The case against Dr. Paul

[volatile]

You are mistaken about history.

Well, you're mistaken about everything.

American armies have been in Europe much longer (over 60 years) than the EU, NATO (American supported), and the UN (American supported) have existed.

I realise that. But France are not at peace with Germany for the first time ever in history because they're scared America will bomb them if they squabble. Peace in Europe, longstanding, permanent, solid peace, can only ever be fostered by cooperation and common understanding. Coercion never works (see the Middle East for proof of that).

 

[dash]

So what? If you're only here to post a really terrible avatar, rather than have productive discussions, will you be leaving the forum now?

Oh now you've hurt my feelings. That's the best picture of myself I could find. I feel so unclean now.

Leaving the forum? Or this thread? I don't know. I think I'll avoid trying to proseltyze. My personal views on the economy won't make a bit of difference in how it all plays out.

-Dave

 

[Kerberos]

Oh now you've hurt my feelings. That's the best picture of myself I could find. I feel so unclean now.

Leaving the forum? Or this thread? I don't know. I think I'll avoid trying to proseltyze. My personal views on the economy won't make a bit of difference in how it all plays out.

-Dave

Speaking of you personal views on the economy, could you perhaps give some timetable for the catastrophic colapse of the economy. I'd like to know exaxtly when to come back and beat you over the head with your failed prediction.

 

[volatile]

Oh now you've hurt my feelings. That's the best picture of myself I could find. I feel so unclean now.

It just seems a bit silly to expend lots of effort on posting random thoughts just to get an avatar. If that's your goal, then it's now done and you can be off, I suppose. But if you're here to discuss, learn and chat, the avatar is immaterial.

Leaving the forum? Or this thread? I don't know. I think I'll avoid trying to proseltyze. My personal views on the economy won't make a bit of difference in how it all plays out.

I think if you care to learn, then there is much here for you. I'm sure you didn't register at the JREF just to get an avatar, right? You came here to have discussions, so cutting and running in the middle of one seems a little, well, hasty.

I think you'll learn a lot about economics if you stay in this thread, or join the recent ones on the Fed. For example, do you understand WildCat's point about shifting the value of gold proportional to the dollar just creates a fiat currency, and is not the same thing as a gold standard?

I think you'll learn a lot about politics if you stay in this thread. For example, do you dispute the Economist's list of best countries to live in, or my evaluations of their social outlook?

I think you'll learn a lot about human nature if you stay in this thread. For example, what's your precise problem with social security, and do you honestly think a country that lets its poor go hungry is better than one which does not?

This forum isn't about avatars. It's about critical thinking.

 

[dash]

Speaking of you personal views on the economy, could you perhaps give some timetable for the catastrophic colapse of the economy. I'd like to know exaxtly when to come back and beat you over the head with your failed prediction.

Timeframe? I couldn't even hazard a guess. Years I suppose. But things are ongoing.

It's the economic equivalent of the perfect storm.

-Dave

 

[dash]

I think if you care to learn, then there is much here for you. I'm sure you didn't register at the JREF just to get an avatar, right? You came here to have discussions, so cutting and running in the middle of one seems a little, well, hasty.

...

I think you'll learn a lot about politics if you stay in this thread. For example, do you dispute the Economist's list of best countries to live in, or my evaluations of their social outlook?

The JREF forum's functionality is such that you can't get your avatar's picture up until you post 50 times and then wait a while. So I was making a nuissance of myself especially to get my postings up. Blame the forum!

I didn't study your list of countries. If your point is that the USA doesn't head the list I'll agree 100%. I don't know what's the best place to live. I'm in the USA and hence must be a paranoid neurotic just like everyone else. My conditioned response is that it sucks here but everywhere else will be worse.

If your point is that the level of socialism equates with quality of life...I don't know.

I don't trust our government. It might be one of those socialist-leaning countries has a more trustworthy government. I feel as if our government is completely out of control, and it sort of scares me.

-Dave

 

[dash]

I think you'll learn a lot about human nature if you stay in this thread. For example, what's your precise problem with social security, and do you honestly think a country that lets its poor go hungry is better than one which does not?

Social security: It's a ponzi scheme. It's an unfunded program. The federal government has liabilities on the order of 50 trillion dollars. You can't get something for nothing. Somehow the working people will have to pay for all those old people, retiring baby boomers who often didn't have any children of their own. I don't want to have to slave so they can retire. I don't want my kids to have to slave to support me and my generation.

I'll take care of my own retirement, you take care of yours. If you guessed wrong, there's always charity and cat-food.

I'm simply not concerned with "the poor". I'm concerned with myself and my family a lot more.

-Dave

 

[D'rok]

Poorly.

Canada's doing poorly? News to me. Care to back this up?

 

[volatile]

The JREF forum's functionality is such that you can't get your avatar's picture up until you post 50 times and then wait a while. So I was making a nuissance of myself especially to get my postings up. Blame the forum!

What a silly thing to say. Either you're hear for the discussions, or you're here to show off your avatar. It makes no sense to post nonsense just to get an avatar, and then to bail out of threads now you actually have one.

I didn't study your list of countries.

It was posted for your benefit. It makes sober reading for any contention that socialism doesn't work.

If your point is that the USA doesn't head the list I'll agree 100%. I don't know what's the best place to live. I'm in the USA and hence must be a paranoid neurotic just like everyone else. My conditioned response is that it sucks here but everywhere else will be worse.

No, my point is that countries which are socialist, and have a strong sense of socialism amongst the populations, are overwhelmingly better places to live, which undermines your assertions that socialism is a bad thing, does it not?

If your point is that the level of socialism equates with quality of life...I don't know.

Look at the list, read about the countries, their politics and their social outlook, then get back to me. All of the top ten countries have a strongly socialist politik. Socialist countries, by and large, are better places to live on any objective metric you care to measure.

I don't trust our government. It might be one of those socialist-leaning countries has a more trustworthy government. I feel as if our government is completely out of control, and it sort of scares me.

So why does the alternative have to be no government? What makes you think local government will be better? Have you ever met any local politicians? They're hardly paragons of virtue themselves. Another alternative is a different type of government, and a different type of society.

Why do you think the government is "out of control"? What are you scared of? Politicians are a scummy bunch, by and large, but that doesn't mean that getting rid of them is a sensible course of action, or that gung-ho, going-it-alone libertarianism will make your life better.

 

[Pardalis]

Canada's doing poorly? News to me. Care to back this up?

Not too bad, well, except Toronto.

 

[volatile]

Social security: It's a ponzi scheme. It's an unfunded program. The federal government has liabilities on the order of 50 trillion dollars. You can't get something for nothing. Somehow the working people will have to pay for all those old people, retiring baby boomers who often didn't have any children of their own. I don't want to have to slave so they can retire. I don't want my kids to have to slave to support me and my generation.

So, what's the alternative? Those who didn't earn enough working their minimum wage jobs to pay for a 401k starve to death? Those whose companies make them redundant because they're off-shoring, or those who are disabled through accident or birth, are left high and dry? You really begrudge those less fortunate than yourself a tiny, tiny fraction of your wage so they can feed their children? You really want to live in a country that leaves a large swathe of its citizens high and dry? I'm alright Jack and screw the next guy?

I'll take care of my own retirement, you take care of yours. If you guessed wrong, there's always charity and cat-food.

You make the assumption that poor people are poor though laziness or stupidity. That is manifestly not the case.

I'm simply not concerned with "the poor". I'm concerned with myself and my family a lot more.

So, in your perfect society, the disabled, the jobless and the poor starve? What's the alternative?

I don't know your employment situation, but the best of us can be suddenly made unemployed, or suffer a disabling accident. The brightest and most hard-working of people can find it tough to get a job. The smartest young woman can end up pregnant and unable to earn enough to feed her kid. Better hope you or your family don't fall into any of those categories.

Why do you hate society? In a society that looks after its poor and fosters a sense of cooperation has lower crime, better health, greater wealth and all the rest. Check my list. Your ideology is selfish, greedy, divisive and destructive.

 

[D'rok]

Not too bad, well, except Toronto.

Woohoo! A hockey derail!

Ah, the Leafs. Their misfortune is my bliss. If only my Oilers could get it together, life would be perfect.

Go Sens and Habs!

(Penalizes self 2 minutes for boarding this thread)

 

[dash]

Why do you think the government is "out of control"? What are you scared of? Politicians are a scummy bunch, by and large, but that doesn't mean that getting rid of them is a sensible course of action, or that gung-ho, going-it-alone libertarianism will make your life better.

I'm not happy with the business in the middle east, the war on Iraq, the War on Terror. I'm not happy with the US having an empire. I'm not happy with Bush trying to whittle away our personal freedoms. I don't like the attempt at RealID -- "Your identity papers, please!" America is slipping into fascism, but it's ok because it's happening slowly enough.

The Iraq War was all about oil. Saddam started making noise about not pricing oil in dollars, instead he'd price it in Euros. If enough countries stop locking their goods to the dollar, the dollar collapses. So we attacked Iraq. Why are we demonizing Iran? Because Iran was threatening to start selling oil for Euros. The Bush administration has lied so many times, they claimed Iran had a nuclear weapons program when they knew from CIA sources it had been abandoned 3 years ago. When the news came out, Iran did a brilliant move -- they said no more dollars for oil. Perfect timing.

If the US can capture the middle eastern oil reserves, this will allow the dollar to survive a bit longer. That's all our government is shooting for. Getting another day, another week, another month, another year. They're not fixing any of the fundamental problems. It's not a level playing field. The US is at a huge advantage having the dollar accepted as the world's reserve currency. If this changes...the US loses its royalty status.

Russia and China will never allow the US to control all the middle eastern oil. They can't take that risk. It's a stalemate. Bush is jackass enough to think he can actually do it. But nevermind Bush, he's just a puppet. It's Cheney calling the shots. These guys are living in fantasy land. They're just trying to avert economic disaster until after the 2008 elections.

This is tiring for me writing this stuff out. I've written a lot of it on my blog, here:

http://dashxdr.blogspot.com

See the "China, Taiwan and decoupling" post.

America needs a wakeup call. I think it's going to get one, relatively soon. If we're lucky it will only be like the 70's again -- a time when gold soared and stagflation reigned. Worst case -- worse than 1929. Empires always end eventually. What's special about ours?

-Dave

 

[dash]

Why do you hate society? In a society that looks after its poor and fosters a sense of cooperation has lower crime, better health, greater wealth and all the rest. Check my list. Your ideology is selfish, greedy, divisive and destructive.

All these things you're describing are the standard arguments. Sound great on paper, but in reality? "Socialists know all about redstributing wealth but nothing about creating wealth."

Let me give you an example. Person X buys an overpriced house in 2004, doesn't read the paper on the loan agreement, signs onto an ARM loan. Person Y buys an equivalent overpriced house in 2004, but he read the loan agreement, and got a 30 year fixed mortgage.

2007 rolls around and person X's mortgage resets, suddenly he can't afford to live in his home. Person Y has managed to make his higher payments on time. He has had to forego a big screen TV, a nicer car, and eating out. Person X suffered no such hardships. He spent the savings on his home payment.

So now the government steps in and says it's not fair that person X should lose his house. We'll adjust the terms of the ARM so that the bank can't foreclose, person X can go on maying his subprime payments.

Is this scenario fair? Fair to who? Person Y got royally screwed.

Take your time to think about the answer. Socialism always leads to the nanny government, where personal responsibility can be ignored. The lesson is that it doesn't pay to be responsible. Person Y's will become fewer and fewer...until the whole system collapses. As it is doing right now. Denial won't change the facts.

-Dave

 

[WildCat]

All these things you're describing are the standard arguments. Sound great on paper, but in reality? "Socialists know all about redstributing wealth but nothing about creating wealth."

Let me give you an example. Person X buys an overpriced house in 2004, doesn't read the paper on the loan agreement, signs onto an ARM loan. Person Y buys an equivalent overpriced house in 2004, but he read the loan agreement, and got a 30 year fixed mortgage.

2007 rolls around and person X's mortgage resets, suddenly he can't afford to live in his home. Person Y has managed to make his higher payments on time. He has had to forego a big screen TV, a nicer car, and eating out. Person X suffered no such hardships. He spent the savings on his home payment.

So now the government steps in and says it's not fair that person X should lose his house. We'll adjust the terms of the ARM so that the bank can't foreclose, person X can go on maying his subprime payments.

Is this scenario fair? Fair to who? Person Y got royally screwed.

Take your time to think about the answer. Socialism always leads to the nanny government, where personal responsibility can be ignored. The lesson is that it doesn't pay to be responsible. Person Y's will become fewer and fewer...until the whole system collapses. As it is doing right now. Denial won't change the facts.

-Dave

You're all over the map here, and we have topics on nearly all of that elsewhere.

But I'd really like to see your response to this:

You realize that by doing this you just turn gold into a fiat currency, don't you?

 

[volatile]

I'm not happy with the business in the middle east, the war on Iraq, the War on Terror. I'm not happy with the US having an empire. I'm not happy with Bush trying to whittle away our personal freedoms. I don't like the attempt at RealID -- "Your identity papers, please!" America is slipping into fascism, but it's ok because it's happening slowly enough.

There seems to be a streak of paranoia and conspiracy theory about your worldview. Just a streak, but it's worrying.

Firstly - fascism. I suggest you actually read about what life was like in the fascist states of Europe in the 1930s and 40s (see, for example The Racial State by Michael Burleigh). America is certainly not becoming a fascist state. I agree with you that the war on Iraq is a bad thing and that ID cards are problematic and worrisome, but they're not "fascist", and the way to conquer them is not isolationism, selfishness and fear.

The Iraq War was all about oil.

No, it wasn't.

Saddam started making noise about not pricing oil in dollars, instead he'd price it in Euros. If enough countries stop locking their goods to the dollar, the dollar collapses. So we attacked Iraq. Why are we demonizing Iran? Because Iran was threatening to start selling oil for Euros. The Bush administration has lied so many times, they claimed Iran had a nuclear weapons program when they knew from CIA sources it had been abandoned 3 years ago. When the news came out, Iran did a brilliant move -- they said no more dollars for oil. Perfect timing.

I suggest you read a little more about the geopolitics of the Middle East, about Iran's very clearly expressed expansionist policies (see the Iran/Iraq war, for example). Yes, they lied about the military capabilities of Iraq and Iran, but that has nothing to do with oil and more to do with political expediency. I despise the war as much as you do, but to reduce a complex series of geo-political events stretching back decades if not centuries into "It's all about the oil" is naive.

If the US can capture the middle eastern oil reserves, this will allow the dollar to survive a bit longer. That's all our government is shooting for. Getting another day, another week, another month, another year. They're not fixing any of the fundamental problems. It's not a level playing field. The US is at a huge advantage having the dollar accepted as the world's reserve currency. If this changes...the US loses its royalty status.

The problems in the US economy have little to do with the price of oil and lots to do with the sub-prime mortgage market and the greed of corporations and individuals alike. In fact, its rabid individualism that got us into this mess in the first place.

America needs a wakeup call. I think it's going to get one, relatively soon. If we're lucky it will only be like the 70's again -- a time when gold soared and stagflation reigned. Worst case -- worse than 1929. Empires always end eventually. What's special about ours?

Agreed, in some respects. But the solution to these problems is not a gold standard, a retreat to global isolationism, an end to trade with Canada and Mexico and all the other loony things Ron Paul advocates.

 

[D'rok]

Socialism always leads to the nanny government, where personal responsibility can be ignored.

You continually make absolute statements like this. They are fallacious and undermine your argument. You are describing the catastrophic results of economic policy in perhaps the least socialist economy in the Western world (USA) and you are then extrapolating those problems to socialism as a principle and socialist/democratic countries in general. This does not match reality.

Socialist Western democracies are not experiencing these problems - at least not anywhere near to the same degree. Our biggest concern is how your recession is going to affect our productivity.

How is personal debt-loading and government debt-loading to the point of bankruptcy (aka the American model) anything but ignoring personal (and national) responsibility? Socialism is not the bogey-man; unrestrained capitalism and consumerism is. (Not to mention rampant imperialsm).

 

[dash]

You realize by doing this you'd just turn gold into a fiat currency, don't you.

I'm not sure I understand your point. Gold can't be created by government fiat. That's the point. If you have a currency that is backed by gold, the government can only issue more currency by acquiring more gold.

If your currency is redeemable in gold, and the government starts cheating by printing more currency, hoping people don't actually redeem their gold, some few people will get wise and start asking for their gold. This can only go on for a while. Either the government reneges on the gold backing (as the US did 3 times in the 1900's) or the government runs out of gold, or the government keeps the dollar strong.

Having a gold backed currency is the best way of keeping the government honest. So they can't just print more money if they want to fund popular programs, in order to keep politicans in office. They'd have to either borrow the money, or raise more in taxes. The US is spending, spending, spending, because they can both borrow (but not for much longer) and print money. Printing money is a hidden tax. It's inflationary. It steals wealth from everyone who has savings in dollars, or dollar denominated assets.

Everyone assumes someone else is paying for all the money the government is spending. They aren't. We all are. It shows up in higher prices for gasoline, food, services, etc. Wages that rise in nominal terms (dollar terms) but are actually declining in real terms (purchasing power).

I don't know if I answered your question, as I said I don't know what your point was.

-Dave

 

[volatile]

All these things you're describing are the standard arguments. Sound great on paper, but in reality? "Socialists know all about redstributing wealth but nothing about creating wealth."

Nonsense. See the list I posted.

Take your time to think about the answer. Socialism always leads to the nanny government, where personal responsibility can be ignored. The lesson is that it doesn't pay to be responsible. Person Y's will become fewer and fewer...until the whole system collapses. As it is doing right now. Denial

Again, nonsense. The countries with the longest established systems of socialist rule are the wealthiest, best educated, healthiest and happiest. Your theory does not play out in practice. The American system is about as far from socialist as you can get in the Western world, and the collapse of its economy is the product of individual greed, not socialism.

Your argument, still, presupposes that people who are on welfare are overwhelmingly there because of their own failings. Whilst this is probably true in some respects, most people do not choose to be on benefits. The Dole in the UK is something like £40 a week, just above the breadline. Most people on benefits are not on them because they want to. Most people scraping by on the meagre state pension are not delighted to be doing so. Most people on disability benefit would rather not be. Do you honestly believe that most unemployed people prefer to be unemployed?

In a socialist society, responsibility is shared. Your role in the community is what's important, and you are part of a communal whole. It actually fosters responsibility, because rather than your own miserable self being the be all and end all of your labours, you are actually responsible to your community. Teamwork, cooperation and togetherness is better than isolationism.

How can leaving poor people to go hungry and be forced to "eat catfood" because you're unwilling to play your part in the fabric of society be "responsible"?

Furthermore, it seems to be that rabid individualism increases fear, crime and insecurity.

 

[volatile]

Printing money is a hidden tax. It's inflationary. It steals wealth from everyone who has savings in dollars, or dollar denominated assets.

Oh! You're one of those.