Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Yes, I would, because it's my obligation as a private citizen signing a contract. Unlike you, I don't find the appeal of living under a bridge because I lost my house.
This doesn't make sense at all. We still had bubbles when we did have the gold standard.
Have someone explain to you economics and the cause of bubbles. Government caused the railroad collapse through free money. The House of Cook.
Quote:
Originally Posted by theunbrainwashed
Gold standards will never work anyway. There is not enough gold in the world for every person in this country, it would seriously diminish the purchasing power of people with the super rich holding the majority of gold reserves, leaving the little people with scraps to fight over. It's not going to work, it's not the 18th century anymore.
Debasing currency. Learn about that and then post.
Prove gold standards don't work.
Quote:
Originally Posted by theunbrainwashed
According to him, it's not his job. Funny, this is the same exact argument he has made when confronted for his hypocrisy.
Show prrof of either one of these.
Quote:
Originally Posted by theunbrainwashed
He's against government spending, except for his little pet projects. Gotcha All for me and none for thee seems to be his motto.
He is against a big intrusive Federal government. If you actually followed Ron Paul you'd know this.
Yes, I would, because it's my obligation as a private citizen signing a contract. Unlike you, I don't find the appeal of living under a bridge because I lost my house.
This doesn't make sense at all. We still had bubbles when we did have the gold standard. Gold standards will never work anyway. There is not enough gold in the world for every person in this country, it would seriously diminish the purchasing power of people with the super rich holding the majority of gold reserves, leaving the little people with scraps to fight over. It's not going to work, it's not the 18th century anymore.
According to him, it's not his job. Funny, this is the same exact argument he has made when confronted for his hypocrisy. He's against government spending, except for his little pet projects. Gotcha All for me and none for thee seems to be his motto.
Your choice. You are also making a hypothetical assumption and i answered with a hypothetical question. Banks don't care about the dollars you pay them. They care about what those dollars represent in purchasing terms. But again, who says wages will go down to 5 cents and prove it. The benefits (stopping the devaluation of my wages without concent) outweigh any negatives.
The last paragraph is dubious and full of it. If your job is to represent a district in texas and the government is dividing how tax revenues will be spent, there is no hypocracy with fighting for your own district. Your sole job is to get a bigger chunk of the pie for them. And don't try wordsmithing me, because this is not the same as the spending we are refering to.
The spending i' referring to are the bills which ask for more spending and to increase the deficit. Again, earmarks are already taxed funds while new spending as to the deficit. I see where the hypocracy is..
Except the parts that he doesn't like. Like the general welfare clause, interstate commerce clause, 13th Amendment, 14th Amendment, 15th Amendment, 16th Amendment, 17th Amendment, etc. He won't come out and say it, but he is implicit in his dislikes for the preceding amendments based on his "states' rights" argument he and his followers make. Sorry, they're all constitutional. I know Libertarians would love to adopt the CSA constitution or the Articles of Confederation, but not gonna happen
You lose all credibility when you claim Dr. Paul supports slavery.
This cartoon character has insulted blacks and gays (see Ron Paul newsletters) and is a fan of legitimate rape (see his interview with Piers Morgan on CNN).
Even Mitt Romney wasn't as deceptive.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
All for me and none for thee seems to be his motto.
and lovin his cousin's idea (FDR)
courtesy of denninger) 
