Ron Paul, does he stand a chance?

[chaos]

Originally Posted by Dabamf

No, it's not. It has huge implications. If we are not born with natural rights, a government is ethically allowed to do whatever it wants, to impose any law it wants. A "government-given right" is an oxymoron. If you view rights as what the government allows, then they are privileges. And after all, privileges can be taken away.

What are the practical implications of this knowledge for the average American making something like $24,000 per year? How does this information matter, at all, in their lives? It doesn't. Rich people argue philosophy while the poor (and increasingly, the middle class) take it in the ass. It doesn't matter to the average person whether they are born with a certain right or if the government grants it. The debate has nothing whatsoever to do with anything in the real world.

[Khorum]

It turns out Ron Paul has had THIRTY TWO interviews since Nov. 5th. On prime time and on every major news network in the US and abroad.

So much for getting "ignored".

But after seeing DarkSensei's Youtube Link there's THIS other CNBC interview which I think really goes much much farther into presenting Ron Paul's monetary policy.

The Interview was held after Ron Paul curbstomped Fed Chairman Bernanke in congress for having the finesse of a blind fat dude in a moshpit with regards to the Dollar's inflation and exchange rate. But it goes into detail about how Paul would actually transition into his Gold Standard policy into practice, by modelling Hayekian "competing currency". It's about as definitive as Paul has been in articulating a "plan" about, well, anything:

[Vinen]

Originally Posted by Khorum

It turns out Ron Paul has had THIRTY TWO interviews since Nov. 5th. On prime time and on every major news network in the US and abroad.

So much for getting "ignored".

But after seeing DarkSensei's Youtube Link there's THIS other CNBC interview which I think really goes much much farther into presenting Ron Paul's monetary policy.

The Interview was held after Ron Paul curbstomped Fed Chairman Bernanke in congress for having the finesse of a blind fat dude in a moshpit with regards to the Dollar's inflation and exchange rate. But it goes into detail about how Paul would actually transition into his Gold Standard policy into practice, by modelling Hayekian "competing currency". It's about as definitive as Paul has been in articulating a "plan" about, well, anything:

November 5th was what he needed for this shit to happen. The meida couldn't ignore him anymore... it's great!

[Dabamf]

Originally Posted by chaos

What are the practical implications of this knowledge for the average American making something like $24,000 per year?

Voting on city & state legislature. Voting for candidates who will represent them in the federal government. A person who believes rights are granted by the government has no problem electing Hilary or George W as long as they are okay with the outcomes of their policies. They have no problem with the welfare state or unnecessary foreign wars as long as they think the results are worth it.

Someone who believes rights are natural and should not be taken away does not have to think "well this harms x people, but does the benefit to y warrant it?" They will never vote for anyone other than a libertarian, and will vote vastly different on city & state issues than someone who believes the government gives rights.

It is actually one of the most important, practically-applicable factors in government.

[FulorianC]

Originally Posted by Vinen

November 5th was what he needed for this shit to happen. The meida couldn't ignore him anymore... it's great!

Yeah, the attention he's received from the money bomb has been far more valuable than the actual money bomb. The guy who thought that up deserves a huge pat on the back.

[Khorum]

Originally Posted by Dabamf

Someone who believes rights are natural and should not be taken away does not have to think "well this harms x people, but does the benefit to y warrant it?" They will never vote for anyone other than a libertarian, and will vote vastly different on city & state issues than someone who believes the government gives rights.

That's true in a world where individual liberties can be guaranteed by words and example alone. Unfortunately, we have to make accommodations for the folks to have to get up in the middle of the night and keep an eye out for those others who disagree with your fondness and exercise of personal liberty.

You're arguing against expanded government with good reason, and most Republicans are fond of that objective, but not all 'big government' is there to diminish individual liberties and expand a collectivist agenda. We also need a strong state to secure those liberties and to share that ideal with the world.

[darksensei]

Originally Posted by Khorum

to share that ideal with the world.

Why? Our government only represents our country. I'm not advocating ignoring the rest of the world, but we don't need to share our ideals with anyone. Especially through force.

[Tolanin]

Originally Posted by darksensei

Why? Our government only represents our country. I'm not advocating ignoring the rest of the world, but we don't need to share our ideals with anyone. Especially through force.

libertarian ideals would be alot more popular if it didnt come off as sticking our collective heads in the sand as a foreign policy... in fact most of the republican party prolly agrees on every other issue.

[Havelock]

Originally Posted by Tolanin

libertarian ideals would be alot more popular if it didnt come off as sticking our collective heads in the sand as a foreign policy... in fact most of the republican party prolly agrees on every other issue.

Libertarianism isn't necessarily isolationist. And if the Republican party really did agree on every other issue, life would be grand, but sadly that's not the case.

[Soriak]

Core inflation in the US is something like 2.2% right now, the target rate by the fed for the year was 2%. Considering the trouble with the housing market, this is pretty close. Looking at the exchange rate alone is misleading, because the dollar didn't devalue 10% in the US.

He also complains about outsourcing, but a weaker dollar creates jobs, as the US becomes more attractive for foreign investors. A higher valued dollar would make outsourcing even more attractive.

[chaos]

Originally Posted by Dabamf

Voting on city & state legislature. Voting for candidates who will represent them in the federal government. A person who believes rights are granted by the government has no problem electing Hilary or George W as long as they are okay with the outcomes of their policies. They have no problem with the welfare state or unnecessary foreign wars as long as they think the results are worth it.

Someone who believes rights are natural and should not be taken away does not have to think "well this harms x people, but does the benefit to y warrant it?" They will never vote for anyone other than a libertarian, and will vote vastly different on city & state issues than someone who believes the government gives rights.

It is actually one of the most important, practically-applicable factors in government.

And yet it is still meaningless in everyday life. Whether you believe you are born free with all rights and cede those to the government willfully, or you believe the government grants you rights, here we are in a 2 party system. Your libertarian vote counts for shit. You buy goods from China and fill your tank with gas made from oil from Venezuela and Sudan. You eat fruits and meat brought to you by illegal laborers. And on and on. The realization of a truth does nothing to affect your reality while living in that truth, and so you wake up and go to your shitty job because that's what you do, then go to Walmart and buy more shit because that's what you do. No, not all of us, but the vast majority of the nation is exactly like this, and much more concerned with their own lives than grand philosophical concepts.

[Soriak]

Originally Posted by chaos

The realization of a truth does nothing to affect your reality while living in that truth, and so you wake up and go to your shitty job because that's what you do, then go to Walmart and buy more shit because that's what you do.

The enlightenment grew exactly out of questions like these and we don't have to argue about the impact that had. It's not the questions itself that are directly meaningful, but what we understand when we think about it.

Voltaire said that people who were used to regurgitate now began to think and once the time of thinking had come, it'd be impossible to rob the people of that power.

[rinthea]

heres what actually happened


such a licking... more like making an ass of himself... theres a lot i like about Paul but hes out of his depth here

Ron Paul: ZOMG money groth is insane!!1 mzm is rising... Aaag 20% inflation!!111!

Ben Bernake: Money growth is moderate. No shit mzm rising, perhaps because people are hoarding their money dimwit. Now why would they be doing that...

Ron Paul: The dollar is FALLING ZOMG!!! PEOPLE ARE HURTING!@!@!!111

Ben Beranke: A falling dollar has no impact on the US apart from imported goods...

Ron Paul: Incoherrent ramblings

Ben Bernake: [trying hard not to burst out laughing]

[FulorianC]

How fucking stupid are you if you think inflation doesn't affect the US aside from imports?

[darksensei]

Originally Posted by chaos

And yet it is still meaningless in everyday life. Whether you believe you are born free with all rights and cede those to the government willfully, or you believe the government grants you rights, here we are in a 2 party system. Your libertarian vote counts for shit. You buy goods from China and fill your tank with gas made from oil from Venezuela and Sudan. You eat fruits and meat brought to you by illegal laborers. And on and on. The realization of a truth does nothing to affect your reality while living in that truth, and so you wake up and go to your shitty job because that's what you do, then go to Walmart and buy more shit because that's what you do. No, not all of us, but the vast majority of the nation is exactly like this, and much more concerned with their own lives than grand philosophical concepts.

This isn't some plebeian versus patrician debate, if you don't care about fundamental questions regarding entities that regulate your life that is your own problem. The majority don't care, but I doubt the majority ever think about it.