I think its funny how Obama and McCain supporters want to deface Ron Paul signs and stiffle our free speech. I guess I see what Obama and McCain and their supporters actually stand for, abolishing the 1st ammendment. not to mention almost all of the others.
You guys should look into Milton Friedman and his ability to explain the importance of prices and freedom.
Youtube 4 ways to spend money with Milton Friedman and he is excellent at explaining why when a goverment spends other peoples money on other people it cannot do some efficiently regardless of how much it tries to spend.
you ron paul supporters are fucking brain dead. the TSA, FBI, CIA, ATF, DEA, Border Patrol, NSA, are CRUCIAL agencies. they do so much work behind the scenes. Go ahead get rid of them with your beloved Paul, and watch the usa go to shit. prostituties and drug dealers will fucking fill the streets; crime is going overflow into your backyard. then youll be crying for the agencies to come back.
whats wrong with whores and drugs!? sounds like a good time to me. your point isnt valid though. i can get drugs and whores no problem now. as for crime. i'm not too worried. i know glock-fu. i need some target practice.
Fucking bastards should get a stick from the revolution. Too bad there weren't many Paulunteers around, or that fucker would have gotten his ass burnt...
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Typical. All paultard are compelte losers. I can't wait until he drops out of the elction. I wonder what all the paulfags will do then? I bet msot of them actually think he has a chance of winning.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Please note hat all the other candidates support and enforce the US constitution. The idea that Ron Paul is the only one who does is just something he says to hook voters. No other major candidates support any unconstitutional measures.
And calling someone a Bush tard is pretty retarded. No one is the Bush family is running, and the current administration has few supporters. If you ever payed attention to what is going on in the world, you'd know all this.
In response to your comment that no other major candidate doesn't support the US constitution.
Take a civics class. In fact take a class of any sort, I imagine it would help your reading comprehension(which is obviously lacking). Ron Paul isn't the end all be all of politicians, far from it...but McCain/Obama have zero respect for the 1st, 2nd, 4th, 9th, 10th amendments, and I'm sure if I put on my thinking hat I can find other amendments they violate.
He voted for the second version of the Patriot Act...restricting first amendment rights. If you receive certain kinds of warrants from the federal government, you cannot tell your spouse, your lawyer, not even a federal judge.
Andrew Napolitano, Fox News' senior judicial analyst explains it well. In fact he did so against the will of Fox News, and tore many modern Republicans a new a-hole in the process.
I don't know how you should vote. Certainly not for either of the two major candidates(or should I just call them freedom haters?) Based on the war mongering foreign policy they share, the corporate interests they protect at home, and the liberty they both want to hand over to the government, I don't know how anyone can in good conscience, vote for McCain or Obama.
Didn't say that at all buddy. Neither of the candidates is conservative, at least not in the limited federal government, pro individual responsibility, fiscally responsible way. Conservative in that they aren't going to change the direction of the country? Sure...too conservative.
How is this that difficult to comprehend? Did the cool aid have lsd in it?
And, how is that bad? For once we have an election where BOTH candidates are honest and competent (With the exception of one of the candidates running mates). why would I want to vote for a guy whos popular among 9-11 conspiracy theorists and wants to severely cut the budget to NASA?
LOL Honest and competent. Well if you're not an old school conservative you wouldn't want to vote for Paul, nor would I want you to vote against your conscience.
You're clearly more comfortable being coddled by the federal government, and super cool with one pseudo socialist and one full on socialist as our candidates.
It was always beyond me why people associated 9/11 consiricists with Paul, it was contrary to his whole point about our foreign policy and it's consequences.
Don't worry mmysama, it doesn't look like your welfare state is going to leave us soon. Talk to me in 20-30 years and see where it's gotten this country. Perhaps you should go see I.O.U.S.A....it was done with David Walker the former comptroller general, Warren Buffet the billionaire, and a few others. Ron Paul was also heavily used in one segment. His ideas are VERY relevant to our fiscal and monetary policies and smart people listen to him even if they don't agree 100%.
The most recent example would be their recent votes to bail out a few poorly run big banks. Or do they have magic money for that? It's the exact opposite of free market thinking.
And Obama clearly expects the earners in this country to take care of the sloven few. That's not socialism?
Social security and medicare are socialist programs, that will in the future bankrupt this country. We'll either not keep our promises, or the money received will be worthless.
So, you would rather trust large corporation's that make a living by screwing people out of their money over elected officials who would rat each other out for a couple votes?
Which part of my statement are you referring to? The banks? Hell yes, they should be allowed to go bankrupt like everyone else. There would be a hell of a lot of self-regulation then.
EVIL CORPORATIONS ARE COMING TO GET YOU! LOL A corporation provides my excellent health insurance, and one day I'll take what money they invest for me and roll it into my own IRA. Are corps in it to make money? Sure, that's why you should invest in a few and reap the benefits yourself.
And yes, I'll trust a contract from a large corporation over a contract from the government ANY day of the week, and you should too. Corporations are required by law to uphold their contracts and promises, whereas the government constantly proves itself to be more corrupt and way more inefficient.
So, corporations provide excellent health insurance? I did'nt know that. I work for a small company that provide no benefits and my father got screwed out of his pension (enron style). I guess I'm just not doing it right.
Perhaps you should look for a position that offers benefits, or work for/negotiate for a raise so that you can buy your own. I'm sorry that your fathers' company was run fraudulently.
Oh boo hoo. You were complaining at first but not now? Still doesn't prevent you from renegotiating/advancing. I've had jobs I liked more than what I do now...but my current job offered more and had more future opportunities. I made the logical decision.
So, you are telling me I should QUIT my job (Because i work for a very small company with no benefits) just because of the health insurance issue? So, everyone who works for a small company, or a corrupt company is supposed to get screwed over because we are supposed to rely on our employers for health insurance?
If it's something that's really important to you at this point in your life, yes. Perhaps if we didn't have one of the highest corporate tax rates in the world small business' could afford to take better care of their employees, creating more desirable salaries/benefits.
I would much rather trust that than one run by Ron Paul. Do you even know what ALL of his policies are? Like for example, he consideres NASA to be unconstitutional. Apparently scientific progress and discovery is a crime if it uses tax payer money. he wants all exploration to be don by private corporations (don't you guys hate corporations?) it will be a LOOOONG time before any corporation deems it profitable to send a probe to mars.
He said he would keep NASA for national defense purposes and make it part of the military, and sell off the other functions to private enterprise. I think the free market would be much better at space exploration than our govt. The Govt has scrapped tons of feasible projects that cost taxpayers millions. It is not profitable for private enterprise now because of all the red tape and barriers created by NASA and govt regulations. He is not against progress, just against wasted money.
I would suggest you look at all the taxpayer dollars NASA has wasted. No private enterprise would still be in business if they have operated like NASA. Free choice to invest in space exploration should be given not forced investment through taxes.
Well, so far the free market has a pretty lousy track record. They only achieved their fist orbital launch a few months ago and there have been a LOT more scrapped projects by private organizations than by NASA. Any space exploration project requires a large amount of capital to see it through. If Ron Paul wanted to stop wasteful spending, it'll be smarter to simply have more oversight.
The free market has a lousy track record because of all the govt regulations and having to use NASA scientists to make their projects. The projects scrapped by private industry only costs those who believed in the investment. These people at least had a choice. More oversight won't cure anything. The regulators are unable to determine how their actions will impact the entire market. Usually they just end up creating a monopoly by inadvertently creating barriers for private industry.
I can think of several examples where increased govt oversight/regulations have made it impossible for small business owners to make a profit while propping up large multi-nationals. Its not a problem of business vs govt., both of them are the problem. Centrallized power or wealth in govt or business is dangerous to our freedom. Unfortuantely, both govt and large corps are bedfellows in America. I think Ron Paul and other third party candidates are the only ones trying to change this.
Who will pay for the probe? or how will the company profit? Guess I am not sure what you are asking. Investors that believe in the project would pay for the probe. The private organization would profit by selling data to scientific organizations, astronomers, geologists, aviation industry, software developers etc. Also, could drop costs allowing space tourism, mining of minerals, property etc.
Why would a private organization want to pay for data on Mars? It's not like anybody is going to colonize it any time soon. there wiould be no reason for them to fund any exploration of Mars until far in the future, when it become financially viable. i don't know about you, but I would like to see a somone walk on mars at some point before I die. there are a lot of other people who want to see the same thing, but how can we expect them all to cough up the tens of billions necessary?
I don't think you will be seeing anyone walking on Mars in your lifetime. The dangers of radiation are still too great with our current materials, and technology hasn't even been developed to make the trip financially or scientifically feasible. Hence the reason why I think the free market would be more innovative. Space exploration and travel would definitely be profitable short term. Just think of the innovative new technology that could be developed. Why did this turn into a space discussion?
Obviously there are companies that think space exploration is profitable or they wouldn't be investing in it. Imagine how much this would increase if regulations and NASA's monopoly were removed. I suggest you check the web for current companies investing in space exploration/travel. We need the atmosphere of 1909 when a couple of bicycle shop owners believed they could fly. SpaceshipOne proves private space travel is financially feasible and NASA's budget should be given to the private sector.
THAT right there is why I will never, EVER vote for a libertarian.
In 1961, President Kennedy announced a plan to land a man on the moon within the decade, Just 8 years later they where successful. That success inspired a generation and was worth every dime. Although an 8 year time frame is too short for a mars project, it is the opinion of many that the technological hurdles will be less than those of project Apollo, it will ultimately cost less than Apollo.
I am beginning to think you are lost in your own little world and incaple of holding a logical discussion. I did you a service of explaining things to you logically, and you just give me strawman arguements with no reasonable backing and a skewed version of Dr. Pauls policies. I will no longer entertain your lack of knowledge. I will close my statments by saying: Give Freedom a Chance. Legislators are not made of finer clay than you or I.
Once again a strawman arguement where you are trying to put words in libertarian's mouths that are just not true. You sound like a broken record about this space thing and have completely ignored everything I have said about how it is feasible in the private sector. Thats ok though keep supporting your government run monopolies.
You said that I will probably not see a man walk on Mars in my lifetime. Where I come from, those are fighting words.
And, What exactly will change about the corporate system if the libertarians have their way? Won't deregulation and the cessation of social programs lead to a a widening of the gap between the rich and poor?
I am saying we won't see it because of NASA's monopoly on space exploration. If the funds were given back to the private industry there is no telling what innovation it might bring.
I can explain how a libertarian policy would help rid of of the current inequality promoted by our govt and corps but 300 words isn't enough. A big part of it though is the federal reserve (fractional lending) and corporations having same rights as individuals. If you are interested in hearing i can message you.
Theres is plenty of funds being given to private industry. Ever hear of the COTS program?
There will always be projects that are greatly beneficial to science but are not financially profitable. No corporation is going to fund something like the great observatories program or the explorer program until far in the future. Until then, space agencies will naturally hold the lead.
Plenty of funds? This is just a program for commercial transportation of supplies to the space station. Once again subsidized by NASA's monopoly. That program is proof of the necessity of private industry space travel. The reason they are openning up the private sector is because they know it will decrease costs. This isn't a discussion about the feasibility of space travel by the way. I have presented good points to every question. Answer me about govt subsidizing the corporations i mentioned.
"NASA concluded that firms in a free market could develop and operate such a system more efficiently and affordably than a government bureaucracy." -Mike Griffin NASA regarding COTS program. Thanks for adding another arguing point for privatized space exploration that I was unaware of.
What about the government paying taxpayer dollars to prop up Choicepoint a private company that databases all our private information. How about the US govt propping up monsanto to patent our food supply. Or the bailout propping up large banks that qualify for funds while small banks are unable to complete with the low interest rates. Or your beloved govt giving corporations the same rights as individuals. I can go on all day about your beloved godfather govt.
Libertarianism is not unpopular. Maybe in the United States because of the stupidity of our citizens thinking everything is either right of left. Libertarianism is considered a liberal idealology in most countries. I am beginning to believe you are uneducated about libertarian beliefs and are just going along with the "cool" "liberal" crowd. Noam Chomsky considers himself a libertarian, as does Bill Maher if you are hoping to look trendy and cool.
Well, you just called the majority of Americans stupid, thats a major fallacy right there. The only people trying to look trendy and cool are the paultards, who didn't even know how the government worked until 18 months ago and think that federal income taxes are theft.
I guess if obedience means intelligence we are the smartest country on earth. I am just saying in every other country there are more than just two ends to the political spectrum. Somehow Americans are the only ones convinced there is only right and left. The income tax is not authorized in the consitution and favors the wealthy. I can give you several examples of how the tax code favors those with more money and how your taxes are being used to prop up the military industrial complex (war).
I really think you would agree with most of our beliefs. I am not trying to convince you to support Ron Paul. I don't agree with him on several things. I am just trying to convince you to support anyone else besides the Dems and Reps. Dems and Reps have been lying to us for years and it is time we held them accountable. Dems are not true liberals and Reps are not true conservatives. I have know how the govt works for quite some time btw. Studied political science for 4 years.
You said that Most Americans are stupid and that There will never be a manned landing on mars in my lifetime. Why the FUCK would I ever agree with your beliefs?
I work for a construction firm thats only staying afloat due to a series of government contracts. Thats money, stolen from the people, given to me so I can feed my family and pave your roads. You'll to make a stronger argument if you want to convince me of anything.
I can give you several examples of how the federal income tax favors the poor. But, you people will believe anything you want as long as theres evidence supporting it, even if theres evidence supporting the opposite. (thats the golden rule of conspiracy theorists). And, there are many countries where there is more obedience, in fact, America actually rates near the bottom for that.
I would rather give my money to private industry- salvation army, red cross, family services etc. They are much more efficient at determining needs than any bureaucratic govt agency. I never once have mentioned any conspiracies I believe in. You should agree with me because if we change things we will see a man on mars and our citizens will no longer be apathetic. I and Paul only suggest reducing the size of federal govt not the state govt. State govt would increase under Paul.
The problem is about centralization of power and wealth. Government power is way too centralized and should be given back to the states. You really should read more about libertarian beliefs. Quit associating them with the nutjob conspiracy theorist groups that want to live in total anarchy. The conspirators only support them because they don't fully understand the ideals either.
I would suggest you read Jean Jacques Rousseau's (he is a socialist) Social Contract and Discourse on Inequality that helped inspire the french and american revolutions. He talks a lot about government size in relation to dealing with its citizens and becoming too large to hear the voice of the people. Don't just believe in something just because it sounds good. Believe in something because you understand what you believe in.
Leaders of the Red cross has also been guilty of embezzling millions from charitable donations, also to pay themselves large salaries. They charge ridiculous prices for blood that people donate for free. You don't have to dig very deep to find evidence of corruption and embezzlements by these charities. And you'd best not say that they are more efficient than welfare and social security unless you are trying to be funny.
Its a matter of costs with healthcare. Government regulations have helped prop up HMOs(privately owned) that have run a monopoly(Akin to corporate-fascism) and increased costs. Not to mention, bureaucratic red tape that does increase costs. Social Security should continue but new generation should be able to opt of if they chose and invest in private instead. Tax credits given to family's for health insurance premiums. Charity for poor read Davy Crocketts- Not yours to give. (Its very short)
On monday u will get kissed by the love of ur life if u paste this to 12 diffrent videos if u don't There will be a crazy murderer in ur home by 3:00
ARe you rly that arrogant? like rly? and you so dense JUST so blinded by you thinking your always right to think that? come on gorw up and get a live which you odviously dont have
Why was this guy all scared? If you're holding a freakin Ron Paul sign up you better be prepared to talk to people and not be a pussy. It's not like these idiots are going to do anything.. I'm getting my Ron Paul signs out tomorrow, hope I'll see you guys out there..
Fair play to ye. Its a pity people don't vote with their brains anymore. I hear that rockstar president isn't working out as well as anticipated.
MrDannyOConnor 1 year ago
I don't mean to be ignorant but who is Ron Paul.
girltex07 2 years ago
hes a jackass, who has hoardes of internet troll followers. the guys seriously thinks he a s shot as president
jaktigmidblinx 2 years ago
the greatest American in my lifetime
ngarrido1 2 years ago
I think its funny how Obama and McCain supporters want to deface Ron Paul signs and stiffle our free speech. I guess I see what Obama and McCain and their supporters actually stand for, abolishing the 1st ammendment. not to mention almost all of the others.
whatitischief 2 years ago
You guys should look into Milton Friedman and his ability to explain the importance of prices and freedom.
Youtube 4 ways to spend money with Milton Friedman and he is excellent at explaining why when a goverment spends other peoples money on other people it cannot do some efficiently regardless of how much it tries to spend.
oryxx 2 years ago
you ron paul supporters are fucking brain dead. the TSA, FBI, CIA, ATF, DEA, Border Patrol, NSA, are CRUCIAL agencies. they do so much work behind the scenes. Go ahead get rid of them with your beloved Paul, and watch the usa go to shit. prostituties and drug dealers will fucking fill the streets; crime is going overflow into your backyard. then youll be crying for the agencies to come back.
jaktigmidblinx 2 years ago
whats wrong with whores and drugs!? sounds like a good time to me. your point isnt valid though. i can get drugs and whores no problem now. as for crime. i'm not too worried. i know glock-fu. i need some target practice.
ya19375 2 years ago
@ya19375 Agreed, whats everyone problems with drugs and whores, I for one love them.
For all the ppl who doesnt, fine by me. All i ask for is some mutual respect
Izoul 7 months ago
Fucking bastards should get a stick from the revolution. Too bad there weren't many Paulunteers around, or that fucker would have gotten his ass burnt...
gauharjk 3 years ago
watch?v=xNOuuhpYBEg
BobBrinkerisanIdiot 3 years ago
If I ever see anybody tearing my Ron Paul signs dows I will beat their ass.
laetrille 4 years ago 3
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Typical. All paultard are compelte losers. I can't wait until he drops out of the elction. I wonder what all the paulfags will do then? I bet msot of them actually think he has a chance of winning.
mmysama 4 years ago
And you fools think the Constitution is just a piece of paper.
WAKE UP MORON.
Vote for Ron Paul now or wish you did later.
Your choice.
btw should we call you a bushtard?
SOSnUSA 4 years ago 5
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Please note hat all the other candidates support and enforce the US constitution. The idea that Ron Paul is the only one who does is just something he says to hook voters. No other major candidates support any unconstitutional measures.
And calling someone a Bush tard is pretty retarded. No one is the Bush family is running, and the current administration has few supporters. If you ever payed attention to what is going on in the world, you'd know all this.
mmysama 4 years ago
Lies.
Dishfarm 4 years ago
Do you people ever stop to think that maybe you are promoting the negative assumption that Ron paul lacks social awareness?
mmysama 4 years ago
In response to your comment that no other major candidate doesn't support the US constitution.
Take a civics class. In fact take a class of any sort, I imagine it would help your reading comprehension(which is obviously lacking). Ron Paul isn't the end all be all of politicians, far from it...but McCain/Obama have zero respect for the 1st, 2nd, 4th, 9th, 10th amendments, and I'm sure if I put on my thinking hat I can find other amendments they violate.
bighitter42 3 years ago
Obama has zero respect for the 1st amendment? Please explain.
mmysama 3 years ago
He voted for the second version of the Patriot Act...restricting first amendment rights. If you receive certain kinds of warrants from the federal government, you cannot tell your spouse, your lawyer, not even a federal judge.
Andrew Napolitano, Fox News' senior judicial analyst explains it well. In fact he did so against the will of Fox News, and tore many modern Republicans a new a-hole in the process.
bighitter42 3 years ago
So, I suppose that makes him a neoconservative and we liberals should never vote for him?
mmysama 3 years ago
I don't know how you should vote. Certainly not for either of the two major candidates(or should I just call them freedom haters?) Based on the war mongering foreign policy they share, the corporate interests they protect at home, and the liberty they both want to hand over to the government, I don't know how anyone can in good conscience, vote for McCain or Obama.
bighitter42 3 years ago
So, you REALLY are saying that Obama is too conservative? I'm beggining to think that you don't really know shit about politics at all.
mmysama 3 years ago
Didn't say that at all buddy. Neither of the candidates is conservative, at least not in the limited federal government, pro individual responsibility, fiscally responsible way. Conservative in that they aren't going to change the direction of the country? Sure...too conservative.
How is this that difficult to comprehend? Did the cool aid have lsd in it?
bighitter42 3 years ago
And, how is that bad? For once we have an election where BOTH candidates are honest and competent (With the exception of one of the candidates running mates). why would I want to vote for a guy whos popular among 9-11 conspiracy theorists and wants to severely cut the budget to NASA?
mmysama 3 years ago
LOL Honest and competent. Well if you're not an old school conservative you wouldn't want to vote for Paul, nor would I want you to vote against your conscience.
You're clearly more comfortable being coddled by the federal government, and super cool with one pseudo socialist and one full on socialist as our candidates.
It was always beyond me why people associated 9/11 consiricists with Paul, it was contrary to his whole point about our foreign policy and it's consequences.
bighitter42 3 years ago
Don't worry mmysama, it doesn't look like your welfare state is going to leave us soon. Talk to me in 20-30 years and see where it's gotten this country. Perhaps you should go see I.O.U.S.A....it was done with David Walker the former comptroller general, Warren Buffet the billionaire, and a few others. Ron Paul was also heavily used in one segment. His ideas are VERY relevant to our fiscal and monetary policies and smart people listen to him even if they don't agree 100%.
bighitter42 3 years ago
I never mentioned anything about welfare. Neither of the candidates are anywhere close to being socialists.
mmysama 3 years ago
The most recent example would be their recent votes to bail out a few poorly run big banks. Or do they have magic money for that? It's the exact opposite of free market thinking.
And Obama clearly expects the earners in this country to take care of the sloven few. That's not socialism?
Social security and medicare are socialist programs, that will in the future bankrupt this country. We'll either not keep our promises, or the money received will be worthless.
bighitter42 3 years ago
So, you would rather trust large corporation's that make a living by screwing people out of their money over elected officials who would rat each other out for a couple votes?
mmysama 3 years ago
Which part of my statement are you referring to? The banks? Hell yes, they should be allowed to go bankrupt like everyone else. There would be a hell of a lot of self-regulation then.
EVIL CORPORATIONS ARE COMING TO GET YOU! LOL A corporation provides my excellent health insurance, and one day I'll take what money they invest for me and roll it into my own IRA. Are corps in it to make money? Sure, that's why you should invest in a few and reap the benefits yourself.
bighitter42 3 years ago
And yes, I'll trust a contract from a large corporation over a contract from the government ANY day of the week, and you should too. Corporations are required by law to uphold their contracts and promises, whereas the government constantly proves itself to be more corrupt and way more inefficient.
bighitter42 3 years ago
So, corporations provide excellent health insurance? I did'nt know that. I work for a small company that provide no benefits and my father got screwed out of his pension (enron style). I guess I'm just not doing it right.
mmysama 3 years ago
Perhaps you should look for a position that offers benefits, or work for/negotiate for a raise so that you can buy your own. I'm sorry that your fathers' company was run fraudulently.
bighitter42 3 years ago
But I like the job I have now.
mmysama 3 years ago
Oh boo hoo. You were complaining at first but not now? Still doesn't prevent you from renegotiating/advancing. I've had jobs I liked more than what I do now...but my current job offered more and had more future opportunities. I made the logical decision.
bighitter42 3 years ago
So, you are telling me I should QUIT my job (Because i work for a very small company with no benefits) just because of the health insurance issue? So, everyone who works for a small company, or a corrupt company is supposed to get screwed over because we are supposed to rely on our employers for health insurance?
mmysama 3 years ago
If it's something that's really important to you at this point in your life, yes. Perhaps if we didn't have one of the highest corporate tax rates in the world small business' could afford to take better care of their employees, creating more desirable salaries/benefits.
bighitter42 3 years ago
You would rather trust a government that props up these large corporations? I think your missing the point of the campaign.
cclodfe 3 years ago
I would much rather trust that than one run by Ron Paul. Do you even know what ALL of his policies are? Like for example, he consideres NASA to be unconstitutional. Apparently scientific progress and discovery is a crime if it uses tax payer money. he wants all exploration to be don by private corporations (don't you guys hate corporations?) it will be a LOOOONG time before any corporation deems it profitable to send a probe to mars.
mmysama 3 years ago
He said he would keep NASA for national defense purposes and make it part of the military, and sell off the other functions to private enterprise. I think the free market would be much better at space exploration than our govt. The Govt has scrapped tons of feasible projects that cost taxpayers millions. It is not profitable for private enterprise now because of all the red tape and barriers created by NASA and govt regulations. He is not against progress, just against wasted money.
cclodfe 3 years ago
I would suggest you look at all the taxpayer dollars NASA has wasted. No private enterprise would still be in business if they have operated like NASA. Free choice to invest in space exploration should be given not forced investment through taxes.
cclodfe 3 years ago
Keep it coming though.
cclodfe 3 years ago
watch?v=6_9LCmG4EWs
He anwsers a few questions on NASA
cclodfe 3 years ago
Well, so far the free market has a pretty lousy track record. They only achieved their fist orbital launch a few months ago and there have been a LOT more scrapped projects by private organizations than by NASA. Any space exploration project requires a large amount of capital to see it through. If Ron Paul wanted to stop wasteful spending, it'll be smarter to simply have more oversight.
mmysama 3 years ago
The free market has a lousy track record because of all the govt regulations and having to use NASA scientists to make their projects. The projects scrapped by private industry only costs those who believed in the investment. These people at least had a choice. More oversight won't cure anything. The regulators are unable to determine how their actions will impact the entire market. Usually they just end up creating a monopoly by inadvertently creating barriers for private industry.
cclodfe 3 years ago
I can think of several examples where increased govt oversight/regulations have made it impossible for small business owners to make a profit while propping up large multi-nationals. Its not a problem of business vs govt., both of them are the problem. Centrallized power or wealth in govt or business is dangerous to our freedom. Unfortuantely, both govt and large corps are bedfellows in America. I think Ron Paul and other third party candidates are the only ones trying to change this.
cclodfe 3 years ago
When a private organization does finally comes up with the money to send a probe to mars, and they suceed in doing it, who will pay for it?
mmysama 3 years ago
Who will pay for the probe? or how will the company profit? Guess I am not sure what you are asking. Investors that believe in the project would pay for the probe. The private organization would profit by selling data to scientific organizations, astronomers, geologists, aviation industry, software developers etc. Also, could drop costs allowing space tourism, mining of minerals, property etc.
cclodfe 3 years ago
Why would a private organization want to pay for data on Mars? It's not like anybody is going to colonize it any time soon. there wiould be no reason for them to fund any exploration of Mars until far in the future, when it become financially viable. i don't know about you, but I would like to see a somone walk on mars at some point before I die. there are a lot of other people who want to see the same thing, but how can we expect them all to cough up the tens of billions necessary?
mmysama 3 years ago
I don't think you will be seeing anyone walking on Mars in your lifetime. The dangers of radiation are still too great with our current materials, and technology hasn't even been developed to make the trip financially or scientifically feasible. Hence the reason why I think the free market would be more innovative. Space exploration and travel would definitely be profitable short term. Just think of the innovative new technology that could be developed. Why did this turn into a space discussion?
cclodfe 3 years ago
Obviously there are companies that think space exploration is profitable or they wouldn't be investing in it. Imagine how much this would increase if regulations and NASA's monopoly were removed. I suggest you check the web for current companies investing in space exploration/travel. We need the atmosphere of 1909 when a couple of bicycle shop owners believed they could fly. SpaceshipOne proves private space travel is financially feasible and NASA's budget should be given to the private sector.
cclodfe 3 years ago
THAT right there is why I will never, EVER vote for a libertarian.
In 1961, President Kennedy announced a plan to land a man on the moon within the decade, Just 8 years later they where successful. That success inspired a generation and was worth every dime. Although an 8 year time frame is too short for a mars project, it is the opinion of many that the technological hurdles will be less than those of project Apollo, it will ultimately cost less than Apollo.
mmysama 3 years ago
None of that explains why you wouldn't vote for a libertarian. You just made an opinionated statement and that was it.
cclodfe 3 years ago
I am beginning to think you are lost in your own little world and incaple of holding a logical discussion. I did you a service of explaining things to you logically, and you just give me strawman arguements with no reasonable backing and a skewed version of Dr. Pauls policies. I will no longer entertain your lack of knowledge. I will close my statments by saying: Give Freedom a Chance. Legislators are not made of finer clay than you or I.
cclodfe 3 years ago
Well, according to you people, spending tax money on space exploration is form of oppression.
Theres are a lot of good reasons that libertarianism is unpopular, and it's not because everyone on the planet is brainwashed.
mmysama 3 years ago
Once again a strawman arguement where you are trying to put words in libertarian's mouths that are just not true. You sound like a broken record about this space thing and have completely ignored everything I have said about how it is feasible in the private sector. Thats ok though keep supporting your government run monopolies.
cclodfe 3 years ago
You said that I will probably not see a man walk on Mars in my lifetime. Where I come from, those are fighting words.
And, What exactly will change about the corporate system if the libertarians have their way? Won't deregulation and the cessation of social programs lead to a a widening of the gap between the rich and poor?
mmysama 3 years ago
I am saying we won't see it because of NASA's monopoly on space exploration. If the funds were given back to the private industry there is no telling what innovation it might bring.
I can explain how a libertarian policy would help rid of of the current inequality promoted by our govt and corps but 300 words isn't enough. A big part of it though is the federal reserve (fractional lending) and corporations having same rights as individuals. If you are interested in hearing i can message you.
cclodfe 3 years ago
Theres is plenty of funds being given to private industry. Ever hear of the COTS program?
There will always be projects that are greatly beneficial to science but are not financially profitable. No corporation is going to fund something like the great observatories program or the explorer program until far in the future. Until then, space agencies will naturally hold the lead.
mmysama 3 years ago
Plenty of funds? This is just a program for commercial transportation of supplies to the space station. Once again subsidized by NASA's monopoly. That program is proof of the necessity of private industry space travel. The reason they are openning up the private sector is because they know it will decrease costs. This isn't a discussion about the feasibility of space travel by the way. I have presented good points to every question. Answer me about govt subsidizing the corporations i mentioned.
cclodfe 3 years ago
Straight from the horses mouth:
"NASA concluded that firms in a free market could develop and operate such a system more efficiently and affordably than a government bureaucracy." -Mike Griffin NASA regarding COTS program. Thanks for adding another arguing point for privatized space exploration that I was unaware of.
cclodfe 3 years ago
What about the government paying taxpayer dollars to prop up Choicepoint a private company that databases all our private information. How about the US govt propping up monsanto to patent our food supply. Or the bailout propping up large banks that qualify for funds while small banks are unable to complete with the low interest rates. Or your beloved govt giving corporations the same rights as individuals. I can go on all day about your beloved godfather govt.
cclodfe 3 years ago
Libertarianism is not unpopular. Maybe in the United States because of the stupidity of our citizens thinking everything is either right of left. Libertarianism is considered a liberal idealology in most countries. I am beginning to believe you are uneducated about libertarian beliefs and are just going along with the "cool" "liberal" crowd. Noam Chomsky considers himself a libertarian, as does Bill Maher if you are hoping to look trendy and cool.
cclodfe 3 years ago
Well, you just called the majority of Americans stupid, thats a major fallacy right there. The only people trying to look trendy and cool are the paultards, who didn't even know how the government worked until 18 months ago and think that federal income taxes are theft.
mmysama 3 years ago
I guess if obedience means intelligence we are the smartest country on earth. I am just saying in every other country there are more than just two ends to the political spectrum. Somehow Americans are the only ones convinced there is only right and left. The income tax is not authorized in the consitution and favors the wealthy. I can give you several examples of how the tax code favors those with more money and how your taxes are being used to prop up the military industrial complex (war).
cclodfe 3 years ago
I really think you would agree with most of our beliefs. I am not trying to convince you to support Ron Paul. I don't agree with him on several things. I am just trying to convince you to support anyone else besides the Dems and Reps. Dems and Reps have been lying to us for years and it is time we held them accountable. Dems are not true liberals and Reps are not true conservatives. I have know how the govt works for quite some time btw. Studied political science for 4 years.
cclodfe 3 years ago
You said that Most Americans are stupid and that There will never be a manned landing on mars in my lifetime. Why the FUCK would I ever agree with your beliefs?
I work for a construction firm thats only staying afloat due to a series of government contracts. Thats money, stolen from the people, given to me so I can feed my family and pave your roads. You'll to make a stronger argument if you want to convince me of anything.
mmysama 3 years ago
I can give you several examples of how the federal income tax favors the poor. But, you people will believe anything you want as long as theres evidence supporting it, even if theres evidence supporting the opposite. (thats the golden rule of conspiracy theorists). And, there are many countries where there is more obedience, in fact, America actually rates near the bottom for that.
mmysama 3 years ago
I would rather give my money to private industry- salvation army, red cross, family services etc. They are much more efficient at determining needs than any bureaucratic govt agency. I never once have mentioned any conspiracies I believe in. You should agree with me because if we change things we will see a man on mars and our citizens will no longer be apathetic. I and Paul only suggest reducing the size of federal govt not the state govt. State govt would increase under Paul.
cclodfe 3 years ago
The problem is about centralization of power and wealth. Government power is way too centralized and should be given back to the states. You really should read more about libertarian beliefs. Quit associating them with the nutjob conspiracy theorist groups that want to live in total anarchy. The conspirators only support them because they don't fully understand the ideals either.
cclodfe 3 years ago
I would suggest you read Jean Jacques Rousseau's (he is a socialist) Social Contract and Discourse on Inequality that helped inspire the french and american revolutions. He talks a lot about government size in relation to dealing with its citizens and becoming too large to hear the voice of the people. Don't just believe in something just because it sounds good. Believe in something because you understand what you believe in.
cclodfe 3 years ago
Leaders of the Red cross has also been guilty of embezzling millions from charitable donations, also to pay themselves large salaries. They charge ridiculous prices for blood that people donate for free. You don't have to dig very deep to find evidence of corruption and embezzlements by these charities. And you'd best not say that they are more efficient than welfare and social security unless you are trying to be funny.
mmysama 3 years ago
Its a matter of costs with healthcare. Government regulations have helped prop up HMOs(privately owned) that have run a monopoly(Akin to corporate-fascism) and increased costs. Not to mention, bureaucratic red tape that does increase costs. Social Security should continue but new generation should be able to opt of if they chose and invest in private instead. Tax credits given to family's for health insurance premiums. Charity for poor read Davy Crocketts- Not yours to give. (Its very short)
cclodfe 3 years ago
No response cool guy?
bighitter42 3 years ago
Fuck you go suck John Mcains dick and pray for war bitch.
laetrille 4 years ago
I'd rather NOT suck John Mcains dick. I am neither a Vietnamese nor republican.
mmysama 4 years ago
LMAO
Lamstraler 4 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
On monday u will get kissed by the love of ur life if u paste this to 12 diffrent videos if u don't There will be a crazy murderer in ur home by 3:00
doofyfoofus 4 years ago
Drunk off his ass!!!!
Ooberskidd 4 years ago
Lawrence,
It's past your bedtime. Read a book, then go to bed. Dumbsh*t.
AHM1776 4 years ago
ARe you rly that arrogant? like rly? and you so dense JUST so blinded by you thinking your always right to think that? come on gorw up and get a live which you odviously dont have
TheMightyDamo 4 years ago 2
Way to be an ass
bluecommunist 4 years ago
yup, thats the plan alright.
NeonKnight88 4 years ago
pure devotion, i love it
mreisma 4 years ago 5
I love it when that girl is sucking my dick. Feels good. Her annoying laugh feels amazing on my penis.
Usnato4evr 4 years ago
Why was this guy all scared? If you're holding a freakin Ron Paul sign up you better be prepared to talk to people and not be a pussy. It's not like these idiots are going to do anything.. I'm getting my Ron Paul signs out tomorrow, hope I'll see you guys out there..
Blake198 4 years ago
Good Times!! thanks for the video :)
PoopyPaul 4 years ago
Beer + RP signs = FUN. wish i was there. this in chicago?
VegasBD 4 years ago