Thread: Ronpaul! fans, answer up!!!1

Originally Posted by Defensor

If you actually LOOKED at Dr. Paul's policies, you'd know that he does not advocate a return to the gold standard as an immediate policy, but rather the legalization of freedom in the money market.

Which is a totally unfeasible idea - because the government will still need a bank and as we expand, we will still need our bank to print money. Most of what he has been saying is self-contradicting. Don't buy it.

Originally Posted by Defensor

But you still are going to have to explain your theory about how returning to the gold standard would make money scarce.

Because if you are allowed to only have as much money as you have gold. It doesn't take a rocket scientist for you to realise that if gold is scarce, money becomes scarce in macro economics.

Originally Posted by Defensor

Good. Keynesianism sucks.

Which is why we have never experienced another 'Great Depression' ever again? Not a good political position on a general standard of modern economics today.

Originally Posted by Defensor

No, Dr. Paul advocates free, fair, and open exchange with every nation in the world. Your classification of him as advocating isolation is just plain wrong.

No, he has already admitted to international isolation in the same manner as Woodrow and his decision to not join the League of Nations, which practically empowered negative elements in the West.

Originally Posted by Defensor

Again, I suggest you take your own advice and actually *look* at Dr. Paul's policies.

I suggest you to ask questions more and not be spoon-fed by a politician who, seems Ok at first but cannot really answer any of his radical policy questions. His ideas cannot work - nothing credible at all.

Originally Posted by Desidude666

Which is a totally unfeasible idea - because the government will still need a bank and as we expand, we will still need our bank to print money. Most of what he has been saying is self-contradicting. Don't buy it.

We didn't have the Federal Reserve before 1913, and we still printed money. The problem with the Federal Reserve is they print money whenever they need it, causing hyperinflation of the dollar.

Because if you are allowed to only have as much money as you have gold. It doesn't take a rocket scientist for you to realise that if gold is scarce, money becomes scarce in macro economics.

This isn't how the Gold Standard works.

Which is why we have never experienced another 'Great Depression' ever again? Not a good political position on a general standard of modern economics today.

Because the Federal Reserve keeps creating artificial booms that are just prolonging a harsh recession.

No, he has already admitted to international isolation in the same manner as Woodrow and his decision to not join the League of Nations, which practically empowered negative elements in the West.

Uh, this isn't isolationism.

I suggest you to ask questions more and not be spoon-fed by a politician who, seems Ok at first but cannot really answer any of his radical policy questions. His ideas cannot work - nothing credible at all.

I suggest you think before you speak.

Originally Posted by Desidude666

Which is a totally unfeasible idea - because the government will still need a bank and as we expand, we will still need our bank to print money. Most of what he has been saying is self-contradicting. Don't buy it.

No, the government doesn't need a bank, and we don't need a bank to print money. Money is a naturally occurring phenomenon on the market.

Because if you are allowed to only have as much money as you have gold. It doesn't take a rocket scientist for you to realise that if gold is scarce, money becomes scarce in macro economics.

Of course there is scarcity. The whole field of economics wouldn't exist otherwise.

And the market would balance out exactly how much money the economy needs.

Once again, your ideas don't hold water.

Which is why we have never experienced another 'Great Depression' ever again? Not a good political position on a general standard of modern economics today.

The Great Depression was caused and elongated by Keynesianism. It was the Austrian school that was correctly warning about everything that was going to happen while the Keynesians were claiming that 'permanent prosperity' was here to stay in the 1920s. It was FDR's interventionism whose goal seemed to be to make the Depression as long and harsh as possible.

And the current depression we are on the verge of, brought about by Keynesian interventionism, is set to be far more disastrous than even 1929.

No, he has already admitted to international isolation in the same manner as Woodrow and his decision to not join the League of Nations, which practically empowered negative elements in the West.

No, he hasn't. You have yet to prove any of your claims that Dr. Paul wants "isolation." That's in fact the complete opposite of the Paul foreign policy.

And the internationalist Woodrow Wilson certainly didn't make the decision to not join the League of Nations. The Old Right in Congress prevented that horrible idea from coming to fruition. And that didn't "empower negative elements in the West," whatever the hell that means.

No offense, but your knowledge of economics and history leaves a lot to be desired.

I suggest you to ask questions more and not be spoon-fed by a politician who, seems Ok at first but cannot really answer any of his radical policy questions. His ideas cannot work - nothing credible at all.

If you're talking about McBama, I agree completely.

Just because ideas are too complicated for you to understand doesn't make them unworkable.

We got out of the Great Depression in spite of FDR's policies, not because of them.

I think more people need to know that.