Fuck it. Voting Ron Paul.

this is what happens if you make a nigger president

>www.dailymail.co.uk

Try again.

This isn't science.

Why did moot delete /new/? It was a shit board, but all that shit is spread around all the other boards now.

>>3623873

Hey dickface.

Did you vote for Obama because of CHANGE?

I bet you did you fucking fagtard.

RON PAUL BELIEVES CREATIONISM SHOULD BE TAUGHT IN SCHOOLS

ITS A FACT

LOOK IT UP

FAGGOT

HES A TEXAS HICK WITH ONE OR TWO RADICAL IDEAS

>dailymail

HURRRRR DURRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR

>>3623863

michelle obama does not have access to public funds

>>3623888

>RON PAUL BELIEVES CREATIONISM SHOULD BE TAUGHT IN SCHOOLS

HURR DURR. Fixing the economy, ending wars, ending war on drugs and illegal immigration is far more important than that in our current situation.
And supreme court already decided that creationism should not be taught in schools and abortion should be legal. So politicians can go fuck themselves anyway.

>>3623904

WAT?

ARE YOU EVEN LISTENING TO YOURSELF?

YOU WANT A PRESIDENT WHO PUBLICLY SLAMS EVOLUTION TO BE IN CHARGE?

HES A CREATIONIST FOR FUCKS SAKE, IM NOT EVEN MAKING THIS SHIT UP, GOOGLE IT

fuck... not sure if youre trolling......

Isn't Ron Paul also the guy that says that Church should be federal service institutions and that there should be no line between church and state and that the founding fathers expected a christian country?

Are most white american politicians this retarded?

>>3623915

OH MY GOD I JUST DISCOVERED THE INTERNET

AND GUESS WHAT PEOPLE ACTUALLY LISTEN TO MY NONSENSE WHEN I TYPE IN CAPS

THATS NEAT

LOL MURIKAA

>>3623915
Why does it matter if he says evolution is just a current theory? It is. We're learning new things everyday.

All the other things he stands for outweighs that, dipshit. Do you hear YOURSELF?

enjoy your worthless currency forever if he loses

>>3623931
Not samefag, but I honestly don't want anybody in charge if they believe in stuff like creationism.

>>3623915

Show me someone who accepts evolution and wants to end the FED, immidiately end all wars, end war on drugs, legalise marijuana and stop illegal immigration, and I will gladly vote for him.

>>3623944

>him
YOU SEXIST PIG

>>3623925

The worst part about this is the RETARDS who are about to vote for him.

Its like voting for Obama bcuz hes black ALL OVER AGAIN

>>3623949
You don't seriously think....

Ron Paul believes gold has inherent value, and that we should base our monetary units on it because of that, and that doing so would actually solve our problems.

This is patently stupid.

Also, if he gets elected, and starts cutting the budget, and has a well-documented grudge against secular sciences, where do you think he'll start cutting first?

I won't throw the future under a bus because a guy expresses some good ideas mixed in with a whole lot of bad.

>>3623931

>evolution is just a current theory

WHAT THE FUCKKKKK!!!!!

RAAAAAGGEEEEEEEEEEE

YOU BEST BE TROLLIN

>>3623952
>The worst part about this is the RETARDS who are about to vote for him
>is the RETARDS

>*are the

fixed it for you. Who would you vote for? :) OBAMA? loolololololloololloolloollllllllllllllllllllloooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
ooooooooollllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll101010101010101010100101011010101010101

>>3623958
100% serious, nigger.

>>3623961
Actually, he's technically correct about that bit, since he's actually referring to "the worst part", which is singular.

It would be clearer to say "The worst part about this is that a lot of retards etc." but he's technically in the clear on that particular segment.

I can already see most of you are getting mad.

                                                                                 Troll Line                                                                                

>>3623956

>Ron Paul believes gold has inherent value

This

This is retarded and stupid and is the main reason why most people will vote for him.

Gold has no real value. Its all speculation and scarcity. The majority of gold is made into jewelry, not actual useful products. We can live without gold, and when people realise that the demand is artifical, prices will drop.

You want something that people can readily use? And will always need more of? Oil. Trade in oil. Fuck.

Those who do not vote Ron Paul, what is the better alternative?

>>3623968
THE MORE YOU KNOW!

>>3623973
LMAO WOW 4CHAN GET THE FUCK OUT OF HERE

does your SILLY PAPER MONEY MEAN SHIT?

fuck this place, i'm out of here

>>3623956
>>3623956
He wants to cut foreign aid and military first, he then wants to cut entitlement. Nothing has inherent value money doesn't have inherent value its just paper but you can't print gold in the same way you can paper, and gold has very little use as anything else this is why he wants to use gold, educate yourself before you post.

He is a creationist and pro-life.. so fucking what? He is a libertarian too.

He believes in individual freedom. Beliefs cant be pushed onto someone else in a libertarian society, unless is done voluntarily. So fucking what there are students that are thought creationism at their homes, or private institutions. If they are good hard working people it shouldn't matter. Ron Paul wants to make all this changes to our society, which is btw going straight to shit and we need changes now.

>>3623973

We dont want to base our currency on something which is used in industry and which is not scarce. The first option will damage said industry, the second will solve nothing when it comes to inflating currency.

Scarcity and no real usefulness are POSITIVES when it comes to currency standard.

>>3623982

omfg. seriously. are you seriously defending a creationist. i know its ad hominem. but fuck. if you are a creationist, i really have no respect for you or expect you to think in a rational and coherent manner. i would rather vote obama for a second term than to let a creationist step into office.

you want my vote? drop the creationist bullshit and then we'll talk.

I find it funny how people who have never read an economics textbok comment on economics, would you listen to a person who never read a biology textbook about biology.

>>3623982
not that guy, but
>gold has very little use as anything else
say WHAT?

What universe do you live in? Gold is immensely useful.

>>3623985
He doesn't believe in individual freedom, he believes in states' freedom. Big difference.
The government can restrict all the individual freedom it wants, as long as its not the federal government.

>>3623973
>You want something that people can readily use? And will always need more of? Oil. Trade in oil. Fuck.

>implying oil lasts forever.
GTFO. You've got the right attitude to feed a dictator alright. FUCK PEACE- LETS START A WAR! amirightoramiright

>>3623992
It has some uses but it is hardly used as a industrial metal, just compare it to silver. Gold has always been money.

>>3623974
I'll vote for Obama, because I don't expect a politician to be perfect, especially in times of political and economic troubles.

Besides which, he has managed to keep the nation in one piece, he has helped dismantle don't ask don't tell, and is getting troops out of Iraq and Afghanistan.

Yeah, I've been disappointed by some of his behavior, no I don't agree with him on everything, and no I don't think he'll solve everything forever, or even solve most of my problems right now.

The US spent 20 years climbing into an economic pit, it will probably take another 10 to recover from it, and I don't think the sluggish nature of a multi-trillion dollar entity is sufficient reason to call one president (whose policies, mind you, are continually undercut by the legislative bodies of Congress) an abject failure.

>>3623987
Why not base our currency on sea shells.

>>3623992
Not that guy, and not even disagreeing with you, but the monetary value of gold does not reflect its usefulness. Just saying.

>>3623987

if it has no real use, then why would anybody want it? when the economy collapses, people are just going to jettison their gold as fast as possible to cash in before it drops further, and buy other things like oil and diamonds

its like paper money all over again isnt it.

oil is safer. because its usefull, people will always want it. even when the economy collapses, people will still want oil, and wont sell off their oil to buy other things like gold or foreign currency. they will hold onto their oil, thus preserving our economy.

jeeze.

>>3623989
and you believe that being an atheist means you're rational, when half of you believe in Zeitgeist. You are economic creationists if anything, the president doesn't have to believe in evolution, you think Obama isn't religious?

>>3623997
Yes, gold is used less than silver. But that's because it's so expensive. If the price(and availability) of gold dropped to something like the one of copper, you'd see an immense jump in usage.

>>3624008
There's a difference between being religious and being a creationist.
Somebody as mentally unstable and unconnected to reality as a creationist should not be the one with his finger on the button.

>>3624000

Even sea shells would be better than nothing.

>>3624004
That wasn't what I was implying. I'm just very familiar with all the uses that gold is so eminently practical for if it weren't for the price.

>>3624005
wrong wrong wrong, they will trade gold for oil in the same way you will trade money for oil, thats why gold is money but it doesn't have the same problems as paper and oil is is a useful commodity which is why it makes terrible money and diamonds are a horrible idea because a lot of their value is face value, based on the cut and not simply the mass of the diamond.

>>3624013
What if like, we store all our sea shells in a giant vault, but then somebody nukes the vault and all the sea shells are now radioactive. You now have a baseless currency.

>>3624008

Obama didnt base his campaign off religion.

Ron paul is.

Obama is a lawyer, hes a smart cookie. He knows he dosnt stand a chance if hes not religiously affiliated, but he never pushes it or mentions GAWD in his speeches. Hes probably one of those closet atheists.

LETS MAKE FOOD MONEY IT WILL ALWAYS BE NEEDED THERE WON'T BE ANY PROBLEMS WITH INFLATION OR DEFLATION GUYS I PROMISE.

>>3624019

No. Then you can always print more food money. You can never make more oil- at least in a commercially viable way.

>>3624017

Then we should base our currency on radioactive sea shells.

>>3623997
The only reason gold has "value" is because your mom and dad thought it had "value" and so did their parents, and so on. That's not very compelling motivation for me to treat it as a valuable commodity.

I'd rather see governments admit that value is based on ideas and just move to a system where the value of a dollar is openly agreed upon and then we go from there. If it needs to be worth more, then it's worth more, and if it needs to be worth less, it's worth less.

It's essentially what we're doing now, only much simpler, and under goddamned control for a change.

>>3623915
LOLOLOL SO?

YOU'RE A CREATIONIST ON ECONOMICS.

WHICH IS FUCKING WORSE FOR A POLITICIAN

GOD DAMN YOU ARE STUPID

Why not use BitCoin as national currency? It cannot be inflated, its cryptographically secured.

http://www.bitcoin.org/

>>3624018

>Obama didnt base his campaign off religion.

Ron Paul isn't saying he going to bring morality to America, he isn't even saying he would ban Abortion. All he is saying is he wants to maximize peoples liberty.

>Obama is a lawyer, hes a smart cookie.

He is also a retard who knows shit about economics, a law degree makes you good at writing laws but he has no practical ideas behind his legislation.

>>3624027
>All he is saying is he wants to maximize peoples liberty.
He's not saying that at all. He wants to maximize states' liberty.

>>3624020
Have you heard of deflation? Why would you base your currency on something that will run out. You know absolute shit about what you are talking about.

>>3624023

>>3624031
by decreasing the amount the FED can interfere with your life, therefore increasing your liberty.

>>3624023
>It's essentially what we're doing now, only much simpler, and under goddamned control for a change.

Its already controlled by the federal reserve

you're forgetting that everything has a subjective value, you're faith in dollars is no better than gold except that you can't print gold. Both money and gold are useless and both their values are determines subjectively through commerce.

>2011
>Still living in that shitty country called America

OKAY

I HAVE IT: SOLUTION!

OBAMA AS PRESIDENT, RON PAUL AS ECONOMICS ADVISOR / FINANCIAL MINISTER

AGREED?

(that way ron paul cannot impose his shit ideas on creationism or slam evolution, abortion etc etc, but can still contribute and realise his ideas about the economy) fair?

>>3624037
Implying the Federal Reserve is a mysterious and powerful shadow organization instead of economic experts working very hard to keep the economy growing while fighting inflation.

I know a guy who works at the Fed. It doesn't scare me.

Tea Party retards scare me.

>>3624042
>(that way ron paul cannot impose his shit ideas on creationism or slam evolution, abortion etc etc, but can still contribute and realise his ideas about the economy) fair?

He never said he would impose his ideas of creationism on people,. those are simply his personal beliefs. Obama's beliefs aren't any better.

>>3624047
He clearly and unambiguously stated that he doesn't believe in the separation of church and state. If that doesn't bother you, you care less about liberty than you claim to.

>>3624033
I'm not forgetting how subjective it is. My problem with the Fed isn't that they're trying to manipulate the value of money, it's that they're sucking at it. Prices are still going up, and they need to pull a Brazil and just stop it.

http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2010/10/04/130329523/how-fake-money-saved-brazil

Now, Brazil still faces a lot of challenges, but this is basically what needs to happen.

>>3624037
No, by increasings states' powers and decreasing my liberty.
States want to ban abortion, gay marriage, evolution? That's alright with Mr. Paul.

Don't get me wrong, USA is a shitty country, but you're deluded if you think it's wrong for a president to take vacations. It significantly improves its mood and productivity for the rest of the year. Stop being short-sighted biggots. And yeah presidential security is expensive. What a surprise.
Another proof of american retardness.

>>3624056
Sorry, meant to reply to >>3624040

>>3624046
>Implying the Federal Reserve is a mysterious and powerful shadow organization instead of economic experts working very hard to keep the economy growing while fighting inflation.

Oh you stupid stupid creature the Federal Reserve is responsible for every bubble with it controlling interest rates and setting them too low for too long. They don't control inflation they create it as a way to stimulate the economy just look at QE1 and QE2, you are truly ignorant all because you think that creationist = irrational and atheist = rational and teaparty = evil redneck retards. You are the irrational economic creationist that permeates the left, not based on empirical evidence but on emotions.

>>3624046
>I know a guy who works at the Fed.
He is a pawn. Who gives a shit if you 'know a guy.' I went to the republican national convention and took a picture with Romney and Steele, it doesn't mean my existance means shit. It doesn't prove a god damn thing. I know a guy that works at a bank- it doesn't mean he owns the damn thing.

Do you even know what the Federal Reserve is?
fucking christ

>Tea Party retards scare me.
lolokbro, and big corporate issues dictating what legislation you and your kids have to abide to don't?

>pic related, but you wouldn't know anything about that.

>>3624047

If ron paul wins do you realise youre going to live in one nation UNDER GOD?????

Fuck man. Wake up. Going away from religion is always better than approaching it. Look at Iran, Israel, Palestine, Vatican City.

You dont want to be governed by irrational and barbaric laws made up by some sand people 2000 years ago do you.

If we become a christian nation, we're just going to prompt another 9/11 or go into an all out war with the middle east.

Shit man. At least Bush had the decency to scramble to justify the war by lying to us about WMDs, you want some ron paul fella justifying war on religious grounds?????

>>3624058
or legalize weed, gay marriage, or abortion. He would simply take the power away from the fed to make these things illegal at the federal level.

>>3624059
Especially when you consider the fact that in all probability, he spends a lot of that vacation still working.

You don't think he is getting briefed on shit? Fuck vacations are nothing more than a change of scenery really.

>>3624054
He said he did believe in the separation of church and state but that the state should not discriminate against religion.

>>3624067
>lolokbro, and big corporate issues dictating what legislation you and your kids have to abide to don't?
Yes, that is the Tea Party.
>>3624069
States aren't going to make this shit legal unless the federal government forces them to. Especially the conservative states.

>>3624067
Yeah, there's definitely not a lot of major corporate prodding within the Tea Party, right, man?

>>3624067
Some day, you wont be a pathetic whiny teenager. Then maybe you'll get people to vote for your candidate.

Ron Paultards are the worst campaigners ever. That is one reason he'll never win.

>ITT

>>3624073
I'm worried about religion dominating the state, not the other way around, dipshit.

>>3624072

damnit. this makes me want to vote for ron paul now.

but i feel like im being deluded by propaganda like how it was with obama.

fuckk....

no way, im not voting for a creationist. thats that.

>>3624074
>Yes, that is the Tea Party.

you are beyond retarded, you think letting people keep there money is being a corporate shill, when the left right most subsidies to big corporations and creates lopsided competition between companies. Have you heard of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac?

>>3624080
then forget about voting for anyone

>>3624079
I know you would infringe on peoples right to follow religion therefore being a fucking nazi.

>come on /sci/
>make ron paul thread
>get fucking told

The experimental data supports this theoretical model.

>>3624086
I don't care what you believe, as long as you keep it out of the public sphere.

>>3624081
Seriously, if you don't know that the Tea Party are even bigger corporatists than the GOP, you know nothing about the party whatsoever. Look up the Koch brothers.

>>3624080

>damnit. this makes me want to vote for ron paul now.

>but i feel like im being deluded by propaganda like how it was with Bush.

>no way, im not voting for a Nigger. thats that.

>>3624077
>>3624077
It's rather strange that there are so many Ron Paul haters on 4chan, being that he is the only candidate against internet regulation.

>>3624088
>I don't care what you believe, as long as you keep it out of the public sphere.

Exactly he never said he would legislate anything based on religion.

>>3624081
>implying every tea tard isn't a corporate shill fighting against his own economic interests

You realize that the tea party is funded by old wealthy white men right? People like Dick Armey and the Koch brothers are who the tea party shills for.

>>3624093
He is the only candidate opposed to regulation on the federal level. State level, however...

>>3624097
>regulating the internet at the state level

wat

>>3624094
No, he said he wouldn't let states interfere with religion. There is a difference. He'd love to see more Jesus in government.

>>3624080
Think about it this way:

>War on drugs: Legalized
What's legalized? Everything? I don't want every single chemical available for recreational use by any jagoff with spare change. Marijuana is already facing gradual decriminalization and legalization. Ron Paul can't force every state to take those laws off the books anyhow. It'll take years for reasonable marijuana use to be legal everywhere, regardless of the president.

>People freely decide who they want to marry
Technically, Ron Paul's States Rights platforms would recharacterize this as "People freely decide who they want to marry whom". It'll just be a bunch of state amendments further complicating the marriage issue with inconsistent laws and punishments.

>War is over
Yeah, I'm sure that's never gonna happen again forever. It isn't like we're already drawing the wars to a close or anything.

>Banks forced to compete
Well, he's got me there. I do think the feds should have let those banks go out of business. their assets could have been put to newer, more transparent institutions and it would have been fine with me.

>Corporate welfare ends
Bullshit. Paul outright says he wants to cut taxes, and that's where corporations get the most infuriating "welfare".

>Voluntary individual interaction
It's a meaningless sound bite, man. Don't buy into a slogan.

>>3624101
Yes. Not possible now really, because the federal authority supersedes the state authority on this matter.

>>3623888

Guess what? He also said it doesn't fucking matter because states are supposed to make those laws individually.

>>3624089
>thinks the DEMS aren't corporatists when they love interfering in business

You don't even know what corporatism is, its about corporate welfare not about free markets. Free markets = no corporate welfare

whose idea was it to end all subsidies and tax credits to corporations it sure as hell wasn't the Dems.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mnuoHx9BINc

>>3624093
>implying net neutrality is a bad thing

>>3624105
Which would mean that over half the country starts teaching creationism as soon as Paul is in office.
Great idea.

>>3624099
Having a perpetual identity doesn't limit free speech, man. It just holds you to what you say.

Anonymity doesn't guarantee free speech, either. It just makes it easier to be an asshole.

>>3624106
We're talking about the Tea Party. The Tea Party loves corporations. More than government, more than people.

Federal law trumps the states. The Supreme Court decided it should back in the early 1800s (McCulloch v. Maryland, 17 U.S. (4 Wheat.) 316 (1819)) and was reaffirmed by a bloody civil war less than fifty years later.

Shut the fuck up about this states rights business. We already had this argument.

>>3624109
oh weird, where did you hear that?

Oh, wait- he never fucking said that. Do you know how impossible what you said would be? derp harder. I went to a roman catholic school and they made such a big fucking deal even teaching us about evolution: I don't think it's going to change anytime soon

well okay.

im for ronpaul in some things.

but seriously the creationist thing is a real bother.

why cant he be somebody's vice president general secretary or something.

>>3624119
>implying southern baptists are roman catholics

southern baptists consider the pope to be the anti-christ. do you really want those people in charge of educating millions of children?

>>3624103
>>3624103
>What's legalized? Everything? I don't want every single chemical available for recreational use by any jagoff with spare change. Marijuana is already facing gradual decriminalization and legalization. Ron Paul can't force every state to take those laws off the books anyhow. It'll take years for reasonable marijuana use to be legal everywhere, regardless of the president.

and you trample on peoples freedom, cigarettes already kill people and so does alcohol but making laws against these things only causes crime that hurts innocent people drug use only hurts the people who use it and they do it voluntarily. He can't force states to but some states have legalized marijuana but its still illegal under federal law

>Technically, Ron Paul's States Rights platforms would recharacterize this as "People freely decide who they want to marry whom". It'll just be a bunch of state amendments further complicating the marriage issue with inconsistent laws and punishments.

Or they can legalize gay marriage.
>Yeah, I'm sure that's never gonna happen again forever. It isn't like we're already drawing the wars to a close or anything.

Yet he started a new war in Libya

>Bullshit. Paul outright says he wants to cut taxes, and that's where corporations get the most infuriating "welfare".

retard, letting people keep their money is not welfare. We have the second highest corporate tax compared to other countries and this is because some get special tax credits and subsidies, that is corporatism.

>It's a meaningless sound bite, man. Don't buy into a slogan.

Only a person who has no idea how the world runs would say this.

>>3624120
All the presidential candidates are christian.
Deal with it.

>>3624114
>The Tea Party loves corporations. More than government, more than people.

corporations are people they hire people they feed people, government doesn't help shit government intrusion in the economy has always created more poverty and problems than anything else.

>>3624125
what the fuck are you talking about? maybe I misread your comment- because I don't know why you're talking about baptists now. Obama is a baptist, but what does he have to do with it

explain yourself, I just got derailed crazy

>>3624127
Explain what "voluntary individual interaction" is, and why only Ron Paul can supply it.

>>3624120
>well okay.

>im for Obama in some things.

>but seriously the Nigger thing is a real bother.

>why cant he be somebody's vice president general secretary or something.

>>3624142
He's a libertarian.

>>3624141
You are acting like your education model would be the pervasive one for religious people. I'm suggesting that 90% of the southern education will be state funded baptist propaganda if Ron Paul gets his way.

The doctor has arrived.

>>3624145
You utterly failed to answer my question and clearly have no clue what you're talking about.

>>3624143

>>3624136
>government intrusion in the economy has always created more poverty and problems than anything else.
That dogma is so fucking retarded it makes me sick. When child labor was abolished in the US people were screaming butthurt because they said it restricted economic freedom. The same with slavery, the production of CFCs etc. Now people just take it for granted these rules are in place and somehow bend their narrow little mind around the fact that the market is not free at all, just to uphold that silly little dogma you just spewed out.

>>3624149
> I'm suggesting that 90% of the southern education will be state funded baptist propaganda if Ron Paul gets his way.
:) why would you think that? Obama is baptist, mate! Why does religion matter? and why would you come to that conclusion?

>>3624143
>implying race is equivalent to willful ignorance about the origins of humanity

You have to be willfully ignorant to doubt the truth of evolution, and I'm not voting for someone who chooses to be stupid.

>>3624154
Libertarian = Do whatever you want as long as you don't hurt anyone else.

In other words, take care of yourself.

>>3624159
You clearly have never met a Southern Baptist. Obama isn't a southern baptist. These people believe crazy shit, and it shouldn't be funded by the public.

>>3624142
It means that you can't be forced to do something that you only do things based on voluntarism. You are not forced to subsidize another persons existence or business. Your money can be taken only through voluntary means and not government theft to give to other people.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LS82SQASgTI

>>3624153

um wtf

twin towers in the background

anyway. radical changes are not good for humanity. case study hitler. case study communism. they all had good intentions, but one must bring about change gradually and have it accepted slowly. not force broccoli down people's throats.

>>3624165
well that is awful. certain things should be forced. a system like that would have no coherance, because people would only work towards individual interest.

>>3624166
That's what Ron Paul will do in his eight years in office.
Gradual change.

>>3624127
>and you trample on peoples freedom
Well that sucks and all, but every law impedes on freedom, and I'm willing to give a little up here and there if it make my world a little better.

And before you cite that old security and freedom line, you should know that that's a pointlessly didactic way of thinking.

>Or they can legalize gay marriage.
Or they can ban it. It's a viable option that a lot of people want to see happen, and that's a bigger infringement on practical rights than any ban on crack.

>Yet he started a new war in Libya
And I don't like that. And I'm sure Ron Paul would never start a fight with anyone, no matter how much their internal struggles affected American interests, or how badly the civilians were being treated by military-backed despots.

>retard, letting people keep their money is not welfare
Then what welfare are corporations receiving, and how would Ron Paul stop it?

>Only a person who has no idea how the world runs would say this.

Only a person who has no idea how the world works would say don't base an ideology and a vote on three words that could come from any campaign machine? Grow up, kid.

>>3624166
twin towers are there pointing out the heart beat remaining, saying the constitution is dying due to what really happened on 9/11. Ron Paul is there because he is bringing it back.

>>3624173
What a cheesy piece of propaganda.

>>3624158
>When child labor was abolished
The government did nothing its the wealth that was created by child labor that allowed the laws to be passed, child labor was already going down. You think kids working on their parents farms wasn't child labor? You think the abolishment of child labor wasn't due directly to capitalism creating wealth in the country. You think you can create a welfare system without the wealth capitalism creates to steal from?
>slavery
Except that free markets don't believe in slavery because people have the right to private property which means the right to their own body

>CFCs

Have you ever heard of consumer demand, you don't need laws to abolish things, the consumer will abolish these things themselves.

>>3624178
>>3624178
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WtGrp5MbzAI

Nope, that is.

>>3624169

no man. ron paul has the right ideas. but hes an extremist. hes what all the revolutionary dictators were like in the history. it will be like hitlar and mao and stalin

take it slow old man. convince the people to take your medicine before you force them to swallow. even then, hes too ambitious. he wants to change everything, not just fix one thing at a time.

changing everything is fine if it all works. but chances are more than one of the fixes are going to cock up and suddenly america is flooded with an overwhelming sea of problems that we could have dealt with individually. it will be like glasnost and perestroika for america.

i can't wait for 2012 to be over so all this ron paul teabagger bullshit will evaporate into nothingness.

>>3624190
Someone has read their Burke.

>>3624184
>the consumer will abolish these things themselves
Then why didn't they?

>>3624171
>>3624171
>Well that sucks and all, but every law impedes on freedom, and I'm willing to give a little up here and there if it make my world a little better.

totally false, there are laws that protect you from having your liberty taken and there are some that do.

>Or they can ban it. It's a viable option that a lot of people want to see happen, and that's a bigger infringement on practical rights than any ban on crack.

It is already banned, he already said he wanted marriage to be privatized, because there are bigger problems than just gay marriage in marriage.

>Then what welfare are corporations receiving, and how would Ron Paul stop it?

Subsidies, tax credits that other corporations don't get. They distort markets and cause a whole host of problems. Not to mention they are given by the government through theft of someone else.

>>3624193
because they had no better alternatives at the time.

>>3624190
He's trying to bring this country back to what the founding fathers intended it to be.
Chill out bro, he's not some radical authoritarian dictator. He's wants to defend your civil liberties.

>>3624189
>we're gonna spread happiness
>we're gonna spread freedom

>obamas gonna change it
>obamas gonna lead them

>obamas gonna change it
>and rearrange it
>we're gonna change the world

okay.jpg
override congress
executive orders everywhere
nlp teleprompter speeches giving false hope
claims recession to have ended and woops lolololol here we go guys, INC> another recession ok
go to war with everyone
I know I'm missing a ton out, but I'm too tired to do some googling on his failures. I'm aware he is just a puppet scapegoat for the big dogs anyways.

>we're gonna change the world
Sure did.

>>3624184
>You think the abolishment of child labor wasn't due directly to capitalism creating wealth in the country.
It's funny how you indirectly suggest capitalism will lead to more government intervention. I could say something about the communist manifesto here but that would be cheap.
>Except that free markets don't believe in slavery because people have the right to private property which means the right to their own body
What. Slaves were seen as property and it was the capitalist aristocracy who most violently resisted the abolishment of slavery, exactly because they viewed slaves as their property. Don't pretend it was good old capitalism all along that was against slavery.
>Have you ever heard of consumer demand, you don't need laws to abolish things, the consumer will abolish these things themselves.
This is blatant denial of what actually happened. Look it the fuck up.

He is the only candidate to have the balls to say no to Israel, this has pissed of the GOP enough to completely ignore him even the left are shills to Israel.

>>3624200
>voice legitimate concerns
>get told to chill out

this is another example of how paultards suck at campaigning.

>>3624194
>totally false, there are laws that protect you from having your liberty taken and there are some that do.
Every law that protects you from another action takes the possibility of that action from someone else. Even in the libertarian credo of "voluntary action only", you're essentially banning every action that influences the behavior of anyone else.

Hell, man, why aren't those actions protected too? It seems like an awfully arbitrary line to draw.

>It is already banned, he already said he wanted marriage to be privatized, because there are bigger problems than just gay marriage in marriage.
So he would make a law stating clearly that the government would not sanction any ban on consensual nuptial unions? That's great, but a lot of Christians believe that the existence of homosexual unions provides a direct infringement on their own freedoms. How would Ron Paul go about reconciling this issue?

>Subsidies, tax credits that other corporations don't get. They distort markets and cause a whole host of problems. Not to mention they are given by the government through theft of someone else.
So individual corporations shouldn't receive special treatment. That's fine with me, man, nothing to argue about there.

Thing is, you don't have to be a libertarian to think that a corporation isn't entitled to special treatment.

Also, not everyone considers taxation to be theft.

>>3624212
You're comparing him to Hitler and Stalin.
That's not a legitimate concern.

>>3624209
>It's funny how you indirectly suggest capitalism will lead to more government intervention. I could say something about the communist manifesto here but that would be cheap.

It leads there not out of necessity but because there is enough money to steal to make these programs.

>What. Slaves were seen as property and it was the capitalist aristocracy who most violently resisted the abolishment of slavery, exactly because they viewed slaves as their property. Don't pretend it was good old capitalism all along that was against slavery.

You are plainly wrong, if anything is was socialist ideas that private property doesn't exist that allowed them to infringe on these peoples property rights. Property rights mean you own what you earn and your body and no one else has a right to it, you volunteer to do things you aren't forced.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o44dc3s0IQE

>This is blatant denial of what actually happened. Look it the fuck up.

It would have happened that way, you don't need government to legislate these things.

>>3624212
all those people were socialist or ran as socialists, who were gonna save them with the use of government. He is the exact opposite.

>>3624223
It is when it's a legitimate comparison.

another reason paultards can't campaign. They'll argue opinions all day.

>>3624232
Both of them are extremists who wan't to revolutionize society and shake up the system. This is a bad thing. Go read some Edmund Burke. Any real conservative should know who he is.

>>3624224
>It would have happened that way

I HAVE QUANTUM VISION AND CAN CLEARLY DISCERN ALTERNATE REALITIES. THERE'S TOTALLY NO WAY PEOPLE WOULD HAVE CONTINUED USING CFCS UNTIL IRREPARABLE DAMAGE WAS DONE TO HUMAN-FRIENDLY ENVIRONS, BECAUSE PEOPLE ARE INHERENTLY RATIONAL AND INCAPABLE OF THESE SORT OF LARGE SCALE MISTAKES.

I don't get this. Are these really the only candidates you have to debate over? You're clearly dissatisfied with all alternatives. Why not vote for someone you actually agree with, rather than yet another "lesser evil"?

>>3624242
that's why i'm writing in feingold.

>>3624224
>the free market will fix it
>you know, eventually
Sure buddy. Why wait for the free market to do it when it's too late when the gubmint can do it now?

>>3624224
>It leads there not out of necessity but because there is enough money to steal to make these programs.
So now you're actually agreeing that wealth will lead to government intervention? A simple yes or no will do.
>You are plainly wrong
You did not address what I said. Did you actually read it?
>It would have happened that way, you don't need government to legislate these things.
Right, like how we are investing in green energy without government stimulation right now? We'll cast away our oil dependance because it's fucking up the energy equilibrium? Fucking moron. My country is the perfect example of how this does not work without government intervention. I live in Holland, and one and a half decades ago we were on par with Germany in developing a sustainable energy technology market. Then the chirstian democrats came into power, stopped the subsidies, and now Germany pretty much has the monopoly in Europe when it comes to solar power etc.

And speaking of
>socialist ideas
and how government intervention will always lead to poverty, did you know (I'm assuming you live in the states) when your county was founded and for a long time thereafter it had higher import taxes than contemporary China? By all standards it could be considered highly socialist. Yet that's where your current prosperity comes from.

>>3624239

Obligatory.

Enjoy your corporate shills, America.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O_Ij-9TWBXw&feature=related

>>3624242
because there aren't alternatives that can compete with it, the reason we don't have CFCs but still buy the things that contained them at a reasonable price today is because we found alternatives through market forces. The same thing is happening with climate change. Market creates CFLs government bans incandescents, government saved us, not quite.

there are some sensible people here, some not so sensible people.

america is a free country, any man can be the president one day. why not stand for election if you think you have a better idea how the world should be run? thats what ron paul did, and i respect him for that. but i will not vote for him because extremism and radical changes are a very realistic threat to the stability and leadership position of a nation that is already at the top of the world.

change the world gradually or let it change gradually. great nations and empires have fallen time and again due to the ambitions of men who thought that they alone could change everything for the better.

>>3624252
I'M SURE THAT'S THE GOVERNMENT'S FAULT, AND IF IT ISN'T, WELL, THERE'S SOME OTHER REASON WHY THE FREE MARKET IS NEVER TO BLAME.

>>3624255
>the reason we don't have CFCs but still buy the things that contained them at a reasonable price today is because we found alternatives through market forces
Yes, but it's government restriction on CFCs that forced the market to look for these alternatives.

>>3624262
Not to mention many governments around the world offering direct financial support for research into the whole situation, from CFC replacements to tracking the damage done.

>>3624259
>implying america will fall if ron paul gets elected.

Oh shit nigger, what are you doing?

>>3624251
>So now you're actually agreeing that wealth will lead to government intervention? A simple yes or no will do.

no, it doesn't have to but politicians can steal others money to get votes.

>Right, like how we are investing in green energy without government stimulation right now? We'll cast away our oil dependance because it's fucking up the energy equilibrium? Fucking moron. My country is the perfect example of how this does not work without government intervention. I live in Holland, and one and a half decades ago we were on par with Germany in developing a sustainable energy technology market. Then the chirstian democrats came into power, stopped the subsidies, and now Germany pretty much has the monopoly in Europe when it comes to solar power etc.

well you are absolutely wrong, people will demand alternatives as oil becomes too pricey and alternatives become cheaper and the reason oil isn't is because of oil subsidies from the government. All subsidies do is hide the cost of the actual technology including green tech. Solar power will never be a good alternative and is a waste of time, Germany also banned nuclear energy.

>Yet that's where your current prosperity comes from.

Not at all protectionist policies raise prices for consumers, outsourcing raises the standard of living of those countries that factories are outsourced to while creating cheaper products for people at home, we can look at places like Hong Kong, Japan, and Singapore.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O2sW2wt3nLU

>>3624224

Socialism didn't exist as an ideology until the 19th century, dumbass.

Slavery has been around for many thousands of years.

>>3624262
They were unneeded, people would buy them if they proved to be non pollutant with a comparable price.

>>3624281

SOCIALISM IS EVERYTHING I DISAGREE WITH YOU STUPID CUNT.

>>3624281
Yes but the idea behind socialism = slavery because theft is legal and no one has private property.

>>3624286
That only works if taxation is empirically theft, which would only be arguable if you would also say that paying the rent is theft.

Socialization isn't the total devaluation of private property, mang, you're just putting asshole words into douchebag sentences to form buttplug ideas.

>>3624283
Again, then why didn't they? Why did the transition from CFCs to alternatives not happen before government regulation?
If you say that there were no alternatives, then why not? Why did the market not provide consumers with alternatives?

>>3624286
Slavery means you are somebody's private property.
How can you be somebody's private property when private property does not exist?

>>3624260
That is usually the case because the government doesn't give up on things and prop up failures with stolen money on the other hand in free markets failures are weeded about by market forces (consumers and competition). Even monopolies are usually caused by the government and then market monopolies are only temporary.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eYTgwzHU6xg

>>3624295
not at all no private property means I can steal your labor through force = slavery. Private property means you own what you make based on volunteerism.

>>3624298
Man, listen to yourself. Every bad thing is usually the government, every good thing is free market? If you were any more of a parrot, you'd be posting from a pirate's shoulder.

>>3624278
>no, it doesn't have to but politicians can steal others money to get votes.
Is that why 1% of the world's population controls 40% of the world's wealth? Because it easy to steal and that gets you votes?
>well you are absolutely wrong
Except I'm not and I just gave you a fucking prime example of why I'm not. You keep ignoring the reality of the examples I give and continue to give an argument from ideology.
>people will demand alternatives as oil becomes too pricey
Exactly, and that's when the damage has already been done.
>Solar power will never be a good alternative and is a waste of time
Again, blatant denial of the reality. For the last decade Germany has been the strongest economy in Europe, and green investments played a major part in that. Notice how this is a concrete example?
>Not at all protectionist policies raise prices for consumers, outsourcing raises the standard of living of those countries that factories are outsourced to while creating cheaper products for people at home, we can look at places like Hong Kong, Japan, and Singapore.
Then how come growing economies ALWAYS prosper under protectionism? Jesus fucking Christ, I'm done arguing here. I have better things to do.

Enjoy your stagnation of research under privatized science. Because this is a science board, after all.

>>3624294
because there was no demand for them, because people were not educated about them. This to didn't need to be done through government, just think about organic food and climate change.

What exactly did you expect?
Spending absurd amounts of taxpayer money on themselves is why people choose to become politicians.

>>3624317
Okay, then why didn't the free market educate them, if it wasn't the governments responsibility? You're just digging your hole deeper.
>climate change
Yet another thing that government had to interfere in because corporations refused to do so.

>>3624308
because all the empirical evidence states this. The government fails for very understandable reasons, it is because they can prop things up that should fail, there is no competition, its a monopoly.

>>3624316
>Is that why 1% of the world's population controls 40% of the world's wealth? Because it easy to steal and that gets you votes?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vDhcqua3_W8

Its because a few people take the risks to start a business and then only a few become prosperous. They can't steal votes the government has the power to steal and whichever special interest they group doesn't matter. They are lobbied by feminists just as much as companies and they both give them concessions. Its up to the government to do the right thing. They are at fault

>Then how come growing economies ALWAYS prosper under protectionism?

Except thats totally wrong

>>3624316
My real problem with libertarianism is that the free market does autocorrect, but it does so in booms and busts, because it's all just impulse with no guiding force except public perception. You just end up on cycles of growth and crashing, which just increases the odds that someday we'll have a situation that collapses beyond repair.

>>3624325
No we already see demand by consumers for alternatives because of rising oil prices, the government actually makes it worse by subsidizing oil. The government won't make any laws until the market finds a good alternative and then they can claim all the credit.

>>3624344
What empirical evidence? Another youtube video? Some papers from the seventies?

You know what evidence I see? All of human history, in which the absence of governance left our existences brutish, ugly, and short. Once we have power structure, we can overcome the flaws of the individual and actually get shit done.

It isn't perfect, but jesus if it isn't better than the alternative.

>>3624346
>>3624346
The boom and bust cycle is caused by the Federal Reserve setting low interest rates that distort market forces create malinvestment and mass speculation. There is no such thing as a collapse beyond repair.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d0nERTFo-Sk

>>3624346
Most of the market's presumed "inherent volatility" is caused by various forms of government interference including the imposition of a fiat currency and the unpredictable monetary policy that goes with it. Political uncertainty destabilizes the market.

>>3624358
>>3624359
Right, because shit was so stable before the Fed. No economy ever collapsed, or went through regular cycles of prosperity and weakness.

>>3624356
>Once we have power structure, we can overcome the flaws of the individual

You can say the same about religion. Read an Economics textbook oh let me guess its written by evil capitalist just like biology books are written by evil atheists, right.

Individuals like Albert Einstein and Isaac Newton. I think you are forgetting about voluntary cooperation. You don't need the government for people to cooperate.

>>3624362
we had recessions not as bad as those caused by the FED but we got out of them much faster.

>>3624362
That's a straw man. Of course there are some causes of collapse (disease, military invasion, massive crop failure, etc.) that have nothing to do with the Fed, but the Fed is also powerless to stop them. The cyclical nature of some businesses has an origin in market fundamentals, but the monetary system pushes the market further from equilibrium exaggerating these cycles profoundly and chaotically.

>>3624371
Funny you should mention them. Do you think science, as we know it today, would ever work without government support?

>>>/int/

why do people do such things on /sci/?

Ron Paul is going to win huh?

>>3624278
lol
the dude in the video
is a psychopath
look at his face

>>3624371
You don't need to found a society on everyone agreeing to do only what they want to do either.

And yeah, religion played an important part in human development. It helped convince people that just because they wanted to do something didn't mean it was okay, and just because they didn't want to do something didn't mean it was wrong.

It's almost as though a person's base intentions aren't good enough to keep society going without a little encouragement.

>>3624286
>yfw

>>3624380
The Fed can't stop them, but it can foresee them and compensate for them in a way that the free market on its own never has.

>>3624358
shut the fuck up
really
are you going to imply that there weren't various crashes and bubbles before the 1930s

>>3624359
>guys i like the gold standard i'm so edgy
>also BUZZ BUZZ BUZZ BUZZWORD FIAT CURRENCY HUEHUEUEUEHU

>>3624380
stop fucking claiming strawmans when you say some bullshit without any degree of specificity
oh wait
you're a libertarian, you can't help it
you have no fucking clue on how much deregulation you want, and that's why you're playing the ideological game instead of the game of pragmatism

>>3624402
>also BUZZ BUZZ BUZZ BUZZWORD FIAT CURRENCY HUEHUEUEUEHU

What makes something a "buzzword" is that it lacks a clear definition and is simply repeated broadly and uselessly. "Fiat currency" has a very precise definition and is not at all repeated ad nauseam.

>>3624412
>implying it isn't repeated ad nauseam
bro
i think you need to go on youtube comments

>>3624405
Whatever, idiot. As usual, talking to "liberals" is manifestly useless. They refuse to listen or to use logic.

>>3624420
>Whatever, idiot

Did you honestly just walk in from recess or something?

>>3624420
AWWW LAWDY
>They refuse to listen or to use logic.
>They
I think you might have misspelled 'I' there.

>/sci/
>michelle obama

>200 posts and 19 image replies omitted. Click Reply to view.

>>3624420
Just for the record, I'm one of the liberals in this discussion, and I wasn't calling you guys retards, or idiots, or morons for disagreeing with me, but I certainly got it in return. Maybe you should consider that before you storm off in a tiff.

I don't think you're dumb, I was just jawing for the sake of the argument, because I like to argue.

>huge troll thread
>Ctrl+F
>rape
>0 hits
>everythingwentbetterthanexpected.jpg

>>3624446

well now you just created a hit you arse

thanks we were doing so fine up to now!