Well, to put it another way, if nothing would change then why even pass a law to make English the official language?

Do you think Ron Paul wrote a bill that would do nothing? I think even his biggest detractors dont believe he would author pointless bills like that recent one that reaffirmed "in god we trust" as the official motto.

Man, I thought you were genuine and you make me look stupid for giving you a considered response to your original question. Back to Daily Paul with you.

It whips up his base and will allow him to make a ton of money in the newsletter business when he leaves congress.

It makes sense....but it basically comes down to whether that is a fair comparison. Useless without pics....er examples.

Ask the people who boo him during the debates...

You are saying they wouldn't be able to vote, wouldn't be able to get aid, etc... unless they were proficient. These things are false.

It would clearly have some effect. It could be as simple and useless as "saving the government money" by not having to have multiple copies of forms, or having to hire translators. I agree that it should not be a high priority and is pretty silly to put any kind of attention on it, other than appealing to idiots who like that stuff.

I have the same questions....which makes me more inclined to assign sinister motives to Paul.

well all you had to do was clarify, so thank you. But the question then is are you sure they need not know english to even come here legally before working towards citizenship?

Like what type of visa or work permit or living status can you legally get that will lead to citizenship but does not require knowing english from the get go?

(fwiw, im not saying one doesn't exist, but its existence, and a large amount of people being in this situation is obviously crucial to this question

another point thats somewhat interesting is that for Paul at least this question isn't as important as for others. Pauls goal is to basically irradicate much of hte federal governments role in the individuals lives of everyone living in this country. in that scenario the officially language aint so important. at least compared to others versions of government

If you were not allowed to use a translator that would be pretty awful.

I still don't get why people call Ron Paul a political conspiracist... Which of his policies?

The non-racist reasoning behind it is that having scisms in American culture is bad, if people cannot communicate with each other, it keeps people separate and into separate blocs and not individuals. I don't think it's a particularly strong argument, but at least see how there could potentially be some value in having certain values that "unify" Americans. The goal is not to screw over Spanish Speakers, but to "encourage" them to learn English by "nudging" them by making it harder to be a non-English speaker.

I don't agree with the above logic, but that's at least how it works. I don't think there's a huge incentive to not speak English (most immigrants would like to speak English), and even if they don't, their kids almost always speak English, and their grandkids speak English almost exclusively on average. This "problem" has existed since the time when immigration from non-English speaking nations became the largest area of immigrants. A lot of people have a "good ole days" mentality, thinking that immigrants back in the 1920s always learned English right away, and there wasn't any Little Italys, Chinatowns, etc... This has happened for a long time, the "problem" solves itself over time naturally, and life goes on.

I also find it anti-libertarian, but I do see it being valuable to be able to speak to almost anyone in my country in a single language. If anything, we should be making it easier for immigrants to learn English and encourage that process, rather than make their lives harder. I'm fine with English as a citizenship requirement.

That also brings up the voting request- if naturalized citizens need to speak English today, they are fine for voting. There are not that many natural born citizens who don't speak English either. Voting is not a huge issue. Only benefits that non-citizen immigrants would be eligible for would be the issue.

I'm almost certain that the green cards for spouses would have zero requirements for English. I think that's the same program as family members (you are a citizen of the US, but your elderly mother lives in France and wants to move to the US). Pretty sure that there is no requirement for either of these programs. I'm not aware of any that you *are* required to know English.

I have a tough time believing states rights advocates would make this argument.

(phill) i just went to the first page of this thread randomly and you were already hating on ron paul. have you honestly been this dedicated to hating ron paul for the past 1000 pages. listen hes not going to win so you can stop worrying. might want to get a life as well

I believe he would still allow states to set their own official languages if they so chose. But if he didn't, that would be surprising.

This is also interesting on the elections business, since AFAIK, there are no federal elections. Every election is done at (most) at the state level. So it seems that an individual's states policies would override the federal (California could make Spanish ballots if they wanted), unless the law specifically forbid that, which I would be surprised if it did.

He's not even American which is even funnier.

1. Racist letters he said he did not write. Some pictures of racists taken why Paul is walking away.

2. Even if Paul came into power, he would follow the constitution, thus what Hitler did would never occur. It would not be possible, as Paul would never take anyone's rights away. He would not do military action unless approved by congress.

3. Hitler was about 42 when he came to power and ran the WWII and died in his 50s. Bush and Obama can be compared to Hitler more than Paul.

McCain is a proven racist as he did not implement MLK birthday after it was enacted into law. There is no proof that RP is a racist.

I have a feeling if you look into your background you will find a public sector worker and a union.

Citation needed.

Here's a citation:

You find someone to fill the documents out for you in English. No proficiency needed.

i didn't do it for the money. go ahead and donate it to Gary Johnson if you want to make me smile. or mail me a joint.

LOL. Dude, does it bother you at all that your little "deducible via cause and effect" theory there is flatly contradicted by history, where there were lots of bank failures? Maybe you need to spent more than 30 seconds thinking about it?

You wanna take a shot at explaining what obvious errors tannenj, etc. are making in their discussion of fractional reserve banking?

Before I begin, I'm assuming you mean this statement?

If it's something else, plz quote, I'll take a look. I can PM you when I find it, and we can see if Max or suzzer or anyone else want to send to you also.

BTW, I'm pretty sure I found it. It's roughly correct but there is a nitty detail that is definitely wrong.

it's not "flatly contradicted by history." that there have been "lots of bank failures" in the past doesn't weaken my point. in fact, i acknowledge that some banks would fail under a libertarian system in the post you quoted (blind much?):

every type of business is going to experience "failures." some companies are going to be better than others. competition and failure are necessary things.

if there are bailouts to be had, banks are incentivized to take more risks. period.