Ron Paul A Distaster For The USA. Hes Always Wrong. Why Is There So Much Love For Him ? Wrong Paul

reply to post by gorgi


Welcome to ATS, Gov agent...

Who pays for your time here?

Khar

Originally posted by gorgi
Ron Paul has been constantly wrong on most stuff relating to the economy. His ideas of what he wants to do to the country will destroy it.

Ron Paul says he wants a smaller government. I suppose he doesnt realize what his actions will do to the country. He says he wants to get rid of many government agencies including the DOE, DHS, IRS, FEMA, DHHS, and the federal reserve.. What is he thinking? These are horrible ideas. The DOE oversees the US energy, inspections, research ect. The DHS keeps us safe. FEMA responds to disasters. The federal reserve is a very important body of the government. Doesnt he realize that by abolishing this he will destroy the country?

The federal reserve is what keeps the US government going. We need a strong independent federal reserve. Studies have shown that the more independent that are the lower the inflation rate is. He keeps calling the Fed wrong or that Bernanke doesnt know what hes doing but thats just plain wrong. He also wants to bring back the gold standard but thats another failure too.

He voted against the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. Does he want another Enron scandal ?

He wants to get rid of the income tax and fun the government through tariffs. Thats insane. Tariffs reduce trade and there will not be enough money to fun the government. His idea of a small government does not work in the twenty-first century, maybe in in the 1800's.

He wants to have a national sales tax. There wont be enough money raised to support the government. Maybe if we abolish government to the point that the is almost no it might work, but thats not realistic. Sales taxes are regressive taxes that hurt the middle and lower class and favor the upper class. maybe he doent know that or he is in someones pocket?

He was also against TRAP. TARP was instrumental in saving the US economy and has worked fantastically. Since then the US has made a profit off it and kept the economy together.

QE1 and QE2 have also worked to stimulate the economy. Ben Bernanke can also prove how it has worked and why we needed it. There is proof that it has worked.

It appears that Ron Paul is continually wrong about the economics of the country. Now that the debate has just passed it seems that the Ron Paul fascination is in full swing once again.

Congressman Paul's Legislative Strategy

wrong paul

youtube

ron paul

more ron paul

ro n paul gold

positions of ron paul

Federal reserve

Bernanke vs Paul

Trap makes profit

Trap works

Trap worked deal with it.

Gold standard wont work

edit on 6-5-2011 by gorgi because: Title

Quoted for truth.
You seem logical, you have my respect sir.

reply to post by gorgi


If you would like to know why folk follow Ron Paul so vigorously, it is because freedom is a catchy idea. It tends to spread like a brush fire. Here is a quote from his book Revolution:

(emphasis added)

Every election cycle we are treated to candidates who promise us “change,” and 2008 has been no different. But in the American political lexicon, “change” always means more of the same: more government, more looting of Americans, more inflation, more police-state measures, more unnecessary war, and more centralization of power. Real change would mean something like the opposite of those things. It might even involve following our Constitution. And that’s the one option Americans are never permitted to hear.

As Orwell said: "In a time of universal deceit, telling the Truth becomes a revolutionary act." It is immeasurably easy to criticize an opposing viewpoint....Offering what you think to be a better idea; not so easy.

Personally, I would love to see a society that uses no money, nor barter. As i well know, this is the definition of idealism, for it will never happen so long as men love and desire power. What Ron Paul is offering, on the other hand, is a chance at returning to true freedom. What have we really got to loose?

Originally posted by HisMajesty
reply to post by gorgi

 

I thought smaller government is Part of the Constitution. Arent you American?

There is nothing in the constitution that says how big a government can be. I am a proud American, fyi.
Small or big, it can be either. In this time we nee a large one because this isn't 1790. We all do not live on farm and the world has changed so much, the economy has changed dramatically since then. Its not the same

Originally posted by Ali3nAlly
reply to post by gorgi

 

All you did was offer opinions. There were absolutely no actual facts in there. Maybe you should have said that Ron Paul is always wrong IN YOUR OPINION...

Its my opinion supported by facts. I posted plenty of facts and showed how wrong he is.

Originally posted by Kharron
reply to post by gorgi

 

Welcome to ATS, Gov agent...

Who pays for your time here?

Khar

Your tax payer money. I make six figures infiltrating web sites. Let me know if you want to join.

Originally posted by gorgi

Originally posted by HisMajesty
reply to post by gorgi

 

I thought smaller government is Part of the Constitution. Arent you American?

There is nothing in the constitution that says how big a government can be. I am a proud American, fyi.
Small or big, it can be either. In this time we nee a large one because this isn't 1790. We all do not live on farm and the world has changed so much, the economy has changed dramatically since then. Its not the same

You only need a large infrastructure because they insist on being centralized over a large geographic area. I think Oscar Wilde was talking about your philosophy when he said:

"The bureaucracy is expanding to meet the needs of the expanding bureaucracy"

The only reason we need big government is because we have big government! Does that make sense to you?

No offense meant, but no person with a basic knowledge of modern economics takes Ron Paul seriously.

Originally posted by kipfilet
No offense meant, but no person with a basic knowledge of modern economics takes Ron Paul seriously.

Gorgi, did you create another account?

Ron paul would be your countries best chance at redemption...
Silly silly op.

Originally posted by blood0fheroes
reply to post by gorgi

 

If you would like to know why folk follow Ron Paul so vigorously, it is because freedom is a catchy idea. It tends to spread like a brush fire. Here is a quote from his book Revolution:

(emphasis added)

Every election cycle we are treated to candidates who promise us “change,” and 2008 has been no different. But in the American political lexicon, “change” always means more of the same: more government, more looting of Americans, more inflation, more police-state measures, more unnecessary war, and more centralization of power. Real change would mean something like the opposite of those things. It might even involve following our Constitution. And that’s the one option Americans are never permitted to hear.

As Orwell said: "In a time of universal deceit, telling the Truth becomes a revolutionary act." It is immeasurably easy to criticize an opposing viewpoint....Offering what you think to be a better idea; not so easy.

Personally, I would love to see a society that uses no money, nor barter. As i well know, this is the definition of idealism, for it will never happen so long as men love and desire power. What Ron Paul is offering, on the other hand, is a chance at returning to true freedom. What have we really got to loose?

All Ron Paul would offer is a return to being sacred of everything and every one. He preaches fear of everything. We all must be afraid. Run for the hills. Thats what he says.

"There is nothing to fear but fear itself"~FDR

We have true freedom. He is not offering freedom, he is offering fear and paranoia. Its one thing to question , but to live in fear and the doomsday for American and the preaching of falsities are rantings with no ounce of fact.

reply to post by gorgi


unfortunately government doesn't shrink of it's own accord. So "big, small it doesn't matter" .. Governments get bigger, they consolidate power. Eventually the USA will be a dictatorship. Fact. It has to happen. And typically, to shrink a government involves bloodshed. Governments are entities unto themselves, they exist to perpetuate themselves, not to Govern us.. to have a government drastically shrink its self is the antithesis of what a Government is supposed to do.

Originally posted by Cuervo

Originally posted by gorgi

Originally posted by HisMajesty
reply to post by gorgi

 

I thought smaller government is Part of the Constitution. Arent you American?

There is nothing in the constitution that says how big a government can be. I am a proud American, fyi.
Small or big, it can be either. In this time we nee a large one because this isn't 1790. We all do not live on farm and the world has changed so much, the economy has changed dramatically since then. Its not the same

You only need a large infrastructure because they insist on being centralized over a large geographic area. I think Oscar Wilde was talking about your philosophy when he said:

"The bureaucracy is expanding to meet the needs of the expanding bureaucracy"

The only reason we need big government is because we have big government! Does that make sense to you?

I never said we need big government for the sake of big government. We need a strong central government with power so we wont live in the doomsday world Ron Paul wants.
If he could cut all the agencies and programs he wants, then he would all be screwed.
Again If you want a weak government with virtually no taxes, go to Somali.

Look people the OP in not a shill, moron or any other negative statement you have made about him/her. Deny Ignorance can also be applied to the horrible way we treat someone who disagrees.

While Ron Paul has a lot of good ideas, he also has a lot of inane ones. He is an ideologist who doesn't see the world as it is. Most of his positions would rely on corporate america to act in a way that is for the benefit of the people. As we all know this is not going to happen. abolishing the EPA and other "red-tape" agencies will only return us to the days of flaming rivers.

You can't get rid of the welfare state. Our country has grown far too large. What people seem to forget is before welfare communities took care of each other. They provided goods and services to each other often in good will. This is not the case anymore we now do this via taxes and "entitlement" spending. Helping our fellow man is a civic duty. All this hate towards people on hard times is beyond selfish. It only ensures that a system of small government would further handicap the poor.

Let me qualify that I do not feel the current methods are working either. Simply put we need real answers. Ideology is great but it fails to correct anything.

The OP simply believes in the ideology that these programs had in mind at the time of their creation. This has been perverted. Stop flaming and have a real discussion.

I would like to say even if Ron Paul got the GOP nomination he would lose. He doesn't appeal to many but the type of people on these sites. If you want Obama out of the Oval Office the GOP needs a real candidate. I doubt this will happen. My money is a Romney/Bachman ticket. ::shivers::

reply to post by gorgi


Last i checked there is no Law that forces americans to pay taxes so why would you have a problem with him eliminating the IRS as its unneeded and broken theres far more greater use for that money . Your opinion is yours and i strongly disagree . Ron Paul is the only person that is truly going to change things that are drastically needed. Your best hope since JFK may he RIP the man was on the ball and told the NWO indirectly he was coming for them. Ron Paul is for change , and your country is in desperate need of change before its to late

reply to post by LexiconRiot


Gorgi, another account?

denying ignorance is the thread author signed out

then a new account just created today who supports the threads op

come on people.

this thread is so transparent it was funny but not anymore.

its nothing but a bash paul thread and pro government thread.

"The federal reserve is a very important body of the government."



please tell me this is a parody post or viral marketing for a new jim carrey movie

Originally posted by Rockpuck
reply to post by gorgi

 

unfortunately government doesn't shrink of it's own accord. So "big, small it doesn't matter" .. Governments get bigger, they consolidate power. Eventually the USA will be a dictatorship. Fact. It has to happen. And typically, to shrink a government involves bloodshed. Governments are entities unto themselves, they exist to perpetuate themselves, not to Govern us.. to have a government drastically shrink its self is the antithesis of what a Government is supposed to do.

We do not need a small weak government. Countries with small weak governments are Somalia and Sudan and Kenya ect... Is that what you want. Ron Pauls ideas will lead to that.

The USA is not nor will it be dictatorship unless the is a revolution to cause one. Our republic is strong and the government evolves to the times. Our Constitution was designed to evolve with the times and to allow flexibility when times change. This is nothing bad.

reply to post by gorgi

What does the farmer losing his crops have to do with anything? Is Ron Paul the new jesus and grow him new ones?

Do you eat Gordi? Do you spend money on food? $50 $100 $200 a week perhaps???

You seem to indicate you have a knowledge of economics. So what happens when there is not enough of something??? Do prices go up? Do people have to do without?

Do you understand the terms:
Price Fixing
Cartel
Monopoly
Monopsony

Now what will happen WHEN not if a cartel gets a monopoly on FOOD??? Do you think you just might have to pay a heck of a lot more for dinner and not quibble if it makes you sick???

THAT is what I was trying to get across.

.... The growing reach of these transnationalised corporations as they extend their control over an ever growing portion of the world's food production and distribution within a globalising world economy makes these questions ever more urgent.

In the United States most people are today well-fed and take ready access to food for granted. This may account for the fact that few Americans are aware of the concentration of monopoly power in the US food system and its consequences. A few statistics reveal the extent of that concentration. Cargill, the largest private (family owned) corporation in America, is also the world's largest grain trader.

Cargill and Continental Grain together control 50% of all grain exported from the United States. Cargill has also become the second largest meat packer in the country. Cargill, Iowa Beef Processors, and ConAgra together slaughter close to 80 percent of all the meat slaughtered in the United States. Four companies - General Foods, General Mills, Kellogg's and Quaker Oats - dominate almost 90 percent of an ever growing cold cereal market. When four companies control 40 percent or more of the market, economists usually consider the market to be oligopolistic.

This enormous market power has made agribusiness corporations the most profitable industrial sector in the United States over the past five years...

www.converge.org.nz...

Again technology has made it easier to farm and do it with less people. With all the advancements over the last century or two, we have needed less people to farm. Are you suggesting that we go back to the ox and plow for farming ? That will add farming jobs. I think your on to something.

No I am not. I am all for technology, heck I am a scientist, It is government supported Cartels Monopolies and Monopsony, I hate. Our government is SUPPOSED to be protecting us from that not facilitating the expansion but you would never know it.

I am afraid the "Supermarket Predators" are in for a very rude awakening in the coming years but by then it will be too late. Once you destroy your independent farmers and the land is in Corporate hands you will not get it back.

NAFTA - Lessons from Mexico:

According to a study by Jose Romero and Alicia Puyana carried ... the number of agricultural households fell an astounding 75% - from 2.3 million to 575, 000....

The vacuum created by retreat of the Mexican state from agriculture was filled by large US and Mexican agribusiness. In the post-NAFTA period the bulk of FDI in agricultural sector has been in the agri-business and agro-processing rather than agriculture[14]. As a result a few large trans-national agribusiness firms, mostly US and Mexican, dominate storage, flour milling, grain trading[15] and meat processing.

Put differently they dominate the intermediation chain that takes crop or cattle and makes it a marketable commodity. Transnational agribusiness has used this dominant position and a process of vertical and horizontal integration to establish an overwhelming presence in the market...

Mexico lost 75% of her farmers, Portugal lost 60%, in India a farmer is suiciding ever 8 hours.... this during GOOD economic times. Now it is America's turn.

Now read the following carefully:

“In summary, we have record low grain inventories globally as we move into a new crop year. We have demand growing strongly. Which means that going forward even small crop failures are going to drive grain prices to record levels. As an investor, we continue to find these long term trends...very attractive.” Food shortfalls predicted: 2008 www.financialsense.com...

World food shortages to stay, riots a risk: FAO
BY Mayank Bhardwaj / Apr 9, 2008

NEW DELHI (Reuters) – Food riots which have struck several impoverished countries could spread with shortages and high prices set to continue for some time, the head of the United Nation’s Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) said. A combination of high oil and fuel prices, rising demand for food in a wealthier Asia, the use of farmland and crops for biofuels, bad weather and speculation on futures markets have pushed up food prices, prompting violent protests in a handful of poor states.... spectregroup.wordpress.com...

Here is the cause of the food riots – POLITICS!

#1. 1995 VP of Cargill Dan Amstutz writes World Trade Organization Agreement on Ag. It got rid of tariffs and opened borders.

#2. Amstutz writes 1996 farm bill called Freedom to Farm (Freedom to Fail Act) that over produces very cheap grain. The law also change US grain reserve policy.

#3. Amstutz goes to work for Goldman Sachs.

#4. Gramm, head of the CFTC, helped firms such as Goldman Sachs gain influence over the commodity markets. At the end of 2006, food prices across the world started to rise, suddenly. Wheat had shot up by 80 per cent, maize by 90 per cent, rice by 320 per cent.

“Then, in spring 2008, prices just as mysteriously fell back to their previous level. Jean Ziegler, the UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food, calls it “a silent mass murder”, entirely due to “man-made actions.” Through the 1990s, Goldman Sachs and others lobbied hard and the regulations [controlling agricultural futures contracts] were abolished. Suddenly, these contracts were turned into “derivatives” that could be bought and sold among traders who had nothing to do with agriculture. A market in “food speculation” was born. The speculators drove the price through the roof.” www.independent.co.uk...

#5. In 2008 Monsanto and Cargill report record breaking profits. USDA reports “The cupboard is bare” we have no more grain reserves.

...Today three companies, Archer Daniels Midland, Cargill, and Bunge control the world’s grain trade. Chemical giant Monsanto controls three-fifths of seed production. Unsurprisingly, in the last quarter of 2007, even as the world food crisis was breaking, Archer Daniels Midland’s profits jumped 20%, Monsanto 45%, and Cargill 60%. Recent speculation with food commodities has created another dangerous “boom.” After buying up grains and grain futures, traders are hoarding, withholding stocks and further inflating prices.... www.globalissues.org...

In 2010 : Fmr. President Clinton Apologizes for Trade Policies that Destroyed Haitian Rice Farming –

“We Made a Devil’s Bargain”
“President Bill Clinton, now the UN Special Envoy to Haiti, publicly apologized last month for forcing Haiti to drop tariffs on imported, subsidized US rice during his time in office. The policy wiped out Haitian rice farming and seriously damaged Haiti’s ability to be self-sufficient.” www.democracynow.org...