I'm a canadian and I'm still a Ron pauler. If want Ron to win, start educating and informing your fellow citizens about Paul. If I was in Us, I would be wearig Ron Paul tshirt day and night.
34:50 well that's definitely unconstitutional. People always sound good, until they actually tell you WHAT they will do. He would be doing things just as dictatorial as Obama. Just a slightly different flavor. Thanks but no thanks.
This is an important topic and I want to see more reason.tv interviews of this nature but Nick Gillespie, two words for you, shhhhhhhut up. I lost count how many times you interrupted David Stockman. What is the point of an interview if you are not going to listen to what the interviewee says?
Please note that my book Keynes Hayek: The Clash That Shaped Modern Economics is published by W.W.Norton in October.
Professor John B.Taylor says that: “Nicholas Wapshott brings the Keynes-Hayek fight of the 20th century back to life, making the clash both entertaining and highly relevant for understanding economic crises of the 21st century.”
Read an extract at: sites.google.com/site/wapshottkeyneshayek/
There's a really good website that explains banking in laymans terms. Makes it easier to understand what guys like Stockman and Ron Paul talk about. Google "hmscoop.com".
too big to fail is a symptom of big government NOT capitalism, because only government can hijack the peoples wealth and give it to these failing companies. The companies themselves never take a piece of your paycheck. Companies will use government to do their bidding.
What most people don't seem to understand, including the mental midgets at "ReasonTV" , is that Reagan was working with a coalition that included neocons like Stockman., and the VP George HW Bush who called Reagan's economic plans "voodoo economics" in the Republican primary. THEY were never for free market principles and became the biggest hiderance.
After the big win for Reagan's second term ,a truly historic landslide, Reagan got rid of Stockman , no longer needin neocons
True conservatives of the Teddy Roosevelt and Dwight Eisenhower brand understand what is going on. Too bad, few self described conservatives really are conservatives anymore. They are neo-con hucksters or huckstered who have driven the nation into a ditch that is filling with water. Hopefully we wake up.
I provided the Reagan Administration with proofs of the cause of the present failure, and a fact of one solution. Stockman still doesn't have a plausible mathematic explanation. (See full video.)
I would like to see more of Reason's interviews run or offered at full length like this. I found it very enjoyable to not guess what fell between the edits. No matter what side of a socio-economic-political debate you find yourself on, it pays to know the opinion of others, as you formulate or express your own opinion.
It's rare that I agree with *everything* that someone else says. So, it's a pleasure to have Stockman speak all my thoughts with clarity and accuracy.
finally someone points towards the unintended consequences of deposit insurance which i believe is at the heart of the whole mess!!! if we're going to keep the fed we have to abolish deposit insurance and give rise to the idea of money warehousing
One major thing he gets wrong is the S&L "crisis".
It wasn't a crisis. If the govt had gotten out of the way and let the "junk bonds" mature, many or even most of those S&Ls would have ended up making money.
Michael Milken was no criminal. He was a scapegoat.
States need to separate from the UNION before its to late and America gets dissolved and takes world orders rather than Independence, in other words communism.
Americans are prostitutes owned by the Federal Reserve and the presidents are the FEDS SELECT pimps and managers. To betray you must first befriend. Eg Obama gained the trust of the masses, after his being SELECTED (Through The FEDs money owning the media ) breaking every promise made in the first 3 weeks as the DemocratRepublic are one of the same – Wake up America your under siege
End the FED as all States prostituted the people who just want to live as they are no longer self supporting
How can a self described libertarian attack Reagan for not cutting enough spending, yet now favors raising taxes and accepts that we will remain a welfare state? The Republicans take over the House this week along with Tea Party backed representatives and now is the time to have a serious debate for ending entitlements, not bashing the GOP for refusing to raise taxes. Not backing the GOP is fine, but how can any libertarian be for raising taxes?
@Thorbie "How can a self described libertarian attack Reagan for not cutting enough spending, yet now favors raising taxes and accepts that we will remain a welfare state?"
He says it clearly: "We've had a thirty year referendum on spending, every aspect of the welfare state."
America voted for big brother. Whether you supported Republicans or Democrats, you voted for the welfare state and the warfare state, more and more and more spending. He's saying if you're going to spend, you must pay.
@imjasonn Paying off the debt is necessary, but a libertarian should understand supply side economics and the Laffer curve. Raising taxes won't work. Reagan and Milton Friedman both knew that cutting high taxes increases tax revenue. Higher taxes leads to less revenue. The debt can be paid off if you cut spending. The budget has doubled since Bill Clinton left office. We have a spending problem, not a revenue problem. We get about $2 trillion in tax revenue for a $3.8 trillion budget.
@Thorbie "...yet now favors raising taxes and accepts" ...in words, yes ...but not all in spirit....he thinks that putting a cap on spending was more important than worrying about taxes ...whereas the groups that includes the likes of RP, etc. thought best to plug the leak first (i.e. stop the tax increase) before attacking entitlements/spending ... they both want to eat the same fish ..one from the front and the other from the rear first ... merely of a syntactic difference
@LORDOFWARS8 I favor a cap on spending too, just not a cap at $3.8 trillion dollars, especially when the debt now stands at $14 trillion. My problem was not because he favored raising taxes, but that he doesn't seem to want any kind of real spending cuts. He's more or less accepted the current spending levels. Spending is the only reason the deficit exists. Tax revenue doesn't create deficits without the spending aspect. My point on taxes was that raising taxes won't work due to the laffer curve
@WouldbeSage "The money should not be privately controlled for the same reason that nuclear weapons should not be privately controlled."
That makes absolutely no sense. Nuclear weapons can be used to kill thousands of people at once. Money can.... be used in voluntary transactions. Yep, dangerous!
@libertyplayground 'WouldbeSage' is probably one of those people who think that the Federal Reserve is a private bank that is owned by the Illuminati or something, and that therefor money should be something the government can print at will whenever it wants more, as opposed to the system in place now where there is at least some restraint, in theory.
Private money would be gold, or as good as gold, or it simply would not be used.
higher tax rates does not equal increased revenue. this was one of his assumptions in addition to the assumption nick pointed out about higher revenue actually going towards the debt
@djyankee251 Exactly. That's the laffer curve in a nutshell, probably the one thing that made Reagan so successful. David Stockman of all people should know better than to favor higher taxes.
42 minutes to a guy who has been a failure ever since the Reagan administration ended? If he foresaw the housing bubble then why'd he invest in auto part companies instead of shorting banks and home builders?
It's sad that he got 42 while Richard Epstein only got 12.
It really was the massive growth in the government debt that exposed the lie of the 'Reagan revolution' to me. I likely would have bought the mystique myself if it wasn't for that. I 'do' credit Reagan for hastening the fall of the Soviet Union, and that was a 'very good thing'. The strategic situation was getting very scary, with some generals on both sides thinking that maybe a disarming first strike was possible. That situation needed to end and end fast.
I'm coming into Reagan!
Tippersnore 1 month ago
Did I just hear a Koch supported org mention Murray Rothbard?
AWESOMENESS!
HaroldRehling 3 months ago
@TomH364 Thanks for the "heads up" on that website brother.. Very informative!
firedogvegas 4 months ago
Hahaha shit hit the fan,
May be those pipe dreamers will accept the reality and vote all clowns ot of Wall street and other places.
Or may be we need to wait for another downgrade.
LOL
2598129 6 months ago
I'm a canadian and I'm still a Ron pauler. If want Ron to win, start educating and informing your fellow citizens about Paul. If I was in Us, I would be wearig Ron Paul tshirt day and night.
desijamesbond90210 6 months ago
34:50 well that's definitely unconstitutional. People always sound good, until they actually tell you WHAT they will do. He would be doing things just as dictatorial as Obama. Just a slightly different flavor. Thanks but no thanks.
sgentlemanjack112 6 months ago
we are screwed if Ron Paul doesnt win. Help us Obi Ron, you are our only hope!
gangelone999 7 months ago
This is an important topic and I want to see more reason.tv interviews of this nature but Nick Gillespie, two words for you, shhhhhhhut up. I lost count how many times you interrupted David Stockman. What is the point of an interview if you are not going to listen to what the interviewee says?
AeroJimE27 7 months ago
It's a pleasure to hear from people who are still intellectually honest these days.
schmoukiz 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Please note that my book Keynes Hayek: The Clash That Shaped Modern Economics is published by W.W.Norton in October.
Professor John B.Taylor says that: “Nicholas Wapshott brings the Keynes-Hayek fight of the 20th century back to life, making the clash both entertaining and highly relevant for understanding economic crises of the 21st century.”
Read an extract at: sites.google.com/site/wapshottkeyneshayek/
Nicholas Wapshott
nhwapshott 8 months ago
There's a really good website that explains banking in laymans terms. Makes it easier to understand what guys like Stockman and Ron Paul talk about. Google "hmscoop.com".
TomH364 8 months ago
too big to fail is a symptom of big government NOT capitalism, because only government can hijack the peoples wealth and give it to these failing companies. The companies themselves never take a piece of your paycheck. Companies will use government to do their bidding.
roger767 9 months ago
outstanding !!! you know i subscribed to this channel. MAKE MORE VIDEOS LIKE THIS ,,, WHAT AN INTERVIEW !!
triumph951000 10 months ago
this guy is on the ball people take in alll this man has to say !
SimplyStupidNews 10 months ago
I agree, the full length interviews are more conducive to gathering the complete picture.
Imperatorcf 11 months ago
Keep these long interviews coming. Rand Paul's and Stockman's are a good start
ih8ronpaulh8ers 11 months ago
What does Glenn Beck think of this?
mandaladouble 11 months ago
Ron Paul 41:05
EastCoastAvenger 11 months ago
Comment removed
EastCoastAvenger 11 months ago
What most people don't seem to understand, including the mental midgets at "ReasonTV" , is that Reagan was working with a coalition that included neocons like Stockman., and the VP George HW Bush who called Reagan's economic plans "voodoo economics" in the Republican primary. THEY were never for free market principles and became the biggest hiderance.
After the big win for Reagan's second term ,a truly historic landslide, Reagan got rid of Stockman , no longer needin neocons
Yababoos123 1 year ago
David Stockman was fired by Reagan in 1985 for good reason, he was considered a total idiot then , even more than he is considered now.
Reagan was happy to get rid of him and Reagans agenda didn't get going unti after David Stockman was booted out
Yababoos123 1 year ago
True conservatives of the Teddy Roosevelt and Dwight Eisenhower brand understand what is going on. Too bad, few self described conservatives really are conservatives anymore. They are neo-con hucksters or huckstered who have driven the nation into a ditch that is filling with water. Hopefully we wake up.
kirkydu 1 year ago
I provided the Reagan Administration with proofs of the cause of the present failure, and a fact of one solution. Stockman still doesn't have a plausible mathematic explanation. (See full video.)
mikemontagne 1 year ago
I would like to see more of Reason's interviews run or offered at full length like this. I found it very enjoyable to not guess what fell between the edits. No matter what side of a socio-economic-political debate you find yourself on, it pays to know the opinion of others, as you formulate or express your own opinion.
gxtt 1 year ago 21
what point does he mention paul?
mit26chell 1 year ago
It's heartening that twice as many people have watched to long interview as the short interview.
032125 1 year ago
Thank you reason.tv. Awsome stuff.
RightWingSomos 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Ron Paul is a liberal penis.
TerrorWarrior5000 1 year ago
Trade deficits aren't a bad thing. The term trade "deficit" is a loaded term anyway!
richardcadbury 1 year ago
It's rare that I agree with *everything* that someone else says. So, it's a pleasure to have Stockman speak all my thoughts with clarity and accuracy.
Westmiller 1 year ago
Bah.
That's my opinion.
blogegog 1 year ago
Anyone know of any good articles that spell out why TARP isn't really being paid out? Current articles, less than a month old, that get into details.
megagagnon1 1 year ago
Nick - Don't smoke so much weed before a big interview, man.
glennd7962 1 year ago
Very nice interview.
RemiG2006 1 year ago
Trade deficits do not matter!
Wormtail81 1 year ago
finally someone points towards the unintended consequences of deposit insurance which i believe is at the heart of the whole mess!!! if we're going to keep the fed we have to abolish deposit insurance and give rise to the idea of money warehousing
58robbo 1 year ago
Great interview reason.tv
julianhpike 1 year ago 3
very good points - seen from within.
grraadd 1 year ago
Thank you for posting this long version of the interview.
voltagedrop 1 year ago
35:11 "Maybe one of his daughters still believes in him." Lol.
MooseOfReason 1 year ago 6
Great interview
heyoehkah 1 year ago
Federal Union was a house of cards from the start !
411American 1 year ago
One major thing he gets wrong is the S&L "crisis".
It wasn't a crisis. If the govt had gotten out of the way and let the "junk bonds" mature, many or even most of those S&Ls would have ended up making money.
Michael Milken was no criminal. He was a scapegoat.
CurtHowland 1 year ago
States need to separate from the UNION before its to late and America gets dissolved and takes world orders rather than Independence, in other words communism.
411American 1 year ago
IT'S A TARP
OnCall101Villa 1 year ago 18
Americans are prostitutes owned by the Federal Reserve and the presidents are the FEDS SELECT pimps and managers. To betray you must first befriend. Eg Obama gained the trust of the masses, after his being SELECTED (Through The FEDs money owning the media ) breaking every promise made in the first 3 weeks as the DemocratRepublic are one of the same – Wake up America your under siege
End the FED as all States prostituted the people who just want to live as they are no longer self supporting
411American 1 year ago
How can a self described libertarian attack Reagan for not cutting enough spending, yet now favors raising taxes and accepts that we will remain a welfare state? The Republicans take over the House this week along with Tea Party backed representatives and now is the time to have a serious debate for ending entitlements, not bashing the GOP for refusing to raise taxes. Not backing the GOP is fine, but how can any libertarian be for raising taxes?
Thorbie 1 year ago
@Thorbie "How can a self described libertarian attack Reagan for not cutting enough spending, yet now favors raising taxes and accepts that we will remain a welfare state?"
He says it clearly: "We've had a thirty year referendum on spending, every aspect of the welfare state."
America voted for big brother. Whether you supported Republicans or Democrats, you voted for the welfare state and the warfare state, more and more and more spending. He's saying if you're going to spend, you must pay.
imjasonn 1 year ago
@imjasonn Paying off the debt is necessary, but a libertarian should understand supply side economics and the Laffer curve. Raising taxes won't work. Reagan and Milton Friedman both knew that cutting high taxes increases tax revenue. Higher taxes leads to less revenue. The debt can be paid off if you cut spending. The budget has doubled since Bill Clinton left office. We have a spending problem, not a revenue problem. We get about $2 trillion in tax revenue for a $3.8 trillion budget.
Thorbie 1 year ago
@Thorbie "...yet now favors raising taxes and accepts" ...in words, yes ...but not all in spirit....he thinks that putting a cap on spending was more important than worrying about taxes ...whereas the groups that includes the likes of RP, etc. thought best to plug the leak first (i.e. stop the tax increase) before attacking entitlements/spending ... they both want to eat the same fish ..one from the front and the other from the rear first ... merely of a syntactic difference
LORDOFWARS8 1 year ago
@LORDOFWARS8 I favor a cap on spending too, just not a cap at $3.8 trillion dollars, especially when the debt now stands at $14 trillion. My problem was not because he favored raising taxes, but that he doesn't seem to want any kind of real spending cuts. He's more or less accepted the current spending levels. Spending is the only reason the deficit exists. Tax revenue doesn't create deficits without the spending aspect. My point on taxes was that raising taxes won't work due to the laffer curve
Thorbie 1 year ago
The money should not be privately controlled for the same reason that nuclear weapons should not be privately controlled.
WouldbeSage 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@WouldbeSage "The money should not be privately controlled for the same reason that nuclear weapons should not be privately controlled."
That makes absolutely no sense. Nuclear weapons can be used to kill thousands of people at once. Money can.... be used in voluntary transactions. Yep, dangerous!
libertyplayground 1 year ago 2
@libertyplayground 'WouldbeSage' is probably one of those people who think that the Federal Reserve is a private bank that is owned by the Illuminati or something, and that therefor money should be something the government can print at will whenever it wants more, as opposed to the system in place now where there is at least some restraint, in theory.
Private money would be gold, or as good as gold, or it simply would not be used.
Panpiper 1 year ago
higher tax rates does not equal increased revenue. this was one of his assumptions in addition to the assumption nick pointed out about higher revenue actually going towards the debt
djyankee251 1 year ago
@djyankee251 Exactly. That's the laffer curve in a nutshell, probably the one thing that made Reagan so successful. David Stockman of all people should know better than to favor higher taxes.
Thorbie 1 year ago
42 minutes to a guy who has been a failure ever since the Reagan administration ended? If he foresaw the housing bubble then why'd he invest in auto part companies instead of shorting banks and home builders?
It's sad that he got 42 while Richard Epstein only got 12.
3tcpx 1 year ago
It really was the massive growth in the government debt that exposed the lie of the 'Reagan revolution' to me. I likely would have bought the mystique myself if it wasn't for that. I 'do' credit Reagan for hastening the fall of the Soviet Union, and that was a 'very good thing'. The strategic situation was getting very scary, with some generals on both sides thinking that maybe a disarming first strike was possible. That situation needed to end and end fast.
Panpiper 1 year ago
Well Fuck!
TheJesusdangerchrist 1 year ago
Great interview. I like the iceberg idea, hmmmm....
accurateled 1 year ago