So excise and customs taxes are justifiable and constitutionally permitted, but income taxes are not? That makes no sense. Either taxes are "equivalent to stealing" or they're not. You can't reasonably be categorically against one kind of tax on the grounds that it's "stealing" and then suggest other kinds of taxes as a legitimate way to fund the government, even if you do propose to simultaneously reduce various welfare programs and the power and influence of the military-industrial complex.
PEOPLE NEED TO SWITCH PARTIES 12 WEEKS IN ADVANCE OF THE PRIMARIES IN MOST STATES.
IF YOU DO NOT SWITCH IN TIME YOU CANNOT VOTE IN PRIMARY.
IF YOU ARE NOT REGISTERED REPUBLICAN YOU CANNOT VOTE IN PRIMARY.
IF RON PAUL DOES NOT WIN PRIMARY, NO GENERAL ELECTION ! REGISTER AS A REPUBLICAN. FIND OUT WHEN YOUR STATE HAS PRIMARIES. FIND OUT WHERE AND VOTE VOTE VOTE ! PLEASE !
WE NEED EVERY LAST VOTE ! Copy and paste this everywhere
Paul is so honest. Whatever you think of him, his honesty and consistency cannot be legitimately questioned by any intellectually honest person. At the very least his presence in the political scene is refreshing.
@385Mercedes Not exactly. Supply side economics means any action that is taken to make it easier for suppliers to supply products to the market, could be looser regulations, corporate tax cuts, loosened labour laws, even better public education programmes would be a supply side theory.
Trickle down economics is a theory based on one facet of SSE.
LoL. Rather disingenuous don't you think. Him disagreeing on when life begins doesn't equate to him not believing in "Self ownership and people having power over their own body". Everything he believes in proves that he does, he simply doesn't agree life starts weeks in to a pregnancy, he believes it starts at conception.
@23lFrench What the hell are you talking about? There is no point in this video (or others) where he even mentions taking your control away from you. On the state level, you can easily find like thinkers and form together to change state legislation(which he allows).
If you mean the Unions, as it is right now, they're getting a 'special treatment' in law, above that of other 'organized groups' like other movements of people. They're getting special treatment, above their rights.
@23lFrench well since he believes that life begins at conception he thinks that a fetus is a human and that abortion is murder. i totally disagree with that but with that view his stance on abortion doesn't contradict his libertarian views.
also Ron Paul mentions that pre-1913, we created revenue through an excise tax. research what an excise tax is Paultard. you are pro-excise taxes obviously.
Ron Paul is the best chance we have toward prosperity and freedom. Interestingly though Cenk became a Liberal because of Reagan and yet Ron Paul is a Milton Freidman economist who was an unofficial adviser and on the Economic Policy Advisory Board during the Reagan administration. Go figure.
@NanoPlinket Milton Friedman = trickledown. Yes, let's have lots of prosperity for the multi-millionaires!! Let's eat the crumbs that fall from their tables!!
00:38 says it all. Ron Paul is a big oil whore, and then tries to reword what a subsidy is to make it more palatable (it's a government handout to big oil, tax break sounds better). green energy cannot get one leg up on an oil company that is first making money from the war which Ron Paul is supposedly against. wake up Paultards. WAKE UP! he is not your savior. he's a slave to the BIG OIL machine!
@LouieDaProtectionist: Your logic is flawed. Defense contractors have made immense profits from the wars in the Middle East, and Ron Paul wants to end all of the wars. He is completely antithetical to any corrupt politician. He wants to end the fed, all of the wars and the drug war, cut 5 gov. departments and slash spending, and actually follow the Constitution, eliminating the decades worth of effort put into unconstitutional things like TSA, Patriot Act, NDAA. A slave lol
@getcruunkk hey MORON, we all want to end the TSA and the Patriot Act (socialists included). Wake the f**k up Paultard! economic freedom DOES NOT equal personal liberty. wake UP and SHUT UP!
@Zalahblue economic liberties apply mostly to multinational corporations, not you and me. we don't spew massive amounts of pollution into the air. Paul is a corporatist, but hides behind the word freedom. the others are worse than him, but he isn't a savior for this messed up system.
@LouieDaProtectionist bullshit. I have the same rights to 'Economics Liberty' as anyone else. Every Business owner does. Ron Paul Explained 'Why' he agreed with 'TAX BREAKS' What exactly is a 'Tax Break'? The Government 'ALLOWING' a company to keep their 'OWN' money. Not a damn thing wrong with that.
@Zalahblue Absolutely :). Another 'caveat' to that is with just trade taxes, companies spend more, because not only are they spending more, but they revolve around spending most of their income on trade. If you remove the income tax from BOTH of us, companies get taxed(via trade) at the % that we 'consumers' often cry that they should have.
i have never seen a saner man in today's politics than Dr. Paul. I am from India and I wish sanity prevails in the US. We here are fighting against corruption too :)
@jesushatesyoutoo: ....um, no. His argument for abortion is that he thinks we should protect our unalienable rights. Life is one of these, and his belief is that an aborted baby is still alive. His reasoning for this is witnessing a late abortion during his career as a physician, and seeing that the baby was crying and breathing. Abortion is a touchy issue though, and people tend to disagree on it, but IMO it's practically a non-issue at this point in our history.
You won't like Ron Paul until you do your research. Find out what really caused the housing crash, the debt crisis, the massive income inequality.
The government is a slave to the rich and powerful. And so is every presidential candidate except Ron Paul. Especially Obama, that corporate owned scumbag.
Maybe if you actually had some clients you wouldn't be on YouTube arguing with a 20 year old on whether the Fed prints money. Which they do and ive presented a case in which they do and sorry, you've lost the argument.
It don't matter HOW MUCH you disagree with that man, you can not deny he is one of the only politicians that actually stands for what he believes and has integrity.
@zebbedi Stupid? really? When hes the only one who is actually for ending the wars, the imperialism, the actually government corruption and actually fix the economy. How can you listen to that and say stupid? you can disagree with him but hes not spinning this stuff out of thin air he has reasons to back up what he is saying. and if he is a liar hes been "lying" the same way ever since he started in politics.
@BloodJunkie11 Ron Paul doesn't back up anything he says so why should I? He makes ludicrously unrealistic proposals. Like ending the FED, IRS and returning to the gold standard. These are not achievable goals, they are just rhetoric.
@zebbedi So a man with the economic understanding of a twelve year old correctly predicted the economic crises we are currently going through around a decade before they happened, while mainstream (Keynesian) economists couldn't predict it a week beforehand?
@Freek314 He didn't predict it. He moaned about the same things he was always moaning about. A lot of Keynesian economists actually predicted the crisis and stated the specifics of the situation, unlike Ron Paul.
@zebbedi Ron Paul predicted the housing crisis, and explained that it was the federal reserve's and fannie mae/freddie mac's fault years before it happened. Keynesians are clueless.
@zebbedi ron paul goes for the 'it is all the governments fault and the feds fault' line. Basically he wants to reduce the entire political debate on everything into an argument about how everything bad comes from government and everything good comes from the free market.
@TheJamesvanmiert You are exactly right. Basically all he wants is deregulation. Any politician who argues for deregulation is doing so because that's what their donors want.
@zebbedi Way to be ignorant- Ron Paul's number one donor is active duty military. Almost all of his donations come from individuals; he doesn't get half a million from Goldman Sachs like Romney. The problem is that you don't understand how the monetary system works so you don't know how it is the root of many of our problems
@johnsurs22 You're a hypocrite. Accusing me of ignorance when it is you who hasn't done their research. Go to the OpenSecrets website and check the donation information. About half of Ron Paul's donations come from individuals, the same percentage as Obama and many other candidates.
Ron Paul also receives heavy donations from Military contractors, Oil companies and investment firms. Like many other Republicans.
@zebbedi Nice try- your website leads me to see that Ron Paul receives 99% of his contributions from individual donors. He only receives 1% of his contributions from all other sources including the military. Yes this 1% includes the "oil company" Clean Gas and the "investment firm" Beeland Enterprises. In 2008, out of millions raised, the top three were all under 100,000 and were the Army, Navy, and Air Force- NO MILITARY CONTRACTORS.
@johnsurs22 Ok since you are obviously retarded I will break it down for you. The pie chart at the bottom of candidate's pages is Campaign committee only and doesn't include PAC contributions (which is where all of the business contributions come from).
Here is the link that tells you about his military contractor contributions. (also opensecrets website)....
@zebbedi What are you talking about? I looked at everything including PAC donations. There is nothing there; now you are just lying. Your military contractors website doesn't work, and exactly why would he receive money from military contractors if he wants to end the wars?
@johnsurs22 It does work but you are too retarded to work out how to convert the link. Think of how a bit.ly link works and replace the (dot) with an actual dot. Don't accuse people of lying when you are too dumb to be able to work out simple things.
@zebbedi No, lowerface "L"s look the same as capitalized "I"s on this comment box, so stop being rude. Maybe you should give a less ambiguous link. Now learn to read. DEFENSE contractors have made a total donation of 10900 out of millions. So that's not MILITARY like you said and that's less than 1% of his donations. You linked an article that praises Paul for his small donor and retiree contributions, so it looks to me like you are a homer that sees what you want to see.
@zebbedi I just checked the link, and yes it worked. Also, those are EMPLOYEES of military contractors, not the contractors themselves. And take a look at Ron Paul's dossier in contrast to Obama's; by that I mean, take a look at his corporate contributors versus Ron Paul's. You'll find next to nothing coming from big business to Ron Paul.
@Reghedable Actually both Obama and Paul receive roughly 50% of their donations from individual contributors. They have the same amount of corporate donations. Obama's comes mainly from Wall street, Paul's is a bit more diversified. These employees of Lockheed Martin and UT are not going to be janitors, there are specialist workers who have an interest in the defence industry, think about it.
@zebbedi Where'd you read this? And it is illegal for businesses to have their employees vote for the business's interest. Furthermore, why would it further any defense contractor to support an anti-war president?
@Reghedable Of course it's illegal. I'm saying they are giving money to their employees to give to Paul but rather 'helping' them to decide which candidates would be best for their industry and therefore themselves.
It wouldn't help them to support and anti-war candidate. That's exactly my point. I'm only speculating on this issue and isn't really why I have a problem with Ron Paul.
It just seems odd. Maybe it's his vote for an end to no bid contracts that gains support from some DC's.
@zebbedi I think if we use Occam's razor in this discussion we'd come to the conclusion that maybe its just the personal preference of the employees, rather than carefully planned coercion on the part of the corporation. And besides, the whole point of the MIC is to support warmongers which ups defense spending, and no matter how we look at it, Ron Paul wants to end foreign interventionism. You can't make that loss of profits up.
@Reghedable I can only infer about his honesty on that issue as his voting record generally backs it up, like I said that's not my problem with Paul and I was merely pointing it out. I'll concede.
Other things bother me, like his pro life stance. It's a direct contradiction to the 1st amendment (because he is against it on religious grounds) and from a candidate who is supposedly an avid constitutionalist.
@zebbedi I agree with you on the pro-life stance, but I think that issue is relatively minor. I'm more concerned with his economic policy, which I generally agree with (I disagree with going back to the gold standard and I don't have a problem with single payer healthcare systems) but I noticed your writeup about Keynesian economists predicting the crash. Even so, it doesn't change the underlying factors responsible for the crash.
@Reghedable He doesn't know anything about economics. As a Chartered accountant I find him ridiculous. He talks ideologically about ending your central bank but he knows that isn't possible. The Federal Reserve isn't the enemy, it's Wall streets influence on the Fed that causes problems.
Why didn't Ron Paul vote for the repeal of Glass Steagal? That's another thing that baffles me, he might have a perfectly good excuse but I find it odd that he didn't notice the problems it would cause.
@zebbedi Which are, as I understand it, federal interference in the housing market via interest rate limits while rising inflation made low interest rates unprofitable. The reason for the inflation is due to the net deficit in taxes collected versus payments needed for various government agencies. They then borrow from banks and other countries, and in order to pay this off the Fed inflates the US dollar to devalue the debt and interest it owes.
@Reghedable That's incorrect. It was a lack of Federal interference that caused the crash and the repeal of Glass Steagal.
Your definition of inflation is also completely wrong, what you have described is Government deficit/surplus. The Fed is not responsible for rampant inflation. The Fed is privately owned and they are not the ones borrowing the money.
It seems to me that you have been listening to too much disinformation.
@zebbedi They are not borrowing money, no. But they do print money. The federal reserve is the central bank of the United States, is it not? Furthermore, inflation as I know it is: The printing of paper money to devalue one's currency worth vs. products, with the most dramatic example of it seen in Zimbabwe, with something like 17 thousand percent inflation at one point or something? And banks, including the Fed, have the rights to print money, afaik.
@Reghedable They do not print money. The Bureau of Engraving and printing does. They are not responsible for the overall increase in money supply either, commercial banks are responsible for that. A central bank's primary goals are too control inflation and regulate banks. The key point here is that they 'control' inflation, inflation is needed to grow an economy but too much can be harmful to people, central banks try to find an equilibrium. The Zimbabwe hyperinflation was different.
@zebbedi Quote: "They do not print money." A few sentences later, Quote: "A central bank's Goals are to control inflation." Technically they don't print it themselves there, yes.. But they have control over the money supply. Google the fed please. You do know what inflation is right?
@NecessariusVerum I don't need to Google the Fed. I wrote my thesis on the Federal Reserve system.They DO NOT print money and they DO control inflation. There is no contradiction or ambiguity in what I said.
Inflation is the phenomenon of raising prices caused by an excess of cash over supply. A Central banks most common policy is to reduce inflation, they suck money out of the economy. The Fed usually sells T-bills on behalf of the Treasury to achieve this.
@zebbedi Add inflation and artificially lowered interest rates to comparatively lax credit regulations and you have banks lending to everyone and their dog to keep themselves afloat.
@zebbedi The constitution doesn't prohibit that, it is a personal belief. Also, the reason he is still constitutional is because he does not want to impose his belief on others, he wants people to decide for themselves through the state.
@NecessariusVerum American ignorance is astounding. You don't even know the basic amendments of your own constitution.
Read the First Amendment. Or even better, research some landmark cases.I suggest Lemon vs Kurtzman.I do so because it invented what is now known as the lemon test.
@zebbedi If you werent so bitter about me scolding on your fallacy than maybe you could comprehend what I said about Ron Paul and his belief and understand the comment without being an asshole but, thats ok.Also, you just contradicted yourself again, if you wrote a thesis then your thesis is inert. If you can't see how you contradicted yourself in that post then I should stop trying to communicate with you because your obviously ignorantly arrogant and think you know everything.You know nothing.
@NecessariusVerum Stop telling me that I made a contradiction and point it out. Quote my posts and show me the contradiction. You're hypocrisy is amusing. You lambasted me for insults yet have only thrown insults my way. I am yet to see any substance from you. Drop the act, stop being so sensitive and get topical.
@zebbedi I wish I could stop telling you what you made a contradiction to but you keep on doing it. Also, I don't know if you read what you write, obviously you don't so ill quote you again " American ignorance is astounding. You don't even know the basic amendments of your own constitution." So who was the first to insult? I have been topical, on the Fed, and then you spew something at me about American ignorance. I think you are projecting your attitude onto me. I think you need to read more.
@NecessariusVerum I challenged you to give one example of me contradicting myself and despite the fact that you claim that there were many you failed to name one. Yes, I did insult you. I still am insulting you but I'm not the person preaching about the perils of ad hominems over substance. I'm not your friend and I don't like you.
Once again you gave nothing to debate. You were completely off topic and it's pointless to try and continue.
@zebbedi You are a complete buffoon. Again stop trying to project your idiocy onto me. If you cant see the contradiction. "The fed doesn't print money" and "They control inflation." There is nothing else left to say. I never said you were my friend, and obviously you don't like people who know what they are talking about considering you don't.
@NecessariusVerum I know your not well educated so I'll try to go slowly. That isn't a contradiction. The Bureau of Engraving and Printing prints money, the Federal Reserve does not. The Federal Reserve do however control inflation.
They control inflation in a variety of ways. Like dealing in Government T-Bills on the secondary market, adjusting the interbank lending rate or adjusting the reserve requirement for commercial banks.
@zebbedi So... Basically you are arguing semantics? You argue strictly that the fed doesn't print the money yet they control how much money aught to be printed... Herp.. Derp.. Thats why YOU are wrong here.
@NecessariusVerum No, they don't make that decision either. Commercial banks have a reserve account with the Federal Reserve. They can ask for a portion of this reserve to be printed into 'real' cash and swapped for more digital money. The Federal Reserve arranges this operation with the Bureau of Engraving and Printing. They neither print the money or make the decision to print the money.
@zebbedi What happens when a currency is inflated? I'll answer that one for you so you wont have to google it and make it seem like you know something. WHEN THERE IS TOO MUCH OF IT. So when the fed controls, lets say it together INFLATION, what they do is tell the printing press. "HEY, WE NEED MORE MONEY MAKE SOME." Yes you are correct on how the fed manages interest rates etc but you are arguing nothing, because you dont know what you are talking about.
@NecessariusVerum You are making a complete fool of yourself. Saying that the Fed just prints money when more money is need is ridiculous on many levels. Firstly they wouldn't need to print it, as digital money would suffice. Secondly, who are they going to give the money to? They don't just just ask for it to be printed and hand it out on the streets you cretin.
@zebbedi Its a little thing called inflation that you need to make yourself fond of, go ahead and google it like everything else son. Ill give you time. Saying the fed prints money is a way to assess their power in our monetary policy. They have the power to create money out of thin air, which basically means they can print money sorry to break it to you but thats the way it is. Your lack of understanding of the big picture is the problem here.
@NecessariusVerum I have an MSc in Economics from Warwick Business School and I'm a Chartered Accountant. I understand this far more than you do. I think the problem here is (what you have been projecting on me) is that you are receiving your information from Google searches rather than the the books and Professors that taught me.
The Federal Reserve rarely create money out of thin air. When they do they create a specialised loan account that has to be repaid, effectively erasing the new money.
@NecessariusVerum That's not true.Most of you uneducated ignorant Americans that parade the internet spouting erroneous views are of the belief that the Fed prints actual cash and then charges the U.S government for the service. This is why I approached it literally.
Even so, the Fed is not responsible for the overall increase in money supply. That lies with the commercial banks . The Fed simply manages inflation.
@zebbedi "The Federal Reserve orders new currency from the Bureau of Engraving and Printing, which produces the appropriate denominations and ships them directly to the Reserve Banks. Each note costs about four cents to produce, though the cost varies slightly by denomination." I couldn't convince you without quotes thought id try it with quotes. It's weird since they order money to be printed. Saying the fed is not responsible for the money printed is absolutely not true.
@NecessariusVerum The Federal Reserve purchases the cash from the Bureau of Engraving and Printing. The Fed is a privately owned bank and the BoE&P is a government department.
I'm not sure why you are finding this difficult to understand. The Fed is the intermediary between the BoE&P and commercial banks essentially.
@zebbedi The reason why we have so much inflation is because of the fed keeping interest rates artificially low as you know, so then the fed allows banks to borrow money at an extremely low rate, which creates unsound credit and in result creates new money out of thin air. Then most of that money needs to be printed and distributed to the various banks. You being on your high horse and wanting to disagree with everything makes you look like an idiot because you are arguing where money comes from
@NecessariusVerum So now you agree that the Fed controls inflation and it doesn't involve printing money. The interest rate you refer to is interbank, which means that commercial banks lend money to each other at this rate. This has nothing to do with printing money. So you can try and frame it any way you like but unfortunately you are just wrong.
@zebbedi And by saying "the fed doesnt print money. This institution controlled by the fed does." Is completely retarded. And until you can actually learn something I have no reason to exchange discourse with someone so mundane and illogical they would argue about whether our central bank controls our MONEY SUPPLY. If you have 0% interest rates but you have 0% savings, how do you think we can hand out money? By-printing-more-credit, they deliver this credit to the banks. Go back to school.
@NecessariusVerum It's not retarded. The whole point of your argument was that the Federal Reserve was printing money and injecting it into the economy. This simply isn't true as the printed money only replaces old money or digital money.
Your last point didn't make any sense. You are clutching at straws to try and deliver an argument but you just don't understand.
@zebbedi I never said the federal reserve didn't control inflation. Did I ever disagree with you on that? No. My point is still valid and trumps your argument because I have just presented that the fed can initiate printing from the bureau. And to argue that the fed doesn't pump money into the economy shows that you have no idea how our monetary system works. Or what inflation is. I can frame it any way I was to and the fed still controls the money supply IE how much money we have.
@NecessariusVerum You are one of the most dense people I have ever encountered. I said that you now agree that the Fed controls inflation without printing money. That was your original assertion and I debunked it. The Fed doesn't pump large amounts of money into the economy (exception of QE), new money is created mainly via commercial banks lending out deposits. I've given you the correct definition of inflation several times.
@zebbed You didn't debunk anything. The Fed creates money whether you like it or not, sometimes they order the printing that's a simple fact. You cant debunk facts imbecile. Also you haven't given me correction on inflation at all, because for me to be corrected I have to be wrong. I don't know why you keep telling yourself that I am wrong when I am right, not a strategy thats going to work.
@zebbedi I have tried to explain to you what goes on in my country but I guess you are too busy thinking your smarter than Americans because he disagrees with your "educated" assessments. Just stay where you are we don't need ANY MORE ignorance here in America. you would defiantly contribute.
@zebbedi If you really had a job you wouldn't need to prove your ignorance here. Tool. Also thanks for trying to shoot an insult, McDonalds, so original.
@NecessariusVerum "If you really had a job you wouldn't need to prove your ignorance here." Not only is that illogical but it's also a tacit admission that you are unemployed. I work for myself and spend a lot on flights, which is why I end up awake at all sorts of hours. What's your excuse?
@zebbedi Like I said maybe if you weren't doing such a bad job at your work you wouldn't be on youtube. Instead you would be doing something contructive like what you say you do. But I am guessing you probably don't and try to sound more legitimate which is so sad.
@NecessariusVerum Seriously my friend, I probably made more this year then you ever will. I shall leave you to your childish ramblings now as nothing constructive or even interesting can be drawn from you. Good luck with your life, you are going to need it with that attitude.
@zebbedi I don't need an excuse, I did not say I am a business person which has clients. Which if they knew how ignorant you were probably wouldn't be consulting with you.
@zebbedi What I meant by that is, if I was lets say, an investor. I would'nt be wasting my time talking to some person bickering back and forth about practices or policy. I would have the confidence to not be such a douche bag and not engage in such discourse with everyone on YouTube and dis Ron Paul and BE WRONG about his stances. Stay out of our country, we need less people like you.
@zebbedi Be a coward and leave me with my victory. That I out debated an "educated", "successful" business man. Damn i'm so good. Sorry for your loss, better luck next time.
@zebbedi So when the fed tells the printing press how much money to print they aren't printing money? Huh...Weird. IF you can't see the facts right in front of you don't bother me writing me back with your none sense. People like you come onto YouTube spouting your bullshit that is totally irrelevant to anything constructive and fundamentally wrong. To say that the fed; the controller of our monetary system doesn't influence money creation, is completely idiotic. Get out of here.
@NecessariusVerum Being facetious doesn't give you an argument. The Fed literally doesn't print money, neither do they decide the size of the order of printed money or own any piece of the department that prints the money. That makes the answer to the question 'Does the Fed print money?' a resounding NO.
@NecessariusVerum "To say that the fed; the controller of our monetary system doesn't influence money creation, is completely idiotic"
I never said that. I have explained numerous times what the Fed does in terms of inflationary measures. You have nothing of substance to say, you only know insults and ad hominems. You are constantly trying to skew my words and it's rather childish. Just admit that you don't have a clue what you are talking about.
@zebbedi You've explained numerous times how semantic oriented your arguments are. You are not teaching me anything I don't know already. I have about the same clue you have and did not have to go to school and get a degree to show you. It's sad that someone with a "degree" is preaching to someone who knows just about as much or more than you do. Your blatant misunderstanding of Ron Pauls vote on glass steagal shows that you cannot comprehend when you read. Also our discourse has shown this.
@NecessariusVerum If you say so you deluded fool. I'll go back to my daily work within this field. Good luck going back to McDonalds or wherever you work.
@zebbedi And speaking of substance, getting on peoples cases about whether the Fed prints money is completely lacks any substance because they are not wrong to generally think that. You are wrong for spreading your none sense and trying to make people look bad with your sudo education.
@zebbedi Also if you payed attention to the context of the issue you would see that "printing money" is basically an euphemism, saying that the fed has control over how much money we have and we need to rework this fiat system. And if we cant come to a consensus on semantics, I hope we could come to one with going back to a sound currency.
@zebbedi When you increase the money supply and you don't have enough dollars to match the demand in paper money supply (implying of course not all money is in paper form you dumb shit) what does the printing press do? THEY PRINT THE MONEY. Oh my god you are such a fucking tool its not even funny anymore.
@NecessariusVerum What are you talking about? That doesn't make sense. You can call me all of the names under the sun that won't change the fact that you don't understand. I'm willing to explain it all to you, in great detail, but you have to first drop these silly ideas that you have been hearing on the internet.
The next step for Ron Paul and his "Libertarian" ideals is to say that nobody can arrest you and take your freedom. Everybody should just buy a gun and defend themselves. His ideas are stupid and his proposals are unrealistic.
@truevoice08 I'm not into reading propaganda pieces from blog sites. I read both articles and neither are relevant to our conversation. The simple fact financially is that Bush started with a surplus and instead of using it to further decrease your national debt he turned it into a deficit by starting expensive wars and giving tax break to millionaires and billionaires.
@truevoice08 Corporations do need to be taxed and regulated. Libertarianism doesn't exist, it's just an idea. An idea that was created by the echo chambers of the Koch Brothers so that they could push for less regulation. Corporations don't own your government, they have an influence.
@zebbedi Yeah, the Koch brothers are corrupting our minds with libertarian propaganda. I'd rather be indoctrinated by the likes of billionaires George Soros and Ted Turner with their leftist media.
@truevoice08 I don't get my information from any left wing media. I'm not American so I don't get to see a lot of American news. I'm basing my comments on facts. The Cato Institute (of which Charles Koch is Chairman) started the Libertarian movement. They published the 'Libertarian Review' magazine, a magazine that ran in the late 70's and early 80's. The Koch brothers have spent over $350 million on Lobbying, think tanks and echo chambers. My god, some of you Americans are blind to facts.
@zebbedi I know about the history of libertarianism much better than you do, kid. The fact that a lot of beltway libertarianism is funded by Koch doesn't discredit the political philosophy. You need to actually address the arguments in order to refute it. Though I doubt you can even identify the positions of libertarians w/o misrepresenting them. That goes the same way for socialism. I can't refute socialists by associating them w/o Soros. That's basic fallacy of association on your part.
@truevoice08 The fact that the Koch brothers are funding it completely undermines it. They are self serving and always will be. Association is a perfect basis to refute an argument and is used in every court of law in the world. I based my argument in fact and you hypocritically challenged my comment by countering with absolutely no facts, you simply called my argument invalid and claimed to know more about libertarianism then I do. The logical starting point would have been to defend the Kochs
@truevoice08 I don't need to. I'm aware of all kinds of fallacious argument. This is not a generalisation based on association it's a direct link between a new breed of problem and 2 nefarious characters that funded it. I'm not talking about the public that follow the ideology but rather the reason for it's reinvention and it's use by particular people as a political tool.
@zebbedi You've shown yourself to be an idiot. You haven't done anything but assume the libertarian ideology is wrong because the Koch brothers are promoting it. Hey, why don't we just eschew economic freedom and sic more regulations and taxes on businesses (eat the rich!) , do another round of quantitative easing , and rake up tariffs on Chinese imports (how dare they offer us cheap and well-made products!). While we're at it, let's donate our children and vital organs to the treasury as well!
@truevoice08 No, you are the idiot for not reading my words. I made an obvious distinction between the public who follow the ideology and the intentions of the people who need their vote. 'Free market' capitalism won't work (that much is obvious to anyone with half a brain cell) but that does not make the followers bad people, just a bit dumb. Lack of education , ignorance and a MSM that brainwashes people is what leads to this type of thinking.
@pokrrgod Your comment doesn't make any sense. How much money a 18 year old save from taxes? a shit
How much money is he gonna earn with no education? A shit
Quote: Corrupted CEOs or needless wars. The government is fucking us right now.
Really? When the government transform into a living thing that we can blame him? Or the ppl that run the government are fucking us? WHICH ARE THE CORPORATION!
If you cant think at least dont open your mouth to repeat what all the idiots say, go watch FOXnews
So what Dr. Paul is saying in a nutshell is he believes is in a survival of the fittest economic state? A state in which the rich and powerful will suddenly become forced to giving a fair wage and living standard to all in the perfect equalibrium of a free market society?
@capt251978 If you are really interested in Paul's ideas read his book "Liberty Defined" or Thomas Woods' "Rollback". Have the initiative. A discussion on youtube isn't very productive.
The war on drugs in another one of those misunderstood issues. He talks about ending federal prohobition of all drugs, even heroin. That's on a federal level though. There's no reason why states couldn't or wouldn't still have something like heroin banned. Saying he is pro drug wiil turn conservatives against him just like saying he doesn't want you to get a federal grant for college will turn liberals against him. It's all about the role of federal vs the role of the states.
Most people misunderstand Ron Paul on many issues. Abortion is an example. He is pro life but he opposes federal laws banning it. He would support local and state laws though. That's where he stands on many issues, like education. Yes, he doesn't think the federal government should have anything to so with it but that doesn't mean he thinks states should or would wash their hands of it. It's not the federal governments job. Just as it's not their job to tell a state it can/can't allow abortions
Great interview Cenk. Bravo.
HansonjSolo 3 days ago
So excise and customs taxes are justifiable and constitutionally permitted, but income taxes are not? That makes no sense. Either taxes are "equivalent to stealing" or they're not. You can't reasonably be categorically against one kind of tax on the grounds that it's "stealing" and then suggest other kinds of taxes as a legitimate way to fund the government, even if you do propose to simultaneously reduce various welfare programs and the power and influence of the military-industrial complex.
03761363537323666 3 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Need more helpful info about tax refund? Take a look to this video " Win an iPad3 with The Tax Plan Group "
TaxPlanGroup 1 week ago
Did some douche in comments really call Dr Ron Paul 'weak'?
After 30 years in Congress not selling out, military service and a gyn.. delivery thousands of babies he is anything but weak.
I think he meant to say Ron Paul is kind, intelligent and wise.
AikenBruce 1 week ago
ron paul 2012! from the UK
LtChris909 2 weeks ago
Ron Paul/scott walker 2012
desola7ion 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
It's not enough to say "Vote Ron Paul"
PEOPLE NEED TO SWITCH PARTIES 12 WEEKS IN ADVANCE OF THE PRIMARIES IN MOST STATES.
IF YOU DO NOT SWITCH IN TIME YOU CANNOT VOTE IN PRIMARY.
IF YOU ARE NOT REGISTERED REPUBLICAN YOU CANNOT VOTE IN PRIMARY.
IF RON PAUL DOES NOT WIN PRIMARY, NO GENERAL ELECTION ! REGISTER AS A REPUBLICAN. FIND OUT WHEN YOUR STATE HAS PRIMARIES. FIND OUT WHERE AND VOTE VOTE VOTE ! PLEASE !
WE NEED EVERY LAST VOTE ! Copy and paste this everywhere
Weedgrindr 1 month ago
Uygur's double chin is probably the reason why he didn't get the 6 PM slot he looks like Jabba the Hut with that homoerotic makeup on.
Deliverance02x 1 month ago
he is a double minded man. works both sides.
jay4271979 1 month ago
Paul is so honest. Whatever you think of him, his honesty and consistency cannot be legitimately questioned by any intellectually honest person. At the very least his presence in the political scene is refreshing.
TheFoadolfat 1 month ago
ZERO taxes!!!
jblitz59 1 month ago
Ron Paul is bat shit crazy.
chewbaccajoe 1 month ago
@chewbaccajoe
Why?.
bluesrockfan36 1 month ago
cenk is such a weak interviewer..
willsbanana 2 months ago
@willsbanana Weak because he allows the person to finish his thought and not interrupt them?
notinwater 2 months ago 27
@notinwater No..,.weak because of his distorted world view and limited intellect.
chewbaccajoe 1 month ago
@chewbaccajoe cenk is 1000 times smarter than you. what world do you live in?
patarfuyfuy 1 month ago 5
@patarfuyfuy I was talking about Ron Paul being weak, not Cenk. And how is he 1000 times smarter than me? lol
chewbaccajoe 1 month ago
@notinwater I guess he rathers how Oreilly does it.
wilsonsmanz 2 weeks ago
Just to clarify- "supply-side"= Trickle-down by any other name.
385Mercedes 2 months ago
@385Mercedes Not exactly. Supply side economics means any action that is taken to make it easier for suppliers to supply products to the market, could be looser regulations, corporate tax cuts, loosened labour laws, even better public education programmes would be a supply side theory.
Trickle down economics is a theory based on one facet of SSE.
N330AA 2 weeks ago
He is a Classic Liberal.
23lFrench 2 months ago
Ron Paul isn't even a real Libertarian. He doesn't believe in Self ownership and people having power over their own body.
23lFrench 2 months ago
@23lFrench
LoL. Rather disingenuous don't you think. Him disagreeing on when life begins doesn't equate to him not believing in "Self ownership and people having power over their own body". Everything he believes in proves that he does, he simply doesn't agree life starts weeks in to a pregnancy, he believes it starts at conception.
Not really an honest comment IMO.
Theobrothers 2 months ago
@23lFrench Bullshit.
SvenBenson 2 months ago in playlist ron paul
@23lFrench What the hell are you talking about? There is no point in this video (or others) where he even mentions taking your control away from you. On the state level, you can easily find like thinkers and form together to change state legislation(which he allows).
If you mean the Unions, as it is right now, they're getting a 'special treatment' in law, above that of other 'organized groups' like other movements of people. They're getting special treatment, above their rights.
MontajBlaze 2 months ago
Comment removed
kriskats19 1 month ago
@23lFrench He is for legalizing drugs how is he not for self ownership? And I'm a guy so I don't give a shit about the abortion stuff...
kriskats19 1 month ago
@23lFrench well since he believes that life begins at conception he thinks that a fetus is a human and that abortion is murder. i totally disagree with that but with that view his stance on abortion doesn't contradict his libertarian views.
crlnewlls 1 month ago
also Ron Paul mentions that pre-1913, we created revenue through an excise tax. research what an excise tax is Paultard. you are pro-excise taxes obviously.
LouieDaProtectionist 2 months ago
Ron Paul is the best chance we have toward prosperity and freedom. Interestingly though Cenk became a Liberal because of Reagan and yet Ron Paul is a Milton Freidman economist who was an unofficial adviser and on the Economic Policy Advisory Board during the Reagan administration. Go figure.
NanoPlinket 2 months ago
@NanoPlinket Milton Friedman = trickledown. Yes, let's have lots of prosperity for the multi-millionaires!! Let's eat the crumbs that fall from their tables!!
385Mercedes 2 months ago
00:38 says it all. Ron Paul is a big oil whore, and then tries to reword what a subsidy is to make it more palatable (it's a government handout to big oil, tax break sounds better). green energy cannot get one leg up on an oil company that is first making money from the war which Ron Paul is supposedly against. wake up Paultards. WAKE UP! he is not your savior. he's a slave to the BIG OIL machine!
LouieDaProtectionist 2 months ago
@LouieDaProtectionist: Your logic is flawed. Defense contractors have made immense profits from the wars in the Middle East, and Ron Paul wants to end all of the wars. He is completely antithetical to any corrupt politician. He wants to end the fed, all of the wars and the drug war, cut 5 gov. departments and slash spending, and actually follow the Constitution, eliminating the decades worth of effort put into unconstitutional things like TSA, Patriot Act, NDAA. A slave lol
getcruunkk 2 months ago
@getcruunkk hey MORON, we all want to end the TSA and the Patriot Act (socialists included). Wake the f**k up Paultard! economic freedom DOES NOT equal personal liberty. wake UP and SHUT UP!
LouieDaProtectionist 2 months ago
@LouieDaProtectionist
"economic freedom DOES NOT equal personal liberty"
Qualify that please.
Theobrothers 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Theobrothers do you think corporations are people. that should be clear enough. again, "economic freedom DOES NOT equal personal liberty"
LouieDaProtectionist 2 months ago
@LouieDaProtectionist You spewed alot without proof. Prove it or Your Spew.
Zalahblue 2 months ago
@Zalahblue economic liberties apply mostly to multinational corporations, not you and me. we don't spew massive amounts of pollution into the air. Paul is a corporatist, but hides behind the word freedom. the others are worse than him, but he isn't a savior for this messed up system.
LouieDaProtectionist 2 months ago
@LouieDaProtectionist bullshit. I have the same rights to 'Economics Liberty' as anyone else. Every Business owner does. Ron Paul Explained 'Why' he agreed with 'TAX BREAKS' What exactly is a 'Tax Break'? The Government 'ALLOWING' a company to keep their 'OWN' money. Not a damn thing wrong with that.
Zalahblue 2 months ago
@Zalahblue marketwatch(.)com/story/reagan-insider-gop-destroyed-us-economy-2010-08-10
erik4727 2 months ago
@Zalahblue Absolutely :). Another 'caveat' to that is with just trade taxes, companies spend more, because not only are they spending more, but they revolve around spending most of their income on trade. If you remove the income tax from BOTH of us, companies get taxed(via trade) at the % that we 'consumers' often cry that they should have.
MontajBlaze 2 months ago
i have never seen a saner man in today's politics than Dr. Paul. I am from India and I wish sanity prevails in the US. We here are fighting against corruption too :)
rtscuycjkk 2 months ago
This man supports the the Sanctity of Life & We the People Act and the says he doesn't believe in intrusion of privacy? The man is a fraud!
jesushatesyoutoo 3 months ago
@jesushatesyoutoo: ....um, no. His argument for abortion is that he thinks we should protect our unalienable rights. Life is one of these, and his belief is that an aborted baby is still alive. His reasoning for this is witnessing a late abortion during his career as a physician, and seeing that the baby was crying and breathing. Abortion is a touchy issue though, and people tend to disagree on it, but IMO it's practically a non-issue at this point in our history.
getcruunkk 2 months ago
You won't like Ron Paul until you do your research. Find out what really caused the housing crash, the debt crisis, the massive income inequality.
The government is a slave to the rich and powerful. And so is every presidential candidate except Ron Paul. Especially Obama, that corporate owned scumbag.
dmcarefuldriver 3 months ago
Thumbs up if you used this video to make an ally out an occupy protester. Vote Ron Paul!
seankubin 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Maybe if you actually had some clients you wouldn't be on YouTube arguing with a 20 year old on whether the Fed prints money. Which they do and ive presented a case in which they do and sorry, you've lost the argument.
NecessariusVerum 3 months ago
It don't matter HOW MUCH you disagree with that man, you can not deny he is one of the only politicians that actually stands for what he believes and has integrity.
BloodJunkie11 4 months ago
@BloodJunkie11 I can't be sure. He's either a liar or he's plain stupid.
zebbedi 4 months ago
@zebbedi Stupid? really? When hes the only one who is actually for ending the wars, the imperialism, the actually government corruption and actually fix the economy. How can you listen to that and say stupid? you can disagree with him but hes not spinning this stuff out of thin air he has reasons to back up what he is saying. and if he is a liar hes been "lying" the same way ever since he started in politics.
BloodJunkie11 4 months ago
@BloodJunkie11 Ron Paul doesn't back up anything he says so why should I? He makes ludicrously unrealistic proposals. Like ending the FED, IRS and returning to the gold standard. These are not achievable goals, they are just rhetoric.
zebbedi 4 months ago
@zebbedi You're misstating a lot of his positions.
Freek314 4 months ago
@Freek314 I'm not. He's says these things regularly. He has the economic knowledge of a 12 year old.
zebbedi 4 months ago
@zebbedi So a man with the economic understanding of a twelve year old correctly predicted the economic crises we are currently going through around a decade before they happened, while mainstream (Keynesian) economists couldn't predict it a week beforehand?
Freek314 4 months ago
@Freek314 He didn't predict it. He moaned about the same things he was always moaning about. A lot of Keynesian economists actually predicted the crisis and stated the specifics of the situation, unlike Ron Paul.
zebbedi 4 months ago
@zebbedi Ron Paul predicted the housing crisis, and explained that it was the federal reserve's and fannie mae/freddie mac's fault years before it happened. Keynesians are clueless.
ecnerwal999 4 months ago
@zebbedi ron paul goes for the 'it is all the governments fault and the feds fault' line. Basically he wants to reduce the entire political debate on everything into an argument about how everything bad comes from government and everything good comes from the free market.
TheJamesvanmiert 4 months ago
@TheJamesvanmiert You are exactly right. Basically all he wants is deregulation. Any politician who argues for deregulation is doing so because that's what their donors want.
zebbedi 4 months ago
@zebbedi Way to be ignorant- Ron Paul's number one donor is active duty military. Almost all of his donations come from individuals; he doesn't get half a million from Goldman Sachs like Romney. The problem is that you don't understand how the monetary system works so you don't know how it is the root of many of our problems
johnsurs22 3 months ago
@johnsurs22 You're a hypocrite. Accusing me of ignorance when it is you who hasn't done their research. Go to the OpenSecrets website and check the donation information. About half of Ron Paul's donations come from individuals, the same percentage as Obama and many other candidates.
Ron Paul also receives heavy donations from Military contractors, Oil companies and investment firms. Like many other Republicans.
zebbedi 3 months ago
@zebbedi Nice try- your website leads me to see that Ron Paul receives 99% of his contributions from individual donors. He only receives 1% of his contributions from all other sources including the military. Yes this 1% includes the "oil company" Clean Gas and the "investment firm" Beeland Enterprises. In 2008, out of millions raised, the top three were all under 100,000 and were the Army, Navy, and Air Force- NO MILITARY CONTRACTORS.
johnsurs22 3 months ago
@johnsurs22 Ok since you are obviously retarded I will break it down for you. The pie chart at the bottom of candidate's pages is Campaign committee only and doesn't include PAC contributions (which is where all of the business contributions come from).
Here is the link that tells you about his military contractor contributions. (also opensecrets website)....
bit(dot)ly/qqIoug
zebbedi 3 months ago
@zebbedi What are you talking about? I looked at everything including PAC donations. There is nothing there; now you are just lying. Your military contractors website doesn't work, and exactly why would he receive money from military contractors if he wants to end the wars?
johnsurs22 3 months ago
@johnsurs22 It does work but you are too retarded to work out how to convert the link. Think of how a bit.ly link works and replace the (dot) with an actual dot. Don't accuse people of lying when you are too dumb to be able to work out simple things.
zebbedi 3 months ago
@zebbedi No, lowerface "L"s look the same as capitalized "I"s on this comment box, so stop being rude. Maybe you should give a less ambiguous link. Now learn to read. DEFENSE contractors have made a total donation of 10900 out of millions. So that's not MILITARY like you said and that's less than 1% of his donations. You linked an article that praises Paul for his small donor and retiree contributions, so it looks to me like you are a homer that sees what you want to see.
johnsurs22 3 months ago
@zebbedi I just checked the link, and yes it worked. Also, those are EMPLOYEES of military contractors, not the contractors themselves. And take a look at Ron Paul's dossier in contrast to Obama's; by that I mean, take a look at his corporate contributors versus Ron Paul's. You'll find next to nothing coming from big business to Ron Paul.
Reghedable 3 months ago
@Reghedable Actually both Obama and Paul receive roughly 50% of their donations from individual contributors. They have the same amount of corporate donations. Obama's comes mainly from Wall street, Paul's is a bit more diversified. These employees of Lockheed Martin and UT are not going to be janitors, there are specialist workers who have an interest in the defence industry, think about it.
zebbedi 3 months ago
@zebbedi Where'd you read this? And it is illegal for businesses to have their employees vote for the business's interest. Furthermore, why would it further any defense contractor to support an anti-war president?
Reghedable 3 months ago
@Reghedable Of course it's illegal. I'm saying they are giving money to their employees to give to Paul but rather 'helping' them to decide which candidates would be best for their industry and therefore themselves.
It wouldn't help them to support and anti-war candidate. That's exactly my point. I'm only speculating on this issue and isn't really why I have a problem with Ron Paul.
It just seems odd. Maybe it's his vote for an end to no bid contracts that gains support from some DC's.
zebbedi 3 months ago
@zebbedi I think if we use Occam's razor in this discussion we'd come to the conclusion that maybe its just the personal preference of the employees, rather than carefully planned coercion on the part of the corporation. And besides, the whole point of the MIC is to support warmongers which ups defense spending, and no matter how we look at it, Ron Paul wants to end foreign interventionism. You can't make that loss of profits up.
Reghedable 3 months ago
@Reghedable I can only infer about his honesty on that issue as his voting record generally backs it up, like I said that's not my problem with Paul and I was merely pointing it out. I'll concede.
Other things bother me, like his pro life stance. It's a direct contradiction to the 1st amendment (because he is against it on religious grounds) and from a candidate who is supposedly an avid constitutionalist.
zebbedi 3 months ago
@zebbedi I agree with you on the pro-life stance, but I think that issue is relatively minor. I'm more concerned with his economic policy, which I generally agree with (I disagree with going back to the gold standard and I don't have a problem with single payer healthcare systems) but I noticed your writeup about Keynesian economists predicting the crash. Even so, it doesn't change the underlying factors responsible for the crash.
Reghedable 3 months ago
@Reghedable He doesn't know anything about economics. As a Chartered accountant I find him ridiculous. He talks ideologically about ending your central bank but he knows that isn't possible. The Federal Reserve isn't the enemy, it's Wall streets influence on the Fed that causes problems.
Why didn't Ron Paul vote for the repeal of Glass Steagal? That's another thing that baffles me, he might have a perfectly good excuse but I find it odd that he didn't notice the problems it would cause.
zebbedi 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@zebbedi Also he voted against the repeal of glass steagal. Again, you don't know what your talking about.
NecessariusVerum 3 months ago
@zebbedi Which are, as I understand it, federal interference in the housing market via interest rate limits while rising inflation made low interest rates unprofitable. The reason for the inflation is due to the net deficit in taxes collected versus payments needed for various government agencies. They then borrow from banks and other countries, and in order to pay this off the Fed inflates the US dollar to devalue the debt and interest it owes.
Reghedable 3 months ago
@Reghedable That's incorrect. It was a lack of Federal interference that caused the crash and the repeal of Glass Steagal.
Your definition of inflation is also completely wrong, what you have described is Government deficit/surplus. The Fed is not responsible for rampant inflation. The Fed is privately owned and they are not the ones borrowing the money.
It seems to me that you have been listening to too much disinformation.
zebbedi 3 months ago
@zebbedi They are not borrowing money, no. But they do print money. The federal reserve is the central bank of the United States, is it not? Furthermore, inflation as I know it is: The printing of paper money to devalue one's currency worth vs. products, with the most dramatic example of it seen in Zimbabwe, with something like 17 thousand percent inflation at one point or something? And banks, including the Fed, have the rights to print money, afaik.
Reghedable 3 months ago
@Reghedable They do not print money. The Bureau of Engraving and printing does. They are not responsible for the overall increase in money supply either, commercial banks are responsible for that. A central bank's primary goals are too control inflation and regulate banks. The key point here is that they 'control' inflation, inflation is needed to grow an economy but too much can be harmful to people, central banks try to find an equilibrium. The Zimbabwe hyperinflation was different.
zebbedi 3 months ago
@zebbedi Quote: "They do not print money." A few sentences later, Quote: "A central bank's Goals are to control inflation." Technically they don't print it themselves there, yes.. But they have control over the money supply. Google the fed please. You do know what inflation is right?
NecessariusVerum 3 months ago
@NecessariusVerum I don't need to Google the Fed. I wrote my thesis on the Federal Reserve system.They DO NOT print money and they DO control inflation. There is no contradiction or ambiguity in what I said.
Inflation is the phenomenon of raising prices caused by an excess of cash over supply. A Central banks most common policy is to reduce inflation, they suck money out of the economy. The Fed usually sells T-bills on behalf of the Treasury to achieve this.
zebbedi 3 months ago
@zebbedi Add inflation and artificially lowered interest rates to comparatively lax credit regulations and you have banks lending to everyone and their dog to keep themselves afloat.
Reghedable 3 months ago
@zebbedi The constitution doesn't prohibit that, it is a personal belief. Also, the reason he is still constitutional is because he does not want to impose his belief on others, he wants people to decide for themselves through the state.
NecessariusVerum 3 months ago
@NecessariusVerum American ignorance is astounding. You don't even know the basic amendments of your own constitution.
Read the First Amendment. Or even better, research some landmark cases.I suggest Lemon vs Kurtzman.I do so because it invented what is now known as the lemon test.
zebbedi 3 months ago
@zebbedi If you werent so bitter about me scolding on your fallacy than maybe you could comprehend what I said about Ron Paul and his belief and understand the comment without being an asshole but, thats ok.Also, you just contradicted yourself again, if you wrote a thesis then your thesis is inert. If you can't see how you contradicted yourself in that post then I should stop trying to communicate with you because your obviously ignorantly arrogant and think you know everything.You know nothing.
NecessariusVerum 3 months ago
@NecessariusVerum Stop telling me that I made a contradiction and point it out. Quote my posts and show me the contradiction. You're hypocrisy is amusing. You lambasted me for insults yet have only thrown insults my way. I am yet to see any substance from you. Drop the act, stop being so sensitive and get topical.
zebbedi 3 months ago
@zebbedi I wish I could stop telling you what you made a contradiction to but you keep on doing it. Also, I don't know if you read what you write, obviously you don't so ill quote you again " American ignorance is astounding. You don't even know the basic amendments of your own constitution." So who was the first to insult? I have been topical, on the Fed, and then you spew something at me about American ignorance. I think you are projecting your attitude onto me. I think you need to read more.
NecessariusVerum 3 months ago
@NecessariusVerum I challenged you to give one example of me contradicting myself and despite the fact that you claim that there were many you failed to name one. Yes, I did insult you. I still am insulting you but I'm not the person preaching about the perils of ad hominems over substance. I'm not your friend and I don't like you.
Once again you gave nothing to debate. You were completely off topic and it's pointless to try and continue.
zebbedi 3 months ago
@zebbedi You are a complete buffoon. Again stop trying to project your idiocy onto me. If you cant see the contradiction. "The fed doesn't print money" and "They control inflation." There is nothing else left to say. I never said you were my friend, and obviously you don't like people who know what they are talking about considering you don't.
NecessariusVerum 3 months ago
@NecessariusVerum I know your not well educated so I'll try to go slowly. That isn't a contradiction. The Bureau of Engraving and Printing prints money, the Federal Reserve does not. The Federal Reserve do however control inflation.
They control inflation in a variety of ways. Like dealing in Government T-Bills on the secondary market, adjusting the interbank lending rate or adjusting the reserve requirement for commercial banks.
Like I said, you don't understand.
zebbedi 3 months ago
@zebbedi So... Basically you are arguing semantics? You argue strictly that the fed doesn't print the money yet they control how much money aught to be printed... Herp.. Derp.. Thats why YOU are wrong here.
NecessariusVerum 3 months ago
@NecessariusVerum No, they don't make that decision either. Commercial banks have a reserve account with the Federal Reserve. They can ask for a portion of this reserve to be printed into 'real' cash and swapped for more digital money. The Federal Reserve arranges this operation with the Bureau of Engraving and Printing. They neither print the money or make the decision to print the money.
Sorry to disappoint you.
zebbedi 3 months ago
@zebbedi What happens when a currency is inflated? I'll answer that one for you so you wont have to google it and make it seem like you know something. WHEN THERE IS TOO MUCH OF IT. So when the fed controls, lets say it together INFLATION, what they do is tell the printing press. "HEY, WE NEED MORE MONEY MAKE SOME." Yes you are correct on how the fed manages interest rates etc but you are arguing nothing, because you dont know what you are talking about.
NecessariusVerum 3 months ago
@NecessariusVerum You are making a complete fool of yourself. Saying that the Fed just prints money when more money is need is ridiculous on many levels. Firstly they wouldn't need to print it, as digital money would suffice. Secondly, who are they going to give the money to? They don't just just ask for it to be printed and hand it out on the streets you cretin.
zebbedi 3 months ago
@zebbedi Its a little thing called inflation that you need to make yourself fond of, go ahead and google it like everything else son. Ill give you time. Saying the fed prints money is a way to assess their power in our monetary policy. They have the power to create money out of thin air, which basically means they can print money sorry to break it to you but thats the way it is. Your lack of understanding of the big picture is the problem here.
NecessariusVerum 3 months ago
@NecessariusVerum I have an MSc in Economics from Warwick Business School and I'm a Chartered Accountant. I understand this far more than you do. I think the problem here is (what you have been projecting on me) is that you are receiving your information from Google searches rather than the the books and Professors that taught me.
The Federal Reserve rarely create money out of thin air. When they do they create a specialised loan account that has to be repaid, effectively erasing the new money.
zebbedi 3 months ago
@zebbedi Maybe you should use it, because you may be "educated" but you dont know a damn thing.
NecessariusVerum 3 months ago
@NecessariusVerum Your opinion on whether I know a damn thing is irrelevant to me. Only my clients matter to me in that respect.
zebbedi 3 months ago
Comment removed
NecessariusVerum 3 months ago
Comment removed
NecessariusVerum 3 months ago
@NecessariusVerum That's not true.Most of you uneducated ignorant Americans that parade the internet spouting erroneous views are of the belief that the Fed prints actual cash and then charges the U.S government for the service. This is why I approached it literally.
Even so, the Fed is not responsible for the overall increase in money supply. That lies with the commercial banks . The Fed simply manages inflation.
zebbedi 3 months ago
@zebbedi "The Federal Reserve orders new currency from the Bureau of Engraving and Printing, which produces the appropriate denominations and ships them directly to the Reserve Banks. Each note costs about four cents to produce, though the cost varies slightly by denomination." I couldn't convince you without quotes thought id try it with quotes. It's weird since they order money to be printed. Saying the fed is not responsible for the money printed is absolutely not true.
NecessariusVerum 3 months ago
@NecessariusVerum The Federal Reserve purchases the cash from the Bureau of Engraving and Printing. The Fed is a privately owned bank and the BoE&P is a government department.
I'm not sure why you are finding this difficult to understand. The Fed is the intermediary between the BoE&P and commercial banks essentially.
zebbedi 3 months ago
@zebbedi The reason why we have so much inflation is because of the fed keeping interest rates artificially low as you know, so then the fed allows banks to borrow money at an extremely low rate, which creates unsound credit and in result creates new money out of thin air. Then most of that money needs to be printed and distributed to the various banks. You being on your high horse and wanting to disagree with everything makes you look like an idiot because you are arguing where money comes from
NecessariusVerum 3 months ago
@NecessariusVerum So now you agree that the Fed controls inflation and it doesn't involve printing money. The interest rate you refer to is interbank, which means that commercial banks lend money to each other at this rate. This has nothing to do with printing money. So you can try and frame it any way you like but unfortunately you are just wrong.
zebbedi 3 months ago
@zebbedi And by saying "the fed doesnt print money. This institution controlled by the fed does." Is completely retarded. And until you can actually learn something I have no reason to exchange discourse with someone so mundane and illogical they would argue about whether our central bank controls our MONEY SUPPLY. If you have 0% interest rates but you have 0% savings, how do you think we can hand out money? By-printing-more-credit, they deliver this credit to the banks. Go back to school.
NecessariusVerum 3 months ago
@NecessariusVerum It's not retarded. The whole point of your argument was that the Federal Reserve was printing money and injecting it into the economy. This simply isn't true as the printed money only replaces old money or digital money.
Your last point didn't make any sense. You are clutching at straws to try and deliver an argument but you just don't understand.
zebbedi 3 months ago
@zebbedi I never said the federal reserve didn't control inflation. Did I ever disagree with you on that? No. My point is still valid and trumps your argument because I have just presented that the fed can initiate printing from the bureau. And to argue that the fed doesn't pump money into the economy shows that you have no idea how our monetary system works. Or what inflation is. I can frame it any way I was to and the fed still controls the money supply IE how much money we have.
NecessariusVerum 3 months ago
@NecessariusVerum You are one of the most dense people I have ever encountered. I said that you now agree that the Fed controls inflation without printing money. That was your original assertion and I debunked it. The Fed doesn't pump large amounts of money into the economy (exception of QE), new money is created mainly via commercial banks lending out deposits. I've given you the correct definition of inflation several times.
zebbedi 3 months ago
@zebbed You didn't debunk anything. The Fed creates money whether you like it or not, sometimes they order the printing that's a simple fact. You cant debunk facts imbecile. Also you haven't given me correction on inflation at all, because for me to be corrected I have to be wrong. I don't know why you keep telling yourself that I am wrong when I am right, not a strategy thats going to work.
NecessariusVerum 3 months ago
@NecessariusVerum You are only right inside your own head. I have tried to explain it to you but your American arrogance is too high for me to dent.
zebbedi 3 months ago
@zebbedi I have tried to explain to you what goes on in my country but I guess you are too busy thinking your smarter than Americans because he disagrees with your "educated" assessments. Just stay where you are we don't need ANY MORE ignorance here in America. you would defiantly contribute.
NecessariusVerum 3 months ago
@NecessariusVerum You don't need to explain to me what goes on in the U.S. I live here and work here most of the year.
zebbedi 3 months ago
@zebbedi If you really had a job you wouldn't need to prove your ignorance here. Tool. Also thanks for trying to shoot an insult, McDonalds, so original.
NecessariusVerum 3 months ago
@NecessariusVerum "If you really had a job you wouldn't need to prove your ignorance here." Not only is that illogical but it's also a tacit admission that you are unemployed. I work for myself and spend a lot on flights, which is why I end up awake at all sorts of hours. What's your excuse?
zebbedi 3 months ago
@zebbedi Like I said maybe if you weren't doing such a bad job at your work you wouldn't be on youtube. Instead you would be doing something contructive like what you say you do. But I am guessing you probably don't and try to sound more legitimate which is so sad.
NecessariusVerum 3 months ago
@NecessariusVerum Seriously my friend, I probably made more this year then you ever will. I shall leave you to your childish ramblings now as nothing constructive or even interesting can be drawn from you. Good luck with your life, you are going to need it with that attitude.
zebbedi 3 months ago
@zebbedi And btw your blocked since you want to run, I have no respect for cowards. Not going to have you rebuttle your nonsense.
NecessariusVerum 3 months ago
@zebbedi I don't need an excuse, I did not say I am a business person which has clients. Which if they knew how ignorant you were probably wouldn't be consulting with you.
NecessariusVerum 3 months ago
@zebbedi What I meant by that is, if I was lets say, an investor. I would'nt be wasting my time talking to some person bickering back and forth about practices or policy. I would have the confidence to not be such a douche bag and not engage in such discourse with everyone on YouTube and dis Ron Paul and BE WRONG about his stances. Stay out of our country, we need less people like you.
NecessariusVerum 3 months ago
@zebbedi Be a coward and leave me with my victory. That I out debated an "educated", "successful" business man. Damn i'm so good. Sorry for your loss, better luck next time.
NecessariusVerum 3 months ago
@zebbedi They can order the bureau to print money right? So that makes your argument a resounding FAIL.
NecessariusVerum 3 months ago
@zebbedi So when the fed tells the printing press how much money to print they aren't printing money? Huh...Weird. IF you can't see the facts right in front of you don't bother me writing me back with your none sense. People like you come onto YouTube spouting your bullshit that is totally irrelevant to anything constructive and fundamentally wrong. To say that the fed; the controller of our monetary system doesn't influence money creation, is completely idiotic. Get out of here.
NecessariusVerum 3 months ago
@NecessariusVerum Being facetious doesn't give you an argument. The Fed literally doesn't print money, neither do they decide the size of the order of printed money or own any piece of the department that prints the money. That makes the answer to the question 'Does the Fed print money?' a resounding NO.
zebbedi 3 months ago
@NecessariusVerum "To say that the fed; the controller of our monetary system doesn't influence money creation, is completely idiotic"
I never said that. I have explained numerous times what the Fed does in terms of inflationary measures. You have nothing of substance to say, you only know insults and ad hominems. You are constantly trying to skew my words and it's rather childish. Just admit that you don't have a clue what you are talking about.
zebbedi 3 months ago
@zebbedi You've explained numerous times how semantic oriented your arguments are. You are not teaching me anything I don't know already. I have about the same clue you have and did not have to go to school and get a degree to show you. It's sad that someone with a "degree" is preaching to someone who knows just about as much or more than you do. Your blatant misunderstanding of Ron Pauls vote on glass steagal shows that you cannot comprehend when you read. Also our discourse has shown this.
NecessariusVerum 3 months ago
@NecessariusVerum If you say so you deluded fool. I'll go back to my daily work within this field. Good luck going back to McDonalds or wherever you work.
zebbedi 3 months ago
@zebbedi And speaking of substance, getting on peoples cases about whether the Fed prints money is completely lacks any substance because they are not wrong to generally think that. You are wrong for spreading your none sense and trying to make people look bad with your sudo education.
NecessariusVerum 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@NecessariusVerum I'm not going to keep going round in circles with you. You need to grow up and accept that you are out of your depth.
zebbedi 3 months ago
@zebbedi And by the way "I am not you're friend and I do not like you."
NecessariusVerum 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@zebbedi Also if you payed attention to the context of the issue you would see that "printing money" is basically an euphemism, saying that the fed has control over how much money we have and we need to rework this fiat system. And if we cant come to a consensus on semantics, I hope we could come to one with going back to a sound currency.
NecessariusVerum 3 months ago
@zebbedi When you increase the money supply and you don't have enough dollars to match the demand in paper money supply (implying of course not all money is in paper form you dumb shit) what does the printing press do? THEY PRINT THE MONEY. Oh my god you are such a fucking tool its not even funny anymore.
NecessariusVerum 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@NecessariusVerum What are you talking about? That doesn't make sense. You can call me all of the names under the sun that won't change the fact that you don't understand. I'm willing to explain it all to you, in great detail, but you have to first drop these silly ideas that you have been hearing on the internet.
zebbedi 3 months ago
Comment removed
NecessariusVerum 3 months ago
@zebbedi Go look at his ACTUAL positions for fuck's sake.
Freek314 4 months ago
@Freek314 I have looked at them in detail. Question is, have you? lol. I highly doubt it.
zebbedi 4 months ago
The next step for Ron Paul and his "Libertarian" ideals is to say that nobody can arrest you and take your freedom. Everybody should just buy a gun and defend themselves. His ideas are stupid and his proposals are unrealistic.
zebbedi 4 months ago
@zebbedi Yeah, we should just vote Obama. I like American society the way it is.
truevoice08 4 months ago
@truevoice08 Good. It will get better, it takes time to fix a mess that George W Bush creates.
zebbedi 4 months ago
@zebbedi Yeah, cause Bush was a free market extremist and Obama is just 100% the opposite of Bush.
Google: Big Government Under Bush
Google: Bush's Regulatory Kiss-off
truevoice08 4 months ago
@truevoice08 I'm not into reading propaganda pieces from blog sites. I read both articles and neither are relevant to our conversation. The simple fact financially is that Bush started with a surplus and instead of using it to further decrease your national debt he turned it into a deficit by starting expensive wars and giving tax break to millionaires and billionaires.
zebbedi 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
We love you Ron Paul!
garybatesrsc 4 months ago
An example of cognitive dissonance:
Leftist: CORPORATIONS OWN THE GOVERNMENT
Libertarian: I agree. I also support reducing taxes and regulations.
Leftist: But corporations need to be taxed and regulated.
Libertarian: By whom?
Leftist: THE GOVERNMENT!
truevoice08 5 months ago 3
@truevoice08 Corporations do need to be taxed and regulated. Libertarianism doesn't exist, it's just an idea. An idea that was created by the echo chambers of the Koch Brothers so that they could push for less regulation. Corporations don't own your government, they have an influence.
zebbedi 4 months ago
@zebbedi Yeah, the Koch brothers are corrupting our minds with libertarian propaganda. I'd rather be indoctrinated by the likes of billionaires George Soros and Ted Turner with their leftist media.
truevoice08 4 months ago
@truevoice08 I don't get my information from any left wing media. I'm not American so I don't get to see a lot of American news. I'm basing my comments on facts. The Cato Institute (of which Charles Koch is Chairman) started the Libertarian movement. They published the 'Libertarian Review' magazine, a magazine that ran in the late 70's and early 80's. The Koch brothers have spent over $350 million on Lobbying, think tanks and echo chambers. My god, some of you Americans are blind to facts.
zebbedi 4 months ago 2
@zebbedi I know about the history of libertarianism much better than you do, kid. The fact that a lot of beltway libertarianism is funded by Koch doesn't discredit the political philosophy. You need to actually address the arguments in order to refute it. Though I doubt you can even identify the positions of libertarians w/o misrepresenting them. That goes the same way for socialism. I can't refute socialists by associating them w/o Soros. That's basic fallacy of association on your part.
truevoice08 4 months ago
@truevoice08 The fact that the Koch brothers are funding it completely undermines it. They are self serving and always will be. Association is a perfect basis to refute an argument and is used in every court of law in the world. I based my argument in fact and you hypocritically challenged my comment by countering with absolutely no facts, you simply called my argument invalid and claimed to know more about libertarianism then I do. The logical starting point would have been to defend the Kochs
zebbedi 4 months ago
@zebbedi Google the fallacy of association.
truevoice08 4 months ago
@truevoice08 I don't need to. I'm aware of all kinds of fallacious argument. This is not a generalisation based on association it's a direct link between a new breed of problem and 2 nefarious characters that funded it. I'm not talking about the public that follow the ideology but rather the reason for it's reinvention and it's use by particular people as a political tool.
zebbedi 4 months ago
@zebbedi You've shown yourself to be an idiot. You haven't done anything but assume the libertarian ideology is wrong because the Koch brothers are promoting it. Hey, why don't we just eschew economic freedom and sic more regulations and taxes on businesses (eat the rich!) , do another round of quantitative easing , and rake up tariffs on Chinese imports (how dare they offer us cheap and well-made products!). While we're at it, let's donate our children and vital organs to the treasury as well!
truevoice08 4 months ago
@truevoice08 No, you are the idiot for not reading my words. I made an obvious distinction between the public who follow the ideology and the intentions of the people who need their vote. 'Free market' capitalism won't work (that much is obvious to anyone with half a brain cell) but that does not make the followers bad people, just a bit dumb. Lack of education , ignorance and a MSM that brainwashes people is what leads to this type of thinking.
zebbedi 4 months ago
Comment removed
curingaging00 5 months ago
@pokrrgod Your comment doesn't make any sense. How much money a 18 year old save from taxes? a shit
How much money is he gonna earn with no education? A shit
Quote: Corrupted CEOs or needless wars. The government is fucking us right now.
Really? When the government transform into a living thing that we can blame him? Or the ppl that run the government are fucking us? WHICH ARE THE CORPORATION!
If you cant think at least dont open your mouth to repeat what all the idiots say, go watch FOXnews
Burdock007 6 months ago
So what Dr. Paul is saying in a nutshell is he believes is in a survival of the fittest economic state? A state in which the rich and powerful will suddenly become forced to giving a fair wage and living standard to all in the perfect equalibrium of a free market society?
capt251978 6 months ago
@capt251978 If you are really interested in Paul's ideas read his book "Liberty Defined" or Thomas Woods' "Rollback". Have the initiative. A discussion on youtube isn't very productive.
truevoice08 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Ron Paul 2012
wccrispy 6 months ago
LOL. 7:52 ron paul... the no
applebaj 6 months ago
The war on drugs in another one of those misunderstood issues. He talks about ending federal prohobition of all drugs, even heroin. That's on a federal level though. There's no reason why states couldn't or wouldn't still have something like heroin banned. Saying he is pro drug wiil turn conservatives against him just like saying he doesn't want you to get a federal grant for college will turn liberals against him. It's all about the role of federal vs the role of the states.
michaelgibson420 7 months ago
Most people misunderstand Ron Paul on many issues. Abortion is an example. He is pro life but he opposes federal laws banning it. He would support local and state laws though. That's where he stands on many issues, like education. Yes, he doesn't think the federal government should have anything to so with it but that doesn't mean he thinks states should or would wash their hands of it. It's not the federal governments job. Just as it's not their job to tell a state it can/can't allow abortions
michaelgibson420 7 months ago
Ron paul for president 2012 .. i could careless how countries across sea treat there people
zambrano718 7 months ago
@zambrano718 Then my wish is that your wish come true. I will laugh REALLY hard when you become a slave |:)
TemporalOnline 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Regulations are not for protecting corps, but protecting people. Why everybody think this is happening? Because of