• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Ron Paul is retiring from the House after this year. This is his farewell speech.

Status
Not open for further replies.
E

ElectricThunder

Member
Would have been a solid farewell if only he'd cut out and re-ordered a fair chunk of it at a time...like the raw milk bit which is a canard I literally only see come up from gun nuts/confederacy faux-recollectors. For Christ's sake the science on it isn't hard, Pasteur is a more worthwhile messiah figure for his work than any of the shitheel Big Shots they revere, and it is NEVER in reference to proper artisan cheese making in the US as that can already happen to some degree.

Really, he went downhill these past 4 years with the rise of his son---ran a different and worse campaign this time versus 2008, and just generally went moreso off the rails. The secession video is circling around folks for some insane reason, and was probably one of the dumbest things he could've made a video on. When you are king of a primary shit heap in 2008 for your party, then still king of an even worse quality one in 2012---you can't rationally make a case for how divorced from it you are...especially while trying to wrangle for Rand----who is indeed such a giant jackass with all the neo-tea party trimmings.

Bah, Gravel went out back into the mists of the world better than this----what's Kucinich got or is he still hopefully seeking some sort of office to keep at it proper?
 
S

shadowsdarknes

Member
KHarvey16 said:
...incompatibility detected...
Click to expand...

Uh, huh. Why is his belief so far fetched? Debt is an issue in the United States. Too much debt can lead to its weakening. A weak enough dollar can be detrimental for the economy. Its a possibility and all possibilities deserve a discussion. That is how I interpreted his message anyway.
 
S

Soul_Pie

Member
Some of the stuff in terms of marijuana, hemp, reducing some forms of big government in particular fighting foreign wars I can totally get behind. But some of those things he mentioned are just batshit insane.

Mind you I prefer him to Romney at the very least, I do find him earnest and I honestly think he believes what he says.
 
C

ClassyPenguin

Banned
shadowsdarknes said:
Uh, huh. Why is his belief so far fetched? Debt is an issue in the United States. Too much debt can lead to its weakening. A weak enough dollar can be detrimental for the economy. Its a possibility and all possibilities deserve a discussion. That is how I interpreted his message anyway.
Click to expand...

But it isn't consistent with the (present)data and history. We tried to control inflation, that only led to the stagflation of the '70's. We have steady rate of inflation that by all measures has been under the predicted rates (one reason being the recession). His chicken little cry is meaningless.

The debt is massive but in no way is it as dangerous as politicians make it out to be.
 
S

Shalashaska161

Member
For every one of the Paul's good idea's he always had another one or two that just left you scratching your head.

Nonetheless, I always sort liked having him around. He was a nice change of pace from your regular established politician. He at least managed to stand out a bit.
 
S

shadowsdarknes

Member
CHEEZMO™;44354787 said:
Hasn't he been saying the dollar's about to collapse any minute now since forever?
Click to expand...

Perhaps he has. I'm not sure, but it wouldn't surprise me if that has been a perpetual fear of his. Regardless, the debt the United States holds is a frightening reality and possibly unsustainable moving forward. Hopefully Obama's plan for what is it 4 billion in savings over the next 10 years will reduce that deficit and future politicians continue that trend.
 
J

Joe

Member
Even Noam Chomsky thinks his policies are crazy
Ron Paul's a nice guy. If I had to have dinner with one of the Republican candidates, I'd prefer to have it with him -- but, his policies
are off the wall.
Click to expand...
 
S

shadowsdarknes

Member
ClassyPenguin said:
But it isn't consistent with the (present)data and history. We tried to control inflation, that only led to the stagflation of the '70's. We have steady rate of inflation that by all measures has been under the predicted rates. His chicken little cry is meaningless.

The debt is massive but in no way is it as dangerous as politicians make it out to be.
Click to expand...

Can you procure the inflation data for me to see? How effective has quantitative easing been? There must be data for that as well. If you have let me see it, if not I will do some research myself. Regardless, I don't think its a stretch to believe a 16 trillion dollar debt deficit is frightening and deserves discussion.

Edit: And quantitative easy is an instrument for controlling inflation, so I don't understand your point of stagflation in the 70s. In other words, how are we any safer controlling inflation with quantitative easing today, than we were with different methods of inflation control that led to stagflation in the 70s?
 
P

Pseudo_Sam

Survives without air, food, or water
It's incredible how anti-Paul GAF is. Like, reading this thread, it's really, really overwhelmingly negative and vitriolic. But the rest if the internet seems to really like him. I don't know, just an interesting difference in demographics? Reddit seems to like him alright, all of his Youtube videos have bigass green "like" bars and shit. What accounts for the difference here compared to everywhere else?
 
V

Valnen

Member
Pseudo_Sam said:
It's incredible how anti-Paul GAF is. Like, reading this thread, it's really, really overwhelmingly negative and vitriolic. But the rest if the internet seems to really like him. I don't know, just an interesting difference in demographics? Reddit seems to like him alright, all of his Youtube videos have bigass green "like" bars and shit. What accounts for the difference here compared to everywhere else?
Click to expand...

The internet is full of libertarian loving psychopaths.
 
C

ClassyPenguin

Banned
Pseudo_Sam said:
It's incredible how anti-Paul GAF is. Like, reading this thread, it's really, really overwhelmingly negative and vitriolic. But the rest if the internet seems to really like him. I don't know, just an interesting difference in demographics? Reddit seems to like him alright, all of his Youtube videos have bigass green "like" bars and shit. What accounts for the difference here compared to everywhere else?
Click to expand...

We got tired of the reddit pseudo-intellectualism, or at least I did.
 
CHEEZMO™

CHEEZMO™

Obsidian fan
Pseudo_Sam said:
It's incredible how anti-Paul GAF is. Like, reading this thread, it's really, really overwhelmingly negative and vitriolic. But the rest if the internet seems to really like him. I don't know, just an interesting difference in demographics? Reddit seems to like him alright, all of his Youtube videos have bigass green "like" bars and shit. What accounts for the difference here compared to everywhere else?
Click to expand...

Reddit and 4chan are full of 15 year old pseuds.
 
N

NervousXtian

Thought Emoji Movie was good. Take that as you will.
Good riddance.. for every decent idea he has, he had 3 bad ones.

The idea of libertarians, much like the idea of communism.. in concept it sounds so appealing.. until you realize how shit it always ends up working. I'm not saying they are the same, just as concepts they seem appealing at talking points.. until you dig down and realize why they just don't work.
 
D

Dastardly Jerks

Banned
Pseudo_Sam said:
It's incredible how anti-Paul GAF is. Like, reading this thread, it's really, really overwhelmingly negative and vitriolic. But the rest if the internet seems to really like him. I don't know, just an interesting difference in demographics? Reddit seems to like him alright, all of his Youtube videos have bigass green "like" bars and shit. What accounts for the difference here compared to everywhere else?
Click to expand...

Because Libertarianism is Babys First Political Ideal™.
 
S

sammy

Member
I miss living in the capitol of TX and being able to walk 2 minutes down the street to see this dude and others do their thing... Can't agree with everything he says, 'cause I have no answers myself and don't like any president in the history of history - but he always brought up some provocative topics.

He's a man of vision and questions even if his policy would be just goofy. I like him just as much as I don't like him... He sparked conversations that the mainstream needed to talk about.
 
D

drspeedy

Member
Very similar to his daily, and campaign, and debate speeches.



In other words, Ron Paul is the most consistent man in the government, and right or wrong he never backed out of a firmly held belief




Here's to hoping his contribution to American politics and public sentiment never fades.
 
M

Mahzkrieg

Banned
NervousXtian said:
Good riddance.. for every decent idea he has, he had 3 bad ones.

The idea of libertarians, much like the idea of communism.. in concept it sounds so appealing.. until you realize how shit it always ends up working. I'm not saying they are the same, just as concepts they seem appealing at talking points.. until you dig down and realize why they just don't work.
Click to expand...


I don't feel like the current set of policies works, though.
And I feel like the course we are on will be disastrous.

I don't know why it's juvenile to be fiscally conservative and socially liberal.
 
I

ivysaur12

Banned
Mahzkrieg said:
I don't feel like the current set of policies works, though.
And I feel like the course we are on will be disastrous.

I don't know why it's juvenile to be fiscally conservative and socially liberal.
Click to expand...

When people say fiscally conservative, I believe they mean "fiscally responsible". Fiscal conservatism is not the same as being fiscally responsible. That's the start of it.
 
S

seanoff

Member
shadowsdarknes said:
Can you procure the inflation data for me to see? How effective has quantitative easing been? There must be data for that as well. If you have let me see it, if not I will do some research myself. Regardless, I don't think its a stretch to believe a 16 trillion dollar debt deficit is frightening and deserves discussion.

Edit: And quantitative easy is an instrument for controlling inflation, so I don't understand your point of stagflation in the 70s. In other words, how are we any safer controlling inflation with quantitative easing today, than we were with different methods of inflation control that led to stagflation in the 70s?
Click to expand...

QE isn't an inflation control policy. It's a policy designed to support consumption in the economy and reduce the effects of and avoid negative growth. (i.e. recessions and depressions)

QE is by it's nature inflationary. It adds money to the economy without any production leading to that growth in money supply.


inflation is usually controlled by restricting the money supply through interest rate rises and falls and rises and falls in govt expenditure. You try to tweak the demand side of the economy with these measures. interest rates rise = people have less to spend and spend less because of the expense of spending. interest rates fall = opposite effect.

Inflation is not really a problem in the US economy atm as can be witnessed by the Fed having interest rates near zero. they are trying to encourage expenditure.
 
C

ClassyPenguin

Banned
prwxv3 said:
man GAF must hate Pen Jillette lol.
Click to expand...
While I do appreciate the promotion of debunking through Bullshit! I don't like him at all. Or maybe it's his attitude on the show.
Half and half said:
More in-depth policy/monetary talk. Less bullet points.
Click to expand...

An MMT Fiscal Responsibility Narrative: Some Truths After A Second Crowd Sourcing Revision
REAL fiscal responsibility is a pattern of fiscal policy intended to achieve public purposes (such as full employment, price stability, a first class educational system, Medicare for All, etc.), while also maintaining or increasing fiscal sustainability, viewed as the extent to which patterns of Government spending do not undermine the capability of the Government to continue to spend to achieve its public purposes.

– REAL fiscally responsible policy, if it works generally as expected, creates greater real benefits than real costs for people! It has nothing to do with conforming to some standard simple measure like an acceptable debt-to-GDP ratio that has only a questionable theoretical connection to the actual well-being of people. It is political malpractice to give greater priority to that kind of abstraction than to full employment, price stability, a strong social safety net, and Government programs that will help us solve the many outstanding problems of our nation. Let’s put an end to the domination of Washington by that kind of malpractice. Let’s put an end to the current misguided fiscally irresponsible campaign to promote a “Grand Bargain” that is sure to do nothing but destroy more private sector money and jobs than would be the case if we either did nothing or increased the deficit and created a full employment budget.

-Greece and Ireland are users of the Euro, not issuers of it. So, their supply is always limited and that’s why they can run out of Euros. The US is the issuer of Dollars; so it’s supply of dollars is limited only by its desire to create them, and its ability to mark up private accounts, and that’s why it can’t become Greece, Ireland, or any other Eurozone nation.
Click to expand...
 
A

Aylinato

Member
FutureZombie said:
People hate freedom because freedom can lead to some people having more money than others. People hate freedom because freedom does not stop people from harming themselves. People would rather have "equality," safety, and order than freedom. And people hate freedom because they do not trust others to make the right decisions.

Sometimes with freedom you don't always get the best result. But it is still preferable to being controlled.
Click to expand...



See, this is how I know that you really do not give two shits about actual freedom. If you cared about freedom you would know that the government is setup to protect individual liberties and shielding the populace through the bill of rights, and amendments from government tyranny. What you have projected, in your "reality" of your mind is that freedom cannot happen with a government in place. However when there is no government in place, that is chaos, and chaos is not freedom. Chaos in it's nature is the opposite of freedom, and subverts the attempts by anyone from becoming free.


Chaos brings about the strongest winning, which is not freedom in the slightest. Freedom is brought about by laws that restrict the greedy, selfish, and ruthlessness that is part of the human condition.


Don't even try to say that "security" is what people want, no, we want a free society where I don't have to watch every fucking step because people do whatever the fuck they want impeding on my freedom to live my life.


::Edit::
Also, you are racist.
 
P

Pseudo_Sam

Survives without air, food, or water
Evlar said:
I'll volunteer for that one.
Click to expand...

Gonna have to explain that one. Penn is like the nicest guy ever, I've actually met him on a couple of occasions. Always listens to your opinions, very open-minded, loves science. Of course you could disagree with his political views or whatever, but the dude is awesome. Does some nifty tricks too.
 
M

Mahzkrieg

Banned
ClassyPenguin said:
One is not compatible with the other without harming people or the economy, especially fiscal conservatism. Austerity hurts the poor and minorities the most.
Click to expand...

Socially liberal for me means letting people do what they want.
Women have control over their bodies.
Adults can marry and assign rights to fellow consenting adults.
etc...
 
P

Pseudo_Sam

Survives without air, food, or water
ClassyPenguin said:
Austerity hurts the poor and minorities the most.
Click to expand...

This only makes sense if you begin from the viewpoint that the poor and minorities are entitled to social benefits in the first place. If the government theoretically spent 0 dollars, how is anyone "hurt"?

Kusagari said:
So why do you like Ron Paul?
Click to expand...

You do realize it's possible to like someone's character and/or respect their convictions even if you disagree with their personal politics?
 
C

ClassyPenguin

Banned
Pseudo_Sam said:
This only makes sense if you begin from the viewpoint that the poor and minorities are entitled to social benefits in the first place. If the government theoretically spent 0 dollars, how is anyone "hurt"?
Click to expand...

By not employing people mainly. Not supporting those who can't work. Those who have been laid off recently.Those who are perusing higher education. Those who can't afford healthcare. Those who have skills but can't afford to update the skills through trade schools.

In many different ways the government not spending hurts people.

And if you think that charity can compensate, think again. It's a huge amount money. The government can spend because it can create money and not beholden to profit or sustainability.
 
V

Veezy

que?
Pseudo_Sam said:
This only makes sense if you begin from the viewpoint that the poor and minorities are entitled to social benefits in the first place. If the government theoretically spent 0 dollars, how is anyone "hurt"?
Click to expand...

Funny thing, human beings are. They'll do just about anything to provide for themselves and their loved ones. Remove our basic needs and all that civility goes the fuck out the window.

See, I'm not foolish enough to think the best reason to take care of the poor is to protect myself. I'm along the lines of the better the worst among us are doing the better the group as a whole is doing. It's why one should keep an eye on the wealth gaps between classes.

But, real talk, if I couldn't eat and I had a family to feed, and there were no options, and I saw you had a loaf of bread. Well, I can't promise that things wouldn't end ugly if I had to snatch that from you.

There are reasons besides people feeling "entitled" that we, as a society, should take care of each other. It's foolish, and completely daft, to think otherwise.
 
V

Valnen

Member
Pseudo_Sam said:
This only makes sense if you begin from the viewpoint that the poor and minorities are entitled to social benefits in the first place. If the government theoretically spent 0 dollars, how is anyone "hurt"?
Click to expand...

Nobody would be hurt...if there were no unemployed or disabled people in the country. But hey, everyone for themselves right?

Fuck libertarians and that line of thinking. It's evil. I know people that would starve to death if a libertarian was elected.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

  • Locked
Time: Person of the Year! (not doing Politics: HARD MODE)
40
1K
SJRB replied
  • Locked
Elon Musk is a Nazi.
4
1K
EviLore replied
Booming British videogame industry under threat as it sleepwalks into AI disaster
25
2K
ReyBrujo replied
  • Locked
[TNYT] Brazil Blocks X After Musk Ignores Court Orders
Social News Community 2
69
5K
ManaByte replied
Australia plans to ban children from social media
2 3 4
160
8K
Cyberpunkd replied
Top Bottom