This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Ron Paul: "Pure Democracy Is Dangerous"... When It's Purchased
From an outright libertarian, the headline seems contrary; but Ron Paul's affirmation that "pure democracy is dangerous" critically confirms what Romney accidentally admitted: that enabling the majority to dictate the minority is a problem when the majority are receiving a [government] check. Bloomberg TV's Betty Liu looks a little shocked when the thoughtful Paul confirms bluntly that the reelection of Obama is driven simply by 'the people' being on the 'receiving end' of government benefits and that the US is "so far gone; we're over the cliff already." From Boehner and the lack of credibility in Washington to GOP's 'acceptance' of higher taxes and why he quit Congress, Ron Paul succinctly reminds many of the true state of the union in which we live...
Paul on Boehner's address to Congress on the fiscal cliff:
"Well, there are a couple of things in there. The problem is, there is no credibility. What I run into going around the country is that people I talk to generally do not believe anything they hear. Someone said we want to work together, fine. We will not raise taxes. They do not believe that. It goes on and on. They're just looking for the truth. They say all we need is a little compromise. No one expects that because they do not admit the truth. The truth is that we are broke. How do you compromise? They only way you are going to compromise if you agree on what to cut. Instead they're trying to find out how they will agree on what they will protect. I do not think I have heard the answer. They talk about this fiscal cliff, but in my mind I work with the assumption we are already over the cliff, we're just wondering how we're going to land…it is unsolvable because you have to cut spending."
On whether there's any circumstance where the GOP would accept a type of tax increase:
"I do, but they're not in Washington. They're outside of Washington. I talk about it all the time. The few people I could work with, like a Dennis Kucinich and others, we had coalitions. We agreed to come together say on militarism. Why do we need to spend more than everyone else put together? You bring coalitions together of progressives and libertarian conservatives and say yes we have to cut across the board. Right now they say compromise on preservation of certain programs, but you have to get together and bring people together of different viewpoints. I do not call that compromise because I do not think anyone should sacrifice their principles. But there's no reason in the world you cannot get progressives and libertarians to agree on some of these cuts and spending we do not need."
On what he'd need to see in order for Congress to come together and approve on some kind of deal:
"As long as they move in the direction of less government. Maybe taking their oath of office seriously…That is long gone. We're so far gone. We're over the cliff. We cannot get enough people in congress in the next 5-10 years who will do the wise things. We have to prepare for having already fallen off the fiscal cliff. it is like what is going on in Greece. Every day you hear of a solution and things pop up, but they are in debt and spend too much money and then the people go out in the street and demonstrate. Romney was hit because one issue he was correct on, he was opposed the bailouts, and the people in the Midwest voted against him. Oh, we have to be taken care of! So that vote was sort of like what we are laughing at in Greece. Those 80,000 people do not want anything cut, they will not compromise. It is the people that are that way. That is why our revolution is significant. We're trying to change people's minds. That is why changing the minds of young people is so important."
"If you look at the numbers and the way pure democracy works, pure democracy is dangerous. The majority dictates against the minority. Right now the majority are receiving a check. That is why people were sort of surprised with these conditions that the president could get reelected. That is a bad sign in that there are more on the receiving end. People do not want anything cut. They want all the bailouts to come. They want the Fed to keep printing money. They do not believe we of gone off the cliff or are close to going off the cliff. They think we can patch it over, that we can somehow come up with a magic solution. You cannot have a budgetary solution if you do not change what the role of government should be. As long as you think we have to please the world and run this welfare state, all we will argue about is who will get the loot. "
On why he quit Congress:
"I think people had enough of me. I do not have much confidence in the political system and never did. My goal has always been to change people's minds because as long as people demand more government, they will get it. Government reflects the people. That is why I am excited to go to college campuses and I will continue to do that. That's where I will get a lot of support and they are saying, I agree with you, we do not need more government, we want more freedom and we want to be able to keep our own money. We want sound money. If you have sound money coming in you do not have deficits because you cannot print more money."
»
- 45465 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
You obviously have not a slightest idea what libertarians think of democracy. :-) Haven't you read that one about 2 wolfs and a sheep ... ?
"Libertarian" in the US has little to do with historical libertarianism - that's the first problem.
The ironic thing with American free market libertarians is they advocate individual sovereignty yet don't see any contradiction that most American lives are dictated by fascist hierarchal structures (corporations) throughout their working lives. Fascist organizations which are closely tied to state interests.
And before people start saying this allegiance is a recent phenomenon - go look at history.
In such a state how does one exactly gain individual liberty?
LRC is the most read libertarian blog in the world. They support free enterprise but not crony capitalism. That they attack with a vengeance. They also call out faux libertarians like the Koch brothers regularly.
" They support free enterprise but not crony capitalism. "
There is nothing free about enterprise.
Please explain your reasoning so that I might correct your error most efficiently.
I am picturing your sticky keyboard layered with dried twinkie filling, nasal mucus and semen. Blech.
"I am picturing your sticky keyboard layered with dried twinkie filling, nasal mucus and semen. Blech."
Lol, I was making a simple point. I own / operate a business and am pretty sure there's nothing free about it. Monetary or otherwise.
Does the lack of freedom to run your enterprise in the current environment mean that it would be impossible to ever remove government restraints on voluntary transactions? It is the goal of government non-intervention which libertarians mean when we speak of promoting free enterprise. We know that there is no freedom in the current environment. That's the problem we hope to overcome.
I often hear from American libertarians that you just need to let the free market out of the cage. i don't understand how that is supposed to happen, there are many people / institutions who have fought hard to acquire vast amounts of power - why on Earth would they risk that with something so dangerous and unprofitable as uncertainty & competition?
In a profit / capital model there is no way to level the playing field, the next best thing seems to have rules & regulations to help make the system more fair to those with less capital involved. With or without gov involvement Jamie Dimon is going to find a multitude of ways to screw you. The question seems to be would you rather have more knowledge of what he's up to or less?
Is the fact that JPM spends countless millions bribing the government an argument against regulation or for regulation?
There are those who would say whoever has more capital involved should get preferential access - these people are commonly called "capitalists."Personally though, I think smart regulation makes most systems better / more efficient.
If your preference is to avoid gov regulation you can always trade in dark pools, I'm not a believer in the idea that "there is no freedom in the current environment."
We could argue open systems, but that's a whole other thing.....
Paid Shill
The USA is a REPUBLIC, NOT A DEMOCRACY! Figure out the difference, ya idjut!
...Constitutional Republic!!
Not a democracy!
Know the difference.
The article to which I linked was written by Tom Woods. Says so right there at the top of the page. Just one more example of LTER making wild accusations about that which he hasn't bothered to read.
So sad. Tom Woods of Harvard and Lew Rockwell are birds of a feather and both are part of the Koch funded Mises Institute. The Kocks are Ayn Rand mega fans. You do know that which you worship, do you not?
Do you have any documentation to support that allegation?
Here's what the folks at LRC really think of the Koch brothers.
And here are 122 additional articles with a similar theme:
https://www.google.com/#hl=en&tbo=d&spell=1&q=site:lewrockwell.com+Kocht...
So if you deny that Koch funds the Von Mises Institute, care to tell me its top ten donors? I've been asking for some time. Seems that all I ever get is "not them."
Ah, so you admit that because you imagine that Koch funds LVMI that it must be true. Typical.
Can you explain why Koch would fund LVMI when Lew Rockwell has published hundreds of articles attacking those he calls "the Kochtopus?" It makes as much sense as saying that you are on my payroll.
You two are like mosley and trav all over again.
I think of it more like Ali versus Foreman. Rand-a-dope, I like to call it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J6Hey54O6Qs
So true! Whatever happened to those guys??? Met in real life and killed each other in a duel? Died. Imprisoned? Miss those guys.
So the fact that they won't tell you doesn't bother you? Because they are all Ayn Rand worshipers, or is there another reason?
Do you ever make an allegation which has a basis in fact? Here's an article from LRC yesterday:
No More Randian Nonsense
We need Austrian economics, says David Gordon.
http://lewrockwell.com/gordon/gordon106.html
The von Mises institute and the Austrian School adhere to the subjective theorry of value. Rand was essentially the founder of "Objectivism". LVMI is all strictly opposed to militarism whereas that wasn't such a strong point of Rand. As a matter of fact, you won't find any articles about her on mises.org except maybe for one or two discussing this very topic. You always seem to make an ass of yourself in all your posts so it's not surprising. Clown.
Why bother denying that which you cannot prove?
If you fail to provide data that a bear shits in the woods, does it make a sound?
Dude, Both the RNC and DNC have likely got paid trolls to try to co intel, co opt and disinigrate and redirect dicussions within the RP movement. These clowns you are arguing with are quite likely some of the paid trolls on the anti RP quest.
I know it is hard to do but JUST. IGNORE. THEM and their arguments. Their job is to rile you, confuse you and muddle the conversation.
Take heed to my words.
LTER is simply confused. He's blinded by ideology to the facts and that's about it. It's important to deal with posters like him because he blatantly misrepresents that which he attacks. Potential readers must be offered the option of accuracy.
Sessinpo, prepare for down arrows.
CrockettAlmanac.com
Longtime congressman Ron Paul has always refused to participate in the congressional pension system, labeling it "immoral".
And RP's networth? Estimated between $1.9 million to over $5 million. Is that a bad thing? Absolutely NOT. I think its great and if RP were worth a billion that would be fine for me.
My point is that you have to take things in perspective and relative to other things for the whole truth.
I agree with you wholeheartedly that compared to other politicians, RP has taken the right stance. But to complete that thought, I also recognize that RP doesn't need that pension. Quitely frankly, most if not all of the politicians don't need those benefits because they have gamed the system while in office. For example, there have been many instances where various politicians have put up a bill they sponsored for constituents or donors that wanted but then the politician voted against their own bill because of hurting other specific constiutents or donors. And I've done postings on this regarding RP in the past, very early in the election so I'm not going to drag that back out and do the research and homework that you, the reader and voter should do yourself to verify the information. The most blatent example and easiest to bring forth is term limits. While I agree with RP on most everything, what government needs and lacks is integrity - not just in ideals but in action. Without that, there can be no real leadership and thus we have a nation divided and drifting for decades now.
And by the way, the other guy in your link that didn't participate in the congressional pension system, well, he apparently didn't need it either, as a multimillionaire himself. And while Howard Coble's networth estimated to be between only $1.8 to $2.9 million, compare that to the high percentage of Americans that have less then $1000 in the bank and less then $10,000 saved for retirement! Go to your average guy on the street living hand to mouth, paycheck to paycheck and make him an offer - Sir, I'll offer you millions in wealth now if you give up your right to SS. What do you think he'll say?
Granted he may waste the wealth you give him and be broke again, but my point is he'll give up that SS for that wealth (earned or not). So it isn't surprising to see any politician say they would give up their congressional pension after all the wealth they have already accumulated through the political system (at your and my expense). But hey, it's not illega which is why I don't condemn them. I just don't put RP or anyone else up on a pedal stool for doing something that should be a no brainer in the first place.
Is there something wrong in pointing out the error of someone who said that Ron had retired so that he could collect free money from having served in Congress? Is fact checking synonymous with putting the subject in question on a pedestal?
Yeah, $174,000 a year and he wants to complain about someone that might be getting $15 a month in food stamps due to no fault of their own. He sponsored 620 bills and 1 passed to sell a customhouse to a historic society. Now that's an expensive realtor. Did each one of those bills cost hundreds of thousands of dollars or millions, like end the federal reserve? He'll be more credible downsizing government when he is no longer part of it. We would do fine with 50 congressmen instead of 500. They could still help all the corporations send the jobs to China for $1 an hour and let American pharmaceutical companies rape Americans at 3 times or more the price they charge Canadians and other countries. All for the campaign contributions that have to spend all their time securing when they're not on vacation. Nobody represents Americans. We should vote on issues directly on the internet, such as war and taxes.
cunt-doppleganger suits you. ron paul rocks your socks!
He didn't accomplish a damn thing in 22 years. Anybody can say we dont need 800 bases and be the worlds policeman, it doesn't take a genius. All the other congressmen know it too, but they don't say it. What's the point? The few that aren't owned by the military know it can't be changed. It'd be different if he could point to one bill or one thing he changed or accomplished. He turned down his pension of $84,000 a year. I guess that was his main accomplishment in saving americans a little bit of money there. Do you know of a more significant accomplishment other than talk? If someone else had been in his seat instead, they might have stayed until they were senile and 90 and died in office and not collected a pension either.
Yo,
paid troll, be gone-we're on to you and your crew
LOL, paid by who. It was just a question. What did he actually accomplish in 22 years? It was time to retire, none of them should be there more than 8 years.
Ron Paul inspired millions of people to pursue their own destinies rather than the destiny imposed on them by the state. Those who deal in ideas are often the most revered people in a society. If you find no value in the ideas of Ron Paul that's fine. Others do and that's the accomplishment.
LOL
That's right! He is Ronny Appleseed. He sowed the seeds of liberty in the minds of the youth. But any farmer can tell you the difference between sowing and reaping. Time!
Ron Paul has been sowing for forty years. Don't fear the reaper.
Waiting for the rain.
I'd say the construction workers who he despises and pisses on for collecting disbility or unemployment or food stamps accomplished alot more in a single year than he did in 22 years. Building factories and schools and stores and hospitals that are no longer required due to the wars and jobs going to China.Commercial construction has been down 50% for 3 years according to government statistics and the real number is surely much higher.
Even his arch nemisis Obama (whom I certainly don't hero worship) can point to things he accomplished. He brought troops back from a more than 10 year war that could have been done in 3 weeks. He got a major piece of legislation for healthcare passed. Good law or bad, he accomplished something.
Inspiring people for $174,000 a year plus all the campaign donations and needless legislation costs isn't what I'd call an accomplishment that justifies an arrogant attitude towards government waste.
The Iraqi government insisted that Bush agree to a pull out of combat troops by the end of 2010. Obama tried to extend that deadline but the Iraqis refused. That's one hell of an accomplishment.
Begone troll. And take your boyfriend lter with you. RP speaks truth to power, thus exposing liars like you every day of his career. He has done more than all the rest of the Congress combined, which collectively (your favorite word perhaps?) which collectively have done great harm. Go to some commie website where you might be appreciated
How about ideals that were and are derived from people long before RP, like the nation's founding fathers.
He is the voice of reason among a room full of monkeys slipping on each others banana peels and throwing feces at each other. His accomplishment is that he courageously spoke truth to power and is probably the only politician who can go to sleep at night without the aid of liquor and prescription drugs.
Your idea of a good congressman is someone who passes a lot of laws, regardless of content?
"Well, he passed 56,903 laws. Sure, they were all corporate giveaways and votes to bomb brown people in other countries, but at least he got them all passed!"
Retard.
>>He sponsored 620 bills and 1 passed<< This is what happens when one honest man is elected to a house of dishonest men. They fear him, and do as much as they can to get rid of him.
Jack,
You are very much part of the problem.
As far as your "lock and load bitchez" goes -- coming from ignorance, you are dangerous, too.
Jack Napier, you say "lock & load"? Sound like a real hero, or perhaps a scared pathetic little troll poking your head back out of the shelter now that your candidate won.
"Wasted enough of our time" - ?
Jack Napier your post was the stupidest post in Zerohedge history.
Very happy to contribute a down arrow to you, fucktard.
Congratulations, you're a douche!
Jack must be a liberal: its the only way such a stupid comment could be written. In fact, Pauls statements embody what you are Jack. A useless eater. He is against giving
people a free lunch. So are the 59 million that voted against the Criminal in Chief. Your own words validate what Paul just said.
No shit. Now he gets to fatten up on his government pension while railing at people getting easy money from the government! It's Ayn Rand taking entitlements all over again.
What he clearly gets wrong is that it's red state voters that are getting most of the government money. Romney crushed Obama with the Social Security and Medicare set, and of the 25 states with the lowest per capita incomes, 19 voted Romney.
Just who does he think is getting the unemployment, food stamp and Medicaid money? Poor, less educated people, right?
Then there's this; http://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_blog/2004/09/red_states_feed.html
How does he square Obama winning by getting the government cheese vote?! Just more right wing dishonesty, just another cookie cutter Republican liar.
"If you have sound money coming in you do not have deficits because you cannot print more money."
but you *can* crank out all the pasta you want
the basement of the nyfed is completely filled with gold-wrapped lasagna instead of good-delivery ingots.
shocking. absolutely shocking. the msm should be screaming bloody murder.
no wonder they made such a big deal about the vault being waterproof.
ACP: The Constitution is already "tweaked" to provide for sound money. Our failing is that we are not following the Constitutional mandates. Both Congress and the voters are as addicted to spending like drunken sailors as addicts are to crack cocaine.
To be stupid, and selfish, and to have good health are the three requirements for happiness; though if stupidity is lacking, the others are useless.
Trump says he wants to lead the revolution and we say, Hell Yeah!!! We could hide at least two snipers in his hair. SHOCK AND AWE BITCHEZ
People want free shit from the government and do not want to work. It is the beginning of the end of the empire.
Yes, bankers want free shit from the government and do not want to work. Unless you consider entertaining clients at strip clubs to be work. But what's this empire bullshit? Are you a libertarian or a neo-con?
Be careful, when the wolves start discussing whats for dinner, it just might be you.
Democracy...right?
I'll take meaningless Platitudes from the winker for $0, Alex.
Why not, you always do and believe them.
I hit the daily double!
Double Jeopardy.
/////////
I take it you don't want to gamble on your beloved democracy right now?...wink.
Suck it, Trebec.
And I have no idea what you are talking about, and I suspect that makes two of us.
No, just one.
I know that LTER is a retard and an imbecile, more than that I don't get its posts
Don't blame those "coke head" bankers Rand. Their bailouts were good bailouts. The Feds pumping of ZIRP money to the banking class are good liquidity injections. We have to understand that they are the hard working job creators, they make their money by earning it.
Dontcha know you have to be careful using sarcasm here Jack?
MDB, how many names do you have?
Nice picture Jack. First rule of ZH, no politics
Earning/Work ratio disproportion still qualifies as free (or very cheap) shit.
hookers and blow bitchez!
Rand,
Why do you ask if I'm neoconservative, do I look like Jeane Kirkpatrick? Empire comment was sarcasm.
The truth is treason in the empire of lies!
The land of the parasites, and the home of the knaves....golems and hobgolems.
Betty Cliuless.
Like the sweater, though.
She is not just clueless but truly stupid and rude. I've watched interview after Interview to see her not understand the topic so six words in, she interupts and asks another question she has not clue about. Ignorant questions abound with this dogfaced broad.
If she interviewed me, after her third bout of stupid, I would donkey punch that bitch in the forehead.
Arrg, she drive me crazy to listen to. I'm often forced to watch due to circumstances.
Then comes the matter of her looks. Arrg, she has to be a contender for the worlds ugliest dog. Sweater? She's got no tits man!
I don't understand how she can get a 2 hr show, really. Course, it is blommbuggy with scores of other imbiciles.
Lastly, bloombug is a fucking ongoing commercial interspersed by financial commentary. 3 min commercial, 3 min commentary.
Arrrg, kill me when I'm forced to watch.
/rant
That is all, thank you for your time...
PS; the BB terminal is awesome though, lol
The majority elected BO? I seriously doubt that.
With the magic of electronic voting, he who controls the software, decides the winner.
deleted
The margins defy logic.
I believe that Chicago leverage is the only plausible explanation.
it's easier to stuff the ballot boxes when people don't show up at the polls
The fact is voter fraud in this case does not matter. If the election was rigged we are screwed. If it was not and the majority actualy voted for Barry then we are screwed.
You are not alone in that sentiment.
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2012-11-07/next-four-years-bloomberg-cover#comment-2955581
That's what I've been trying to convey my whole life. Voting becomes an illegitmate form of governance the moment the voter becomes corrupt
Doesn't a thumbdrive with who knows how many zeros of votes on it and no paper trail just seem fucked up?
Ninety million eligible voters found something other than voting to do on election day. While Mr. Apathy always wins, he also always concedes to the runner up...
Is there any mechanism for people who didn't vote to make sure they didn't vote? Of course not; the only way they could have voted without voting is if someone else voted in their name. Surely nobody would do that, they'd have to forge a signature... now who would have access to voter's signatures?
http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/local/2012/11/08/voter-finds-mai...
++++++
Obama lost every voter state requiring Photo ID.
http://american3rdposition.com/?p=8416
makes you wonder, no?
Remember, three things come out of Chicago, Criminals (Blago) Gangsters (take yer frikin pick) and Pizza (deep dish, yumm)
Barky don't look like no fuckin pizza to me.
What I've found so far looking at the data that is available from where the losers are loudest-
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2012-11-08/its-not-so-rosie-what-keeps-glo...
Remember: 1 billion rounds order to be received by December 31, 2012. US miltary used 78 million rounds in Iraq this year. They know something we don't know.
Amen
Plutocrats give money to Obama to register parasites so that they will fall for the theory that taxing income is taxing the 'rich'. You think Warren Buffett or Larry Ellison gives a shit about income taxes. As Leona Helmley famously said 'those are for the little people'. Hammer the doctor, the small businessman or the executives at Berkshire Hathaway or Oracle for making over $250,000/year but leave my $50 billion pile alone.
Indeed - how would the rich ever get rich if they paid the same taxes as the poor
There's not enough people pulling the choom wagon............
A pusher or two will do.
Herr Hitler had the appropriate quote, "Democracy always leads to socialism." Of course Hitler's cure for democracy was perhaps worse than the disease!
Doctor: (Graham Chapman) This is where Mrs Shazam was so wrong. Exploding is a perfectly normal medical phenomenon. In many fields of medicine nowadays, a dose of dynamite can do a world of good. For instance, athlete's foot - an irritating condition - can be cured by applying a small charge of TNT between each toe.
Now, many of the medical profession are sceptical about my work. They point to my record of treatment of athlete's foot sufferers - eighty-four dead, sixty-five severely wounded and twelve missing believed cured. But then, people laughed at Bob Hope, they laughed at my wife when she wrapped herself up in greaseproof paper and hopped into the Social Security office, but that doesn't mean that Pasteur was wrong!
5 minutes into your "stay" at Bergen-Belsen would eradicate your decision to use the word "perhaps."
Indeed J, it was meant to suggest just that.
But then socialism is self-defeating and always fails. In a perfect world "democracy" (aka a Republic really) is then restored.
In a true Republic, socialism is impossible because of sound money, vote being limited to property owners, etc.
The risk is that something other than either takes control in the transition. When that risk is outweighed by the potential reward and the awaken are ready to make the push. Just like clockwork the elite will unleash the boogie man to rally all. The awaken must keep their eye on the prize. It no longer makes sense to fight against a foreign enemy when the one ruling within is more dangerous. America's battle is now defined to her own shores. It's time for her people to help themselves instead of others. For if they do not, they will no longer be in a position to help anyone let alone themselves.
Yes, but in a currency collapse, the evil ones will have no money to keep bribing their henchmen for control. That will give free men a chance to restore the Republic.
The evil ones have tons of ways to pay for service. Gold, Silver, food, housing for family,etc,etc. Guys in their position hire people to make sure they have backup plan after backup plan. They will not let go of their power without a fight unfortunatly.
"In a true Republic, socialism is impossible because of sound money, vote being limited to property owners, etc."......
Don't forget the Constitution...y'know ..that document that the penciled neck facsists despise?
Hitler was head of the National Socialist Party at that time.
We call them Fascists now.
Their rivals were the Communists.
"Their rivals were the Communists."
This is true because they were so similar and trying to fill the same niche where there was room for only one.
This party platform explains a lot if you read to the end.
it all leads to the same thing
http://youtu.be/ntmthFyaYzY
Betty Liu is an idiot.
Don't hold your breath on most college kids' enthusiasm for RP and libertarianism in general. I know some who may wear the t shirts like Reloveution, but they are clueless when it comes to free markets. At best they like the marijuana message, and just sort of the 'rebel' aspect to it. And they still support Obama pavlovian style in his calls to make college 'affordable' instead of thinking for themselves and coming to the correct conclusion that the govt poisoned the well in the first place by getting involved, as its guaranteeing the debt collateralized ultimately (and oftentimes it winds up the taxpayer paying) by the taxpayer who never was at the negotiating table when the 18 year old aspiring art history major signed on for the debt serfdom, allowed for jacking up costs, worsened education, more promulgation of statism at these govt funded schools.
Many of them kind of like to think of themselves as 'anarchists' when really they're like the 'anarchists' at these Dem Nat'l Conventions who want more redistribution of wealth and more equality. They're actually statists. Real anarchists of course reject government altogether and embrace individual liberty and voluntaryism.
Although, I should say that when I actually have the chance to explain the benefits of allowing the market to work and the person is not some tool, they actually start to get it. I explain how I personally realized that as a Christian, I'm to use spiritual warfare and not the sword to change peoples' minds.
We disagree somewhat.
Becoming a socialist is a result of indoctrination. People don't run around expecting handouts and the Government to do everything. They have be "trained" to believe in that. Their natural beliefs are in the free market and in freedom. As such, Ron Paul is playing a vital role in countering the brainwashing that many receive in college.
If they are able to make their $100 billion in cuts come January and Boner gets his $250 billion in cuts to accomodate another $2.5 trillion being added to the debt ceiling, there will be millions that will quickly lose their jobs and finding the next one wont be easy. They wont need to be trained to become socialists.
Exactly why there will be no real cuts. Boehner will cave, again.
Edit: When I said 'equality' at the end, I should have more specifically said equality of outcomes, which is what the so-called 'anarchists' want.
We...are...done.
You know its screwed when people are actually voting for free birth control.
On a more positive note, the people of Kentucky (and three other states) voted to amend its constitution to make hunting, fishing, and trapping a personal right.
Am I alone in thinking we elected the wrong person?
If you are thinking we, as in you and me, then yes you are alone.
They only had levers for the wrong people. That's the catch.
Hopefully, yes. We didn't elect Bernanke.
As an aside, Alan Grayson is back. Should make for some amusing exchanges with Bernanke.
What's this 'we' shit?
From her questions, that chick doesn't understand one iota what the fuck Paul is talking about.
Well that's understandable as she doesn't seem interested in hearing his answers to her questions. Many interviewers today have that fault. Perhaps they think they're being aggressive but they seem able only to interrupt rather pose challenging follow up questions based on what the interviewee actually said.
Johnny Carson was a great interviewer. He put his guests at ease and listened and the effect was usually interesting and often revealing. Shatner also does great interviews on his Raw Nerve show.
Who the fuck is paying for all the Chemtrails that are being sprayed worldwide on a dailybasis??? Some elite fuckers ae probably making money off it,while they ruin our hralth and our planet.
So...
Who is making money from it and who is paying for it.
Market oracle runs a story by jim willie and HAARP,and chemtrails.
C.B Willie knows what I know...
Do you know...????
Willie is not a dumb man.
It is a joint global/military operation. During the past 50 years, the Sun has become larger due to excessive dust belts approaching it. The aliminum, barium, and stronthium partially deflect the Sun's rays, however they eventually descend to the soil and disrupt the acidity. This is where Monsanto steps in with the solution....
Most important words in this segment: "Government reflects the people."
Too true.
Ninety-nine percent collectivist will get you this mess, ninety-nine percent anarchist won't.
We're probably at the point where whatever previous intelligent races in the universe wiped themselves out.
If we will not make the budget cuts necessary, sooner or later we will borrow and spend the state into total collapse. That point is approaching.
The money printing is all that keeps the congress spending freely. The Fed is printing and feeding ZIRP loans to it's friends and feeding money to congress by buying US debt. If the Fed was ended, then the problems of the public and private finances of America would HAVE to be confronted.
If American's want to go ape and revolt, I suggest they head for the federal reserve banks as they are the root of the present system.
I gave up on Congress 18 months ago when Boehner gave in to Obama. He had that communist in a corner and could have gotten spending cuts. Instead he rather go golfing and get an orange tan. Fuck Boehner.
The House of Representatives has the power to kill the Welfare State and control the budget. So we have a Boehner, but no balls to do it. Therefore I expect and prepare for a sudden collapse. Then pitchforks, hangings, riots in the streets, and all kinds of fun. That's where these bastards are taking us.
The problem here is that you seem to think those people are where they are to serve their constituents. I can see how you might make that mistake. That is what they want you to believe. However, they are actually there to make obscene amounts of money while doing as little as possible, and at the end of the day walking away to enjoy their ill gotten goods while enjoying the unparalleled benefits that they have voted for themselves and maybe doing a little bribery on the side.
"It’s impossible to ignore the fact that 57 members of Congress, or roughly 11 percent, are members of the financial elite. Overall, 250 members of Congress are millionaires, and their median net worth accounts for roughly $891,000, or nine times that of the average American."
http://www.forbes.com/sites/moneywisewomen/2012/03/21/average-america-vs-the-one-percent/3
...with this Deep Thought from Wayne Allen Root --
“Inquiring minds want to know how Harry Reid entered the U.S. Senate with no assets and became one of the wealthiest United States Senators?”
Most telling is who became a millionaire after being elected to Congress. Harry Reid - yes, also Charlie Rangel and Boehner come to mind.
This is the best description of the average Congress-person I've ever seen. Kudos.
"it is like what is going on in Greece. Every day you hear of a solution and things pop up, but they are in debt and spend too much money"
Well they are in current account surplus now , not primary surplus but getting close.
All money is debt in this system so how can you use that as a metric of living beyond ones means - absurd.
The only logical metric that I can see is trade balance figures and the US is in a far worse place then Greece on that score.
The Gold libertarians have lost creditility - talking about fiscal stuff when even the gold standard was not about fiscal stuff - it was all about preventing trade imbalances.
Ron Paul is a fucking cuckoo.
I have said for years Dork that the American trade deficit was what would bring this nation down. Last month it was around 45 billion dollars. So we Americans consumed 45 billion more in goods and services from abroad than we sold abroad. This just keeps going on because nations keep accepting the US dollar, which is now just printed green paper. I have wondered at others willingness to work and produce real wealth and send it to America in return for green slips of paper that the federal reserve prints up out of thin air. The Petro Dollar and it's world reserve currency status is defended by a trillion dollar a year military complex. Any nation, like Iraq, that attempts to run it's oil trade in non US currency will be attacked. Iraq.
Now Iran is working to bypass the petro dollar, an excuse MUST be found to invade and destroy them. That is what lies behind the war fever.
Yes Jack
But even England could "print"Gold back in the day as they had control of south africa and canada which had almost the entire stock of known below ground at that time.
With France and Germany playing the role of perhaps China and japan $ treasury holders today.
In truth the top superpower of the day always remains in trade deficit...............if they did not they would not be a superpower.
Other countries currencies can become worth less not worthless against the reserve currency of the day so Gold was a mere comfort blanket for Sterling before the great war.
The freegolders wish to break this vice but I have my doubts about the whole thing as we don't really know if somebody somewhere owns most of the Gold outside nation state control.
If they do freegold won't work anyway - it needs more private owners.
I have a trade deficit with Walmart. I buy and buy from them, and they buy jack shit from me. Am I going down too?
Jack, I think trade deficit fear mongering is overblown. How great is it that we get fancy cars from Germany/Japan and iPhones from China and in return they get...pieces of paper! Chumps.
Seriously, a trade account deficit is a sign that a country has a healthy capital account surplus. Don't sweat it.
Disagree about Ron Paul, but +1 because it is all about the balance of trade and it frustrates me too that the debate, such as it is, is always focused elsewhere.
Wow, you are a dork. Sound like a retard. How's it going for you over there?
Yeah, Dork, I agree with your statement that this is the BASIC PROBLEM:
All money is debt in this system so how can you use that as a metric of living beyond ones means - absurd.
Tragically, I find Ron Paul to be, by far, the best of the politicians that could actually get elected. However, I regard his Libertarian philosophy as backwards. Indeed, I believe that pretty well everything regarding how human beings generally think to be BACKWARDS, on deeper and deeper levels, as far as one can go!
I am not surprised that you get an overwhelming thumbs down vote for your comments, since I feel you too are twisting in the wind, regarding how backwards things are!
Social systems, and indeed most systems, can be seen as toroidal vortices. "Things" are actually made of infinite loops spiralling through their environment and back around. (Amongst those who explain that, I tend to like the videos of Damon Vrabel.) My point is that the money-as-debt system BEGAN from the top down, but has now spiralled around to go back from the bottom up. I believe it is backwards to blame the poor people for adapting to the runaway triumphs of the banksters' abilities to take control of the economic systems, through the banksters becoming the Fraud Kings. That is only looking at one half of the Mobius strip, that is looping through the monetary systems, and especially through the funding of the political systems, so that the people end up voting for the banksters' puppet politicians.
The runaway destruction of America began more than a hundred years ago, when the banksters were first able to bribe politicians to stop silver from being money. From that point onwards, "money" gradually had its meaning more and more perverted, to eventually become totally opposite and backwards to what money originally meant.
The next two biggest steps on that path were the creation of the Federal Reserve Board, in 1913, and then the total abandonment of the connection of "money" to gold in 1971. At that point, "money" became nothing but debt, and therefore, everything had become TOTALLY BACKWARDS!
However, I find the classic Libertarian views about those events to be totally backwards too! Ron Paul's views about "sound money" are grossly oversimplistic and superficial. As I have repeated many times in previous posts here on Zero Hedge: Money is backed by murder. The debt controls depend on the death controls.
That grand cycle was really what was behind the banksters' ability to take over the government, and then drive the endless spiral of money-as-debt into exponential growth, and finally develop a totally backwards insanity, based on a fundamentally fraudulent financial accounting system, that the vast majority of people were forced to accept and adapt to live inside of. Therefore, all of these silly notions of blaming "democracy" for there actually being a PLUTOCRACY are backwards.
Unfortunately, I find it practically impossible to believe that enough Americans could soon enough understand the degree to which everything they think is backwards! The perceptual paradigm shifts needed for enough Americans to understand that would require a prodigious series of political miracles. IN THEORY, I believe it is relatively easy to understand, but that requires accepting the basic ideas regarding the realities that social systems are always organized systems of lies, operating organized robberies. The BASIC ideas that we need are SUBTRACTION and then ROBBERY. However, those necessary concepts require thinking about everything in as backwards a way as we can possibly imagine to the ways that we tend to think now ... which is something I have been attempting to do for several decades, but without any practical success from doing so, since that is, of course, about as unpopular as it could possibly be!
Anyway, my main point is that I agree with you that, as long as we continue to operate inside an accounting system which pretends to be based on "money" that is made out of nothing, and returns to nothing, then that is ABSURD! That has NOTHING to do with the energy laws that we use to try to approach a scientific understanding of everything else, from physics to biology! Fiat money-as-debt is as BACKWARDS as it can possibly get! Nothing ever gets made out of nothing, nor destroyed to nothing. Fiat money only exists as fraud, backed by force. However, my POINT is that all accounting systems MUST be based on fraud, backed by force. It is BACKWARDS to believe we can return to "sound money" that is not going to have money backed by murder.
Ultimately, that is the extreme problem that Americans face. They have built the biggest combined money/murder system in the world, through the triumph of the greatest systems of fraud, backed by force, which have been built on the runaway triumph of huge lies, backed by lots of violence. However, they deliberately think about all of that in ways that continue to be as BACKWARDS as they can possibly continue to be!
Paradigm shifts in political science are IMPERATIVE, but those require breakthroughs to thinking about our problems in ways that are TOTALLY BACKWARDS to the ways that most of us tend to think about those problems now. Ron Paul, in my opinion, is a classic reactionary revolutionary, who does excellent analysis, up to a point, but then his "solutions" collapse back to the same old backwards ideas.
Gold is the bankers money - it was used to settle accounts between nations , hopefully to prevent war rather then start it.
Fiat is the money of the nation - it need not be interest bearing debt
However Paul wants to reduce the money supply to a dot as the banks credit money systems pay down malinvested debt (mortgages etc)......
Which means people cannot trade or settle debts other then barter which is insane.
He would have you eating rocks.
I have nothing against fiat money itself, except when that becomes privatized! Money could be anything that people agree that is. Money traditionally meant metal coins. The inherent conservation of matter, found in metal coins, provided a "ring of truth," for a relative truth standard in that money. Any commodity based money means that the conservation of matter is manifesting through that. However, the greater principle is the conservation of energy, and that includes the conservation of matter. Therefore, merely conservation of matter based money is no longer good enough.
But nevertheless, I believe that the original intent of the American Constitution was that American money would be ONLY gold and silver coins, because, after one allows the creation of any fiat money system to make "money" out of nothing, then one opens the way for runaway fraud to take over, and especially the privatization of that power to make money out of nothing, by the government giving that away to private banks, is the supreme accomplishment of organized crime covertly taking control of the government, in ways that will eventually destroy the vast majority of the people!
Here are some bits of history, which I believe to be true, although I take them second hand.
The 1792 US Coinage Act provided for a national Mint where silver dollars were to be produced along with gold coins, beginning in 1794. The Act states: "The Dollar or Unit shall be of the value of a Spanish milled dollar as the same is now current, to wit, three hundred and seventy-one and one-quarter grains of silver." The Act also prescribed the death penalty for anyone debasing the national currency. (That was consistent with the ancient Greek ideas about money.)
However, after Lincoln's assassination, silver was de-monetized.
The European central bankers wanted the re-institution of a central bank under their control and an American currency backed by gold. They chose gold as gold has always been relatively scarce and therefore a lot easier to monopolize, than, for example, silver, which was plentiful in the United States, and had been found in huge quantities with the opening of the American West. So, on April 12th, Congress went back to work at the bidding of the European central bankers. It passed the, "Contraction Act," which authorised the Secretary of the Treasury to contract the money supply by retiring some of the Greenbacks in circulation. This money contraction and it's disastrous results is explained by Theodore R. Thoren and Richard F. Walker, in their book, "The Truth In Money Book," in which they state the following, "The hard times which occurred after the Civil War could have been avoided if the Greenback legislation had continued as President Lincoln had intended. Instead there were a series of money panics, what we call recessions, which put pressure on Congress to enact legislation to place the banking system under centralized control. Eventually the Federal Reserve Act was passed on December 23rd 1913."
This is how the, "Contraction Act," passed by Congress affected America (the money supply goes down purely because currency in circulation is being withdrawn): 1866 - $1,800,000,000 capita in circulation - approximately $50.46 per 1867 - $1,300,000,000 in circulation - approximately $44.00 per capita 1876 - $600,000,000 in circulation - approximately $14.60 per capita 1886 - $400,000,000 in circulation - approximately $6.67 per capita Therefore in the twenty years since 1866 two thirds of the American money supply had been called in by the bankers, representing a 760% loss in buying power over this twenty years. The money became scarce simply because bank loans were called in and no new ones were given.
1872: Ernest Seyd is sent to America on a mission from the Rothschild owned Bank of England. He is given $100,000 which he is to use to bribe as many Congressmen as necessary, for the purposes of getting silver de-monetized, as it had been found in huge quantities in the American West, which would eat into Rothschild's profits.
1873: Ernest Seyd obviously spent his money wisely, as Congress passes the, "Coinage Act," which results in the minting of silver dollars being abruptly stopped. Furthermore, Representative Samuel Hooper, who introduced the bill in the house, even admitted that Ernest Seyd had actually drafted the legislation.
1874: Ernest Seyd himself admitted who was behind the demonetizing of silver in America, when he makes the following statement, "I went to America in the winter of 1872 - 1873, authorized to secure, if I could, the passage of a bill de-monetizing silver. It was in the interests of those I represented, the governors of the Bank Of England, to have it done. By 1873, gold coins were the only form of coin money."
THE SUCCESS OF THE INTERNATIONAL BANKSTERS, USING THEIR POWER TO FUND THE AMERICAN POLITICAL PROCESSES, AND THEREBY CORRUPT THEM, WAS THE BEGINNING OF THE DESTRUCTION OF THE AMERICAN DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC.
The original intentions of the American Constitution should have continued to have gold and silver be the backing of the American money supply, and paper money be backed by that real gold and silver. There is nothing inherently wrong with fiat money, as long as the People, through their government, directly control it, and regulate the amount of it, in ways that serve the long term interests of the People as a whole. It is possible for the creation of fiat money to be done in ways that are consistent with the principle of the conservation of energy. Then, that fiat money can be even better than money backed by commodities, like gold and silver, where the conservation of matter principle stands behind that kind of money.
ONE OF THE WORST SYSTEMS IS THE ONE WE HAVE NOW, WHERE THE BEST ORGANIZED GANG OF CRIMINALS, THE BIGGEST GANGSTERS, THE INTERNATIONAL BANKSTERS, ARE ABLE TO TAKE CONTROL OF A PRIVATIZED FIAT MONEY SYSTEM, BACKED BY THE POWERS OF THE GOVERNMENT, WHICH THEREFORE ALL OF THE PEOPLE ARE FORCED TO ACCEPT!
The real money system is based on robbery, backed by ultimate form of robbery, which is the power to kill. In theory We the People are supposed to direct those powers, through the mechanisms of a democratic republic. That is a good theory, except when too many of the people become brainwashed to believe in bullshit, so that they no longer understand that, and allow it to be subverted and perverted to the point where it is TOTALLY BACKWARDS to what it should be!
What actually happened is that the power to rob and kill was used by a shadow government, of puppet masters, that were able to take control of the puppet politicians. Those puppet politicians, inside of that context where a shadow government, operated by the best organized gangs of criminals, working behind the scenes, were able to bribe, intimidate, and even assassinate, in order to take over the actual political processes, so that laws would be made and maintained which make American money become BACKWARDS!
PRIVATIZED FIAT MONEY-AS-DEBT, CONTROLLED BY PRIVATE BANKS, HAS BEEN THE ACTUAL AMERICAN SYSTEM FOR A CENTURY! THAT SYSTEMATICALLY DESTROYED THE AMERICAN REPUBLIC, AND MADE IT BECOME BACKWARDS TO WHAT IT SHOULD BE!
However, in order to understand that, and to fix it, one must focus on the basic realities for HOW and WHY that happened, which is that all money exists within the flow of energy, and that energy directs its own transformations, and so, the crucial core of those events were the acts of murder, that controlled the real social system, to direct everything else that it did. Unless enough of We the People understand that money is backed by murder, and that power should be directed by the People, for their greater longer term benefit, then their money system will NOT be consistent with energy laws in ways that serve them. What has ACTUALLY happened is that those groups who were the best at being dishonest, and backing that up with violence, were able to take control of the American government, to direct that government to give those criminals the power to make money out of nothing, as debts placed upon all of the other people.
Our real money systems are due to the reality of murder and robbery being controlled by the best organized gangs of criminals, operating a shadow government, which took control of the public government, and used the powers of We the People, to rob those People. Tragically, that established system is now on a runaway path towards massively murdering many of the People. Way too many of the American People have been brainwashed to believe in the biggest bullies' bullshit, and that is more true about their understanding of "money" than anything else!
Judging by your continued use of backwards and complete inability to articulate anything else sensibly, I'm guessing you are a FORWARDS kind of guy.
Of course, I am am a forwards looking kind of guy. We can never go backwards, and looking backwards only helps to understand why we are headed in the absurd directions that we are headed in now. Certainly, no old-fashioned religions, or ideologies like Libertariaism, are useful for going towards the future, other than as a kind of raw ore to try to smelt and transform into something useful when going forwards, towards the future.
As far as your insult goes that I do not articulare anything else sensibly, that merely indicates that you can not understand sense when you see it, probably because you are another one of the many, many others that keep looking in the rear view mirror, while driving forwards.
Methinks that Dork is pulling our Cork....
I see someone is in denial....
FUCK YOU.
Denial: it's not something an drunken irishman ask for when he wants to hang a picture of the Pope over his toilet.