Added: 2 years ago
From: CTSchiffSupporter
Views: 2,326
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (18)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • CountArtha - But few had abortions. The whole point for some was to have the child(ren) out of wedlock, so to enable them to have low or no cost housing etc., which was ultimately paid for at the taxpayers expense.

  • PoliticsAddict - Thatcher did not forget the poor - she made it easy for all the unmarried mother's (and alike) of the UK to have free housing etc., at the expense of the tax payer.

    Very few of the delinquent dad's were made to pay child support either and I believe this is still the case today.

  • If mothers can get abortions on demand, why should fathers be made to pay child support?

  • @CountArtha they shouldn't. and shouldn't get welfare either. actually, the only kids for which child support should be enforced is for kids within a marriage(and tax deduction for people with kids).

  • I am an avid watcher of the global economy in my spare time. Seems to me that P. Schiff is one of very few who tell it as it is. As he says the politicians have only one eye on the next election and not on the good of the Country they represent. We have the same problem in Australia, but fortunately we don't have the debt the USA & Europe have.

    However the future looks positively grim once these countries and their stimulus packages run out.

  • Great video!

  • reminds me of the margarette thatcher philosophy, focus on free markets, forget the poor. forget the social dependants. forget the unions. just return to market principles and it will improve things in the longrun. with peter, he is correct but connecticut voters don't have 10 years to return to market principles, maybe. i mean peter can be like a ron paul easily, be the only guy voting no. the whole congress is gonna have to be in line with his message to change anything, not just him alone.

  • Margaret Thatcher was not strictly an Austrian economist, her politics may seem similar on the surface, but underneath they are quite different. As for forgetting the poor, you couldn't be more wrong. The only way for the poor to be better off, is not for them to live on the dole in a country growing ever poorer, and soon not able to afford their handouts, but rather for them to live in a country growing richer where they have greater opportunity to enrich themselves.

  • Can Peter Schiff alone save the country? Of course not. But there needs to be voices in Congress and the Senate that speak for liberty, that point the way out of the disaster that is coming. If those voices are not present in the government when everything falls apart, the government will respond to the situation by even bigger government, ultimately turning the whole nation into a command economy which could easily result in Soviet style bread lines.

  • Peter Schiff for senate!

  • Wow all senior citizens in the crowd that rely upon the entitlement nipple of the state and federal government.

  • I love how you tell it like it is. No sugar coating things. You are a respectable candidate, Schiff

  • I think it's his best Town Hall so far. Although that comment about voting against the bailout of Connecticut might come back to bite him.

  • I disagree. He handled it very well by stating that it would force CT to cut it's budget.

  • Only if the voters are as short sighted as I fear them to be.

  • That is exactly what I mean. I hope the Connecticut voters won't be so short-sighted.

  • I care. Schiff FTW!

  • wonderful

Loading...
Alert icon
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