You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Ron Paul on the Dollar Problem
- Thread starter tyler19
- Start date
Quote from TheDarkness:
Profiling and categorizing is a trait to survival, whether its people, markets, animals, food, whatever.
[/B]
Yeah it think I know what you're saying. We're all afraid of sharks. Its a type of prejudice/ fear that keeps us alive. Its up to the human being to learn about sharks to see how dangerous they really are and which types of sharks are the most dangerous. since 30/375 species are dangerous, people classify all sharks as dangerous, even tho more people get killed by vending machines.
lol
8s
Don't really know much about Ron Paul...
BUT - seems to me that simplifying the tax system makes no sense to a country that has exported it's manufacturing base and shifted to "services"...
I mean - whut's gonna happen to all those accountant jobs/lawyer jobs if we make things simple and transparent???
Isn't it better to keep them all employed by making things as complicated and convoluted as possible?
Then we can appear to be producing something (even thought we're not) by pointing to how the service industry is strong!
BUT - seems to me that simplifying the tax system makes no sense to a country that has exported it's manufacturing base and shifted to "services"...
I mean - whut's gonna happen to all those accountant jobs/lawyer jobs if we make things simple and transparent???
Isn't it better to keep them all employed by making things as complicated and convoluted as possible?
Then we can appear to be producing something (even thought we're not) by pointing to how the service industry is strong!
Quote from sprstpd:
All I'm saying is that I am somewhat leery of Ron Paul's individual social views. Even though he is the only candidate who gets the financial aspect of what's going on, is that enough for me to look past his other views? I don't know.
Well then don't bother to find out. It's hard to comprehend the idiocy that you read and actually try to retain as proper critique.
Seriously, it sounds like the best course for you is to just bend over and accept the next shill president.
Quote from Hydroblunt:
Well then don't bother to find out. It's hard to comprehend the idiocy that you read and actually try to retain as proper critique.
Seriously, it sounds like the best course for you is to just bend over and accept the next shill president.
Find out what? I've already done research on the matter.
Apparently you think that I must completely agree with all facets of a candidate to vote for him, or that I can't have mixed thoughts based on some of a candidate's views.
Oh wait, I'm sure you have rebuttals for the articles that I linked to but you are just keeping them to yourself. You're certainly not winning over a potential Ron Paul voter because of your attitude.
Quote from sprstpd:
Find out what? I've already done research on the matter.
Apparently you think that I must completely agree with all facets of a candidate to vote for him, or that I can't have mixed thoughts based on some of a candidate's views.
Oh wait, I'm sure you have rebuttals for the articles that I linked to but you are just keeping them to yourself. You're certainly not winning over a potential Ron Paul voter because of your attitude.
It doesn't matter what his opinions are on social issues because he a true republican that believes that those things should be decided by the states and not the Federal government. Gays marrying in CA, fine if that's what they want, not in Kentucky, again fine if that is what they want. Land of the free and all that.
Quote from Mvic:
It doesn't matter what his opinions are on social issues because he a true republican that believes that those things should be decided by the states and not the Federal government. Gays marrying in CA, fine if that's what they want, not in Kentucky, again fine if that is what they want. Land of the free and all that.
http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul148.html
The notion of a rigid separation between church and state has no basis in either the text of the Constitution or the writings of our Founding Fathers. On the contrary, our Foundersââ¬â¢ political views were strongly informed by their religious beliefs. Certainly the drafters of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, both replete with references to God, would be aghast at the federal governmentââ¬â¢s hostility to religion. The establishment clause of the First Amendment was simply intended to forbid the creation of an official state church like the Church of England, not to drive religion out of public life.
To me, this implies that if he had his way, he would make separation of church and state a thing of the past (not that it isn't already). That is not "letting states decide".
http://www.ronpaul2008.com/issues/life-and-liberty/
His stance on abortion is definitely not taking government out of the loop either.
Ron Paul wants to appear "anti-government," and for the most part he seems to be true to his word. But there are some social views of his that don't fit which I find troubling. I guess if one were all for the mixing of religion and government, then you would have no issue with this. The current administration has convinced me that blurring the line of church and state is dangerous and should be avoided at all costs.
This kind of stuff makes me wary of Ron Paul too:
http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/14021.html
At least he mentions that it is not "the most important issue" for him, but to me it shows a willingness to disregard science and side with personal religious belief. Another strike against.
http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/14021.html
At least he mentions that it is not "the most important issue" for him, but to me it shows a willingness to disregard science and side with personal religious belief. Another strike against.