Author Topic: I disagree with Ron Paul  (Read 4835 times)

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 66457
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: I disagree with Ron Paul
« Reply #75 on: August 19, 2011, 02:51:50 PM »
If he can`t muster up any real Congressional Support from either side, than his Presidency would become a giant disaster.

No it wouldn't.  Stopping bad legislation can be just as beneficial as passing good legislation. 

The True Adonis

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 50229
  • Fear is proof of a degenerate mind.
Re: I disagree with Ron Paul
« Reply #76 on: August 19, 2011, 02:56:23 PM »
No it wouldn't.  Stopping bad legislation can be just as beneficial as passing good legislation.  

Let`s listen to the person, John Chambers of the S&P who made the final call to downgrade the Credit and what caused it and WHY he made that call.  With Ron Paul and his inability to muster up any support and heavy handed rubber stamp of NO, we are surely headed for disastrous consequences.


Fury

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 21026
  • All aboard the USS Leverage
Re: I disagree with Ron Paul
« Reply #77 on: August 19, 2011, 03:44:05 PM »
I would also like to hear more on this in general from Ron Paul.  It's one of those questions I don't hear him get asked.  He comments on it here and there.  Regardless, if this is my major problem with Paul, I'm good with that.  From what I get, he's against all regulation.

There needs to be serious regulation reform across the board so that innovation and small business is not stopped or hurt imo.  There's a lot of people that flat out believe that means just get rid of it all, but that's naive.  Business will be happy to do the most unscrupulous shit if you let them and they don't care how many get fucked along the way or down the road.

I'd wager Paul looks at it as if you cut off the free money the FED gifts these banks then there would be no need for regulation. Without the free cash guarantee and the end to bailouts of insolvent firms (i.e. the possibility of a bank failure becomes a real possibility), banks will deleverage themselves from these ridiculous ratios and police themselves. The banks that want to run high-risk trading schemes (which brings the increased risk of failure) can run them to their heart’s content. They just won’t be bailed out after their schemes come down on their heads. High-risk, high-reward, bitchez.

That’s my only gripe with the HFTs. Every time there is a flash crash the NYSE or whoever steps in and cancels all the trades run by the algo, thus removing any risk from them fucking up their programs. If they were forced to take the losses the flash crash brought then they would be forced to up their game on their bots.

Hugo Chavez

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 31865
Re: I disagree with Ron Paul
« Reply #78 on: August 19, 2011, 04:12:22 PM »
I'd wager Paul looks at it as if you cut off the free money the FED gifts these banks then there would be no need for regulation. Without the free cash guarantee and the end to bailouts of insolvent firms (i.e. the possibility of a bank failure becomes a real possibility), banks will deleverage themselves from these ridiculous ratios and police themselves. The banks that want to run high-risk trading schemes (which brings the increased risk of failure) can run them to their heart’s content. They just won’t be bailed out after their schemes come down on their heads. High-risk, high-reward, bitchez.

That’s my only gripe with the HFTs. Every time there is a flash crash the NYSE or whoever steps in and cancels all the trades run by the algo, thus removing any risk from them fucking up their programs. If they were forced to take the losses the flash crash brought then they would be forced to up their game on their bots.

I do think that's the way he sees it.  But would that be the reality of it?  It's that part that I'm not sure about.  They do have a pretty big card to play with their, "give us the money or it's the end of everything you know" card.  Where the right regulations might prevent them from creating a shitstorm like this in the first place.

Deicide

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 22921
  • Reapers...
Re: I disagree with Ron Paul
« Reply #79 on: August 19, 2011, 04:18:36 PM »
I do think that's the way he sees it.  But would that be the reality of it?  It's that part that I'm not sure about.  They do have a pretty big card to play with their, "give us the money or it's the end of everything you know" card.  Where the right regulations might prevent them from creating a shitstorm like this in the first place.

The big question is if it would ever get that far, I mean, to even see if it would function that way. The system is so entrenched and it just seems like the Fed and Family get to do whatever they want. Assuming RP doesn't win the Presidency, what could possibly stop the next bailout if and when the economy crashes? :-\
I hate the State.

Bindare_Dundat

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 12227
  • KILL CENTRAL BANKS, BUY BITCOIN.
Re: I disagree with Ron Paul
« Reply #80 on: August 19, 2011, 05:01:23 PM »
I'd wager Paul looks at it as if you cut off the free money the FED gifts these banks then there would be no need for regulation. Without the free cash guarantee and the end to bailouts of insolvent firms (i.e. the possibility of a bank failure becomes a real possibility), banks will deleverage themselves from these ridiculous ratios and police themselves. The banks that want to run high-risk trading schemes (which brings the increased risk of failure) can run them to their heart’s content. They just won’t be bailed out after their schemes come down on their heads. High-risk, high-reward, bitchez.

That’s my only gripe with the HFTs. Every time there is a flash crash the NYSE or whoever steps in and cancels all the trades run by the algo, thus removing any risk from them fucking up their programs. If they were forced to take the losses the flash crash brought then they would be forced to up their game on their bots.



Awesome post. What the hell happened? We used to disagree all the time. Lol but seriously you are very close to the truth of the matter.

Hugo Chavez

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 31865
Re: I disagree with Ron Paul
« Reply #81 on: August 19, 2011, 05:28:01 PM »
The big question is if it would ever get that far, I mean, to even see if it would function that way. The system is so entrenched and it just seems like the Fed and Family get to do whatever they want. Assuming RP doesn't win the Presidency, what could possibly stop the next bailout if and when the economy crashes? :-\
good question.  maybe it's just hard to see it without regs because of that.

Deicide

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 22921
  • Reapers...
Re: I disagree with Ron Paul
« Reply #82 on: August 19, 2011, 05:29:32 PM »
good question.  maybe it's just hard to see it without regs because of that.

I think they're will be another crash and they will want another bailout...unless they are threatened with violence or something, what will stop them from getting it?
I hate the State.

MB_722

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 11173
  • RIP Keith
Re: I disagree with Ron Paul
« Reply #83 on: August 19, 2011, 09:17:47 PM »
you need regulation the question is HOW.

this part scares me about RP. then again I know its a farce. yes iv been drinking :D

Hugo Chavez

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 31865
Re: I disagree with Ron Paul
« Reply #84 on: August 19, 2011, 09:26:34 PM »
you need regulation the question is HOW.

this part scares me about RP. then again I know its a farce. yes iv been drinking :D
I do think the right regulation is important...  Problem is, I don't have any faith that the assclowns elected can get the "right regulation" done.

MB_722

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 11173
  • RIP Keith
Re: I disagree with Ron Paul
« Reply #85 on: August 19, 2011, 09:31:29 PM »
I agree, it like the myth of government incompetency. its competent enough to make us think its incompetent.

Emmortal

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5660
Re: I disagree with Ron Paul
« Reply #86 on: August 19, 2011, 10:03:14 PM »
you need regulation the question is HOW.

this part scares me about RP. then again I know its a farce. yes iv been drinking :D

Paul is for regulation that doesn't allow individuals or entities (corporations) to impose on others rights.  If elected he wouldn't go in and start stripping away legislation that would let companies do whatever the fuck they wanted.  I wouldn't be surprised if he would push for things like Glass-Steagal to be re-instituted.  When he talks about over regulation people take that to the extreme and say he just wants to remove all regulation which is far from the truth.

It's crystal clear that there are WAY too many regulations in our country.  Why do you think health care has sky rocketed?  Do you realize it costs over $300 for a nurse to admister fucking Tylenol to a patient in a hospital?  Fucking retarded.  It's not just health care but everything that affects our daily lives that has been regulated to the extreme.  The government has regulated us into not having to take personal responsibility and make choices for ourselves because they are chosing for us.

Hugo Chavez

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 31865
Re: I disagree with Ron Paul
« Reply #87 on: August 19, 2011, 10:30:08 PM »
Paul is for regulation that doesn't allow individuals or entities (corporations) to impose on others rights.  If elected he wouldn't go in and start stripping away legislation that would let companies do whatever the fuck they wanted.  I wouldn't be surprised if he would push for things like Glass-Steagal to be re-instituted.  When he talks about over regulation people take that to the extreme and say he just wants to remove all regulation which is far from the truth.

It's crystal clear that there are WAY too many regulations in our country.  Why do you think health care has sky rocketed?  Do you realize it costs over $300 for a nurse to admister fucking Tylenol to a patient in a hospital?  Fucking retarded.  It's not just health care but everything that affects our daily lives that has been regulated to the extreme.  The government has regulated us into not having to take personal responsibility and make choices for ourselves because they are chosing for us.
There are so many clips where he just talks about doing away with regulation.  some that follow him have for sure spoken like all regulation is bad.  He really need to talk about this a bit more.

Bindare_Dundat

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 12227
  • KILL CENTRAL BANKS, BUY BITCOIN.
Re: I disagree with Ron Paul
« Reply #88 on: August 19, 2011, 10:35:53 PM »
There are so many clips where he just talks about doing away with regulation.  some that follow him have for sure spoken like all regulation is bad.  He really need to talk about this a bit more.



Could you post a clip where he mentions unregulating everything. I think Emmortal is closer to the actual words he uses.

Bindare_Dundat

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 12227
  • KILL CENTRAL BANKS, BUY BITCOIN.
Re: I disagree with Ron Paul
« Reply #89 on: August 19, 2011, 10:41:52 PM »
REP. RON PAUL: Well, because I talk about a lot less regulation – I don’t like the regulatory agencies, but that doesn’t mean the free market doesn’t have regulation. The regulations in the free market are much stricter because if a company gets into trouble and goes bankrupt, the law – the economic law, which should be enforced by government, that company goes bankrupt. So instead of bailing them out, these companies should have gone bankrupt.

But you have sound money and free markets; you can’t counterfeit money, like the Federal Reserve does.

Hugo Chavez

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 31865
Re: I disagree with Ron Paul
« Reply #90 on: August 19, 2011, 10:58:35 PM »


Could you post a clip where he mentions unregulating everything. I think Emmortal is closer to the actual words he uses.
that's what I'm wondering about now, if he wasn't talking about that.  Remember, this thread was just bumped by 3333.  It's been a while since I was looking at this aspect.  I do remember the general context of his interviews soundling like he was just against regulation period when I created this thread.  And indeed others who are for Ron Paul have spoken the same way as if all regulation is taboo.  That's why I do think he needs to expand a bit more on the issue.  Is he flat out againt regulation or is he actually thinking the same as I about regulation?  I'm not sure at this point?

I never really meant this to be an attack thread on Ron Paul.  At the time my thinking was, "holy shit, I found something I don't agree with" kinda thing.

Emmortal

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5660
Re: I disagree with Ron Paul
« Reply #91 on: August 19, 2011, 11:18:50 PM »
that's what I'm wondering about now, if he wasn't talking about that.  Remember, this thread was just bumped by 3333.  It's been a while since I was looking at this aspect.  I do remember the general context of his interviews soundling like he was just against regulation period when I created this thread.  And indeed others who are for Ron Paul have spoken the same way as if all regulation is taboo.  That's why I do think he needs to expand a bit more on the issue.  Is he flat out againt regulation or is he actually thinking the same as I about regulation?  I'm not sure at this point?

I never really meant this to be an attack thread on Ron Paul.  At the time my thinking was, "holy shit, I found something I don't agree with" kinda thing.

Everyone should always question why they agree or disagree with someone.  It's a difficult thing to do with so much political posturing and people saying one thing and doing another these days.  It's extremely important you base your opinoins on the facts and not just something someone told you who missinterpreted from someone else who read an article written by someone with an agenda.

While we have access to much more information these days, we have a plethora of missinformation to deal with as well which makes it more difficult to make wise decisions.  This has been recognized by people who are pushing their ideas and viewpoints on others because they know that 90% of the people who receive the information their giving won't do any fact checking on it and take it for face value.

I have friends older than myself who send me e-mails all the time about some wild one sided opinionated subjects which I go through about 10 minutes of research to find out is completely blown out of proportion or outright patently false.  Not to get too far off on a tangent, but I blame technology on this, or our lack of ability to digest the loads of information given to us at instant speeds through technology.  I see it a lot in Gen Y as well.  Just observing my young nephew play video games, he's a bright kid but he has almost zero attention span and problem solving skills, spends a good 70% of his day texting on his phone or surfing the net on it barely noticing the world around him.  It really makes me wonder about how things are going to turn out in the future.

Bindare_Dundat

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 12227
  • KILL CENTRAL BANKS, BUY BITCOIN.
Re: I disagree with Ron Paul
« Reply #92 on: August 19, 2011, 11:25:43 PM »
India is most over-regulated country in the world
India is most over-regulated country in the world: Survey - The Economic Times

India has topped a list of the most "over-regulated countries in the world" in a survey on Asian business and politics by Hong Kong-based Political and Economic Risk Consultancy Ltd (PERC).

The survey used responses from American executives about regulatory conditions in the United States to provide a benchmark against which to assess the Asian scores.

India was rated worst in terms of over-regulation, scoring 9.16 points out of 10, followed by China with 9.04 points, Japan in third position with 3.28 points and the US at fourth with 1.51 points.

Hong Kong received the best score in the survey of 0.98 point, while Singapore was second with 1.08 points, according to the survey done in the last quarter of 2010, based on responses from 1,370 executives.

In general, regulations were complex and non-transparent, while standards and certifications procedures were onerous in India, according to the PERC survey findings.

Foreign exchange, capital transactions and some credit operations were subject to approvals, restrictions and additional requirements that went far beyond what most other countries require, concluded the survey.

Even procedures for something as simple as getting a tourist visa were more cumbersome in India than was typical elsewhere, it pointed out.

It also cited specific examples from the World Bank's Doing Business Survey of why India's regulatory system deserves to be graded as poorly as it was. It can take a month-and-a-half to register property, almost 200 days to obtain a construction permit, over 1,400 days to enforce a contract and seven years to close a business.

"Documentation requirements for both exports and imports are onerous," the PERC survey pointed out.

"Labor requirements are strict and companies lack flexibility on hiring and firing workers," it concluded.

Regulations in the country were frequently not enforced, which raised the question of why they were on the books at all, noted the survey.

"In a recent scandal involving the telecommunications ministry's mishandling of a landmark allocation of mobile telephone spectrum, as many as 85 of 122 new licences which were bundled with the bandwidth allocation were issued to companies that did not have the required capital to seek bandwidth," the survey pointed out.

These companies "suppressed facts, disclosed incomplete information and submitted fictitious documents", according to the survey.

"Of course they could not have done so without the complicity of bureaucrats at the ministry, who overlooked qualification shortcomings and arbitrarily moved forward the cut-off date for applying by one week to favor some companies that had applied earlier, while leaving others out," it said.






So much for all those regulations.

240 is Back

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 102387
  • Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com
Re: I disagree with Ron Paul
« Reply #93 on: August 19, 2011, 11:26:44 PM »
I agree, it like the myth of government incompetency. its competent enough to make us think its incompetent.

the smartest thing the devil ever did was convince people he didn't exist...

Bindare_Dundat

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 12227
  • KILL CENTRAL BANKS, BUY BITCOIN.
Re: I disagree with Ron Paul
« Reply #94 on: August 19, 2011, 11:30:12 PM »
that's what I'm wondering about now, if he wasn't talking about that.  Remember, this thread was just bumped by 3333.  It's been a while since I was looking at this aspect.  I do remember the general context of his interviews soundling like he was just against regulation period when I created this thread.  And indeed others who are for Ron Paul have spoken the same way as if all regulation is taboo.  That's why I do think he needs to expand a bit more on the issue.  Is he flat out againt regulation or is he actually thinking the same as I about regulation?  I'm not sure at this point?

I never really meant this to be an attack thread on Ron Paul.  At the time my thinking was, "holy shit, I found something I don't agree with" kinda thing.


Didn't look at it as an attack. Its a great topic of discussion and something he does need to be more clear on.