Premier Rock Forum

The Swiss sorta still have this beat.

Good day at work, Bob?

As usual, lots of assumptions with little facts.

Ron Paul has written numerous books on the subject of economics (going back decades) and with the price of gold at an all time high, and the USD at an all-time low I'd say the position he has been arguing has been largely vindicated.

Like I said before, disagree with him or not he is well versed on the subject and on matters relevant to the economy his knowledge and experience towers above the rest of the candidates. And by the fearful look on his face, I doubt Bernanke would disagree.

Alan Greenspan on Gold Standard
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z5MVsm2cpc0

You think that Ron Paul is on the Joint Economic Committee; and the Committee on Financial Services as Ranking Member of the Domestic and International Monetary Policy, Trade and Technology subcommittee, and Vice-Chair of the Oversight and Investigations subcommittee simply because he "represents a view point popular enough to warrant representation"?

Not only did Ron Paul predict the current economic troubles well in advance, he also predicted the 1987 recession in 1983!

Ron Paul 1983 wrote:In a couple years you will see recession if not he depression of '86 or '87

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8GzRWSof8uQ

1983: Ron Paul Debates Federal Reserve Governor 1of7
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6epCVUppjJM

Ron Paul was a senior member of House Banking Committee over 25 years ago and even served on United States Gold Commission. What experience and credentials do any of the other candidates have?

Big Dave wrote:Anyhow, this is scarcely the point. I was just pointing out how you attempted to deflect criticism of your libertarian Jesus by mythologising his status. Bad logic stirs Dave.

It doesn't look like you are being 'stirred' by "bad logic" (unless your own), but rather your seeming inability to:

a) Admit Ron Paul can be right about something, and/or
b) Admit you're wrong or lacking knowledge on the subject.

Instead of getting 'stirred' over your own assumptions and presumed understandings of other people's thought processes, you might be better served by investigating the source of your own emotive, knee-jerk reactions...

Argyreia Nervosa wrote:As usual, lots of assumptions with little facts.

Such as:

Argyreia Nervosa wrote:Disagree with him or not, Paul easily knows more about the economy than every other candidate combined.

Ron Paul has written numerous books on the subject of economics (going back decades) and with the price of gold at an all time high, and the USD at an all-time low I'd say the position he has been arguing for decades has been largely vindicated.

Oh wow! He writes books! Him and Richard Littlejohn.

By that logic, I guess I should put Hitler in charge nationalism, Ayn Rand in charge of public health and Derek Smart in charge of public relations.

Like I said before, disagree with him or not he is well versed on the subject and on matters relevant to the economy his knowledge and experience towers above the rest of the candidates. And by the fearful look on his face, I doubt Bernanke would disagree.

I've read his book on Gold Standard and other articles and say, he doesn't know what he's talking about. If a layman like myself thinks that your economics have more holes than Ani DiFranco's socks, then you probably do not know more about economics than "everybody else".

This gives an alternative option: that Ron Paul does know a lot, he's just manipulating the truth to forward a scary and paranoid libertarian agenda.

Alan Greenspan on Gold Standard
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z5MVsm2cpc0

This has not been posted before!

You think that Ron Paul is on the Joint Economic Committee; and the Committee on Financial Services as Ranking Member of the Domestic and International Monetary Policy, Trade and Technology subcommittee, and Vice-Chair of the Oversight and Investigations subcommittee simply because he "represents a view point popular enough to warrant representation"?

Yes I do. I think all political view-points, within practicality and reason, should be represented in Government committee making and public/industry relations.

Ron Paul was a senior member of House Banking Committee over 25 years ago and even served on United States Gold Commission. What experience and credentials do any of the other candidates have?

I don't give two shits. They are not baitshit racists crazed on private healthcare, nationalism and weary theories about international bankers.

It doesn't look like you are being 'stirred' by "bad logic" (unless your own), but rather your seeming inability to:

a) Admit Ron Paul can be right about something, and/or
b) Admit you're wrong or lacking knowledge on the subject.

Instead of getting 'stirred' over your own assumptions and presumed understandings of other people's thought processes, you might be better served by investigating the source of your own emotive and knee-jerk reactions...

No, you're just bonkers if you believe half of what you've posted.

Ron Paul can be right about things. I hear he keeps in excellent health and enjoys the countryside.

How's your day been, dude?

I've read his book on Gold Standard and other articles and say, he doesn't know what he's talking about.[b] If a layman like myself thinks that your economics have more holes than Ani DiFranco's socks, then you probably do not know more about economics than "everybody else". [b][

I never said Ron Paul knows more about economics than "everybody else" I said every other candidate.

Again, you've demonstrated that there is marked difference between what has actually been said and your interpretations of it.

I can only imagine what happens to entire books once you've gone through your unconscious process of deletion (not everything thought is said), distortion (assumptions and structural inaccuracies) and generalization (a shift towards absolute statements)...

Alan Greenspan, Gold and Economic Freedom wrote:In the absence of the gold standard, there is no way to protect savings from confiscation through inflation. There is no safe store of value. If there were, the government would have to make its holding illegal, as was done in the case of gold. If everyone decided, for example, to convert all his bank deposits to silver or copper or any other good, and thereafter declined to accept checks as payment for goods, bank deposits would lose their purchasing power and government-created bank credit would be worthless as a claim on goods. The financial policy of the welfare state requires that there be no way for the owners of wealth to protect themselves.

This is the shabby secret of the welfare statists' tirades against gold. Deficit spending is simply a scheme for the confiscation of wealth. Gold stands in the way of this insidious process. It stands as a protector of property rights. If one grasps this, one has no difficulty in understanding the statists' antagonism toward the gold standard.

Big Dave wrote:No, you're just bonkers if you believe half of what you've posted.

Then I think we're done here. You shouldn't waste your time with people you think are "bonkers" any more than I should waste my time feeding someone obviously acting like a troll.

An Internet troll, or simply troll in Internet slang, is someone who posts controversial and usually irrelevant or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum, with the intention of baiting other users into an emotional response[1] or to generally disrupt normal on-topic discussion.[2]

Funny, that.

Interestingly enough, Dr. Paul will not debate his congressional opponent.

He looks like the guy from the Pi movie.

So there's that.

Interestingly enough, Dr. Paul will not debate his congressional opponent.

Check the second video - "if time permitted, I might consider that". Debate's not out.