYcwghjqM8&feature=g-u&context=G287a953FUAAAAAAACAA[/youtube]

 

[sync0s]

Just reading the last couple of post, We are kind of mixing a few things up here understandably it common and legitimate. I believed your referring to Natural Rights while one is referring to Natural Law, neither being exclusive to libertarians or necessarily an inherent property of, although it is commonly shared, the philosophy has been around since around 10 AD...one example of this is the silver rule, "treat others as you wish to be treated"(paraphrasing)..

Natural Rights confused with Thomas Jefferson and the Declaration of Independence - Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of happiness which is actually Natural Law. (this is debatable due to uniqueness of said document)

Natural law is often conflated with common law, the two are distinct in that natural law is a view that certain rights or values are inherent in or universally cognizable by virtue of human reason or human nature, while common law is the legal tradition whereby certain rights or values are legally cognizable by virtue of judicial recognition or articulation. This is often incorrectly being present in the United States Declaration of Independence and Constitution. However, Natural rights are rights not contingent upon the laws, customs, or beliefs of any particular culture or government, and therefore universal and inalienable, without a document or not.

So we can understand the miscommunication.

This is one of the major points where religion or spirituality collide with philosophy, the most major one being of course free will. This is also a major point me as an agnostic. Free Will being as it is and Natural rights being at the core of spirituality is something that makes me lean a little more toward the prophets and think..they had some really important things to teach us....there is much more then this but these two things are pretty major for me.

As far as the Libertarian perspective I think you could actually argue that Natural Law could actually be an anti-libertarian view DEPENDING on the laws, it most definitely WOULDN'T be anti-state or anarchist view regardless and would definitely be a right or conservative view also, Natural rights however is most definitely a libertarian view and also a liberal view.

This is the reason for the argument:

There is no reason to not side with ron paul, and if you beg to differ you are not paying attention.

I didnt know god given rights and human sovereignty was a sided view...

tryingtogrow89: I probably agree with you a lot politically and philosophically, but the only things you demonstrate in these post is ignorance or the unwillingness to believe that there could possibly be another valid argument out there that doesn't agree with Ron Paul. Ron Paul is not the oh so great Master Wise One. He is a smart guy, with a lot of good ideas, yes.

The thing I respect most of Ron Paul is his courageousness in being the first main stream libertarian and to take all of the flak for it and keep fighting. He has given Libertarians a voice that needs to be heard. That being said, I think if it were Gary Johnson vs Ron Paul, my vote would more likely head in Johnson's direction (except I hate the flat [sales] tax), because Ron Paul's social conservatism disagrees with me.

 

[Dan Kone]

I'd like to ask a favor please. Can we keep this thread to discussing polling/chances to win/etc and not just spam it with Ron Paul ads please?

You guys have posted litterally hundreds of Ron Paul ads on this forum. It's already driven many posters off this forum. If you guys just want to have a circle jerk praising Ron Paul, why not go to a Ron Paul forum?

We all understand you guys like Ron Paul. That's fine. If you want to discuss Ron Paul, that's ok too. But do we really need every thread on this forum spammed with Ron Paul videos and ads? It makes the whole forum annoying to read. If people want to see more Ron Paul videos they can google them. Do you really need to spam them everywhere?

Those videos aren't convincing people to vote for Ron Paul here. They are just annoying people. Please stop.

 

[Parker]

The free market makes the right decisions for the free market. It does not make the right decisions for people.

well of course it does, The People decide the free market not some bureaucrat

That's why regulations are necessary. If the regulations don't work, then they need to be reformed, not dismantled.

The gulf coast oil spills took blame away from the oil companies because they said government checked off on it. So when government cannot enforce regulations the answer is more regulations. Guess who writes those regulations? The companies those regulations, oversee. Yea that's fair.
Go have your eyes looked at and notice the doctor is "certified by a board". Most don't know what that means. Some get grand fathered in and don't have to be up to date on the latest technology. I can tell you that for a fact.

I'm not sure why people think that the free market is more important than people, but I don't think it is.

Because you don't understand the free market. You want to manage things for others and not let the individual decide and therefore grow. When government gets involved quality goes down and prices go up. We've seen it time and time again. You will think $2 is a good price on a good or service but that doesn't mean it is for me.
Price and quality. Take one away, the consumer suffers.

 

[Parker]

I'd like to ask a favor please. Can we keep this thread to discussing polling/chances to win/etc and not just spam it with Ron Paul ads please?

if you dont like it and its within the forum guidelines tough

You guys have posted litterally hundreds of Ron Paul ads on this forum. It's already driven many posters off this forum.

bullshit

If you guys just want to have a circle jerk praising Ron Paul, why not go to a Ron Paul forum?

make your own board and do whatever you want instead of coming in here and ordering people around.

We all understand you guys like Ron Paul. That's fine. If you want to discuss Ron Paul, that's ok too. But do we really need every thread on this forum spammed with Ron Paul videos and ads? It makes the whole forum annoying to read.

You don't speak for others. You dont like it because you want to control how others act and you dont like Ron Paul

If people want to see more Ron Paul videos they can google them. Do you really need to spam them everywhere?

It's information not spam. People aren't stupid you just think they are

Those videos aren't convincing people to vote for Ron Paul here. They are just annoying people. Please stop.

You don't get to decide for others what's good for us, you control freak. Go sell your snake oil elsewhere.

 

[Parker]

I'm aware of all that. But to me, that's a reason to fix the system, not throw it out entirely. By throwing it out you only let corporations have their way due to the fact they are the only ones with power left standing.

You don't get it. Because of all the rules and regulations, which those corporations help write, there is less competition, there are less mom and pop stores springing up. The start up costs add too much for many.
Parents get fined when their kids open up a neighborhood lemonade stand because people like you have to be coddled by government and told what to purchase and from whom.
Same reason you cannot smoke weed legally. Government owns its citizens right? They can tell you what you can or cannot put into your own body. Don't worry, government will save you.

Good to know you will eat in a filthy restaurant because they have their health inspection sticker up to date. Nothing to see here, it's chow time for the lemmings.