ron paul=awesome/kickass?

[Nitro Express]

Also going back to Paul, I know it can't be entirely blamed on him but you worry about someone who has brought up a son who is a fucking mental crazy wackjob.

He was one of the seven senators that refused to vote for the defense bill that allows our military to arrest you with no trial and hold you indefinitely. The US Constitution forbids the US military being used as a domestic police force and also states everyone is innocent until proven guilty and have the right to a public fair trial.

The problem with the congress and the president passing legislation that is anti-constitutional is it makes the government criminal. The constitution of the land is above the congress and president and if they aren't going to enforce the law and even illegally break it, then we the people have to step in and take charge. That becomes a potential powder keg. Now that's crazy and the current batch of lawmakers are bringing us closer and closer to a dangerous situation. If it continues without being able to be fixed with elections, then the government will start to divide along certain lines and the states will divide along certain lines and we will be in a situation we haven't been in since the civil war. If people thought this country was coming apart in the 1960's they have no idea how bad the situation can get in just a few short years from now.

[Pink Spider]

Did you just use the per capita of East Germany in 1984 and compare it to Germany as a whole 25 years later? Nuts.

Fair enough. I admit that I probably should have looked it up further. I don't really know much about the current economy of Germany because it's not really relevant to anything I've come across before. Perhaps it was nuts... I don't claim to know everything.

The facts are pretty straightforward.
The fucking bizarre response to all of this is to want MORE DEREGULATION???

Fucking mental. Absolutely fucking mental.

So, basically everyone that disagrees with your opinion of things is just "fucking mental" or "crazy" or "nuts" or whatever. I get it. I've heard it about 3 or 4 times now. Maybe not all directly aimed at me...but enough. My apologies for wanting to discuss and maybe learn something.

[Seshmeister]

Passive aggressive hyperbole whatever...

There is a deeply held at times irrational belief that many Americans have which is that government is always the problem and less of it is always better.

Go back try and get an open mind and think about it.

Bear in mind I have nothing to gain either way and only give the smallest tiny fuck what you end up thinking either way unlike most of the media and all of the politicians who offer an opinion to you.

[Seshmeister]

Why not for example deregulate high street branch banking security?

Let's lobby the government to make it legal to do bank robberies. So it's fine to go in with a gun and rob banks.

I think if you did that then a lot more banks would get robbed. A fuck of a lot more.

I think it's pretty fucking likely though that a fuck of a lot less money would have gone missing than with the recent crises.

And it would have been more spread out and with nicer people...

[Nitro Express]

The debate between the size of the government needed is as old as this country is. It all boils down to trust doesn't it. I mean the best government would be a benevolent dictatorship. It would be efficient and things would get done but good luck finding one. I've never seen big government work well in big countries like this one. So many parts are so different I really do think we would be better off giving the states more power to regulate themselves as they see fit. Then live in the state that best suits your interests. It's the same problem why a world government would never in reality work, too many different philosophies and interests. Socialism tends to work best in smaller countries where the population tend to want the same things. In big diverse countries it just doesn't work.

[Dr. Love]

Also going back to Paul, I know it can't be entirely blamed on him but you worry about someone who has brought up a son who is a fucking mental crazy wackjob.

[citation needed]

[Nitro Express]

Why not for example deregulate high street branch banking security?

Let's lobby the government to make it legal to do bank robberies. So it's fine to go in with a gun and rob banks.

I think if you did that then a lot more banks would get robbed. A fuck of a lot more.

I think it's pretty fucking likely though that a fuck of a lot less money would have gone missing than with the recent crises.

And it would have been more spread out and with nicer people...

I think our government already has made bank robbery legal. When MF Global ended up with lot's of it's clients money missing the CEO just shrugged and said he had no idea where the money went and nothing happened to him. Plus, the government should have taken over the banks in trouble instead of just giving them blank checks. There is no auditing being done and no real investigation. It's a pimper's paradise right now and some of the biggest crooks are in the government itself. So the main question is not regulation but who do you trust? Who's trustworthy? The corruption is complete. A modern paper economy is nothing more than a bunch of IOU's. Once the trust is gone in the system it no longer works. Just the other day I saw a guy come into a bank branch and ask if they had any gold. This was a commercial bank and the teller did have some gold coins and he bought several of them. I said I didn't know you guys sold gold and she goes oh, we do now because the demand is up. Why is this? People are losing their trust in the paper system. People don't trust the government either. One reason we have so many banking problems is the government allowed the old banking rules to be deregulated because the banks bought the politicians.

[Dr. Love]

The facts are pretty straightforward.

The finance sector lobbied governments for years saying they wanted deregulated.

When I say lobbied I mean a mixture of legal bribery and pressure using arguments built on academic expert arguments who they also legally bribed.

This started way back and governments of both sides went along with it. Then when the whole thing goes to fuck the finance sector are saying it's not their fault it's the government/the system which made them do it. Everyone apart from the finance sector picks up the bill.

The fucking bizarre response to all of this is to want MORE DEREGULATION???

Fucking mental. Absolutely fucking mental.

Deregulation is pointless without the reintroduction of risk. Banks know they can gamble and get bailed out with taxpayer money AND not be tried for their crimes. Take away that safety net and I am positive they act differently. There are a lot of companies that aren't highly regulated AND don't have that safety net that are successful (and a lot that fail).

My own company's vertical recently became more heavily regulated. It cost us a fair amount of money to become and stay compliant, and a lot of decisions we make now are based in part on how the government has worded/ruled on certain standards.

The interesting part is that it hurt our competition much, much worse, and ultimately drove many of them out of business. Now we don't have much competition... if you want services like ours, you're going to have to pay whatever we want to charge, and no one can really get into the market because it's just too difficult anymore unless you're entrenched, like we are.

I don't think that Ron Paul would say every regulation should be rescinded, but I do think he would say that regulations should be just and smart. Liberty is about being able to do whatever you want AS LONG AS it doesn't harm anyone else. What the banks did in 2007/2008 was very harmful to a lot of people, and they should be held responsible for any criminal actions which they committed, and there should be laws against harmful and deceptive practices. Those that break the law should be tried and sent to jail.

Once the government cracks down on Wall Street and shows them that they will let them go bankrupt, and they will send CEOs and other employees to jail, and that NO ONE is above the law, then they will change their ways. But as long as we allow the banks to lobby and influence the officials that then write the regulations on them, or worse, let them write the regulations themselves, nothing will change. Remove government control/influence, you remove the motivation for people to corrupt the government to control that influence.

There should be laws, but they should be targeted, and be intelligent, and be limited.

[Dr. Love]

[Dr. Love]

[Dr. Love]

[Nitro Express]

Deregulation is pointless without the reintroduction of risk. Banks know they can gamble and get bailed out with taxpayer money AND not be tried for their crimes. Take away that safety net and I am positive they act differently. There are a lot of companies that aren't highly regulated AND don't have that safety net that are successful (and a lot that fail).

My own company's vertical recently became more heavily regulated. It cost us a fair amount of money to become and stay compliant, and a lot of decisions we make now are based in part on how the government has worded/ruled on certain standards.

The interesting part is that it hurt our competition much, much worse, and ultimately drove many of them out of business. Now we don't have much competition... if you want services like ours, you're going to have to pay whatever we want to charge, and no one can really get into the market because it's just too difficult anymore unless you're entrenched, like we are.

I don't think that Ron Paul would say every regulation should be rescinded, but I do think he would say that regulations should be just and smart. Liberty is about being able to do whatever you want AS LONG AS it doesn't harm anyone else. What the banks did in 2007/2008 was very harmful to a lot of people, and they should be held responsible for any criminal actions which they committed, and there should be laws against harmful and deceptive practices. Those that break the law should be tried and sent to jail.

Once the government cracks down on Wall Street and shows them that they will let them go bankrupt, and they will send CEOs and other employees to jail, and that NO ONE is above the law, then they will change their ways. But as long as we allow the banks to lobby and influence the officials that then write the regulations on them, or worse, let them write the regulations themselves, nothing will change. Remove government control/influence, you remove the motivation for people to corrupt the government to control that influence.

There should be laws, but they should be targeted, and be intelligent, and be limited.

Great point. The best regulator is failure. It also makes more wise customers. Once these institutions know they are going to get bailed out they go to seed. Without that government safety net, they know failure means out of business for good. When the investors know there are no bailouts, they really check where they put their money. It's the free market at work.

[Dr. Love]

[Dr. Love]

[Nitro Express]

Democratic Republics don't work well with a lazy uninformed population. The US traditionally never was the mecca for the lazy. We used to be a nation of informed workers and the wealth from that just made us complacent and lazy.