budlover13
King Tut
ND has a valid opinion imo. Regardless of his purely legal age to be here.
The Truth About Ron Paul
- Thread starter deprave
- Start date
- Status
Gosh, especially when it gets plainly explained to you what is wrong with your argument but you don't concede when your point is made moot, instead you just segue into another ad hominem attack. Does RP advocate getting rid of ALL regulations? Or just the ones that harm the private sector? You really haven't looked into things have you? You also have no idea what the Constitution for the United States is, what it stands for and why it is important, do you?
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
your favorite state, north dakota, god forsaken land that it is, contributed the most to ron paul in 2008.
maybe that will dissuade you.
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Paul-2008-mon.pdf&page=1
Dan Kone
Well-Known Member
I've explained in great detail why he was wrong and nothing I said was disputed. I've explained exactly how glass-steagall led us to a run on the banks and nearly a second great depression (which is exactly why Glass-Steagall was put into law in the first place". He nor anyone else disputed what I was saying. I've shown exactly how financial deregulation allowed the housing crisis to happen and no one disputed those facts. I've provided direct quotes from Ron Paul about how he supports financial deregulation.
So how is being wrong a valid opinion?
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
i heard they put stickers on the mailboxes of people who support ron paul.
Yeah, I had car trouble in that state during not so nice weather, one of the worst 3 days of my life were spent in that hell hole that no one lives in. That graph just reads like a list of country hicks with guns and beer.
Dan Kone
Well-Known Member
He said he supported getting of Glass-Steagall. That did serious harm to the people of our country and led to a run on the banks, bailouts, etc. Ultimately it did harm to the private sector too. So there you go. A case of Ron Paul supporting deregulation that actually did the opposite of your claims.
Dude, I don't dispute anything you said except the root cause of the problem. You are spot on when it comes to how the greatest fraud ever perpetrated on the American people happened, kudos to you.
budlover13
King Tut
*Still observing in the background for info*
Dan Kone
Well-Known Member
hard to make that claim when you're telling which viewpoints are valid.
OregonMeds
Well-Known Member
UB how is all that obama change and hope working out for you? Feels good to be manipulated and lied to and getting absolutely nothing you were promised doesn't it?
Gosh! Really? Because he sure didn't vote that way!!
http://www.house.gov/paul/congrec/congrec99/cr110899-glb.htm
CONFERENCE REPORT ON S. 900, GRAMM-LEACH-BLILEY ACT
------------
HON. RON PAUL
OF TEXAS
[Page: E2297]
Madam Speaker, today we are considering a bill aimed at modernizing the financial services industry through deregulation. It is a worthy goal which I support. However, this bill falls short of that goal. The negative aspects of this bill outweigh the benefits. Many have already argued for the need to update our financial laws. I would just add that I agree on the need for reform but oppose this approach.
With the economy more fragile than is popularly recognized, we should move cautiously as we initiate reforms. Federal Reserve Board Chairman Alan Greenspan (in a 1997 speech in Frankfurt, Germany and other times), Kurt Richebacher, Frank Veneroso and others, have questioned the statistical accuracy of the economy's vaunted productivity gains.
Federal Reserve Governor Edward Gramlich today joined many others who are concerned about the strength of the economy when he warned that the low U.S. savings rate was a cause for concern. Coupled with the likely decline in foreign investment in the United States, he said that the economy will require some potentially `painful' adjustments--some combination of higher exports, higher interest rates, lower investment, and/or lower dollar values.
Such a scenario would put added pressure on the financial bubble. The growth in money and credit has outpaced both savings and economic growth. These inflationary pressures have been concentrated in asset prices, not consumer price inflation--keeping monetary policy too easy. This increase in asset prices has fueled domestic borrowing and spending.
Government policy and the increase in securitization are largely responsible for this bubble. In addition to loose monetary policies by the Federal Reserve, government-sponsored enterprises Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac have contributed to the problem. The fourfold increases in their balance sheets from 1997 to 1998 boosted new home borrowings to more than $1.5 trillion in 1998, two-thirds of which were refinances which put an extra $15,000 in the pockets of consumers on average--and reduce risk for individual institutions while increasing risk for the system as a whole.
The rapidity and severity of changes in economic conditions can affect prospects for individual institutions more greatly than that of the overall economy. The Long Term Capital Management hedge fund is a prime example. New companies start and others fail every day. What is troubling with the hedge fund bailout was the governmental response and the increase in moral hazard.
This increased indication of the government's eagerness to bail out highly-leveraged, risky and largely unregulated financial institutions bodes ill for the post S. 900 future as far as limiting taxpayer liability is concerned. LTCM isn't even registered in the United States but the Cayman Islands!
Government regulations present the greatest threat to privacy and consumers' loss of control over their own personal information. In the private sector, individuals protect their financial privacy as an integral part of the market process by providing information they regard as private only to entities they trust will maintain a degree of privacy of which they approve. Individuals avoid privacy violators by `opting out' and doing business only with such privacy-respecting companies.
The better alternative is to repeal privacy busting government regulations. The same approach applies to Glass-Steagall and S. 900. Why not just repeal the offending regulation? In the banking committee, I offered an amendment to do just that. My main reasons for voting against this bill are the expansion of the taxpayer liability and the introduction of even more regulations. The entire multi-hundred page S. 900 that reregulates rather than deregulates the financial sector could be replaced with a simple one-page bill.
You haven't really looked into these things have you?
budlover13
King Tut
Just piping in with questions and observations from my point of view. Still want to learn and so far i've learned that RP is for the people.
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
i was promised a tax break. got that. $400 for two years in a row since i worked. another $240 since the first $2,400 of my unemployment benefits were not taxed when i did not work. both thanks to the american recovery and reinvestment act passed by the democrats (and a few republicans) and signed into law by president barack hussein obama.
i was promised greater equality. the first bill he signed into law was the lily ledbetter fair pay act, which gives my wife, my mom, and women all over this country better tools to combat pay discrimination. he also laid the groundwork to end DADT, and then did so. thanks, mr. president!
i was promised he would get tough with the banks and credit card companies. now my credit card company has to put my billing date on the same day each month, making it less likely that i incur a late fee because they suddenly move the date up a week from the month previous. they are also not allowed to raise my apr if i am a day or two late. thanks, mr. president (and nancy pelosi and the rest of the democrats)!
i was promised we'd draw down our troops in iraq while focusing on killing osama bin laden. the troops are slowly coming home from iraq, and osama bin laden is dead. thank you, mr. president (and navy seals who i would not want to cross the wrong way)!
i was promised greater access to health care for myself and my fellow americans. my wife can now obtain insurance in two ways: she could have stayed on her parents insurance up until last year or so, thanks to the patient protection and affordable care act, and now she may no longer be denied by greedy insurers because she has a pre-existing condition. thanks, BRObama!
oh, and thanks to an act of congress, commercials now have to be the same volume as the programming, instead of being blaring loud. that saves me the annoyance of having to adjust the volume during commercials. thanks, obama!
how are you spending the extra money you got from obama?
OregonMeds
Well-Known Member
http://www.house.gov/paul/congrec/co...110899-glb.htm
I tried to look into it, but your link doesn't work for me. Does it work for anyone else?
I tried to look into it, but your link doesn't work for me. Does it work for anyone else?
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
which people?
would ron paul have signed into law the lily ledbetter fair pay act, or would he have let the magical pixie dust of the free market assure women don't suffer pay discrimination?
sync0s
Well-Known Member
Give me a minute to type out this response, it's lengthy.
scratch that, here: http://moveleft.org/obamas_promises/index.html http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/obameter/rulings/promise-broken/
- Status