REVscene Automotive Forum - If America doesn't elect Ron Paul, their country is DOOMED

REVscene Automotive Forum (https://www.revscene.net/forums/)

- Vancouver Off-Topic / Current Events (https://www.revscene.net/forums/vancouver-off-topic-current-events_50/)

- - If America doesn't elect Ron Paul, their country is DOOMED (https://www.revscene.net/forums/659745-if-america-doesnt-elect-ron-paul-their-country-doomed.html)

Quote:

Originally Posted by The7even (Post 7743528)

Ahahaha. yeah,no.

Why Are Americans Being Forced to Buy Health Insurance? - Money - Health.com

Unless you’ve been living under a rock, you know that President Barack Obama has signed a health-care bill that contains several landmark reforms to the nation’s health insurance system. Some sound great: Insurers will no longer be able to deny coverage for preexisting conditions, and young adults will be allowed to stay on their parents’ health plans until the age of 26.

Others sound less favorable. Uninsured people will have to buy health insurance—a policy known as the "individual mandate"—or pay a fine.

I belong to a forum filled with deep south hard core conservative Republicans that i go to for the lols in reading their hatred of 'Obamacare'.

So I was asking, what is day-to-day life like, health care wise in the US.

Can you imagine, from the Canadian perspective, being forced to stay in a job you hate because of health insurance? It's fine if you are healthy, but as soon as you get the pre-existing label...you are screwed!

Want to start you r own business, in the land of opportunity? Same problem.

Forget all the details of affording insurance or not, and all the other problems, but just think about having life decisions derailed because of insurance, and something like diabetes or some other, treatable ailment.

They are just so fucked up.

Americans will fight that they don't want "government death panels" dictating their health. I'm sorry, you want a for profit company doing it instead?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gridlock (Post 7743661)

People in America have been brainwashed buy big corporations to not want health care.

Forget about Ron Pauls newsletters, people are now starting to read his book.

Ron Paul’s Book Sounds A Lot Like His Newsletters

Ron Paul’s Book Sounds A Lot Like His Newsletters | RedState

“The individual suffering from AIDS certainly is a victim – frequently a victim of his own lifestyle – but this same individual victimizes innocent citizens by forcing them to pay for his care,”

Also a few days before the poll Ron Paul is taking a break when the others are in full campaign mode. I guess his old age is catching up to him.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Manic! (Post 7743704)

Well...let's take off the kid gloves, its kind of true, isn't it?

Unprotected anal sex-gay or not-choice.
Sharing needles-choice.

Pretty much anything other than blood transfusion, is a choice.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gridlock (Post 7743734)

Well...let's take off the kid gloves, its kind of true, isn't it?

Unprotected anal sex-gay or not-choice.
Sharing needles-choice.

Pretty much anything other than blood transfusion, is a choice.

You know you can get Aids having strait sex too?
Technically having a blood transfusion is a choice. No one can force an adult to have one.
Having a partner cheat on you, catch Aids and give it to you is not a choice.
Being raped and getting aids is not a choice.
Being born with Aids is not a choice.

Pissing people off is not a good way to win an election.

America is doomed if he does get elected.
He states his desire to abolish the Federal Reserve. This will put monetary policy in the hands of congress. That will be game over.

Quote:

Originally Posted by finbar (Post 7743754)

America is doomed if he does get elected.
He states his desire to abolish the Federal Reserve. This will put monetary policy in the hands of congress. That will be game over.

The Federal Reserve is as Federal as Federal Express.

The Fed is an establishment by private institutions and not the government. Abolishing the Fed translates to real transparency on how the American money is printed and how it distributes that money. Any wrong doing and it can be easily recognized. As of now, the US government cannot know how the Fed itself works (made possible by government cronies at Jekyll Island).

When you eradicate the Fed, you eradicate these problems. What happens next ? You establish a real institution that is not outside the law and works for the people.

Yeah I can see how you'd like the scumbags who will change like wind direction on decisions to "not piss off the people" thats exactly the kind of leader the US doesn't need. The guy that bucks the trend and goes against the "popular thing to do" is the guy they need. Not some spineless Ken doll teleprompter reader. Clearly you believe in saying things you dont believe in just to get some votes.
It is you who does not understand RP's voter base and supporters.
You are completely clueless as to why he has his current supporters and will win over more.
You are far dumber than I gave you credit for.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Manic! (Post 7743744)

Pissing people off is not a good way to win an election.

Quote:

Originally Posted by will068 (Post 7743788)

As of now, the US government cannot know how the Fed itself works .

The chairman of the fed answers to congress.

Doesn't matter what so ever. RP is pushing a gold backed currency.

Quote:

Originally Posted by finbar (Post 7744014)

The chairman of the fed answers to congress.

Quote:

Originally Posted by finbar (Post 7743754)

America is doomed if he does get elected.
He states his desire to abolish the Federal Reserve. This will put monetary policy in the hands of congress. That will be game over.

yeah the fed has done great on its own secretive self hasnt it....

america is already doomed ppl are just waiting for the moment the cracks crumble it

Quote:

Originally Posted by finbar (Post 7744014)

The chairman of the fed answers to congress.

yes.. they'll answer questions... but still do whatever the hell they want

http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews...an-banks-again

Quote:

GOP presidential contender Rep. Ron Paul, a staunch Federal Reserve critic, pointed out:

The Fed’s latest actions in cooperating with foreign central banks to undertake liquidity swaps of dollars for foreign currencies is another reason why Congress needs enhanced power to oversee and audit the Fed. Under current law Congress cannot examine these types of agreements. Those who would argue that auditing the Fed or these agreements with central banks harms the Fed’s independence should reevaluate the Fed’s supposed independence when the Fed bails out Europe so soon after President Obama promised US assistance in resolving the Euro crisis.

Once again the Fed’s actions highlight the problems associated with fiat money, as Paul observed: “Fiat money caused this European crisis and the financial crisis before it. More fiat money is not the cure. The global fiat currency system has proven itself a failure. We need real monetary reform. We need sound money."

Still, even as Bernanke asserted he would not lend money to bail out European banks, there were indications that he somehow felt the United States had a vested interest in doing so. He stated that he was “very concerned” about the situation in Europe.

Senator Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) commented of Bernanke, “He did say if they can’t get their thing in order it could affect us. He said a collapse over there would be detrimental to us.” Hatch went on to assert he was confident in how Bernanke would handle the situation.

But observers say that because Bernanke knew that a public bailout of European banks would not be well received, he went about it in a roundabout way.

It’s worth noting that the Federal Reserve has already garnered a reputation for secrecy. Bloomberg News was compelled to sue the Fed in order to obtain information on its emergency programs during the 2007-09 financial crisis, though Bloomberg did exclude foreign-currency liquidity swaps because names of the commercial banks which borrowed under that program were already disclosed.

The Fed’s dealings have often been the subject of great secrecy. During a March 2009 Senate budget meeting, when Bernanke was asked by Sen. Bernie Sanders (D-Vt.) what the Fed has been doing with the American people’s money, he sidestepped the question.

Sanders said:

We have spent a lot of time in Congress talking about the $700 billion TARP bailout … not a whole lot has been talked about with regard to the $2.2 trillion that the Fed has lent out. Now I find that absolutely extraordinary that I wrote you a letter and I said, "Hey, who did you lend the money to? What were the terms of those loans? How can my constituents in Vermont get some of that money? Who makes the decisions? Do you guys sit around in a room? Do you make it? Are there conflicts of interest?: So my question to you is, will you tell the American people to whom you lent $2.2 trillion of their dollars? Will you tell us who got that money and what the terms are of those agreements?

To which Bernanke responded, “Any bank that has access to the U.S. Federal Reserve system.”

Sanders asked for the names of the banks, but Bernanke refused to submit any because he claimed it “is counterproductive and will destroy the value of the program … banks will not come to the Federal Reserve.”

Sanders grew angry at that response and said, “Well isn’t that too bad. In other words, they took the money, but they don’t want to be public about who received it.”

The dialogue continued for several minutes, but in the end, no specific information regarding the exchanges between the Federal Reserve and the recipients of its funds was revealed.

It is because of this secrecy and the unconstitutional and detrimental actions of the Federal Reserve that Ron Paul has led the movement to audit the Fed, a movement that has gained momentum and popularity. On February 26, 2009, Paul introduced H.R. 1207, the bill to audit the Federal Reserve, declaring:

I rise to introduce the Federal Reserve Transparency Act. Throughout its nearly 100-year history, the Federal Reserve has presided over the near-complete destruction of the United States dollar. Since 1913 the dollar has lost over 95% of its purchasing power, aided and abetted by the Federal Reserve’s loose monetary policy. How long will we as a Congress stand idly by while hard-working Americans see their savings eaten away by inflation? Only big-spending politicians and politically favored bankers benefit from inflation.

That bill has managed to attract 320 co-sponsors in the House

there's a lot more too the article but this is good enough to quote if you want more go to the link

Quote:

Originally Posted by StylinRed (Post 7744152)

yeah the fed has done great on its own secretive self hasnt it....

america is already doomed ppl are just waiting for the moment the cracks crumble it

yes.. they'll answer questions... but still do whatever the hell they want

Federal Reserve Secretly Bails Out European Banks ... Again

there's a lot more too the article but this is good enough to quote if you want more go to the link

http://www.gifsforum.com/images/gif/...t-read_gif.gif

Ron Paul has no chance of winning anyway.

If ron paul gets elected, incoming assassination watch

Quote:

Originally Posted by strykn (Post 7744297)

If ron paul gets elected, incoming assassination watch

it'll probably more like an induced stroke/heart attack and people will believe it since he's old

Quote:

Originally Posted by Manic! (Post 7744234)

http://www.gifsforum.com/images/gif/...t-read_gif.gif

Ron Paul has no chance of winning anyway.

didn't expect you to, it was meant for finbar; i doubt you'd know what it says anyway

The worst words uttered in recent times are, `too big to fail`.

No one can tell you what would have happened if they just let companies go down. They can only speculate. My speculation is, it would have been worse, but much faster.

In a world with no AIG, GM, Chrysler and several other banks, it would have galvanized other institutions to get their shit together. Yes, the unemployment numbers would have been bad, but I believe, in my uneducated on the subject mind that re-organizing the remaining survivors would have created the growth.

All thats happening now is a slow decline. The economic problems weren't caused by the housing market. That was a symptom. The problem was cheap money. And that is what Paul talks about with Fiat currency. Here's the history of the US economic problems of what brings us to today:

2008-housing crash. Banking failure.
2000-2008-Bush lowered taxes
2000-dot com bust. Housing boom(bubble)
1990's-deregulation of banking sector. Dot com boom(bubble)
1980's-Reaganomics lowers taxes. Money gets cheaper as interest rates fall. I'd almost say that there was a consumption boom(bubble).
1970's-Bretton-Woods suspended, US no longer on gold standard, other countries follow suit.

Took about 35 years for it to unravel.

Play it backwards. With the US no longer on the gold standard, there is nothing physical to control the amount of the money supply. This allows interest rates to fall as all that holds the economy together, is the belief that it works. This is why Reagan was successful; he was a charasmatic leader. Now, without the gold standard, the sky is the limit on the belief that the economy can provide. That leads to the excess of the 1980's. Add in a little deregulation, allowing banks to go unchecked. Cheaper money again leads people to buy big houses and use them as ATM's...and what do you know, people start looking at whats happening, believe it to be unsustainable, and it is so. It crashed because people, people in the macroeconomic sense, wanted it to. People think, the bubble had to pop. It doesn't just do it on its own. People make it pop.

The only thing that is keeping the economy from improving now is people lack the belief that it works. And that is Obama's downfall. He spent his time on Obamacare, instead of doing "something" to instill confidence in the economy. And at the heart, that's all it takes. People can get on the news and talk about economic indicators and interest rates and tax rates and everything else, but at the end of the day, people need to make the decision to spend, thinking that they have more money coming in to replace it. That's it. All Ron Paul wants to do is make all the other 'stuff' that happens in the background have some type of accountability to the people.

That's been the problem for the last year. The democrats and republicans have been having a pissing match over every single issue and the losers are the people that need to have faith in the system. It all comes down to the republicans wanting power-meaning the economy needs to go to shit to take out Obama, and the democrats don't want the Republicans to be able to say, "we did this, and this caused the economy to grow".

And great, you can do that, but those of us that are enlightened know that the paper we have in our wallets, and the number in the bank account is meaningless. The paper is worth maybe a penny, and on a computer I can type an extra 0 and it costs nothing. It has value because we as a people choose for it to.

So, that's why Ron Paul has support. Because he understands that there needs to be something there. This paper can be redeemed for gold. It has value. That's why people will ignore every other fucked up thing out of his mouth, because he gets that changing this 'system' will give people something to believe in, and that is the only thing that will change the current economic conditions.

Everything was predicted. In the last 40 years, we've gone to a system of bubbles. Whats the next big thing? Steady economic growth isn't sexy. We need 80% returns on money now. As I put above, I see 3 major bubbles in the last 40 years.

1. Consumption Bubble-people in the 80's just bought the fuck out of everything.
2. Dot Com bubble-how fucking stupid. Here we have a company called 'flooze' raking in millions of investor cash without a hope in sight of profit. Good call.
3. Housing Bubble-been beat to death.

Manufacturing isn't sexy anymore. Fuck it, we'll let China do that. Oops.

If you are willing to hand over your entire base of "things that actually add value" such as farming, and manufacturing in favor of more consumption, then your country is indeed doomed.

Would I think that Ron Paul would make a good president? No, not really. I think its too late to return to the system that he proposes. His system of states rights may work for the people in terms of representation, but would result in a system of infighting as the states diverge from one another. Gays are married in one state, and lynched in another.

I do believe that he is good for the discussion, as he continually brings up good, valid points. You have the Bachmann's, the Santorum's and the Perry's all trying to outdo each other on how conservative they can get-ie. Perry saying, "I hate gay rights", to which Santorum responds, "really, I've hated gay rights for way longer. So much so that my name is synonymous with evil, rectal things on google"

That is all meaningless bullshit in the election. It panders to the unenlightened.

I'd like to see him do well enough that he is a choice for VP, or made Secretary of the Treasury.

Holy shit...that was a long-winded post.

Actually it doesn't matter if he wins or not, but every moment he gets to talk to the public opens more people to liberty. If he died gunshot style it would be the best thing to happen.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Death2Theft (Post 7744486)

Actually it doesn't matter if he wins or not, but every moment he gets to talk to the public opens more people to liberty. If he died gunshot style it would be the best thing to happen.

More like Ron Paul slips and falls, hits his head on the ground and dies. Ron Paul truthers claim the CIA used a satellite to spray WD-40 in front of him.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Manic! (Post 7744550)

More like Ron Paul slips and falls, hits his head on the ground and dies. Ron Paul truthers claim the CIA used a satellite to spray WD-40 in front of him.

To lubricate his joints?

Manic has simply no clue. It may seem like ad-hominem but its just fact.

He is fully aware and just being an troll, he never backs up any of his arguements with credible sources nor does he confront or admit when he's wrong.
I dont mind that tho it just gives RP more of a chance to respond like a boss.
IE. his reaction to the video with the black guy speaking up for him..... He doesn't even remember it cuz it was like any other day. BAWS

Obama wins! Obama wins! Obama wins! Obama wins! Obama wins! Obama wins! Obama wins! Obama wins! Obama wins! Obama wins! Obama wins! Obama wins! the primary in Ohio!!!!!

The democratic primary. He was the only one running.

Results so far:

Santorum

26,443

25%

Romney

26,398

25%

Paul

22,728

21%

Gingrich

14,244

13%

Perry

11,099

10%

Bachmann

5,496

5%

Huntsman

628

1%

Tens of millions spent just try to get a votes from a hundred thousand people. The whole primary system seems ridiculous.

Oh shit...they could actually end up having Santorum as the nominee.

Romney is no surprise...Paul is doing well and way to tank Gingrich.

I suspect that they will all start attacking Santorum and looking for skeletons in his closet. I hope its that he's gay. Please make him be gay.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gridlock (Post 7748236)

This is only the first primary and Ohio is big time evangelical christian. Ron Paul is done for good for ever.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Manic! (Post 7748250)

This is only the first primary and Ohio is big time evangelical christian. Ron Paul is done for good for ever.

Oh yeah, I know this happens over and over. It's just, Santorum has never really been considered a legit contender. He wins this, gets more press and starts to gain momentum.

Great chart to look at:
Primaries - Exit/Entrance Polls - Election Center 2012 - Elections & Politics from CNN.com

Born-Again or Evangelical Christian?

Santorum: 32% yes 13% no

Romney: 14% Yes 48% no