10 reasons why you should vote for Ron Paul in 2008.

Of course not. He hasn't presented a viable alternative for the Fed. For those who don't understand simple economics, Gold Standard is not a an alternative since fractional banking can be still practiced. If you get rid of the Fed, commercial banks will be able to create as much money as they want.
If he wants to abolish the Fed, he needs to come up with a mechanical system that would steadily increase the supply of money as Milton Friedman suggested. Getting rid of monetary policy altogether is the most uneducated economic decision a president could make (not that I think RP is up to doing something that stupid).

 

Another nice post.. Someone's getting some green!

 

They're all a bunch of weirdos as far as I'm concerned. nothing else to it,
and they use a bunch of weird terms that really make no sense,
so yea, don't vote ron paul 2008 cause he's just a very well disguised cronny like all of them.

Don't even vote at all... the computers will do it for you anyways.

 

That's a pretty up beat look at the situation..

The worst thing you can do in an election is NOT vote.. I think we have seen in the past just how important it really is to vote, and how close election can be.

 

Yet he sure appears to stick to his guns and not change for votes.

100% correct, to not vote or not vote for the person you trully want as you 'think' it is throwing your vote away. That's often the reason a candidate doesn't win as people do not turn up to vote, even the third party candidates.

Support means nothing if you don't get your supporters to turn out.

 

Notice that the attackers of Ron Paul never attacked his stances on anything economical or political except for his views on 9-11. It seems like there are still people that dont want an intelligent president. they just want one that hangs on daddy's coatails

 

I don't think I have ever attacked him myself.. Other's may choose to disagree.. I agree with many of his stances, but I just disagree with his delivery.. On many issues, even those I agree with, he turns me off with his delivery...

 

Reason number eleven.

 

You haven't read enough about Ron Paul or watched his interviews. He has never said he would get rid of the Fed immediately, he has said he would like to see the Fed compete against gold and silver in an open market. Let people choose between the Federal reserve notes and silver and gold. Then we can see which system is the best.

I for one bet on gold and silver. Screw fractional reserve banking. As I've said in numerous posts on this thread, fractional reserve banking works great until there is a bank run, and then the whole system comes down like a stack of cards.

How would you like it if tomorrow there was a major market crash, and people started lining up the banks to pull there money out, and you were one of them, but suddenly the bank shuts its doors, because due to fractional reserve banking, it loans out more money then it has, therefore, you won't be getting your money back..........fractional reserve banking is wonderful............for the banks.

So just because he goes onto Jones show, you think this makes him a nut?

 

That only happens under the gold standard with fractional reserve banking. Under the fiat currency system with fractional reserve banking, no one would be in a rush to pull their money out since the amount of money that the system holds is virtually infinite.
You have to understand that fractional reserve banking doesn't imply an economy with a fiat currency. In fact, the gold standard gave birth to fractional reserve banking. If our goal is to restrict fractional reserve banking, there needs to be a law that prohibits banks from lending out excess reserves. It's irrelevant what monetary system we're under.
I think a better alternative to the gold standard would be:
1) Higher required reserve ratio
2) Limiting the Fed's ability to create money
This would basically accomplish the same thing as the gold standard (that we've had in the past), except more stable and we won't have to waste a perfectly good precious metal.

 

Haha!!!!!! I Hate To Be Mean But You Guys Qare Funny!!! You're All Brainwashed By Your Tvs To Believe Anyone Can Save This Country... Its All A Distraction... For What You Ask???

I Don't Know Entirely, But The 130 Unopened Concentration Camps All Across America Must Have Something To Do With It!!! They're All Here To Control You, None Of Them Are On Our Side!!!!!

 

I don't believe all hope is lost. No one in this forum has said that "anyone" can save this country. As Ron Paul has correctly said in so many of his interviews, it isn't he who is leading this revolution, it is the people! WE can change this country!

Well, I agree with you on getting rid of the Fed, but I don't understand how we would waste gold or silver by using it. The central problem is with paper money itself: It just doesn't work. Name one paper currency that has survived for 500 years?

You won't be able to, because none has. Gold and Silver has been around for 4000+ years, there is a reason it has been used in almost every civilization. It keeps inflation down, and the labor theory of value of economics shows that gold and silver are valuable due to the intensity, time, expense, and risk involved with mining it.

With paper money, the government always prints to much, always, and they always destroy the economy eventually.

 

Have you looked at Ron Paul's record as a Congressmen? Those of us who are wise do not make decisions based on what we see on television, because as the old saying goes, appearances can be deceiving. I've actually researched Ron Paul, and he is the only candidate that follows Constitution principles.

It hasn't got so bad that no one can get on TV if they are not controlled by the establishment.............we are not that bad yet, though we are getting close. If you've seen the GOP debates, it is clear that Ron Paul is at odds with the other candidates, it is clear that he is different.

 

Then how come he denies the obvious involvement of secret goverment forces killing those 3000 INNOCENT people in those two towers??

its clear he TALKS diffirent...

 

Even though I disagree with Paul on 911, and do believe it is also a Black Op carried out by the U.S. government, I still agree with him on 99% of all the issues facing the nation today, and out of all the GOP candidates, he is the best man for the job, the only person who can beat Hillary Rodham Clinton.

One thing that you also have to remember is that Ron Paul has said that he would be willing to do a new investigation of the 911 attacks if the people want it. No other candidate running for president right now will open a new investigation on 911. If you want 911 truth to be promoted, Ron Paul is the only candidate who has said he will do it. He may not believe 911 was an inside job, but the fact that he is willing to do a new investigation tells me that he is the person who should get in the White House once Bush leaves.

 

You can't name a successful country today that is under the gold standard either. Fiat currency system failed in different parts of the world under different political and economic systems. I believe that the fiat currency system does well under an appropriate system.
The Fed is not creating too much money; the government is spending too much money.

 

This is a paradox. Both are connected to each other. The government spends too much, because they can borrow from the Fed, who can print unlimited quantities of money out of thin air. With a paper currency backed by precious metals, the government would automatically be kept in check, because if they didn't have enough gold/silver reserves to say, go to war, and if there wasn't a Central Bank like the Fed, they would not be able to get away with it.

You're right that the government spends too much, but I disagree that the Fed doesn't print too much money, because as soon as Bush asks for billions to continue the war, this money has to come from the Fed, and once the Fed prints it, they are adding more dollars into a world economy that has too many dollars.

Think about this: The Fed wasn't created until 1913. Americans were doing fine before then, in fact, they were doing more than fine, they were extremely wealthy. The United States doesn't need a central bank, we were fine under when we were under the Silver Standard.

When you say that the Gold Standard has failed in other nations, or here in the U.S., what reasons and historical evidence do you have to show this? I've actually seen more countries fail as a result of paper currency than because of Gold or Silver. Governments throughout history have been prone to corruption, they always spend too much.

Even the Roman Caesars had to debase their coins to continue their wars, pulling out the Silver and Gold and replacing them with cheap metals, because the people wouldn't accept these wars had the Roman government attempted to pay for it in precious metals.

 

Ok, well let me ask you this...

Does he mention the multiple concentration style camps established across america?

Does he confront the fact most of our politicians are involved in secret fraternities?

Does he deal with the fact all of our presidents are bloodlines of the royal family???

 

As long as we keep focusing on $, we'll never wake up to the truth...