PDA

View Full Version : Ron Paul On Our Economy


Nekko1
01-25-2010, 05:15 PM
State of the Republic Address

Is That All There Is To A Recession?

by Congressman Ron Paul

January 21, 2010

As we start the new year 2010, the establishment politicians, economists and Wall Street are trying to convince themselves that we have turned the corner and economic growth has once again begun. The predictions that conditions are getting back to normal come from those who never saw the crisis coming and don’t have the vaguest notion what caused it. Some of them concede that it could be a jobless recovery. That will establish a new definition for a recovery.

Official unemployment is at 10% but even the government knows that if everyone is counted, including those individuals that are too discouraged to even be looking for work, the unemployment rate is 17%. Free-market economists claim the actual unemployment rate is closer to 22%.

There’s reason to believe that the correction is just barely started and has a long way to run. If the financial bubble came from excess credit created by the Federal Reserve, doubling the money supply can hardly be a solution. It wouldn’t make much sense for a doctor taking care of a very sick patient from severe infection to deliberately give the patient another infection. Yet that’s what the PhD doctors are doing to our very sick economy. It can’t work. It will make the economy much sicker. If our leaders don’t wake up soon, the economy will be brought to its knees.

Great danger lies ahead.

In foreign policy, it’s always crucial that the motives of those who would do us harm are understood. Denial of the truth and accepting more politically palatable excuses will guarantee that threats to our safety will continue as we pursue a seriously flawed involvement overseas.

It’s the same in economic policy. If there’s denial or ignorance of the real cause of financial bubbles and the inevitable corrections that must follow, the economy cannot be re-energized.

We should have learned the lesson from the Depression of the 1930s that it was a predictable result from the Federal Reserves orchestrated excesses of the 1920s. Instead, the new-born Keynesian economists who took charge made certain that the correction would not be a one or two year affair as were the previous corrections in our history. The aggressive intervention by Hoover and Roosevelt, the Republicans and the Democrats, turned a short recession into the Great Depression, which lasted until the end of World War II.

The real tragedy was that the interpretation of the 1930s institutionalized bad economic theories. Unfortunately, and erroneously, the Depression was blamed on the gold standard, free markets and a lack of regulations. Though monetary policy was analyzed, its importance was 100% misinterpreted. The low interest rates and excess credit of the 1920s, driven by Federal Reserve policy, was not considered a factor in producing the stock market bubble and the mal-investment.

Instead, the 1930s analysts and even later analysis by Milton Friedman and the monetarists, along with academic “scholars” like Bernanke, came to an opposite conclusion: the Fed was at fault but only because it was too tight, arguing that massive monetary inflation was the only answer to the slumping economy.

And now we are witnessing a grand experiment by the very person who for years claimed "special knowledge" regarding the Depression. Chairman Bernanke is in the midst of trying to solve the problem of massive monetary inflation and excessively low interest rates instituted by his predecessor, Alan Greenspan, by implementing even more inflation at historic rates. The sad part is the answer to his very risky experiment with the wealth of our country and the health of our economy will take years to analyze. The conclusions will be just as flawed as they were in the aftermath of the Great Depression by an intellectual and political community that had totally rejected commodity money and the principle of free market with the current understanding in Washington.

One hope, though, is that free-market thinking and Austrian economic theories will have greater influence in the next decade or two, since their influence is now on a dramatic upswing. But there are a lot of hurdles to overcome.

In the 1930s, in an effort to find the true cause of the crisis, Congress ordered an official investigation. It became known as the “Pecora Investigation” named after Ferdinand Pecora, the aggressive chief council of the hearings. It received a lot of public attention and brought about many major changes but, tragically, every conclusion made and new policies implemented caused the depression to worsen and legitimized bad economic theories that continue to haunt us to this day.

The Federal Reserve was not blamed except for not printing enough money fast enough. Artificially low interest rates and mal-investment, the main source of the grossly distorted economy and bubble of the 1920s were exonerated. Not enough regulations were blamed, thus the Glass-Steagall Act and the Securities Act of 1933 were passed and deepened the depression. Separating commercial and investment banking and the newly created SEC were to have solved all future problems—as long as the Fed was free from any restraint in its money creation operation to serve big-government spenders and members of the banking cartel.

Since the flaws in the monetary and economic system were not corrected but made worse after the Depression, it was to be expected that periodic booms and busts would persist. The longer these cycles could be papered over with new money and credit, the greater would be the distortions and debt that would one day have to undergo a major correction.

That correction is now in its early stages. Since the dollar was the reserve currency of the world and totally fiat since 1971, without any linkage to gold, the financial bubble became worldwide. This bubble that burst in 2008 was the largest in history. During the formation of the bubble, the U.S. as the issuer of the world currency received undeserved benefits. We essentially became the counterfeiter of the world and no one called us on it.

Even today, the trust in the dollar that persists has buffeted the pain of the correction for us. This unique setup was a prime cause for our balance of payment deficits and the huge foreign debt we owe—the largest in the history of the world. The discord in the world financial system is telling us that it’s time for us to pay for our profligate spending and massive foreign indebtedness. We have lived, as a nation, far beyond our means and the message is, for the foreseeable future, that we will be forced to live beneath our means as this debt is paid.

The inflation optimists are excited about current signs of economic growth and have even announced the end of the recession. It is conceivable that a reprieve can be achieved and the penalty that our economy must endure delayed. A reprieve must not be confused with a pardon; one is a temporary delay, the other an exemption. The payback for our excesses is certain to come.

Massively increasing debt and monetary inflation can slow the crash and change some government statistics encouraging the optimists. But real job growth and return of prosperity will remain elusive. The odds of us once again becoming an exporter of manufactured goods, like steel, cars, and textiles, are remote.

Ironically, a reprieve may well restore some confidence and motivate some spending and investment. But instead of restoring long-term growth, it may well act perversely by precipitating price inflation and higher interest rates. Since today’s interest rates are artificially set, much of our investing is unproductively misdirected.

Current enthusiasm in the stock market is once again a reflection of the message that low interest rates send. Thus too, the government’s stimulus package has helped to sustain the bond bubble, which in time must be deflated in order to get back to sound economic growth. All of this activity poses a threat to the dollar.

Governments are very powerful, and when in partnership with the monetary authorities that can inflate the currency at will, big government thrives. Welfare demands and senseless wars can be financed for long period of time through inflation, as long as trust in the currency lasts. Trust, though ultimately controlled by facts, can be misleading, since currency values can gain benefit from a country that has a strong military and wealth and a reasonably healthy economy. Eventually, markets and reality overwhelm, and illusions about a currency’s worth become a reality.

Today, reality is setting in and the first of three major events has begun. The worldwide financial system, built on a foundation of paper, has received the shock waves of an impending collapse.

The wild speculation and the derivatives market, the stock market bubble, the insurmountable debt—public and private—and the massive mal-investments have been shattered.

The only solution so far offered worldwide, but led by the United States has been to “print money” faster, keep interest rates low at practically zero percent, and remove all stops for controlling deficits. These are the very policies that caused the disequilibrium, and doing more of the same, but only faster, can hardly help our economy. The addiction to easy credit and deficit defies a wise political solution. Politicians are incapable of delivering the message of frugality, common sense, and sound money.

We can expect that the course we are on to continue and accelerate, since the first event, the collapse of the financial system, is still in its early stage.

The housing crisis is far from over; the commercial property crisis has not yet gotten much attention, and the financial obligations of the government are growing exponentially. And none of this forces the slightest pause in the expanding of welfare growth. The number of regulations, which are indeed a tax, are exploding though the market was already suffering from regulatory excesses. There’s a consensus in Washington that “wise” regulations can compensate for all the mistakes made by the Federal Reserve, the Executive Branch, and Congress. This fallacy has been around a long time and will be difficult to overcome.

The pessimism of the middle class continues to get worse despite the prognostication of Wall Street and the Administration. Most Americans know that the standard of living and real wages have not gone up for the past 10 years. If you’re not a shrewd stock trader and instead invested in stocks 10 years ago and held on, in real terms you would have lost 20% of your savings. The middle class is poorer also because house prices have crashed and many have lost their homes. On top of this, all we hear about is the trillions of dollars of debt and entitlement obligations that have been racked up for future taxpayers to pay. When it is revealed that the insider friends of the Fed and Congress get billions of dollars in bailout at the expense of the middle class, it’s no wonder the people are taking to the streets and directing their hostilities toward both Republicans and Democrats in Washington. Many would agree it is well-earned anger and properly directed.

This anger and frustration will certainly grow as the consequences of the collapse of the financial system become more severe. The concerted effort to prevent the correction the market demands, guarantees a prolonged agonizing crisis. Every effort to reverse the tide will depend on spending, higher deficits, increased taxes and money creation. This effort is now providing another grand bubble: the dollar/bond bubble.

The next event will be a dollar crisis. A full-blown dollar crisis will be worse than our current financial crisis. The extent of a dollar crisis depends on whether or not the Washington politicians wake up and change their ways — a dubious hope.

More likely, the insanity will continue until some not yet known event will undermine the confidence of the dollar worldwide. Signs of less desire by foreigners to hold our dollars are already present. I’m certain our Treasury and Federal Reserve are pulling out all stops to prevent a massive run on the dollar. At present the “orderly” retreat from the dollar is working. But it won’t last.

China is quite active in investing in natural resources around the world, including Iran. While we live in the dark ages and believe only our military presence and military threats can protect our access to oil, China is actually spending some of their savings investing in their future access to energy and other precious metals and minerals.

But the orderly retreat from the dollar won’t last forever. Since 1973, shortly after the breakdown of the Bretton Woods Agreement, the dollar has lost 32% of its value against a Federal Reserve basket of currencies. But that doesn’t tell the real story, since that is a measurement against all other currencies, and they are fiat currencies as well. This gave the dollar an artificial benefit from its position of power in great wealth and military prowess.

The dollar in relationship to gold, however, is down 97% since 1971, and 82% as measured by the CPI. The dollar, mismanaged by the Fed, has not been a benefit to the savers who sought to responsibly take care of themselves. They’ve been cheated by a rotten system and are just beginning to understand exactly how the Federal Reserve has been responsible for the swindle.

It is impossible to predict the time when confidence will be lost, but it can come quickly. Resorting to buying other paper currencies will not be of much help. When the dollar crashes, most likely the purchasing power of all currencies—since all countries hold dollars as a reserve—will go down as well.

This means that dollars and other currencies will go into buying consumer items, precious metals and other physical properties. Consumer prices will soar, as well as interest rates. The central bank will lose control; and the more they inflate, the worse the confidence becomes. The interest rates will respond to these efforts by rising sharply.

If the Fed tries to reverse the run on the dollar, interest rates will also soar, and the pain on the American citizens will be of such proportion that political chaos will result. Either scenario leads to political and social chaos—the third event, and the most dangerous.

With no ability of the federal government to fund its commitments, international or domestic, major changes will occur in our system. The social unrest will elicit cries for government to exert unusual force to head off a complete breakdown of law and order. The ultimate trap will be set for a system of government claiming to protect a free society. If more power and police authority are not given to the federal government, it will be argued that only anarchy will result. If more government policing power is given, it will mean a lethal threat to civil liberties. Already we have permitted the notion that a single person, the Attorney General or President, can decide who is an “enemy combatant”, thus denying that individual the right to habeas corpus, permitting indefinite detentions without charges made. This attitude toward civil liberties has changed significantly since the fear built around 9/11.

Yes, I know declaring one an “enemy combatant” is reserved for the radical Muslims engaged in terrorism against the United States. To be reassured by this reasoning is quite dangerous and naïve. Logic should not lead us to equate suspects with terrorists, and include American citizens, and yet this has already been set by precedent. Under difficult circumstances, our political leaders will not be hesitant to use these powers to maintain order. Tragically, the people may even demand it.

We are rapidly moving toward a dangerous time in our history. Society as we know it is vulnerable to political and social chaos.

This impending crisis comes as a consequence of our flawed foreign and domestic economic policies, a silly notion about money, ignorance about Central Banking, ignoring the onerous power and mischief of our out-of-control intelligence agencies, our unsustainable welfare state, and a willingness to sacrifice privacy and civil liberties in an attempt to achieve safety and security from an inept government. Dangerous times indeed!

What can be done about it? Must we wait for the inevitable and expect to restore our liberties in a street fight against the overwhelming power of the state? Not a good option!

The only way that we can prevent blood from running in the streets is to offer a better idea of the proper role of government in a society that desires first and foremost -liberty.

And that is impossible without a firm commitment by our thought leaders to the ideas of freedom, the source of all creative energy and prosperity. An all-powerful state is the threat to that ideal.

The prevailing attitude of the people-as it once was in early America-must be that of liberty and self reliance, rather than the nanny state and dependency relying on government force to mold all private choices.

If this is understood, a smooth-although not painless-transition to a free society is achievable. Ignoring this option will be very destructive to everything that is dear to the hearts of most Americans.

What is it that we must do? We must immediately:

• Balance the budget by reducing spending

• Change our foreign policy to that of non-intervention

• A full audit and more supervision of the Federal Reserve leading to abolishing the Federal Reserve

• Legalize competition to the Federal Reserve with competing currencies

• Regain respect for civil liberties and privacy while reigning in the CIA

• Wean ourselves off the dependence of wealth transfers by government

• Abolish crony capitalism—no subsidies, no bailouts, no regulatory or tax privileges to protect the powerful elite - especially the military industrial complex

• Eliminate the income tax, inheritance tax and taxes on savings and dividends

None of this can happen without the restoration of Congress to its dominant position of the three Branches of Government as was originally intended by the Constitution. The Executive and Judicial must be reined in, and Congress must assert its prerogatives over all legislation curtailing all unconstitutional agenda through budgetary controls.

Signs abound that angry Americans are now more ready than ever before for a change in direction that is indeed real. If this program were implemented - even suddenly and dramatically - the adjustment, though significant and to a degree somewhat painful, would be much shorter and of minor consequence compared to the chaos and poverty that will result if we refuse to change our gluttonous appetite for a free lunch.

____________

This is a transcript of a youtube video that can be found here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nQts2...layer_embedded

Osgiliath666
01-25-2010, 07:03 PM
Me likey... A lot. This nation would be in a far better position based on these principals. Thank you and good night.

LummusL
01-25-2010, 10:47 PM
/shrug.

Dispell this myth that our government and ourselves as individuals need to be constantly inefficient to the point of being blatently wasteful and suddenly you might become self sustaining. Manage the population and dispell this other myth that the only way you can boost an economy is to add more people being increasingly wasteful is also win. If you have less people who need vastly less resources to have a good lifestyle, then there is less demand for intrusive foreign policy, such as wars, to settle disputes over them and so forth. Less need for wars = much less of a need to blow money on a bloated military industrial complex and more money to spend on infrastructure to increase efficiency which might lead to even more savings and happiness. Just think if we had the global population of the 1700's with todays tech and vastly efficient land use coupled with a desire to avoid waste we would probably have Utopia. Much of the world could be left wild and green and its a good bet that what we take from the world could be replenished indefinately while still advancing technology.

Yup, but that is fail right now. Waste generates money either through producing the wasted goods or cleaning up the aftermath of their use. More people is a plus too because more people is more waste to create/dispose of and more bloated and wasteful programs and infrastructure to keep it all in check. Our government loves it and we seem to lean on our government to be the magic problem solvers when all we need to do is keep waste in check at an individual level.

RP has some great thoughts, but most of them revolve around maintaining a posture that the government is the central problem solving body....which is laughable since they are the global champs of waste. In the mean time we want to live longer and pump out big families all the while expecting to have a better life than those before us, which is bullshit unless you think we can just conjure up another Earth sometime soon.

Sanchek
01-26-2010, 12:38 AM
RP has some great thoughts, but most of them revolve around maintaining a posture that the government is the central problem solving body.

FYI, that could not possibly be a more exactly incorrect statement.

Osgiliath666
01-26-2010, 07:55 AM
elaborate..

Sanchek
01-26-2010, 10:06 AM
I wouldn't even know where to begin. You have to be exceptionally uninformed or misled to think that Ron Paul wants government to be a problem solving body. That's exactly the opposite of what he has been advocating for decades.

Kelraz Bladesinger
01-26-2010, 12:40 PM
What is it that we must do? We must immediately:

• Balance the budget by reducing spending

• Change our foreign policy to that of non-intervention

• A full audit and more supervision of the Federal Reserve leading to abolishing the Federal Reserve

• Legalize competition to the Federal Reserve with competing currencies

• Regain respect for civil liberties and privacy while reigning in the CIA

• Wean ourselves off the dependence of wealth transfers by government

• Abolish crony capitalism—no subsidies, no bailouts, no regulatory or tax privileges to protect the powerful elite - especially the military industrial complex

• Eliminate the income tax, inheritance tax and taxes on savings and dividends

I agree with a large part of Congressman Paul's assessment, but I still don't buy that eliminating the income tax, inheritance tax, and taxes on savings and dividends is anything but a huge boon for the wealthy. It would lower the government (local and federal) income (far more than reducing the budget would) and that money would have to come from somewhere so it'd end up back in some other form.

Sanchek
01-26-2010, 01:11 PM
The money only has to come from somewhere if you accept that the Federal government needs multi-trillion dollar budgets every year. If those taxes were repealed tomorrow, the Federal government would have about the same income it did in the mid-90s.

Malse
01-26-2010, 01:53 PM
http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/briefing-book/background/numbers/revenue.cfm

Sanchek
01-26-2010, 02:27 PM
What that doesn't show is that the Federal government's revenues have increased by about 250% between 1990 and 2008. Over 500% from 1980 to 2000.

We just keep feeding the monster, placated by the table scraps it sends back to us here and there.

Malse
01-26-2010, 02:56 PM
http://www.usgovernmentrevenue.com/downchart_gr.php?year=1960_2014&view=1&expand=&units=b&fy=fy10&chart=F0-fed&bar=1&stack=1&size=l&title=&state=US&color=c&local=s




http://www.usgovernmentrevenue.com/downchart_gr.php?year=1960_2014&view=1&expand=&units=p&fy=fy10&chart=F0-fed&bar=1&stack=1&size=l&title=&state=US&color=c&local=s




http://www.usgovernmentrevenue.com/downchart_gr.php?year=1960_2014&view=1&expand=&units=k&fy=fy10&chart=F0-fed&bar=1&stack=1&size=l&title=&state=US&color=c&local=s





So, yes and no.

Malse
01-26-2010, 04:51 PM
[quote=Adjusted dollars of income tax versus total federal revenue]
http://www.usgovernmentrevenue.com/downchart_gr.php?year=1960_2014&view=1&expand=&units=k&fy=fy10&chart=10-fed_F0-fed_50-fed&bar=0&stack=0&size=l&title=&state=US&color=c&local=s

Sanchek
01-26-2010, 05:22 PM
What is it you're trying to point out? Inflation? Graphs aren't very useful unless we're talking about the same interpretations of them.

Sanchek
01-26-2010, 06:02 PM
That most astonishing part of it all, with regards to "the money has to come from somewhere", is this:

http://www.urban.org/UploadedPDF/1000556_TaxFacts_081803.pdf

Even with FDR's unprecedented spending on social programs in the 30s, Federal revenues were manageable until WW2 (the first time that we didn't dismantle the military industrial complex after a war).

How can anyone possibly justify that the Federal government needs WW2, save-the-world-from-Nazis revenues indefinitely? It's just unbelievable, put into any kind of reasonable proportion.

Osgiliath666
01-26-2010, 06:23 PM
I wouldn't even know where to begin. You have to be exceptionally uninformed or misled to think that Ron Paul wants government to be a problem solving body. That's exactly the opposite of what he has been advocating for decades.

I think you misinterpreted something.. I did not take that from Lumms post at all. Then again maybe it is I who is out to lunch.

Malse
01-26-2010, 06:34 PM
What is it you're trying to point out? Inflation? Graphs aren't very useful unless we're talking about the same interpretations of them.

That your figures were wrong. Federal revenue of all sources has only gone up about 80% in real terms since 1980, not 500%, and their relative portion of GDP has remained in the ballpark of 16-19% the whole time. Income taxes have remained at about 60% of the total the whole period. Much of the growth in federal income has been from the increasing size of the various payroll and welfare (ss/medicare/etc) pools combined with inflation.

That spending is far outstripping income is a separate problem that must be solved in any case. I'm not arguing against the reduction in federal taxes, particularly since that would necessitate a dismantling of the M-I-C complex and an end to massive, market skewing subsidies, but to pretend we can just rewind to 1980s pre Reagan insanity federal revenue levels is naive, at minimum.

Sanchek
01-26-2010, 07:08 PM
That your figures were wrong. Federal revenue of all sources has only gone up about 80% in real terms since 1980, not 500%, and their relative portion of GDP has remained in the ballpark of 16-19% the whole time. Income taxes have remained at about 60% of the total the whole period. Much of the growth in federal income has been from the increasing size of the various payroll and welfare (ss/medicare/etc) pools combined with inflation.

That spending is far outstripping income is a separate problem that must be solved in any case. I'm not arguing against the reduction in federal taxes, particularly since that would necessitate a dismantling of the M-I-C complex and an end to massive, market skewing subsidies, but to pretend we can just rewind to 1980s pre Reagan insanity federal revenue levels is naive, at minimum.

So, revenue increases by 80%. Remove 45% of that, per the chart you originally replied with. You're at 99% of the original revenue, adjusted for inflation.

http://ayonae.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=442&stc=1&d=1264550602

That even ignores the fact that the top tax bracket never dropped below 70% pre-Reagan. Since Reagan, it dropped to 38% and has never been above 40%.

Not only are the revenues increasing, but they are now coming disproportionately from the middle class. Talking aggregate averages is extremely misleading.

Sanchek
01-26-2010, 07:18 PM
I think you misinterpreted something.. I did not take that from Lumms post at all. Then again maybe it is I who is out to lunch.

I was responding to this direct quote from Lummus:

RP has some great thoughts, but most of them revolve around maintaining a posture that the government is the central problem solving body.

Lummus probably agrees with Ron Paul without realizing it, but suggesting that Ron Paul wants the government to intervene or solve our problems is laughably absurd.

LummusL
01-26-2010, 10:31 PM
Sanchek, I probably do not 100% understand Ron Paul's stance. He seems to be an advocate of fiscal responsibility on the part of the government. Perhaps even an advocate of personal fiscal responsibility which would probably be the greater role model to follow over anything the government presents as being acceptable leadership.

He does have many valid points that I agree with, such as vastly reigning in our military and squelching our aggressive foriegn policy down to the level of...lets say... Canada (only with a nuclear deterant), which we can certainly afford. Cut the defense budget down to an 1/8th of what it is, set a flat income tax and abolish the rest and I would be happy. Take the rest of the money, once the budget is balanced, and spend it wisely on infrastructure and R+D incentives to get us off the hydrocarbon teet. or whittle everything down to the bar bones and just pass the savings along to the tax payers. I can also agree that it will take a long time to unfuck all this and when its said and done...we will be a ghost of what we were but perhaps life will be better with less.

Then again, I have to take all of this in with a certain amount of apprehension and scepticism. The grain of salt does not go far enough. The man is after all a Congressman which is a body of nitwits almost loathed by the general public at this point. Perhaps he is a bit of a rogue element in Congress, but truth be told he is in Government and the article is government centric. Plus right now there is the strong arguement that government spending does create jobs and so on. If we cut back vastly, then there has to be private sector jobs available to absorb the losses or we are left with just more unemployment. Since the world economy doesn't play fair and favors the sweat shop nations in Asia, I seriously have to wonder what all these people would do. We have almost 400 million people but can probably only gainfully employ 200 million or less as a guess, since some of that 400 million is kids and old folks. Discourging big families and imigration would probably be a good idea right now or replace some jobs that technology usurped with real people. Doubt any of it would happen.

Sanchek
01-26-2010, 11:00 PM
Ron Paul has a consistent voting record on the limited government stuff that goes back to the 70s. You should read up on him, or watch some of his interviews. I think you'll like him more than you'd expect.

He's one of only a few actual Republicans in Congress, IMO.

The great thing about him is that it doesn't matter where you stand on the stupid, divisive social issues that the Right and Left pry us apart with (abortion, gay marriage, religion in general, etc). Rather than push a partisan-pandering social agenda, his stance is that it's none of the Federal government's business.

It's a shame that sort of pragmatism doesn't fly with all the nitwits treating politics like a football game.

PheloniusRM
01-27-2010, 12:02 AM
Ron Paul is great in theory but terrible in reality. I love his politics. Any time someone asks me my political leanings, I say fiscal conservative, social - dont care. Unfortunately, Ron Paul isnt electable as anything higher than a congressman. All you suckers who voted over the past 3 presidential elections based on social issues, while both parties raped and pillaged the kitty, shame on you, this is all your fault.

Two things come to mind. I was at my grandparents last Christmas. I noticed he had the big three books on his coffee table, beck, palin, oreilly. I made some noise when I saw them. He said, oh you must be a liberal. I then spent the next hour explaining to him that I am an independent, and what we stand for, and no I dont read those three douchebags.

The other is the teaparties. At first it was a gop sponsored movement. All I ever saw was democrat bashing. Then the message became solidified. Higher taxes, higher spending, higher deficits, all bad. Then the teapartiers realized that both dems, and pubs were playing the same game. Now the teapartiers are angry at both parties. Seems odd how you dont hear about them anymore and their invisible funding has dried up. Its because they are nearly a non partisan independent movement now.

Call me a dreamer. I am 36 this year. The first election I was able to vote in was 1992. I was so proud to cast my vote for ross perot. I did it again in 1996. I would give anything to see a ross perot / ron paul win the presidency.

The unfortunate reality is that every politician, regardless of morality, eventually falls into the money trap. I fear that even ron paul, were he elected president would take the corporate handouts.

Is there any action less violent than pitchforks that can right the course of the SS America?

LummusL
01-27-2010, 03:13 AM
Is there any action less violent than pitchforks that can right the course of the SS America?

Grim reality has to set in eventually. Hopefully that reality is that we don't have the solid production base anymore to live high on the hog and also that the Cold War is over. We don't need 10 supercarriers. Its almost spurious, other than to harass 3rd world nations which is a business we need to get out of. Anyone more formidable has ballistic missile that can easily sink a carrier from thousands of miles away. That money would be better not spent but if it has to be spent than spend it on something that has more positive returns for the future of the nation on the domestic front.

Anyway the reality is that the country isn't broke, but we have no disposable income either. The dinners out and vacations have to go.

Phel, my dad has jumped on the whole Palin, Beck and Oreilly band wagon too. Its going to make for some interesting discussion when I fly home next month.

Sixee
01-27-2010, 08:54 AM
I would give anything to see a ross perot / ron paul win the presidency.



You aren't the only one.

there any action less violent than pitchforks that can right the course of the SS America?

Wasn't it Thomas Jefferson that said there should be a revolution every generation, or so?