Attention Ron Paul supporters
- Thread starter MellowFarmer
- Start date
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
MellowFarmer
Well-Known Member
Thank you deprave that was very informational and cleared up the main question I could not figure out how to pose without sounding like a cunt. Are you all delusional I mean they won't even tell you on the nightly news if he's got a primary win do you really think they're going to tell him he got the most votes? I feel like a 
but the idea of an American politician running only to further a cause just never ever crossed my mind another sad fact on the state of our nation.
I think about the ocean a rain I am curious as to if you have any thoughts on the ideology of Libertarian Socialists/Anarchist?
*those Googling include Emma Goldman
but the idea of an American politician running only to further a cause just never ever crossed my mind another sad fact on the state of our nation.I think about the ocean a rain I am curious as to if you have any thoughts on the ideology of Libertarian Socialists/Anarchist?
*those Googling include Emma Goldman
MellowFarmer
Well-Known Member
Uncle Buck I request that you leave my thread. We are not a threat to your leader's victory this election and your fear of Waking Up is rather depressing, more so in fact than with the average joe sheep because your dedication and passion would be a welcomed asset.
MellowFarmer
Well-Known Member
He has been running since 1980 is that your final answer?
Edit: BA142 quoted
Edit: BA142 quoted
BA142
Well-Known Member
Wut
Just a hypothesis. I don't mind Ron, he was the best candidate running out of all the Republicans. I just think he's going to retire soon....this was probably his last 'hoorah'
RyanTheRhino
Well-Known Member
how will I sleep at night. knowing that a random idea developed while stoned was wrong. It was just a high thought we all have them
MellowFarmer
Well-Known Member
how do you figure?
Harrekin
Well-Known Member
You support tariffs?
How big is the import/export gap in US trade?
Taxes are passed to the consumer through higher prices.
Your idea is stupid, no offense.
PetFlora
Well-Known Member
Ayn's philosophy has been twisted by the scum-baggers who followed her. Not being 'for' the collective, does not mean abusing them. The welfare system has abused them, while he education system has dumbed most of us down to a worker bee mentality
PetFlora
Well-Known Member
Love your Avatar. Even though I am a registered Independent, I campaigned for RP 8 years ago. Unless he becomes the Rep candidate (fat chance) I will vote Libertarian. However, the problem with Libs is to function properly, it requires everyone adhere to highest standards of personal responsibility (10 Commandments) which big biz loves to piss all over, or wipe their asses with then flush down their gold toilets
deprave
New Member
Ron Paul disagrees with Ayn Rand on quite a few things, the major one being the 14th amendment. Also its important to remember Ayn Rand hated libertarians even thou we do agree with a lot of which she wrote from the individualist point but thats sort of disregarding the ethical arguments and some social issues.
Finally regarding Ayn Rand and Libertarians, most Libertarians (especially left leaning ones) are going to disagree with Ayn Rand's conclusion that government can work ...we just have to try (this is total lol status for me as a left libertarian and a revolutionary borderline anarchist)...I believe that the conclusion is a form of denial or hopeless optimism, atlas shrugged gets to the end and she trys to write about how we can make this work. The anarchist in me says that's totally impossible because government by its very nature of being a monopoly of power not held accountable for its actions attracts evil people. The revolutionary in me which also disagrees with Ron Paul concludes that you can't comprise with said evil people from within or you can't fix what is already so broken rather you must start from the ground up.
Finally regarding Ayn Rand and Libertarians, most Libertarians (especially left leaning ones) are going to disagree with Ayn Rand's conclusion that government can work ...we just have to try (this is total lol status for me as a left libertarian and a revolutionary borderline anarchist)...I believe that the conclusion is a form of denial or hopeless optimism, atlas shrugged gets to the end and she trys to write about how we can make this work. The anarchist in me says that's totally impossible because government by its very nature of being a monopoly of power not held accountable for its actions attracts evil people. The revolutionary in me which also disagrees with Ron Paul concludes that you can't comprise with said evil people from within or you can't fix what is already so broken rather you must start from the ground up.
kelly4
Well-Known Member
You must mean having to prove who you are. I'd file that under change. It's being progressive and forward leaning.
I see it as exactly what you are looking for...forward thinking, progressive change. OBAMA says change is good after all....
RyanTheRhino
Well-Known Member
you caught me talking out of my ass.
But I would say the incumbent always has residual votes & the more people who decide not to vote because they don't like either candidate make the incumbents residual votes hold more weight.
PetFlora
Well-Known Member
Libertarians are overreacting, and would be brought into a more reasonable balance by the public.
Clearly, we needs some govt. Certainly no where near the largesse out of control national govt we have had for some 50 years. States should have power over state issues.
One- two terms in office, no golden parachutes, no lobbyists, no military presence beyond our borders, and no Fed would eliminate the bloodsuckers, and satisfy the populace.
Combine this with a real education system would eliminate the worker-bee mentality that has been instituted since 1913, and restore the type of individualism I believe Ayn philosophized, not the interpretation of Alan Greenspan, et al. Alan wriggled his way into AAyns study groups. She never had a lot of use for him, though some lit says they were very close. AG later became chairman of the Fed (1987- 2006). Keep in mind his financial influence spans a much larger period of time. His financial legacy pre/post chairman has brought the US economy to its knees. Combine this with big businesses' thirst to subvert (conquer) resource rich countries around the world
I believe both Individualism and Libertarians would function happily in such an environment. I know I would
Clearly, we needs some govt. Certainly no where near the largesse out of control national govt we have had for some 50 years. States should have power over state issues.
One- two terms in office, no golden parachutes, no lobbyists, no military presence beyond our borders, and no Fed would eliminate the bloodsuckers, and satisfy the populace.
Combine this with a real education system would eliminate the worker-bee mentality that has been instituted since 1913, and restore the type of individualism I believe Ayn philosophized, not the interpretation of Alan Greenspan, et al. Alan wriggled his way into AAyns study groups. She never had a lot of use for him, though some lit says they were very close. AG later became chairman of the Fed (1987- 2006). Keep in mind his financial influence spans a much larger period of time. His financial legacy pre/post chairman has brought the US economy to its knees. Combine this with big businesses' thirst to subvert (conquer) resource rich countries around the world
I believe both Individualism and Libertarians would function happily in such an environment. I know I would
bedspirit
Active Member
You're stupid. Offense intended.
Do you remember when Harley Davidson almost went out of business in the 80's? Do you recall how they turned things around. It wasn't by firing all of their American workers and moving to China. Ronald Reagan put a huge tariff on imported motorcycles. As a result, Harley Davidson remained in the United States and made a huge comeback. I've got about 734 more examples if you care to debate.
edit: Ok, you're not stupid. you're just repeating the same line every other free trader uses. I just get tired of hearing it from people who have no idea what they're regurgitating. Maybe you do have an idea, but I've seen the argued played out to it's finality countless time and each time your argument loses. obviously the point of the tariff is to make imported goods more expensive. So for you to point out that consumers would end up paying more is redundant. That's the whole idea. It's incentive for an american company to produce a similar product, place it on the store shelf next to the highly taxed imported product, and ideally sell more units of that product.
lifegoesonbrah
Well-Known Member
Yah Tarrifs are really ineffective because they simply cause retaliatory tariffs from other countries, which just raises price levels on everything. The government makes out pretty well but the consumers end up paying ridiculous prices and substitute products become prevalent when they shouldn't be (IE sugar and HFCS). The smoot-hawley tarrifs were part o0f the cause of the great depression and are a good example of how tariffs can get extremely political, because you are favoring markets over others, and they ended up severely dampening trade (I think international trade decreased by 60%).
lifegoesonbrah
Well-Known Member
It's funny, about half the documentaries/books about the housing bubble open with the Ayn Rand and Greenspan relationship to try to blame libertarian ideology for the bubble because the financial market had been deregulated. They always disregard the part where central banking is not free market.
ChesusRice
Well-Known Member
And it's controlled by the Joos