Republican Primaries

[Scott_Lafrance]

So you ignored the substance of my post, told me I was ignorant about the currency system but still never answered the basic question as to how eliminating the gold standard and the Federal Reserve would eliminate our economic problems and how this could be done without throwing our nations and the world’s financial system into utter turmoil.

I find that Ron Paul supporters, always a testy lot, get even more testy when you confront them with the details of what Ron Paul actually proposes

Ron Paul actually proposes the introduction of competing currencies that are actually based on something of value, rather than the “full faith and credit of the United States of America”, since Moody’s is downgrading that credit rating.

moneymorning.com/2011/01/16/u.s.-debt-levels-elicit-warnings-from-moodys-and-sp/
nytimes.com/2011/01/14/business/economy/14place.html?_r=1
bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aMvxwUDZDinE&refer=us

 

[jam070406]

So you ignored the substance of my post, told me I was ignorant about the currency system but still never answered the basic question as to how eliminating the gold standard and the Federal Reserve would eliminate our economic problems and how this could be done without throwing our nations and the world’s financial system into utter turmoil.

I find that Ron Paul supporters, always a testy lot, get even more testy when you confront them with the details of what Ron Paul actually proposes

Actually he addressed the concern that only Ron Paul has courage to talk about. And that is what the founding fathers warned was that a private bank issuing currency and loaning at interest is what has lead to the near collapse of this nation.

 

[ishii]

You didn’t say assisted suicide. I believe it to be murder.

Marriage is a covenant with God administered by His Church.
Does the Church view “marriage” outside of the Church as valid?

You’re dodging the question. Does a libertarian run state allow Dr. Kevorkians to set up shop and help individuals (who own their own body of course) end it all? Does a state have an interest in keeping the institution of marriage safe from attack from those who’d tear it down in the name of “gay rights” ?

Ishii

 

[Scott_Lafrance]

Actually he addressed the concern that only Ron Paul has courage to talk about. And that is what the founding fathers warned was that a private bank issuing currency and loaning at interest is what has lead to the near collapse of this nation.

Founding Fathers. Baaaaah! They gave us slavery. The should all be removed from the history books.

 

[Scott_Lafrance]

You’re dodging the question. Does a libertarian run state allow Dr. Kevorkians to set up shop and help individuals (who own their own body of course) end it all? Does a state have an interest in keeping the institution of marriage safe from attack from those who’d tear it down in the name of “gay rights” ?

Ishii

What are you talking about. It is the STATE that is attacking marriage! Wow, read the newspaper. New York, Maryland, Massachussetts, California, Washington DC. The governments of these places are the ones “legalizing” same sex marriage. Obama refuses to defend DOMA. Which of the other sacraments would you like the state to “protect” and be in control of?

And you act as if decriminalizing suicide would become a rampant plague upon the earth if it were decriminalized. Bodies would just pile up in the streets. Rats, plague, black death. The world as we know it would end if the federal government did come riding on a shining white horse to save us all!!!

 

[bbarrick8383]

wnd.com/?pageId=15232

 

[jam070406]

You’re dodging the question. Does a libertarian run state allow Dr. Kevorkians to set up shop and help individuals (who own their own body of course) end it all? Does a state have an interest in keeping the institution of marriage safe from attack from those who’d tear it down in the name of “gay rights” ?

Ishii

What’s a libertarian state?
A place where liberty is afforded to all?
I’ve actually never been called a libertarian before until these boards. I consider myself an orthodox Catholic first and foremost.

I can’t answer you because my world view is different from a secular world view.
Does the state have an interest in outlawing divorce?

 

[Stjudeprayforus]

I voted for Pawlenty…

Although my full support and money will go to Perry if he gets in.

Perry/Rubio

 

[Scott_Lafrance]

What’s a libertarian state?
A place where liberty is afforded to all?
I’ve actually never been called a libertarian before until these boards. I consider myself an orthodox Catholic first and foremost.

I can’t answer you because my world view is different from a secular world view.
Does the state have an interest in outlawing divorce?

Maybe after the state fixes the marriage problem, it can take on baptism, or confirmation. Maybe they can fix that pesky “women’s ordination” issue. That’s what we all need, the state to fix the problems of the church. Maybe the state can then decide on the legitimacy of vocations.

 

[ishii]

What’s a libertarian state?
A place where liberty is afforded to all?
I’ve actually never been called a libertarian before until these boards. I consider myself an orthodox Catholic first and foremost.

I can’t answer you because my world view is different from a secular world view.
Does the state have an interest in outlawing divorce?

You seem to want to argue on semantics. I would regard a libertarian state as one in which libertarians have a majority in govt. and can run things they way they want to - much like liberals in the first two years of Obama had the majority and did what they pleased. I posed a couple of fair, practical questions. If our govt was run by libertarians, then on what grounds would they keep the Dr. Kevorkians outlawed and on what grounds would the state defend marriage as between a man and a woman?

Ishii

 

[Scott_Lafrance]

You seem to want to argue on semantics. I would regard a libertarian state as one in which libertarians have a majority in govt. and can run things they way they want to - much like liberals in the first two years of Obama had the majority and did what they pleased. I posed a couple of fair, practical questions. If our govt was run by libertarians, then on what grounds would they keep the Dr. Kevorkians outlawed and on what grounds would the state defend marriage as between a man and a woman?

Ishii

Good God, another one. This “anything goes” mentality is not libertarianism, it is libertinism. They are not the same. how would you like it if I walked around calling conservatives “religious fascists”?

Here is a question for you. Which of the remaining sacraments would you like the state to get involved in? Ordination? Maybe the state can compel the Church to start ordaining women. I mean, isn’t that discrimination? Isn’t it a violation of the Civil Rights Act?

 

[jam070406]

You seem to want to argue on semantics. I would regard a libertarian state as one in which libertarians have a majority in govt. and can run things they way they want to - much like liberals in the first two years of Obama had the majority and did what they pleased. I posed a couple of fair, practical questions. If our govt was run by libertarians, then on what grounds would they keep the Dr. Kevorkians outlawed and on what grounds would the state defend marriage as between a man and a woman?

Ishii

What grounds do they make decisions on now??
It’s not the Church.

 

[jomoco]

They both stand for lower business taxes and less business regulation , which Ron Paul does.also, as far as I can tell However neither Romney or Perry calls for destroying the American financial system as a solution to the problem.

Can you explain to us exactly how eliminating the federal reserve and putting this back on the gold standard is going to alleviate our economic problems?

Back in my younger days I worked in banking for several years as an auditor and I’ve always been somewhat amazed at how little people really know about the function of the Federal Reserve. Functional the Federal Reserve is to bring stability to the banking system and to our currency. They do this mainly through managing the Fed funds rate and temporary loans to banks.

Let me explain how this works. Little town bank finds at the end of the day they have a liquidity problem. Big town bank determines that they have a surplus of funds at the end of the day. So little town bank goes to the Fed and uses the overnight federal funds market to gain liquidity and big town bank deposits their excess funds with the Fed. The Fed sets a low rate for both ends of this transaction

So now the Fed goes away. When little town bank finds it has a liquidity problem they have to go to big town bank to borrow money at any rate big town bank wants to charge them. This of course puts little town bank at a competitive disadvantage, which allows big town bank to come into their market and undercut them on savings rates and loans rates. The end result being over period of time little town banks all disappear in favor of big town bank’s who now can charge whatever they want for loans. And of course, there is no longer any regulation of big town bank or little town bank so if they fold their depositors are on their own.

Of course, the situation is made worse for both of them by putting tus back on the gold standard-putting our currency at the whim of speculators worldwide who can drive up and down the price of gold at whim. In the past the government got around this problem by setting a arbitrary rate for the price of gold, and forbidding Americans from owning gold other than jewelry This, of course, would not work in today’s world. But then when offering simplistic solutions. It is best to not let reality intrude.

Your knowledge of the fed, its origins, its constitutionality, and exactly who created it and why, leave me in serious doubt of your ability to discuss the fed intelligently.

Before the fed was created everyone’s US dollars gained value modestly for more than a century. From the fed’s birth in 1913 until the present the value of the US dollar has dropped 95 percent. How can anyone rationally argue that putting the value of our country’s money into the hands of an INTERNATIONAL banking cartel has been anything but disastrous?

Ron Paul obviously knows his American history far better than you apparently do my friend.

Are you even familiar with the names John D. Rockefeller, Paul Warburg, Nelson Aldrich Rockefeller, or the fact that Woodrow Wilson himself felt he had betrayed his country by signing the federal reserve act into law?

“I am a most unhappy man. I have unwittingly ruined my country. A
great industrial nation is now controlled by its system of credit. We are
no longer a government by free opinion, no longer a government by
conviction and the vote of the majority, but a government by the opinion
and duress of a small group of dominant men.”

• Woodrow Wilson

Are you unwittingly supporting the single worst thing affecting our once great country today Bob?

jomoco

 

[estesbob]

Your knowledge of the fed, its origins, its constitutionality, and exactly who created it and why, leave me in serious doubt of your ability to discuss the fed intelligently.

Before the fed was created everyone’s US dollars gained value modestly for more than a century. From the fed’s birth in 1913 until the present the value of the US dollar has dropped 95 percent. How can anyone rationally argue that putting the value of our country’s money into the hands of an INTERNATIONAL banking cartel has been anything but disastrous?

Ron Paul obviously knows his American history far better than you apparently do my friend.

Are you even familiar with the names John D. Rockefeller, Paul Warburg, Nelson Aldrich Rockefeller, or the fact that Woodrow Wilson himself felt he had betrayed his country by signing the federal reserve act into law?

“I am a most unhappy man. I have unwittingly ruined my country. A
great industrial nation is now controlled by its system of credit. We are
no longer a government by free opinion, no longer a government by
conviction and the vote of the majority, but a government by the opinion
and duress of a small group of dominant men.”

• Woodrow Wilson

Are you unwittingly supporting the single worst thing affecting our once great country today Bob?

jomoco

Other than call me stupid you offered nothing to support the idea that eliminating the fed and returning to the gold standard would solve our economic problems and would not cause massive turmoil in the United States and world financial markets. Again simplistic solutions to complex problems supported by nothing other than everybody else is too stupid to understand how great they are.

 

[ishii]

Good God, another one. This “anything goes” mentality is not libertarianism, it is libertinism. They are not the same. how would you like it if I walked around calling conservatives “religious fascists”?

Here is a question for you. Which of the remaining sacraments would you like the state to get involved in? Ordination? Maybe the state can compel the Church to start ordaining women. I mean, isn’t that discrimination? Isn’t it a violation of the Civil Rights Act?

That’s easy. The strength and stability of our society does not hinge on women’s ordination as it does with marriage - hence the state’s interest in preserving the traditional institution of marriage. So your challenge falls short. On what grounds would a libertarian state which says “I own my body” keep the Dr. Kevorkians out of business? A fair question that deserves a calm, non - sarcastic answer it seems to me.

Ishii

 

[Ben_F]

With me it´s Herman Cain. The smartest intelligence analyst I ever knew once told me. The best anti-tank weapon is another tank. God bless:thumbsup:

 

[jam070406]

Other than call me stupid you offered nothing to support the idea that eliminating the fed and returning to the gold standard would solve our economic problems and would not cause massive turmoil in the United States and world financial markets. Again simplistic solutions to complex problems supported by nothing other than everybody else is too stupid to understand how great they are.

Actually Scott provided you info on Paul’s currency ideas and you ignored them and continue to spew your same meaningless shallow bullet points.

 

[estesbob]

Actually Scott provided you info on Paul’s currency ideas and you ignored them and continue to spew your same meaningless shallow bullet points.

I read his link and there are the usual libertarian fairyland ideas that you can eliminate the fed & reinstitute the gold standard, and it will not have any effect whatsoever on our current financial system or the world financial system. The problem is it starts from the premise that these currency systems are already in effect but does not take into account the cost of implementing them. And here’s the kicker-even if you were able to implement them without any economic cost. They would not eliminate the bust and boom cycles of the economies of the world. Nor would there eliminate the economic problems facing us today.

Simplistic solutions to complex problems-the hallmark of Ron Paul

 

[jomoco]

Other than call me stupid you offered nothing to support the idea that eliminating the fed and returning to the gold standard would solve our economic problems and would not cause massive turmoil in the United States and world financial markets. Again simplistic solutions to complex problems supported by nothing other than everybody else is too stupid to understand how great they are.

So I gather the fact that the century before the fed saw the US dollar modestly gain value, and the century after the fed’s creation saw the US dollar lose 95 percent of its value is completely lost on you somehow?

mises.org/mobile/daily.aspx?Id=5172

jomoco

 

[jam070406]

That’s easy. The strength and stability of our society does not hinge on women’s ordination as it does with marriage - hence the state’s interest in preserving the traditional institution of marriage. So your challenge falls short. On what grounds would a libertarian state which says “I own my body” keep the Dr. Kevorkians out of business? A fair question that deserves a calm, non - sarcastic answer it seems to me.

Ishii

You are arguing for Judeo Christian principals and so is Scott. But he is pointing out that the same institution that you count on to uphold those principals is the same one stripping them away. So since the bedrock of this nation which was founded on those principals, as reiterated by the founders, is nearly gone we are left with liberty vs. tyranny.