-
Please REGISTER at Anabolic Steroid Forums, and become a member of our NEW community!
Ron Paul 2012
- Thread starter vancouver
- Start date
The federal government is not funded with tax dollars. It's not like the US is printing trillions of dollars to cover the debt. The federal government is self financing. Gov. spending creates dollars. Taxes destroy dollars.
Debt is necessary to society's economic well-being. Deficits are necessary. When the government takes dollars out of the economy to balance the budget, boom goes the dynamite, and we are hit by recession. Clinton balanced the budget and Bush got the recessionary result.
The US's capacity to create dollars through spending is infinite in theory limited only by inflationary concerns. We are not concerned with inflation from that angle. In fact, the only phenomenological proof of inflation is tied to energy and its costs.
heckler7
Registered
Bump for Ron Paul
Of course debt's necessary. But at some point you have to look at something like our debt and realize it's unsustainable. Our healthcare system is fucked and terrible. Fighting all of these unjust wars is pointless and yielding nothing but bad PR for us. Of course the government isn't funded with tax dollars but tax dollars are the dependent variable of the large experiment that is out economy. When more money goes in to something than comes out of it you have to cut the cord.
We've all heard that it takes money to make money, but at some point every good businessman has to know when to cut and run. The net yield from our economic system is negative and getting progressively worse. And if our government was self financing we wouldn't be in so much debt to China.
Even if you ignore defense look at SS and Medicare. Our problem isn't that the moneys from these programs wasn't invested well or that healthcare is so expensive. Our problem is that the natural result of making shitty food cheap and making it easy for people to do no physical activity on a daily basis is poor health that can't be fixed with medicine. Something like 80% of our medical costs go to preventable chronic disease. You can't throw money at that situation as it inevitably leads to throwing more money at it down the road. These are all poor investments and directly linked to poor financial decisions our government makes. These poor financial decisions are either going to need to be fixed in the form of removing farm subsidies and requiring physical activity (Not going to happen), or throwing more money at the problem which will eventually lead to higher costs. Those costs are going to have to be offset with taxation. Look at what happened with cigarettes. People didn't all of a sudden start reading research and realize they were bad, the cost of cigarettes went from $1.20 a pack to like $8 and people lost interest. Those that didn't paid a higher price and that money went to help fund the downstream consequences of their actions. Taxes don't destroy dollars, they influence behavior and should be used accordingly. Don't want companies outsourcing jobs? Provide tax incentives to stay here or hammer companies who outsource with higher taxes to offset the savings they make by hiring overseas and they will stop doing it.
Clinton balancing the budget had nothing to do with the 2001 recession.
the recession of 2001 was purely based on the markets and over investment in the tech sector when that bubble burst it effected capital far more than labor. those of us that work and were working in the tech sector then know of this first hand. our sales at Agilent decreased from 20B to 1B in 3 quarters while our entire payroll was over 1B. we were the largest manufacture of telecom test equipment in the world. needless to say that lead to massive layoffs, etc.
some recession have similar causes of others while some do not. the recession in the early 80's had to do with high inflation and the fact that tax brackets had just been adjusted in the late 70's and that bumped many into higher brackets. this helped to fuel the fallacy of supply-side tax cuts "working" when there were many more underlying factors at play. in economics there is never one cause just like there is never one solution, the "magic bean theory" just doesn't exist in reality and that one simple change can turn an economy around. sadly many believe this time and time again
[h=2]Gary Johnson on All But Three Ballots[/h]September 12, 2012
The Libertarian Party reports that Gary Johnson will be on the ballot in at least 47 states, plus the District of Columbia.
The party is involved in litigation to get him on the ballot in the three remaining states, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania and Michigan, where a judge ruled last week that Johnson could not appear on the ballot because he also ran as a Republican in the state?s February presidential primary.
Johnson is already on the ballot in two more states than the 2008 Libertarian nominee, Bob Barr.
[FONT=Helvetica, helvetica, sans-serif]Barr, a former Georgia congressman, won just 0.4 percent of the national vote. But in Missouri and North Carolina, the two closest states in 2008, he won enough votes to flip the outcome.[/FONT]
Gary Johnson on All But Three Ballots - Reason 24/7 : Reason.com
[FONT=Helvetica, helvetica, sans-serif]Would be nice to see him in the debates so the nation can see a different political view on govt. The powers that be will never let that happen. it's goes against the two big govt political parties [/FONT]
The Libertarian Party reports that Gary Johnson will be on the ballot in at least 47 states, plus the District of Columbia.
The party is involved in litigation to get him on the ballot in the three remaining states, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania and Michigan, where a judge ruled last week that Johnson could not appear on the ballot because he also ran as a Republican in the state?s February presidential primary.
Johnson is already on the ballot in two more states than the 2008 Libertarian nominee, Bob Barr.
[FONT=Helvetica, helvetica, sans-serif]Barr, a former Georgia congressman, won just 0.4 percent of the national vote. But in Missouri and North Carolina, the two closest states in 2008, he won enough votes to flip the outcome.[/FONT]
Gary Johnson on All But Three Ballots - Reason 24/7 : Reason.com
[FONT=Helvetica, helvetica, sans-serif]Would be nice to see him in the debates so the nation can see a different political view on govt. The powers that be will never let that happen. it's goes against the two big govt political parties [/FONT]
No.
You are not understanding what I am saying. The US has an infinite capacity to create dollars limited only by inflationary concerns. There is no unsustainable debt. It's a matter of values ... not spending.
The US healthcare system is not limited by governmental spending. The high healthcare costs lie elsewhere.
Dale, you're the funniest guy on this site. But I'm not going to tackle the Randian bullshit you're printing in that third paragraph where people just happen to get what they deserve. Throwing money at a situation happens to work. The only time it does not work is when the money managers are fucking crooks. If you want to get into a debate about the culpability of the fucking slime cigarette industry and its predation of the public, I'd be happy to be part of that.
Taxes do destroy dollars in the economic sense. The US does not depend on tax revenue to pay its bills. The major and, as far as I'm concerned,only purpose taxes serve is to stop the accumulation of wealth. It is, as you pointed out, a behavioral exercise. Your point that taxes influence behavior does make sense. And it is not inconsistent with my ultimate point about taxes.
You are incorrect. I can prove that balanced budgets cause recessions. You cannot prove your point. You can only offer up anecdotal evidence to prove your point. If you have any real proof, I'd like to see it. Don't interpret this as disrespect. I was slammed by Monetary Sovereignty too.
http://rodgermitchell.com/TotalPublicDebtvsRecession.png
http://rodgermitchell.com/totaldebtvsinflation.png
What the hell are you trying to say?
Ron Paul is a Randian moron. Don't waste your time son. Get an education. Paul is a diversion.
I'm saying the two parties rep and dem support a huge expanding govt. it would be nice to see a small govt candidate in the debates, so people can see how phony the two main parties are. do you understand what the hell I'm saying now?
the same can be said about you, but I won't say it......
Not really. The federal government is huge. Giant. Did I say it's big? It is. My dong is not even in competition with its size. That means it's huge.
Small government dreaming is a romantic throwback. It's not possible in modern society. We have to work with what we have. It's best you marry yourself to that understanding.
Right. Ron Paul is a visionary whom tells it like it is. You're a child. Keep reading.
it was a speculative bubble those graphs prove nothing. the financial sector is built on speculation and risk there have been asset bubbles throughout US history following periods of technological advances or new business opportunity (like the bogus securities sold backed by mortgages in the 2000's). it has happened repeatedly in the US and most other industrialized country's in the west and Japan over the decades.
the 2001 recession was the end result of that which started with the 1996 Telecommunications Act which required the Incumbent Local Exchange Carriers (ILECS) to unbundle their networks and provide access to new entrants, both for voice telephony and broadband Internet access. this combined with the increasing numbers of dot.coms and rising stock share prices allowed the use of speculative capital to fuel over-investment in that sector. in a nut shell there is only so much of an increase in productivity seen in an economy like the US based mainly on the service sector.
Bubbles, Crisis and Policy
Franklin Allen
Wharton Business School
http://finance.wharton.upenn.edu/~allenf/download/Vita/bubbles.pdf
and here is some data of some recent account balances of OECD country's. based on your theory any country with a surplus should go into recession yet it did not happen.
Public Deficit by Country | Global Finance
and here is historical budget information from the US from 1789-2015. there is absolutely no correlation between a balanced budget and recessions as there are many years with a budget surplus and no recession.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/budget/fy2013/assets/hist01z1.xls
US Business Cycle Expansions and Contractions
http://www.nber.org/cycles.html
I don't believe people get what they deserve and I hate Ayn Rand, my thoughts are more Darwinian/Lamarckian. When it comes to health and making smart decisions, that is typically what happens. We are beyond genetic determinism with what we know about human health. When I am talking about 80% of health costs, I am including cancers and such. The way we are throwing money at the problem via pharmaceutical interventions that will never work is a waste. The system has to be blown up. Our entire system is run via subsidies that come directly from tax dollars. So, in essence, when you pay your taxes you are investing in a system where people can do whatever they want and they have to rely on a system that doesn't work. It will never work because that's not how evolution by natural selection works and humans are very much a part of that. You could probably halve the deficit by removing the costs of Type 2 diabetes for 10 years, and that's only 1 disease which is obviously caused by lifestyle. I'm not saying that leveling the playing field by removing subsidies will even work, people will still eat garbage, which is where taxes have the opportunity to save $$$. It's just like preventative maintenance on a car, you put the small increments of money in up front and it saves you major money on repairs down the road. In the same way, the cure for cancer lies in prevention, once you have it you're fucked, at least with what we have now. You could very easily improve that situation, but taxes would be necessary to do that. Pharmaceutical companies are driven by profit, not a divine urge to help you with your disease. If that was their primary force they would be researching diet and exercise rather than researching drugs that can't compete with either. Our entire society from top to bottom resists survival of the fittest. You see this with stupid people cutting off their arm with a chainsaw and using the manufacturer. It's also why I am for things like pell grants because the fittest don't necessarily come from the luckiest sperm.
This quote sums it up for me, " The only time it does not work is when the money managers are fucking crooks." Any time human beings are involved there will be crooks. Since we are human beings it will happen every time.
taxes also give a fiat currency value when it has no intrinsic one by nature. you can not take a fiat currency to a bank and redeem it for say gold or silver, it's nothing except worthless paper in that aspect. there has never been a no-tax society that uses a fiat currency in world history.
the USD was taken completely fiat so it's prior debts could be reduced via monetary inflation and no gold had to be given in exchange for those USD's paid out. the combination of fiat currency's, central banks and rehypothecation is the biggest banking scam ever.
why do we keep talking about Ron Paul? our government does not want him in office therefore he never will be.
we get two choices each election, a democrat and a republican, pick one if you care or if you really think it matters.
and even if Ron Paul won the popular vote they would find a way to make him lose just like they did Al Gore.
we get two choices each election, a democrat and a republican, pick one if you care or if you really think it matters.
and even if Ron Paul won the popular vote they would find a way to make him lose just like they did Al Gore.
hypo_glycemic
Registered
There's a reason why a Libertarian hasn't ever been president (nor ever will be)-- It looks good on paper, but would lead into a dictatorship.
There's a purpose for Government.
There's a purpose for Government.
perfect example of a "sheep" ^^^^
hypo_glycemic
Registered
How so what?
how would a libertarian president lead to a dictatorship?
when people make this statement they need to elaborate as it's quite vague and ambiguous. do they mean small as in the number of people it employees? small as in the amount of GDP it contributes to consumption (currently about 20% of GDP)?
considering that the corporation is a product of government there has yet to be a country with small government and many large firms in world history as they rely on it. with out government most of the large firms or MNE's in the US would not exist.
Ron Paul - $41,077,461
Ron Paul: Campaign Finance/Money - Summary - Representative 2012 | OpenSecrets
Romney
$446,135,997
Obama
$715,677,692
2012 Presidential Race | OpenSecrets
* capital choose who it wanted to be POTUS and it wasn't Ron Paul. when the supreme court decisions gave capital the same "rights" as the individual in the US, democracy died....
Ron Paul to host daily radio program and podcast
Just because he?s retired from politics doesn?t mean Ron Paul is slowing down: the former congressman from Texas and three-time presidential hopeful will soon have his own spot on national radio.
Dr. Paul, who retired from Congress earlier this year after a failed bid at the Republican Party?s nomination for president, has inked a deal with the Courtside Entertainment Group that will let him broadcast brief one-minute radio commentaries twice a day across the country. Dr. Paul?s segments will also be compiled for a weekly podcast, available to download for those who miss his daily addresses.
"There's no questioning the fact that Ron Paul is one of today's most impactful leaders. His thoughts and opinions have created a significant and loyal following that has made its presence known throughout the country," Norm Pattiz, founder of Westwood One and Courtside Entertainment Group, says in a press release this week.
Dr. Paul, 77, says in a statement that he?s ?very excited? to be presented with an opportunity that will let him ?take the message of freedom to more people than ever, especially now when our country needs it so much.?
"Radio and podcasting are a much more powerful means of communication than speaking on the floor of Congress. I welcome this chance to work with Norm and Courtside and interact with America in a new way, delivering a message that is timelier than ever and a philosophy that people are clearly hungry to hear more about,? he says.
According to Courtside, Dr. Paul?s daily dispatches will be carried on an array of networks and on the Web and will begin March 18. ?His new radio show for Courtside and his digital presence via podcasting create a platform that will be hugely successful,? predicts Pattiz.
Since retiring from Congress earlier this year, the former representative has remained politically outspoken, speaking publically in recent weeks about the United States? involvement in the African nation of Mali and the ongoing funding of foreign wars. His son, Sen. Rand Paul (R-Kentucky), was chosen by members of the Tea Party faction to speak to the country Tuesday evening to rebut US President Barack Obama?s State of the Union address. Rep. Paul ran against Pres. Obama in both the 2008 and 2012 elections.
http://rt.com/usa/news/ron-paul-radio-courtside-252/
Just because he?s retired from politics doesn?t mean Ron Paul is slowing down: the former congressman from Texas and three-time presidential hopeful will soon have his own spot on national radio.
Dr. Paul, who retired from Congress earlier this year after a failed bid at the Republican Party?s nomination for president, has inked a deal with the Courtside Entertainment Group that will let him broadcast brief one-minute radio commentaries twice a day across the country. Dr. Paul?s segments will also be compiled for a weekly podcast, available to download for those who miss his daily addresses.
"There's no questioning the fact that Ron Paul is one of today's most impactful leaders. His thoughts and opinions have created a significant and loyal following that has made its presence known throughout the country," Norm Pattiz, founder of Westwood One and Courtside Entertainment Group, says in a press release this week.
Dr. Paul, 77, says in a statement that he?s ?very excited? to be presented with an opportunity that will let him ?take the message of freedom to more people than ever, especially now when our country needs it so much.?
"Radio and podcasting are a much more powerful means of communication than speaking on the floor of Congress. I welcome this chance to work with Norm and Courtside and interact with America in a new way, delivering a message that is timelier than ever and a philosophy that people are clearly hungry to hear more about,? he says.
According to Courtside, Dr. Paul?s daily dispatches will be carried on an array of networks and on the Web and will begin March 18. ?His new radio show for Courtside and his digital presence via podcasting create a platform that will be hugely successful,? predicts Pattiz.
Since retiring from Congress earlier this year, the former representative has remained politically outspoken, speaking publically in recent weeks about the United States? involvement in the African nation of Mali and the ongoing funding of foreign wars. His son, Sen. Rand Paul (R-Kentucky), was chosen by members of the Tea Party faction to speak to the country Tuesday evening to rebut US President Barack Obama?s State of the Union address. Rep. Paul ran against Pres. Obama in both the 2008 and 2012 elections.
http://rt.com/usa/news/ron-paul-radio-courtside-252/
top tier for who? you forget who runs the country, the people with all the wealth and not the ones making 1980's wages...that is the entire purpose of neo-liberal economic policy, to concentrate wealth and political power. the left & the right are 2 heads of the same beast with only minor differences between them, it's that's why RP or anybody like him will never stand a chance.
cshea2
Registered
Not only that, let's say RP does get elected what then? You think congress obstructed Obama, how do you think they will treat RP. RP would probably have to sign executive orders left and right to push his agenda through, which goes against everything he stands for.
