Quote:
Originally Posted by meekrab
Complete economic collapse. Between the fact that he wants to go back to the gold standard (requires devaluing the **** out of the dollar unless we pull trillions of dollars worth of gold out of our asses)
|
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G2y8Sx4B2Sk
Ron Paul: Legalize Competing Currencies
A Free-Market Monetary System
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hayek in 1977
My conviction is that the hope of returning to the kind of gold standard system which has worked fairly well over a long period is absolutely vain. Even if, by some international treaty, the gold standard were reintroduced, there is not the slightest hope that governments will play the game according to the rules. And the gold standard is not a thing which you can restore by an act of legislation. The gold standard requires a constant observation by government of certain rules which include an occasional restriction of the total circulation which will cause local or national recession, and no government can nowadays do it when both the public and, I am afraid, all those Keynesian economists who have been trained in the last thirty years, will argue that it is more important to increase the quantity of money than to maintain the gold standard.
|
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RKQmYfY3R7c
Ron Paul in 2007: "
I wouldn't exactly go back on the gold standard but I would legalize the constitution where gold and silver should and could be legal tender, which would restrain the Federal Government from spending and then turning that over to the Federal Reserve and letting the Federal Reserve print the money."
No reasonably educated individual has advocated a return to the gold standard for many decades now. What you call a "fact" is actually a falsehood - an unapologetic lie designed to discredit a man whose ideas are eminently reasonable and whom you do a great disservice to by shamelessly spreading this filth. I might as reasonably claim that you have sex with dogs. What gave you the idea that Dr. Paul favors a return to the gold standard?
Quote:
Originally Posted by meekrab
end the Federal reserve (destroying fractional banking/credit liquidity)
|
0/2. Ending the Fed would not entail an end to fractional reserve banking. Although Dr. Paul does oppose the practice, it
is a free-market invention and would almost certainly re-emerge in the absence of a central bank. Your fears are unfounded. Why do you think otherwise?
Quote:
Originally Posted by meekrab
cut the size of the military drastically (making unemployment even worse).
|
This is a step in the right direction as it represents both an actual position of Dr. Paul's
and an accurate assessment of the consequences of his proposal. Unfortunately, what it ignores is that an increase in unemployment can (and in this case would) yield an increase in production as well, meaning that we could literally continue to pay every soldier the same rate we do now, spend less, and produce more, resulting in an increased standard of living for everyone. Therefore the correctness of your claim is unimportant. Why do you disagree, if indeed you still do?
The Fetish of Full Employment
Quote:
Originally Posted by meekrab
There's absolutely no way to do all that at once without destroying the economy. Granted, the nation that would emerge from all those changes 20 years down the line would likely be stronger and more robust than the US currently is, but I don't want to spend my late 20s and early 30s in a third world country.
|
I submit that you are mistaken, that this fact is demonstrable, and that you should not defend the positions you have here taken. Kindly answer the three questions I've posed if you think otherwise.
Two Plus Two
Linear Mode
