Republican primaries.

Last edited:
I've watched loads of Ron Paul videos, and the man makes complete sense. The others are so inept and Ron Paul owns them everytime.

How can anyone not understand or agree with what Paul is saying ?? :confused:

Ron Paul 2012.

Quite simple really, because he is on a GOP ticket trying to appeal to the Americans with below average intelligence. He's far to clever for them...:D
 
He talks some sense some of the time, unfortunately he fails on the economics side with his right wing faith based Austrian school of economics (The austrian school of economics is to real economists, what creationists are to real biologists). However, out of all the GOP candidates I like him the most. Not because I agree with most of his policies, but because he is entertaining :D

Talking about economics, here are his standpoints which all seem reasonable to me:

* Vetoing any unbalanced budget Congress sends to his desk.

* Refusing to further raise the debt ceiling so politicians can no longer spend recklessly.

* Fighting to fully audit (and then end) the Federal Reserve System, which has enabled the over 95% reduction of what our dollar can buy and continues to create money out of thin air to finance future debt.

* Legalizing sound money, so the government is forced to get serious about the dollar’s value.

* Ending the corporate stranglehold on the White House.

* Driving down gas prices by allowing offshore drilling, abolishing highway motor fuel taxes, increasing the mileage reimbursement rates, and offering tax credits to individuals and businesses for the use and production of natural gas vehicles.

* Eliminating the income, capital gains, and death taxes to ensure you keep more of your hard-earned money and are able to pass on your legacy to your family without government interference.

* Opposing all unfunded mandates and unnecessary regulations on small businesses and entrepreneurs.
http://www.ronpaul2012.com/the-issues/economy/


He isn't the greatest orator, and it sometimes sounds like he stumbles on some of his words, but for me, Paul talks straight, honest and clear about the issues, the others just fill up the space.
 
He supports the austrian school of economics, thats enough for me not to take him seriously. Sorry.

The rise of the so-called "tea party" movement has given a big boost to Libertarian economics, also known as "the Austrian School," a branch of thought that, although it calls itself economics, is better termed a Utopian philosophy. Ever since Paul Samuelson (and even Milton Friedman), academic economics have tried to define a more scientific framework for economics. In general this has meant applying statistical modeling, and formal definitions to various actors in the economy, including both public and private institutions as well as individuals and groups, that can then be applied to surveys and other data. You cannot ever make economics non-political since class and other interests of course also economic interests. But Samuelson hoped to move the economic debate from the realm of mostly ideology, to the realm of mostly evidence driven analysis.

"The Austrian School" is the opposite of a data or evidence driven framework. Texas Congressman Ron Paul is undoubtedly the most influential American advocate. Instead of paying any attention to data, it accepts as given from God (or nature) the transcendental "organizing" power of the market price mechanism. Its name derives from the identity of its founders and early supporters, Ludwig von Mises, and Nobel laureate Friedrich Hayek, both Austrians. the Ludwig von Mises Institute and Virginia based George Mason University are the principle US ideological centers of this trend.

Its principles are as follows:

1. The business cycle is a completely virtuous cycle. Slumps are the price we pay for booms. Recessions are the just punishment for the excesses of previous expansions. The fact that the rich reap the rewards regardless, and the poor are the ones punished regardless, is of no importance to the Austrian school. Every graph of the financial crises showing crashes and bubbles is just God's continuing morality play. Government intervention in this "virtuous" cycle prevents God and/or nature from rendering justice with the "tough love" everyone needs – and thus is evil. The Austrians are always in a state of continual frustration because no nation in the world seems to be willing to wait out financial crises and depressions trusting in the "magic of the market" to fix everything – that mirable dictu, keeps crashing and suffering from persistent instability. Instead of waiting for God's judgement, people – to the amazement of the "Austrians" – still resist walking calmly to the grave from starvation or homelessness!! They say: "if this is virtue, then the Devil has ascended Heaven." Nonetheless, the "virtuous business cycle of capitalism" has a certain seductive power. Not because it offers any solutions, but because it explicitly offers nothing: Welcome to God's Plan.

2. The Austrian School rejects a scientific foundation to economics. The failure of any political regime to endorse the virtuous business cycle theory of the Libertarians gives rise to all sorts of political backwardness and numbness to reality in its supporters – listening to them frequently arouses a generous desire to help them with a wake-up "dope slap," after such tortured jewels as: "the people are too stupid to understand," or "the people are entitled to nothing," and other too-vulgar-or-racist-to-repeat sentiments. So few believe them, in fact, that they have become hostile to any group or government or institutional level of analysis at all. Instead they advocate strict adherence to "methodological individualism" – analyzing human action exclusively from the perspective of individual agents. Austrian economists also argue that mathematical models and statistics are an unreliable means of analyzing and testing economic theory, and advocate deriving economic theory logically from "basic principles" – read "divinely inspired principles" – of human action. They have even given their methodology a name, "praxeology." Additionally, renouncing science altogether, the Austrians reject experimental and empirical research altogether. They reject testability and falsification en toto. The great virtue (not!) of a theory that rejects testing and falsification is, of course, that it cannot be disproved!

3. The role of the state in Austrian and now Libertarian theory is more confused than its transparently false propositions on the business cycle. The first Austrian, von Hayek, was actually a social democrat and strongly supported standard social democratic policy on the key role of the state in providing services that were market failures. He differed only on whether the post office should be public or private. But latter day Austrians at the Von Mises Institute take this notion for a ride off the sanity cliff, calling for the end of public schools, roads, post offices, Internet, media of any kind, health care, retirement, fire stations, etc, etc, etc.

4. Like many cultish theories, libertarian economics rise in popularity reflects public dissatisfaction with the performance of large institutions in many areas of economic and public life. They often correctly identify corporate corruption as a source of the decay of these institutions, but rather than reform the corruption, they become captured by an attractive, but ultimately doomed, ideology that – due to its futility as a guide to leadership – strengthens the very corruption they decry.

Here is a "parable of the ship" from Mike Huben – a nearly perfect allegory of Libertarian and Austrian School Economics, that should serve you well in any debates:

The owner of a ship noticed that his ship was filling with water. Being an educated man (if not nautically trained) he knew there were many possible causes for water in a ship: leaks in the hull, the bilge pump being broken, waves washing over, condensation, and even the crew urinating in the hold. He heard the bilge pump running, he saw water from waves pouring in the open hatches, but worst of all he smelled urine in the hold! Being sensible, he ordered the crew to shut the hatches and then gave them a lengthy, stern harangue on hygienic use of the head. While he was lecturing the crew, his ship sank due to a combination of causes: large, unobserved leaks in the hull, a bilge pump that was running but not pumping correctly, and condensation that had shorted out warning circuitry.
http://politicalaffairs.net/the-con-job-of-libertarian-economics/
 
417718_115168501941002_100003435594487_34639_279995838_n.jpg
 
Ghoti, not everything is about science.

True, you get art and religion and those type of things.

However, science is:

sci·ence   [sahy-uhns] Show IPA
noun
1.
a branch of knowledge or study dealing with a body of facts or truths systematically arranged and showing the operation of general laws: the mathematical sciences.

Surely you would want to apply that definition to economics? :confused:
 
Well, you have a fair point and i'll give you that.

However, regarding the issues i quoted from his site, those just need common sense to be applied. Maybe the method of actually actioning those things needs scientific reasoning, however that's a different story.
 
Well, you have a fair point and i'll give you that.

However, regarding the issues i quoted from his site, those just need common sense to be applied. Maybe the method of actually actioning those things needs scientific reasoning, however that's a different story.

If they get that right I will be very impressed.
 
Care to explain why most of his predictions for the economy were spot on? Fluke?

And care to explain why the scientific method failed to see it?

Ghoti doesn't understand how economics or logic works he also doesn't understand that Austrian economists doesn't reject empirical evidence they simply don't base their predictions on empirical trends simply because there are no constants in economics and because the amount of variables that one has to assume for in order to predict properly allows for to much variation and ultimately it makes the mathematical model to hard to predict and to complicated.

However it is futile to argue with him, basically all he does is he googles 'arguments against Austrian economics'. However he doesn't understand it. It is very similar to an religious fanatic who argues against the theory of evolution without having read a single piece of natural selections. What the religious fanatic usually does is he turns on his computer then googles 'why evolution is false' and then copy and pastes the first article. Now you have to remember that to the fanatic this argument is the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth no matter how hard you try and put in logic or even empirical evidence contradicting his article into the table. It simply doesn't matter. The mere fact that they do not understand that formal logic is indeed a form of mathematical induction and is actually a method of trying to understand evidence and samples is astonishing.
 
Last edited:
Ghoti doesn't understand how economics or logic works he also doesn't understand that Austrian economists doesn't reject empirical evidence they simply don't base their predictions on empirical trends simply because there are no constants in economics and because the amount of variables that one has to assume for in order to predict properly allows for to much variation and ultimately it makes the mathematical model to hard to predict and to complicated.

However it is futile to argue with him, basically all he does is he googles 'arguments against Austrian economics'. However he doesn't understand it. It is very similar to an religious fanatic who argues against the theory of evolution without having read a single piece of natural selections. What the religious fanatic usually does is he turns on his computer then googles 'why evolution is false' and then copy and pastes the first article. Now you have to remember that to the fanatic this argument is the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth no matter how hard you try and put in logic or even empirical evidence contradicting his article into the table. It simply doesn't matter. The mere fact that they do not understand that formal logic is indeed a form of mathematical induction and is actually a method of trying to understand evidence and samples is astonishing.

Where is the "Like" button?
 
Ghoti doesn't understand how economics or logic works he also doesn't understand that Austrian economists doesn't reject empirical evidence they simply don't base their predictions on empirical trends simply because there are no constants in economics and because the amount of variables that one has to assume for in order to predict properly allows for to much variation and ultimately it makes the mathematical model to hard to predict and to complicated.

However it is futile to argue with him, basically all he does is he googles 'arguments against Austrian economics'. However he doesn't understand it. It is very similar to an religious fanatic who argues against the theory of evolution without having read a single piece of natural selections. What the religious fanatic usually does is he turns on his computer then googles 'why evolution is false' and then copy and pastes the first article. Now you have to remember that to the fanatic this argument is the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth no matter how hard you try and put in logic or even empirical evidence contradicting his article into the table. It simply doesn't matter. The mere fact that they do not understand that formal logic is indeed a form of mathematical induction and is actually a method of trying to understand evidence and samples is astonishing.

Nice post.
 
It is sickening how much money is wasted on this type of thing (world wide).

The entire USA "voting for President" every 4 years is totally ridiculous. Billions is wasted on campaign money, and it really is a total waste of money. They should have elections like every other democratic country, and the president should be the person who heads up the winning party - end of story.
 
Nice post.

If it was true. Its got nothing to do with what I think, or with what I know. I listen to the economists on this. The real ones. There is a reason why no serious economic system in the world takes the austrians seriously, but its cool. If you and Nico recon you know more than most of the economists then you must be really smart... using an economic system not based on a "body of facts or truths systematically arranged and showing the operation of general laws" Forgive me if I dont take an unproven fringe belief system seriously. I gotta deal with the real world. Not utopian market fundamentalism.
 
If it was true. Its got nothing to do with what I think, or with what I know. I listen to the economists on this. The real ones. There is a reason why no serious economic system in the world takes the austrians seriously, but its cool. If you and Nico recon you know more than most of the economists then you must be really smart... using an economic system not based on a "body of facts or truths systematically arranged and showing the operation of general laws" Forgive me if I dont take an unproven fringe belief system seriously. I gotta deal with the real world. Not utopian market fundamentalism.

as always you simply don't understand it. Therefore I can't take your criticism seriously. You 'listen' to economist, therefore it must be true eh?
 
as always you simply don't understand it. Therefore I can't take your criticism seriously. You 'listen' to economist, therefore it must be true eh?

I listen to a lot of economists, yes. I dont pretend I know more than most of them ;) I leave that for peeps like you.
 
Care to explain why most of his predictions for the economy were spot on? Fluke?

And care to explain why the scientific method failed to see it?

I dont know how developed the scientific method was in the 1920`s.... you do know the world and economics have come a massive way since then right? Hehe, this is so cute, it like a creationist debating evolution with a Darwin argument:D

The founder of the Austrian school, Carl Menger, was responsible for starting the Marginal Revolution, an important step forward in economic thinking. However, that was in the late 19th century. Ludwig von Mises is credited with introducing the economic calculation problem in the 1920s, which argued that a state-run economy could not be efficient because prices could not be known, only decided by the state. The school hasn't produced anything of much note since then. Now they are primarily a small group of cranks funded by even richer cranks through the von Mises Institute looking for self-serving rationalizations couched in the form of economic theory.
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Austrian_school

Yeah people... lets base our economics system on a school of thought that invents words for itself (like scientology) and has produced nothing really useful since the 1920`s. Wooooh! orsm. #fail
 
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X