If the Mass. vote he mentions means the election of Scott Brown, then he is sadly wrong about the ultimate motives, as Scott Brown has voted for a majority of the anti-business measures Obama has passed ever since he got into the Senate. For the rest of the video, it is perfect.
Given a choice of drinking fast acting poison or being sliced up slowly i would choice poison. Doesnt really mean i endorse poison, by all means i endorse water, or fruit juice. But i prefer poison over slowly being cut up.
But Mr Hannan does respect RP and especially over his stance of the constitution
In any of the videos ive seen ive never seen him saying that people should vote for the lesser of the two evils just that out of the very poor choice obama was a better one.
Personally im with you. The amount of people i heard, both red and blue, saying that they liked RP and thought he was the best choice but were voting for either Ob, or Mc cause they disliked the other candidate, thought he had a better chance etc is unreal.
If people voted for who they think is it would be better
Well congratulations for being persistent. I conseed the point.
I think ive watched just about every Daniel Hannan interview. In all his interviews(just like his speeches) he choices his words carefully. And in all that ive seen hes always been reluctant to endorse anyone, or even give an opinion beyond the US constitution being a sublime piece of work.
However my downfall is that i dont read his blog or newspaper articles.
Tax competition is what happens between Swiss cantons. That´s why their tax burden is one of the lowest in Europe. Of course EU-nationalists hate strong decentralization. Switzerland don´t even have a national social security system (70% voted against it two years ago)
@oblivion292 If there were one world gov't, then the powers that be could just keep raising taxes without any restraint. Never give the Power Pigs what they want. Those who crave power least deserve it.
B R I L L I A N T !!! The rational goal of this competition is to allow people escape from violence (state force) and vote with their feet for liberty. If this were to happen, states (violence) would dissapear, and we would be free...
How I wish Dan Hannan was leader of the Conservatives but sadly he's ahead of his time just now. I hope the British drop their Socialist nonsense and catch up with him soon!
Whats wrong with you? Ron Paul is awesome. You should subscribe to a few of his channels and hear what he has to say. The American media has tried to make him look like a kook but cause so many people have the internet theyre able to see his real message.
RP and Hannan stand for the same thing. Freedom for the citizen, Freedom for business, theyre against bigh government and against business getting perks.
What's wrong with me is that I've got this ache in my left elbow . I'm too young for it to be arthritis, but it does feel kind of like that. Anyway, that's not germane to this discussion, but thanks for asking!
The shortest way I can put it is that RP creeps me out. His unwillingness to deal with jihadi aggression scares me. His desire to return to the gold standard scares me almost as much as it scares every economist in the world. Plus, he's creepy. Sorry :(
Ack! That's a good thing?!? Regardless, I've heard him say on at least two occasions that he supports the weird Ron Paul. I still like him though. He's right most of the time.
Sadly, this thread will soon be silenced by ron paulians thumbing down my original comment (-6 equals squelching of speech). You'd think Paulians would be pro-speech, but you'd be wrong, as we see on any political youtube channel.
Youve got to learn something about economics and the myths of the great depression, gold standard etc. And learn whact cause the boom bust cycle.
Contary to popular(keynesian) belief its not the bust that is the problem but rather the boom. The boom is able to happen cause the fed is able to print money it does not have, lowering interest rates, which then creates asset bubble that eventually burst.
A gold standard stops these artificial booms from happening, and hence theres no bust!!
Also Ron Paul was happy to go into Afghanistan but not Iraq. He was happy about going after the people that attacked America but not happy to OCCUPY Muslim countries
If you read the 9/11 reports youll discover the attacks happened cause of American occupation of Muslim holy land!!
RP correctly states occupying more holy land will only endanger America more, and will not make it safer!!
I'm a rather hardcore Friedman economist, so get that keynesian crap out of your mind. We can both agree that it's worthless drivel.
I understand your faith in the gold standard, but it's misguided. There were countless boom/bust periods in Europe and Asia in the last few centuries, despite the fact that they were all on the gold standard. The tulip fiasco of the Netherlands is a perfect example.
500 chars at a pop is no way to hold a debate. Perhaps we should agree to disagree?
Im not 100% sure but didnt Friedman also think the fed needed to print more during the great depression?
And the great depression didnt happen on a real gold standard.
Tulip mania although i havent read much about it yet i believe it was a bit of a myth and had something to do with gold and silver coinage, and Greshams Law.
Would you agree that fractional reserve banking should end, or that money shouldnt be created as debt but rather equity?
NO! Friedman said no such thing. You should read his books/watch his videos. He's very Paulian, but not at all creepy. He's so smart he makes Thomas Sowell look mundane. Trust me, it's worth your time.
I must confess that I don't understand your comment, "...the great depression didn't happen on a real gold standard." What do you mean? I assume you are blaming the Fed as most Paulians do for everything wrong in the world today, but I'd love to understand your thinking on this issue.
I dont think RP is creepy. He appears warm and honest and i love his stance on the constitution. Its localism, as Danniel Hannan would call it that made America great.
And when it comes to the great depression ill have to look it all up again, but i believe it was a "flexiable" gold standard cause Keynes said there should be some ability to print. From july '21 - '29 the money supply increased 55% an ave of 7.3 a year. This is why gold was confiscateed and revalued from $20 to $35 p/oz cont.
had there been any real desire to stay honest to the gold standard the government wouldnt of been able to flood the market with so much money.
But i still think it would be better to go further than a gold(or any
)standard. For instance get rid of fractional reserve, and ending money being created as debt will stop us having to pay interest on it to private bankers!!
But then again RP wants to end the Fed!
Look im gonna have to run here but if you want to continue feel free to PM me
Nah, no need to pm. Let's end this. I pretty much agree with you. My only disagreements are that
1) returning to the gold standard is an impossibility that will destroy countless American lives and
2) Ron Paul is seriously creepy. He's like a modern day LaRouche. Isn't there some person out there who's not creepy and is fiscally responsible? If so, he's got my vote. Haven't found him yet though :(.
Hes nothing like LaRouche and the LaRouche cult thats built up around him.
And can you explain how and why you think the gold standard will destroy countless America lives? Not unless youre talking about poor bankers here and their families. Cause after all. The gold standard has done alright for 5000 years and hasnt destroyed anyones lives in the past.. Well except for spoiling a few peoples plans to go to war
The trouble with the "creepy" arguement is that it's the pinnacle of subjectivity. I adore Ron Paul and find him to be rather "Magoo", but not creepy.
For all we know you were molested by an uncle that looks like Ron, but that's still no reason not to support the most consistent and honest politician in DC today.
I'm not saying that to troll; my point of course is merely that your inexplicable sense of the creeps is hardly a rational argument for the rest of us.
There is some cult around Paul but he is not looking for it, unlike LaRouche. I don´t necessarily agree with everything the guy says but his point about fiscal responsability and humble foreign policy is by far the most important, and is something that most US conservatives don´t get. Even his son doesn´t get it.
You'll never be able to say that first sentence again, masflojo :).
The gold standard would require the government to own from tens of $ trillions of gold bullion or its equivalent in other commodities to cover the money already out there. I can't explain in 500 chars or less how catastrophic if would be to attempt such a thing. Just think about how it will either: get the financing; or devalue the dollar to cover.
Nope youre completly wrong. Going onto a gold standard doesnt meant government would have to buy a lot more gold. The price has been manipulated down for years and if it was allowed to rise it could be sitting anyware up to $4000 and at the min 2g.
Friedman thought the great depression was cause of deflation but studies have proven that hypothesis to be false(A. Atkeson & P. Kehoe"Deflation and Depression: Is There an Emperical Link?")
Thats not true. Also, when you say the money already out there, I assume you are talking about M1? Other than that, there are many ways the Fed could erase some of the "money" it has created without it having much effect at all on the U.S. or global economy. "Necessary controllable inflation" is a myth and inflation whether it be 1% or 10%+ destroys wealth and savings. A gold standard would strengthen the dollar and slow if not stop inflation.
It is true. I'm speaking more about the M2, though not exactly. And I'm adding in the tens of $trillions that the government has promised to pay in the next decade alone. It's not possible if you promise anyone who has a thousand bucks an ounce of gold or equivalent commodity. There's simply no way the US can get ownership of that much gold. Only options:
-Decrease the value of the dollar (say ~$1mil/oz)
-Enslave the citizens and force them to create commodities to give to the government.
He didnt support obama but said he was the preferable choice ove mccain cause he would be seen by the world in a more positive light, and less of a war monger(but look at him now)
But he prefered RP cause of his love for the constitution, sound money, and peaceful intentions
If the Mass. vote he mentions means the election of Scott Brown, then he is sadly wrong about the ultimate motives, as Scott Brown has voted for a majority of the anti-business measures Obama has passed ever since he got into the Senate. For the rest of the video, it is perfect.
darwincity 1 month ago
Socialism is slavery. Live free or die; death is not the worst of evils.
SkankinRep 1 year ago
EU is Suicidal.
3martijns 2 years ago 3
That was an intelligent argument.
gbrady3434 2 years ago 5
"said he was the preferable choice over mccain"
That, is an endorsement, my friend.
I find it an impossibility for one person to favor both Obama AND RP at the same time.
Regards
quaffer22 2 years ago
Thats a very weak endorsement.
Given a choice of drinking fast acting poison or being sliced up slowly i would choice poison. Doesnt really mean i endorse poison, by all means i endorse water, or fruit juice. But i prefer poison over slowly being cut up.
But Mr Hannan does respect RP and especially over his stance of the constitution
NicosMind 2 years ago
Hey, friend.
Let me 1st say; I like Mr. Hannan.
I have been favoriting his vids for quite some time.
Because he felt Obama was a better choice than McCain [among the ilk I despise], I never condemned him.
I and others knew Mr. Hannan, like millions across the world, would come to realize there was only one candidate to support in the 2008.
Personally, I would rather say to people that I was in favor of none of the "top-tier" candidates, than have them choose a lesser of two evils :)
quaffer22 2 years ago
In any of the videos ive seen ive never seen him saying that people should vote for the lesser of the two evils just that out of the very poor choice obama was a better one.
Personally im with you. The amount of people i heard, both red and blue, saying that they liked RP and thought he was the best choice but were voting for either Ob, or Mc cause they disliked the other candidate, thought he had a better chance etc is unreal.
If people voted for who they think is it would be better
NicosMind 2 years ago
@NicosMind
I didn't want this to turn into an argument. So, let's turn to news-print, instead.
It took but a minute to find what I read some quite some time ago, on the Telegraph:
"This is going to be the single most unpopular thing Ive ever written, but here goes. I hope Barack Obama wins on 4 November."
"Im aware that I am alienating my natural constituency. "
~ Daniel Hannan ~
My continued patronage COULD BE construed to mean the likeable MP deserves more than ONE chance :)
quaffer22 2 years ago
@myself
oops !
MEP
quaffer22 2 years ago
Well congratulations for being persistent. I conseed the point.
I think ive watched just about every Daniel Hannan interview. In all his interviews(just like his speeches) he choices his words carefully. And in all that ive seen hes always been reluctant to endorse anyone, or even give an opinion beyond the US constitution being a sublime piece of work.
However my downfall is that i dont read his blog or newspaper articles.
NicosMind 2 years ago
Thanks for the civil reply, friend.
quaffer22 2 years ago
Tax competition is what happens between Swiss cantons. That´s why their tax burden is one of the lowest in Europe. Of course EU-nationalists hate strong decentralization. Switzerland don´t even have a national social security system (70% voted against it two years ago)
xaviqaz 2 years ago 4
Wouldn't a one world government bring about one set of tax laws? Then there wouldn't be any competition. Interesting..
oblivion292 2 years ago
@oblivion292 Yes, and so the authorities could raise them as high as they wanted, since you would have nowhere to run to.
strongbadXCP 2 years ago 4
@oblivion292 If there were one world gov't, then the powers that be could just keep raising taxes without any restraint. Never give the Power Pigs what they want. Those who crave power least deserve it.
soco13466 2 years ago 5
B R I L L I A N T !!! The rational goal of this competition is to allow people escape from violence (state force) and vote with their feet for liberty. If this were to happen, states (violence) would dissapear, and we would be free...
ronpaulspanish 2 years ago 4
How I wish Dan Hannan was leader of the Conservatives but sadly he's ahead of his time just now. I hope the British drop their Socialist nonsense and catch up with him soon!
coltrane1966 2 years ago 3
I'm guessing it's no coincidence that you are allocated a time slot during lunch time Dan? Or why is there never anyone there to listen?!
I for sure would be...
Sillysod 2 years ago
leave the EU now. its the only way to get rich quick.
tucays1 2 years ago 12
Is this all about what he says.... or the fact that practically everyone is gone.
olecodjur 2 years ago
you are wasting your breath Dan, these ignorant parasitic thieves are only interested in their own wealth gains.
tucays1 2 years ago 16
This comment has received too many negative votes show
I really like this guy. It makes me very sad that he supports Ron Paul in the US.
blogegog 2 years ago
@blogegog
Whats wrong with you? Ron Paul is awesome. You should subscribe to a few of his channels and hear what he has to say. The American media has tried to make him look like a kook but cause so many people have the internet theyre able to see his real message.
RP and Hannan stand for the same thing. Freedom for the citizen, Freedom for business, theyre against bigh government and against business getting perks.
And are both very much for competition
NicosMind 2 years ago 7
What's wrong with me is that I've got this ache in my left elbow . I'm too young for it to be arthritis, but it does feel kind of like that. Anyway, that's not germane to this discussion, but thanks for asking!
The shortest way I can put it is that RP creeps me out. His unwillingness to deal with jihadi aggression scares me. His desire to return to the gold standard scares me almost as much as it scares every economist in the world. Plus, he's creepy. Sorry :(
blogegog 2 years ago
blogegog, I agree with your assessment of Ron Paul minus the creepiness.
gbrady3434 2 years ago 4
@blogegog
Actually... he supported Barack Obama.
See Mr. Hannan's video list.
He talks about it.
quaffer22 2 years ago
Ack! That's a good thing?!? Regardless, I've heard him say on at least two occasions that he supports the weird Ron Paul. I still like him though. He's right most of the time.
Sadly, this thread will soon be silenced by ron paulians thumbing down my original comment (-6 equals squelching of speech). You'd think Paulians would be pro-speech, but you'd be wrong, as we see on any political youtube channel.
blogegog 2 years ago
Youve got to learn something about economics and the myths of the great depression, gold standard etc. And learn whact cause the boom bust cycle.
Contary to popular(keynesian) belief its not the bust that is the problem but rather the boom. The boom is able to happen cause the fed is able to print money it does not have, lowering interest rates, which then creates asset bubble that eventually burst.
A gold standard stops these artificial booms from happening, and hence theres no bust!!
NicosMind 2 years ago 3
Also Ron Paul was happy to go into Afghanistan but not Iraq. He was happy about going after the people that attacked America but not happy to OCCUPY Muslim countries
If you read the 9/11 reports youll discover the attacks happened cause of American occupation of Muslim holy land!!
RP correctly states occupying more holy land will only endanger America more, and will not make it safer!!
Now doesnt that sound like common sense?
NicosMind 2 years ago 2
I'm a rather hardcore Friedman economist, so get that keynesian crap out of your mind. We can both agree that it's worthless drivel.
I understand your faith in the gold standard, but it's misguided. There were countless boom/bust periods in Europe and Asia in the last few centuries, despite the fact that they were all on the gold standard. The tulip fiasco of the Netherlands is a perfect example.
500 chars at a pop is no way to hold a debate. Perhaps we should agree to disagree?
blogegog 2 years ago
Im not 100% sure but didnt Friedman also think the fed needed to print more during the great depression?
And the great depression didnt happen on a real gold standard.
Tulip mania although i havent read much about it yet i believe it was a bit of a myth and had something to do with gold and silver coinage, and Greshams Law.
Would you agree that fractional reserve banking should end, or that money shouldnt be created as debt but rather equity?
NicosMind 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
NO! Friedman said no such thing. You should read his books/watch his videos. He's very Paulian, but not at all creepy. He's so smart he makes Thomas Sowell look mundane. Trust me, it's worth your time.
I must confess that I don't understand your comment, "...the great depression didn't happen on a real gold standard." What do you mean? I assume you are blaming the Fed as most Paulians do for everything wrong in the world today, but I'd love to understand your thinking on this issue.
blogegog 2 years ago
I dont think RP is creepy. He appears warm and honest and i love his stance on the constitution. Its localism, as Danniel Hannan would call it that made America great.
And when it comes to the great depression ill have to look it all up again, but i believe it was a "flexiable" gold standard cause Keynes said there should be some ability to print. From july '21 - '29 the money supply increased 55% an ave of 7.3 a year. This is why gold was confiscateed and revalued from $20 to $35 p/oz cont.
NicosMind 2 years ago 3
had there been any real desire to stay honest to the gold standard the government wouldnt of been able to flood the market with so much money.
But i still think it would be better to go further than a gold(or any
)standard. For instance get rid of fractional reserve, and ending money being created as debt will stop us having to pay interest on it to private bankers!!
But then again RP wants to end the Fed!
Look im gonna have to run here but if you want to continue feel free to PM me
NicosMind 2 years ago
Nah, no need to pm. Let's end this. I pretty much agree with you. My only disagreements are that
1) returning to the gold standard is an impossibility that will destroy countless American lives and
2) Ron Paul is seriously creepy. He's like a modern day LaRouche. Isn't there some person out there who's not creepy and is fiscally responsible? If so, he's got my vote. Haven't found him yet though :(.
blogegog 2 years ago
Hes nothing like LaRouche and the LaRouche cult thats built up around him.
And can you explain how and why you think the gold standard will destroy countless America lives? Not unless youre talking about poor bankers here and their families. Cause after all. The gold standard has done alright for 5000 years and hasnt destroyed anyones lives in the past.. Well except for spoiling a few peoples plans to go to war
NicosMind 2 years ago 2
The trouble with the "creepy" arguement is that it's the pinnacle of subjectivity. I adore Ron Paul and find him to be rather "Magoo", but not creepy.
For all we know you were molested by an uncle that looks like Ron, but that's still no reason not to support the most consistent and honest politician in DC today.
I'm not saying that to troll; my point of course is merely that your inexplicable sense of the creeps is hardly a rational argument for the rest of us.
Oh yes, and Hannan rocks.
032125 2 years ago 3
Good point.
blogegog 2 years ago
There is some cult around Paul but he is not looking for it, unlike LaRouche. I don´t necessarily agree with everything the guy says but his point about fiscal responsability and humble foreign policy is by far the most important, and is something that most US conservatives don´t get. Even his son doesn´t get it.
xaviqaz 2 years ago
@blogegog
I've never heard anyone ever, not even Ron Paul critics call him creepy.
I would like to hear you back up your completely baseless claim that a gold standard would ruin lives.
masflojo 2 years ago
You'll never be able to say that first sentence again, masflojo :).
The gold standard would require the government to own from tens of $ trillions of gold bullion or its equivalent in other commodities to cover the money already out there. I can't explain in 500 chars or less how catastrophic if would be to attempt such a thing. Just think about how it will either: get the financing; or devalue the dollar to cover.
blogegog 2 years ago
@blogegog
Nope youre completly wrong. Going onto a gold standard doesnt meant government would have to buy a lot more gold. The price has been manipulated down for years and if it was allowed to rise it could be sitting anyware up to $4000 and at the min 2g.
Friedman thought the great depression was cause of deflation but studies have proven that hypothesis to be false(A. Atkeson & P. Kehoe"Deflation and Depression: Is There an Emperical Link?")
500chars is hard. Not impossible
NicosMind 2 years ago
@blogegog
Thats not true. Also, when you say the money already out there, I assume you are talking about M1? Other than that, there are many ways the Fed could erase some of the "money" it has created without it having much effect at all on the U.S. or global economy. "Necessary controllable inflation" is a myth and inflation whether it be 1% or 10%+ destroys wealth and savings. A gold standard would strengthen the dollar and slow if not stop inflation.
masflojo 2 years ago
It is true. I'm speaking more about the M2, though not exactly. And I'm adding in the tens of $trillions that the government has promised to pay in the next decade alone. It's not possible if you promise anyone who has a thousand bucks an ounce of gold or equivalent commodity. There's simply no way the US can get ownership of that much gold. Only options:
-Decrease the value of the dollar (say ~$1mil/oz)
-Enslave the citizens and force them to create commodities to give to the government.
blogegog 2 years ago
Change your options to "show all".
Buffalo122333 2 years ago
Ooh cool! Never noticed that. Thx much.
blogegog 2 years ago
He didnt support obama but said he was the preferable choice ove mccain cause he would be seen by the world in a more positive light, and less of a war monger(but look at him now)
But he prefered RP cause of his love for the constitution, sound money, and peaceful intentions
NicosMind 2 years ago