Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:
see all

All Comments (41)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • Schiff should talk with Ron Paul more for tips on how to answer some of these socially conservative and military questions, but I think he still did all right. He should've also said succinctly he's for the US leaving the UN.

  • Abortion is relevant. As a U.S. Senator, he will have to approve justices to the Supreme Court who will be there for life and decide on laws regarding abortion.

  • The problem with the pro-life movement is that it presents abortion as just a moral issue. This is absolutely stupid because they argue against people who are moral relativists. The arguements go nowhere.

    The issue being ignored is that 50 million babies have been killed since Roe v Wade. aka 50 million tax payers (whose gonna pay for all that social security?). It doesn't help that the replacement level (2.1) slipped to 2.0. US will be like the EU in no time.

  • Of course, the real problem with this statement is that it isn't true. Abortion hasn't killed any babies, it has killed fetuses.

    Going by your logic, why don't we make it mandatory for all married couple to have at least 3 kids and all women who haven't had a kid by 34 gets artificially inseminated.

  • You also ignore the fact that the US population grew by 50% since Roe V Wade! In the early 70's US population was 200M, today it's well over 300M! You can't count an abortion as a lost child because in most cases a women will eventually have a child she wouldn't have had, had she not had the abortion.

  • @christo930

    Call them whatever you want, the point is that they were potential tax payers that got snuffed.

    As for your second statement, don't let the straw man collapse in on itself.

  • How is it a strawman? There are 2 simple facts here:

    1) US population grew by 50%

    2) Abortion doesn't necessarily reduce the number of children a woman decides to have, just when. For example, I exist because my mother had a miscarriage the year before I was born. Had that baby gone to term, my mother wouldn't have had me but she would have had the same number of kids..

  • 1) Population growth isn't the issue, it's the fertility replacement level. The only thing keeping the American fertility rate teetering near the replacement level is Mexican immigration (2.9 TFR). New England's fertility rate is identical to western European countries (1.5 tops).

    2) I'm not saying abortion is the only reason for declining birth rates. There are many other reasons as well. With such a bad TFR America needs as much children as possible (TFR can be increased through tax cuts)

  • The total population of the earth is also increasing at an exponential rate. Western fertility has gone down because of wealth (but don't worry, the gov is working on that one), but the third world population is growing.

    I can't see the consistency between a libertarian view and restricting access to abortion. Using the gov to force women to have children is hardly freedom, in any sense of the word.

  • Social security wouldn't be such a big problem if we could build the country up again. We've kicked the jobs out of the country and replaced them with low paying jobs. If we brought back the high paying jobs and got the federal gov under control, social security would be fine. It would probably also help to raise the retirement age.

  • It took decades to sell our industry off. The capital needed to build it all back up again is far more then what we have.

    That is why Peter keeps screaming for higher intrest rates to get people to save now so we can invest it later.

    The real problem is all of the wealth that we have destroyed with government and the TARP, and all stimulus plans.

    It will take decades before we see a recovery and thats IF are government starts acting sensibly soon.

    If things don't... we are screwed.

  • Foreign investment could help a great deal.

  • Our labor laws and taxes on profitable buisnesses are hurting us. I'm not saying all labor laws are bad but some hurt American workers.

    If you were an invester would you invest your money in a country where the pay, taxes and construction costs were higher? You wouldn't since it hurts your return.

    We will not see improvement in this country until a change in the way government taxes it's people and industry.

    Start a buisness as I did and you will see the living hell our government is.

  • Taxes need to be reduced, there is no argument there. One problem I do have is where people want to seem to make the spending cuts. I believe all foreign aid should go and the military severely cut back before one single social safety net is cut. But many people want all the pork as long as we cut social programs.

    I, for one, would rather have a much smaller military and not "help" foreign nations and not have to see starving people on the street.

  • Comment removed

  • I was one of those highschool students that he mentioned. Good speech - pretty much his views and stances in a nutshell.

  • Halleluja Sir. Magnificent talk.

  • He's done other talks...when he says that he wants to "cut social security" he wants to wean people off of it. He recognizes that some people are legitimately dependant upon the system...but the key is to actively wean the country off of this dependance.

  • I am a prolifer too. I would prefer it if Peter Schiff was prolife like Ron Paul because I think that abortion is morally wrong. However, remember we are in a prochoice friendly country and he wants to repeal legislation that involves government meddling such as the healthcare bill...that means no US taxpayer funded abortions under his watch. That's ok with me. I'm voting for Schiff.

  • I understand people's concerns about Peter's stance on social issues. But remember, he believes these are STATE level issues.

    In other words, the federal government shouldn't be able to force states to legalize abortion or gay marriage.

    As a pro-lifer and an opponent of gay marriage, I'm pretty happy with that.

  • peter is solid on the financia/ fiscal policy. but he strays on social issues..i mean he would have been better off saying hes pro-life but wants the federal government out of the abortion debate, like ron paul. because republicans will vote against him because he said, "i'm pro-choice". he needs to sound more like a politician unfortunately because the people are stupid and they are so stubborn. and he shouldn't have said he will cut social security first. it should be last if anything.

  • Pro-Choice is not a losing stand in CT, which is a liberal state. Of course, Kentucky is a totally different situation for Rand Paul.

  • You're right Social Security should be cut last.

  • If he did that he would be no better than all those corrupt politicians that would say or do anything just to please people to get re-elected.

  • true but he still needs to get elected first. he's not gonna change anything if he loses the election. so he needs to be smart about what he says, like when he said we need to cut social security, sure. but make it the last program to cut, that way people will be reassured they can still get benefits.

  • He made it pretty clear to his supporters around the world that he isn't going to smooth talk for votes. Cutting social security on a gradual basis is his objective. He recognizes that it would not happen over night. Its not popular and it may cause him to lose. But social security consumes a huge amount of money. Social security is a ponzi scheme as we all know it needs to go.

  • Being pro-choice is desirable in CT. Every single modern-day Republican federal representative for Connecticut has been pro-choice and pro-gay marriage. CT is one of the most abortion-friendly places in the country.

  • I'm talking about how schiff wants to cut social security "first". come on, thats lunacy talk. you say you will cut social security last. but nobody is gonna elect some shmuck to discontinue their ssi. you gotta act like a politician somewhat, gotta play their game a little bit. winning is the key.

  • Well, Schiff doesn't explain his social security plan that well in this video. Watch the Woodbury town hall. He's basically saying that in order to be realistic about social security, in order to not fund a deficit, or in this case our obligations which is more expensive then the known deficit, something has to be done. Back when SS was first started it was like 7 workers for every retiree, now its like 1 worker for every retiree.

  • Never mind, I didn't see your other posts. I agree, but like I said he goes into better detail in the Woodbury town hall. He says the government does need to take care of current retirees because they've already paid into the system. You know theoretically social security could have been an "ok" program. If the government actually put it in a fund that gathered interest it would actually generate money. But no the idiots use it as a veiled tax and blew it all on stupid shit.

  • Ehh I sorta agree with you and I sorta don't. As far as social issues go abortion is the most debatable. I believe human life should be protected (excluding murders), but then again I'm not a woman so I don't know what being pregnant is like. I think late term abortions really need to be looked at. I've seen videos and pictures and they are really quite disturbing, and barbaric. Especially for a society that is suppose to protect life, more so innocent life. Like I said very tricky is this issue

  • I thought that the federal government ignored the strict limits placed on it by our Constitution years ago. It was the only way they could take over everything in our lives. With all these unconstitutional powers, why would they ever want follow the Constitution again.

  • Peter Schiff is an ideal candidate for public office, fiscally conservative and socially liberal.

  • thanks for this video compilation, Peter. I wish you the best! Keep working hard.

  • Thanks for this great upload. I hope he will run against Chris Dodd

  • RE- abortion. If human life begins at conception then abortion is man-slaughter at least, and the right to life applies.

    Hopefully, Peter will develop a more nuanced reply to the Iraq and Afghanistan questions. Like, what about Afghan. as a heaven for "terrorists", Afghan. as a satellite of anti-American elements in the Pakistani Intelligence service, Pakistan's nukes and the US relationship with Israel.

  • I think peter is saying that human life does not begin at conception.

  • On the social issues I myself have disagreements with Peter, but I think it is important to realize he has no control over these issues anyway and cannot affect CT lives. Meanwhile, our economy is being destroyed, it looks like we will dip back down into recession again, and our debts are enormously frightening. This is what Peter will change.

  • Imagine if Peter was president

  • best thing ive ever heard

  • Peter Schiff for Senate!

Loading...
0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more