Ron Paul

  • News
  • Thread starter falc39
  • Start date
In summary, Congressman Ron Paul has gained attention for his recent fundraising efforts, raising over $6 million in one day. His fundraising stats show a significant increase and some consider it exponential growth. However, not everyone is on board with his ideas and some view him as a "crazy" and a "nut." Despite this, Paul's consistent voting record and dedication to the Constitution have earned him a loyal following. Some of his proposed policies, such as pulling out of foreign aid and isolationism, have been met with criticism and skepticism. Others argue that his adherence to the Constitution is both courageous and possibly a bit "nutty." Overall, Paul's ideas have sparked debate and discussion among voters and his upcoming appearance on Meet the Press may shed
  • #141
mheslep said:
I'll take crack at the environmental case. The free market environmentalism approach would be as follows. First, create pollution credits in the vein of basic trespass law, you can't throw your pollution over the fence onto my property unless I agree and you pay me for it. Thus, 10 tons of sulfur dioxide up the stack would cost X creating incentives to reduce emissions. The credits must be salable so that the system has a natural check. If a polluter tries to hide emissions, then even if one cares nothing for the local environment there's a built in incentive to police the polluter since if I'm in the market to sell credits the polluter is depressing demand by cheating. Thats going to put drag on your 100 plants, get producers to go another way, for instance, investing in clean energy.

Now, in evaluating the EPAless world we also need to compare to system as it is now, with all the paperwork and licensing process. If that is greatly reduced, it also reduces impediment to the creation of new efficient/cleaner plants (which they should be w/ credits) and replace the broken down old cars of the power industry - the pre 1977 filthy coal plants still chugging along. Finally, with regards to fears of excessive legal costs in a EPAless system, don't discount the legal costs now.

With regards to individual polluters (catalytic converter removal,etc) - I don't know how to address that. In any case that's covered AFAIK by state laws. I can't pass my state inspection system without one, so no federal EPA needed there. Indeed, the EPA blocks states from increasing restrictions on auto emissions past some EPA-knows-best limit without a waiver from EPA as California's are likely quite aware at the moment.

I don't know if Rep. Paul agrees with all this in detail. He's stated that private property rights need to be enforced (again), and that though its not a priority for him he'd move towards dumping EPA. The above is basically the less - government approach to cleaner air/water/... per, say, https://www.amazon.com/gp/associates/link-types/marketplace.html?t=theedgeofengl-20&asin=9990561818"&tag=pfamazon01-20

A final reason: I don't see much basis in the constitution for EPA in its current form; its a distortion beyond all recognition of the commerce clause.

This experiment has been tried and led to the creation of the EPA. I am not sure why folks don't get the mercenary aspect of commerce/free enterprise, esp as practiced here in the USA. No one gives a hoot about future damages or reduction of life quality until it results in law suits--and then careful calculus is applied to the future cost of litigation vs doing biz as usual. Without some standards such as the ones promulgated by the EPA, there is no legal ground to stand on. Witness the tobacco suits. One expert after another to convince jury after another there is harm associated with tobacco smoke. This is an egregious case, try arguing what DU has done to Iraqis, above ground testing to Nevadan's and southern Utahn's, it becomes very difficult to prove damages and collect. As someone quipped above, if you want an economy based on legal opinions, elect Paul.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #142
quick follow up on the town of Sutton thing in New Hampshire. It now has been found that there was a second town that completely did not report their votes for ron paul - Greensville.

- Two hand count towns reported "zero" votes for candidate Ron Paul to the media, even though they did have votes for him. The town of Sutton reported zero, but had 31 votes; the town of Greenville reported zero, but had 25 votes. The two towns had misreported results affecting exactly the same candidate in exactly the same way.
http://www.blackboxvoting.org/"

wow, so both towns made the same mistake, on coincidently the same candidate, with about the same number of votes... amazing.

and, I'll mention again... rudy guiliani was the only candidate to get 9.11% in a county. He actually got it three times! what are the chances of that happening? Could it be some sick joke and a showing of the evil villain syndrome? :biggrin:

and considering that NH used the same machines that have been tested in my home state (california) as 'vulnerable'...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #143
Are you trying to say there was some sort of voter fraud? That sort of thing doesn't happen in the USA & never will! :wink:
 
  • #144
falc39 said:
and considering that NH used the same machines that have been tested in my home state (california) as 'vulnerable'...

Some municipalities in NH use machines and some use hand counts. One of the other possible irregularities that has been raised is that the outcomes in hand-count districts are significantly different, on average, than the outcomes in machine-count districts. Though I've heard of differences in regards to Obama and Clinton, I don't know if Ron Paul is included in that too.
 
  • #145
falc39 said:
quick follow up on the town of Sutton thing in New Hampshire. It now has been found that there was a second town that completely did not report their votes for ron paul - Greensville.
Since Ron Paul is doing so poorly it would take a huge amount of votes to make him viable. He might as well quit now.
 
  • #146
:-/ So Evo who would you vote for then?
 
  • #147
TridenTBoy said:
:-/ So Evo who would you vote for then?
Obama
 
  • #148
Evo said:
Since Ron Paul is doing so poorly it would take a huge amount of votes to make him viable. He might as well quit now.

No no! He has to stay in long enough for me to vote for him in the primary; assuming of course that by then Obama won't need my vote.

Paul had better not deny me my protest vote!

I do agree though: He can't win, so while the vote is still critical, I think Paul voters should back Obama.
 
  • #149
denverdoc said:
The guy uses constitutionalism to validate and rationalize a very myopic and privelaged view of the world.
I suppose the idea of maximum freedom can be seen as a privilege.
 
  • #150
Ivan Seeking said:
No no! He has to stay in long enough for me to vote for him in the primary; assuming of course that by then Obama won't need my vote.

Paul had better not deny me my protest vote!

I do agree though: He can't win, so while the vote is still critical, I think Paul voters should back Obama.

I don't see how that's possible with most Paul supporters, at least with me. I mean, I prefer him over Hillary, but he is a completely different candidate. I guarantee you that government will get bigger if he wins. I also guarantee you that the country will lean even more towards a globalist ideology under him. I mean, what do they even agree in? The war? Possibly, although Obama has already flip-flopped on that. The only thing they really have in common is that they both tend to draw a lot of young supporters.
 
  • #151
http://news.bostonherald.com/news/2008/view.bg?articleid=1066072 [Broken]
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #152
I remember reading a good article four years ago saying that Howard Dean really won NH.

There might be something about counting votes in NH that favors the inside party favorite.
 
  • #153
Hello,

My favorite guy Bill Richardson is out of the race already. The best qualified, and the most experienced is no longer campaigning - nuts!

Situation is that the Republican's had seven states
trying to move their primary dates up, the Democrats
only had to contend with Michigan and Florida. The
Republicans were forced into making a reasonable
compromise of counting and seating only half of the
delegates. The Democrat's however will not seat anyone
from Michigan and Florida as a punishment.

I cannot vote or have my vote count in the Democratic
primary, that leaves the Republican primary.

I've decided to vote for Ron Paul.

I will not vote for any candidate with an "R" by their name in the general election because of the out of control spending they have had at the tax payers expense these past seven years.

I want to see Ron Paul to continue to raise
heck and to discuss the issues others seem afraid to
tackle.

Doctor Paul's uncanny ability to cut away the typical
facade of hypocrisy is refreshing and as the only
anti-war and anti-spending like a drunken sailor
Republican, I think his voice is an important one.

Also I think Mitt Romney could be the most threatening
to the eventual democratic nominee (smooth talker), so anything to keep Mitt from winning Michigan (and continuing war spending) is a plus in my eyes.

Ending the war spending in Iraq is priority with me. Spending toppled the old Soviet Union and it could be our undoing as well.

Vote Ron Paul, he is the crazy guy that's most likely NOT to win in the general election - but he's a hoot.

Cheers, George
 
  • #154
falc39 said:
I guarantee you that government will get bigger if [Ron Paul] wins.

Here's what would happen:
Paul says something, congress votes the same way it did before, and all of his ideas are shot down. Checks and balances :wink:
 
  • #155
ShawnD said:
Here's what would happen:
Paul says something, congress votes the same way it did before, and all of his ideas are shot down. Checks and balances :wink:
Highly unlikely. At least in the first few years elected Presidents (e.g. not Ford, not Johnson) tend to get much of what they want. You are thinking about a Ron Paul w/ his current 3-8% vote counts. An elected President Paul, or most anyone else with ~60 or 70 million votes in their pocket will have political clout which a congressman ignores at peril. After a couple of those ill considered Paul policies were implemented and the consequences seen, then I agree, that'd be the end of it.
 
  • #156
mheslep said:
Highly unlikely. At least in the first few years elected Presidents (e.g. not Ford, not Johnson) tend to get much of what they want. You are thinking about a Ron Paul w/ his current 3-8% vote counts. An elected President Paul, or most anyone else with ~60 or 70 million votes in their pocket will have political clout which a congressman ignores at peril. After a couple of those ill considered Paul policies were implemented and the consequences seen, then I agree, that'd be the end of it.

I was thinking more like the congress is elected by people over 60 while Ron Paul would somehow snake the 18-<age> vote, mostly from people who never voted for congress . The huge disconnect between people putting them in power would lead to a disconnect between the prez and a bunch of congressmen elected by senior citizens.
 
  • #157
Currently, Ron Paul has more votes in Michigan than Thompson and Giuliani combined!
 
  • #158
Ivan Seeking said:
Currently, Ron Paul has more votes in Michigan than Thompson and Giuliani combined!
But those two are also dead. Being on top of the zombie pile isn't too awe inspiring. :rolleyes:
 
  • #159
It is highly significant. It shows that Ron Paul's message has legs. It is a significant percentage of the vote that everyone else wants.
 
Last edited:
  • #160
Ivan Seeking said:
Currently, Ron Paul has more votes in Michigan than Thompson and Giuliani combined!

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21229213/
Candidate Votes % of votes Delegates won Projected winner
Mitt Romney 337,847 39% 23
John McCain 257,521 30% 6
Mike Huckabee 139,699 16% 1
Ron Paul 54,434 6% 0
Fred Thompson 32,135 4% 0
Rudy Giuliani 24,706 3% 0
Uncommitted 17,971 2%
Duncan Hunter 2,823 0%

54,000 votes for Ron paul with Thompson + Giuliani = 54,000 votes together.
 
  • #161
Hey all, quick update of a finding of a book I'm now currently reading:

I already own Ron Paul's book on foreign policy, A Foreign Policy of Freedom. I have an electronic copy of his most recent, Pillars of Prosperity. But on the 200th anniversary of the constitution (more than 20 years ago), Ron Paul wrote the book Freedom Under Siege. I find this book interesting because it is not like the previous two that I've been reading, which were mostly a collection of all his speeches made in congress. This book is Ron Paul, written more than 20 years ago, speaking directly to the book reader. He touches a lot of his inner beliefs, like how morality fits in with government and the sources that have influenced a lot of his views (quotes a lot of Mises and history in general). Much more personal than his speeches in congress. I actually enjoyed reading the critique of the absurdness and hypocrisy of the draft. There's also a lot of monetary policy too (like always). I think what is most remarkable about his book is that what he has been saying and writing 20 years ago, is still relevant (maybe even more) when read today. Compound that with the fact that he has been saying the same thing, never straying from his principles- I'm really beginning to see Ron Paul as a statesman, because he sure as hell doesn't portray your average politician.

Here's a free copy for those who are interested:
http://www.mises.org/books/freedomsiege.pdf

I think I already posted his Pillars of prosperity link earlier in this thread.

I believe there's another book on economics that ron paul wrote a while ago with someone else. I think it's called The Case for Gold. I'll probably check that one out next.

Has anyone on this forum been reading any of his books?
 
  • #164
Many docs have trued their hand in politics, Dr Paul should actually test the medicine he proposes under some throwback platform to the middle ages when landed gentry ruled all. The constiturion and our early gov't had serious flaws--I fail to see the attraction except insofar as to regain privacy. The fiscal policies are nuts. The man has less compassion then my pet palm, but neatly disguises it under these atavistic policies aimed at further polarization between the have nothings and those with lawyers.
 
  • #165
Ron Paul unveils Comprehensive Economic Revitilization Plan

This is a relief for me to see, all the other candidates plans seemed the same. Finally, a plan that actually attacks our problem of runaway spending.

http://www.ronpaul2008.com/Prosperity

I love the monetary policy reforms too. Bravo

Comments?
 
  • #166
I like some of the measures there but these ones: Eliminate Taxes on Dividends and Savings, Repeal the Death Tax, Accelerate Depreciation on Investment, Eliminate Taxes on Capital Gains - seem like they would be an absolutely gargantuan boon to wealthy and extremely wealthy people, not balanced by the relatively small-peanuts measures on the list that might benefit the less wealthy. I have to wonder what percentage reduction in taxes for the average multi-millionaire this would represent.

Also, I agree that SOx has probably been too restrictive but he seems to be talking about getting rid of it without replacing it with anything. Is he saying that Enron-type disasters won't happen again for some reason or is he saying that we should accept the possibility of them happening for the good of the economy? And what about the subprime mortgage thing, does he think nothing needs to be put in place to avoid that kind of stuff?
 
  • #167
I agree, his proposal would greatly help big business and the rich.

For those that aren't familiar with Sarbanes-Oxley, this was a law that now makes the "protected" officers of a corporation financially and legally responsible for mismanagement and illegal activity. The law does not (as Paul would have you believe) affect privately owned companies.
 
  • #168
I believe he wants to reform sox, not completely remove it.
Pass H.R. 1049 to reform Sarbanes-Oxley and reduce the burden it places on small businesses.
 
  • #169
Today, McCain on CNN said "We have to stop borrowing money from China."

geeez, talk about stealing what Ron Paul has been saying all this time.

Anyway, how would he fund his military occupations then?
 
  • #170
falc39 said:
I believe he wants to reform sox, not completely remove it.
Pass H.R. 1049 to reform Sarbanes-Oxley and reduce the burden it places on small businesses
Unless the small business is a corporation, it's not affected by Sarbanes-Oxley. Most small companies aren't incorporated. Talk about smoke and mirrors.
 
  • #171
Evo said:
Unless the small business is a corporation, it's not affected by Sarbanes-Oxley. Most small companies aren't incorporated. Talk about smoke and mirrors.

I believe that was the intention of sox. But from what I've read, there are many that have complained of it affecting businesses outside of the corporation.

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1571/is_2004_Feb_2/ai_112723160"
http://smallbusinessreview.com/finance/Sarbanes_Oxley_Hits_Small_Business_Too/" [Broken]
http://www.usnews.com/usnews/biztech/articles/060502/2sbw.htm"
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #172
Evo said:
...The law does not (as Paul would have you believe) affect privately owned companies.
Paul's website says about S-O:
...the burden it places on small businesses.
. I see nothing about private businesses. There are many small family based corporations in the US, the incorporation being a good way to stop the bank from getting your personal assets if the business fails.

Edit: On reviewing S-O I see that it is not the size of the corporation that matters; it applies only if the corporation is publicly traded.
 
Last edited:
  • #173
Wow, anybody watching the debate? Huckabee now just used the 'borrowing from China' line. unbelievable. They should cite dr paul as the source. I'm not surprised though, Huckabee has been stealing from Paul's platform for a while now.
 
  • #174
Ron Paul said:
the burden it places on small businesses
Not really a burden. If the company is a supplier to a company that falls under Sarbanes, and only if they are requested to show compliance do they have to show such compliance, or refuse to show compliance. If they refuse to show compliance, then they can't blame the other company if they choose not to use them. It's actually a plus for these companies that usually have to have these audits done anyway.

But paying for a SAS 70 audit has several benefits, he says. “Instead of having every single client come in and look at their controls, they have an independent party come in and do a report,” he says. And, for certain industries, he adds, SAS 70 “is almost always part of contract negotiations.” In businesses such as IT outsourcing, not having a SAS 70 can keep suppliers from getting new contracts.

Do you know what Sarbanes-Oxley is? Is a a set of accounting rules to show that corporations have adequate controls in place to avoid disasters like Enron and WorldCom where employees and shareholders were defrauded out of millions of dollars. It's to prevent executives of a company from making money off of fraud. Usually it is the little guys that get hurt when there are no controls. Removing or modifying SOx would benefit big business.

Have you not seen the trend here on who Ron Paul wants to help? Ron Paul speaks with forked tongue. (as the old Indian movie characters said)
 
Last edited:
  • #175
Evo said:
Not really a burden. If the company is a supplier to a company that falls under Sarbanes, and only if they are requested to show compliance do they have to show such compliance, or refuse to show compliance. If they refuse to show compliance, then they can't blame the other company if they choose not to use them. It's actually a plus for these companies that usually have to have these audits done anyway.



Do you know what Sarbanes-Oxley is? Is a a set of accounting rules to show that corporations have adequate controls in place to avoid disasters like Enron and WorldCom where employees and shareholders were defrauded out of millions of dollars. It's to prevent executives of a company from making money off of fraud. Usually it is the little guys that get hurt when there are no controls. Removing or modifying SOx would benefit big business.

Have you not seen the trend here on who Ron Paul wants to help? Ron Paul speaks with forked tongue. (as the old Indian movie characters said)

Yes, but there has been criticism of it and its regulations. I know what the intent was. But there are many times when good intentioned things end up giving bad results.
 
<h2>What is Ron Paul's political background?</h2><p>Ron Paul is a retired American politician who served as a U.S. Representative for Texas from 1976 to 1977, 1979 to 1985, and 1997 to 2013. He is known for his libertarian and conservative views and ran for president three times, in 1988 as the Libertarian Party nominee and in 2008 and 2012 as a Republican.</p><h2>What are Ron Paul's main political beliefs?</h2><p>Ron Paul is a staunch advocate for limited government, individual liberty, and free market economics. He is known for his opposition to government intervention in personal and economic matters, including foreign policy and the Federal Reserve system.</p><h2>What is Ron Paul's stance on foreign policy?</h2><p>Ron Paul is a non-interventionist and has consistently opposed U.S. involvement in foreign wars and conflicts. He believes in a non-interventionist foreign policy that focuses on diplomacy and trade rather than military action.</p><h2>What is Ron Paul's position on the economy?</h2><p>Ron Paul is a strong supporter of free market economics and limited government intervention in the economy. He advocates for lower taxes, reduced government spending, and a return to the gold standard. He also opposes the Federal Reserve system and advocates for a more limited role for the government in regulating the economy.</p><h2>What are some notable policies or initiatives supported by Ron Paul?</h2><p>Ron Paul has proposed numerous policies and initiatives during his time in politics, including auditing the Federal Reserve, abolishing the income tax, and reducing the size and scope of the federal government. He has also been a vocal advocate for civil liberties and has introduced legislation to protect individual rights and privacy.</p>

What is Ron Paul's political background?

Ron Paul is a retired American politician who served as a U.S. Representative for Texas from 1976 to 1977, 1979 to 1985, and 1997 to 2013. He is known for his libertarian and conservative views and ran for president three times, in 1988 as the Libertarian Party nominee and in 2008 and 2012 as a Republican.

What are Ron Paul's main political beliefs?

Ron Paul is a staunch advocate for limited government, individual liberty, and free market economics. He is known for his opposition to government intervention in personal and economic matters, including foreign policy and the Federal Reserve system.

What is Ron Paul's stance on foreign policy?

Ron Paul is a non-interventionist and has consistently opposed U.S. involvement in foreign wars and conflicts. He believes in a non-interventionist foreign policy that focuses on diplomacy and trade rather than military action.

What is Ron Paul's position on the economy?

Ron Paul is a strong supporter of free market economics and limited government intervention in the economy. He advocates for lower taxes, reduced government spending, and a return to the gold standard. He also opposes the Federal Reserve system and advocates for a more limited role for the government in regulating the economy.

What are some notable policies or initiatives supported by Ron Paul?

Ron Paul has proposed numerous policies and initiatives during his time in politics, including auditing the Federal Reserve, abolishing the income tax, and reducing the size and scope of the federal government. He has also been a vocal advocate for civil liberties and has introduced legislation to protect individual rights and privacy.

Similar threads

  • Programming and Computer Science
Replies
18
Views
1K
  • Precalculus Mathematics Homework Help
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • General Discussion
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • Science Fiction and Fantasy Media
Replies
2
Views
997
  • General Discussion
2
Replies
50
Views
10K
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • Precalculus Mathematics Homework Help
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • General Discussion
Replies
8
Views
5K
  • General Discussion
Replies
18
Views
4K
Back
Top