So who's voting for the Ronpaul in the primaries?

For the serious discussion of weighty matters and worldly issues. No off-topic posts allowed.

Moderators: Azrael, Moderators General, Prelates

Are you voting for the Ronpaul in the primaries?

Yes
52
31%
No
91
54%
No, I'm a neocon
5
3%
Yes, and I coded the voting machine; expect a landslide
20
12%
 
Total votes: 168

User avatar
Umlaut
Everybody's a diacritic
Posts: 504
Joined: Wed Sep 13, 2006 8:48 pm UTC
Location: Longmont, CO
Contact:

Re: So who's voting for the Ronpaul in the primaries?

Postby Umlaut » Thu Dec 06, 2007 6:22 am UTC

My point was that the EU could very well end up like the US federal government. I didn't say it is, but the conditions are very similar in many ways to the USA at the framing. It obviously not identical (hundreds of years more history for European countries and such), but there is a strong unification against the USA as an imperialist threat and a strong economic threat in China that might give the idea of a binding federal government some sway.

fjafjan wrote:
Umlaut wrote:The thing is, you just described the founding of the US. The colonists wanted a framework of mutual protection, trade, and cooperation. This is exactly what the EU is right now. It is obviously nothing like the US is now, but it is easily possible that the EU could end up as a powerful federalism. I don't think you appreciate the independence granted under a federal government (and how it can be slowly taken away).

Could end up obviously, but it's like comparing Iraq to Canada because one day it might be a functioning democracy with no internal conflict.


When was Canada ever in a situation like Iraq is now?
You will be baked and then there will be cake.

User avatar
fjafjan
THE fjafjan
Posts: 4766
Joined: Fri Oct 06, 2006 12:22 pm UTC
Location: Down south up north in the west of eastern west.
Contact:

Re: So who's voting for the Ronpaul in the primaries?

Postby fjafjan » Thu Dec 06, 2007 6:29 am UTC

Umlaut wrote:My point was that the EU could very well end up like the US federal government. I didn't say it is, but the conditions are very similar in many ways to the USA at the framing. It obviously not identical (hundreds of years more history for European countries and such), but there is a strong unification against the USA as an imperialist threat and a strong economic threat in China that might give the idea of a binding federal government some sway.

fjafjan wrote:
Umlaut wrote:The thing is, you just described the founding of the US. The colonists wanted a framework of mutual protection, trade, and cooperation. This is exactly what the EU is right now. It is obviously nothing like the US is now, but it is easily possible that the EU could end up as a powerful federalism. I don't think you appreciate the independence granted under a federal government (and how it can be slowly taken away).

Could end up obviously, but it's like comparing Iraq to Canada because one day it might be a functioning democracy with no internal conflict.


When was Canada ever in a situation like Iraq is now?

To be fair I am not too good with Canadian history but there certainly is some ethnical divisions (french v english) and there most certainly was local conflicts.
Point is your point that "they might become" is entirely irrelevant to what I remarked against which was a comparison between the two now.. The "theoretical" similarity really doesn't do much to support that comparison.
//Yepp, THE fjafjan (who's THE fjafjan?)
Liza wrote:Fjafjan, your hair is so lovely that I want to go to Sweden, collect the bit you cut off in your latest haircut and keep it in my room, and smell it. And eventually use it to complete my shrine dedicated to you.

AKADriver
Posts: 94
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 2:28 pm UTC
Location: McLean, VA

Re: So who's voting for the Ronpaul in the primaries?

Postby AKADriver » Thu Dec 06, 2007 5:01 pm UTC

Er, can we just agree that the EU was a suboptimal example and move on? You can't tell me that I don't have a valid point bringing up the US Civil War.

User avatar
Umlaut
Everybody's a diacritic
Posts: 504
Joined: Wed Sep 13, 2006 8:48 pm UTC
Location: Longmont, CO
Contact:

Re: So who's voting for the Ronpaul in the primaries?

Postby Umlaut » Thu Dec 06, 2007 10:18 pm UTC

Europe hasn't been torn by war?

I definitely agree that the EU is not even remotely a governmental body (let alone a strong federalism). They have basically no authority at all right now, but with all the support for the idea, it seems like the EU is going the way the US did a couple hundred years ago.
You will be baked and then there will be cake.

Rysto
Posts: 1460
Joined: Wed Mar 21, 2007 4:07 am UTC

Re: So who's voting for the Ronpaul in the primaries?

Postby Rysto » Thu Dec 06, 2007 10:20 pm UTC

Since the EU came in?

User avatar
3.14159265...
Irrational (?)
Posts: 2413
Joined: Thu Jan 18, 2007 12:05 am UTC
Location: Ajax, Canada

Re: So who's voting for the Ronpaul in the primaries?

Postby 3.14159265... » Mon Dec 17, 2007 4:21 am UTC

I am in Canada so no vote.

This guy is damn brilliant. He has nothing to do with democrats and republicans, he just has common sense and doesn't lie, which is crazy awesome.

Question: What are his chances like?

Also, check out his site, apparently today is a big fund raising day too. He is at $17.5 Million.
"The best times in life are the ones when you can genuinely add a "Bwa" to your "ha""- Chris Hastings

Sunsnail
Posts: 166
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2007 6:44 pm UTC

Re: So who's voting for the Ronpaul in the primaries?

Postby Sunsnail » Mon Dec 17, 2007 4:32 am UTC

I wouldn't bet on him winning, but he has bigger chances than someone like Nader.

http://ronpaulgraphs.com/dec_16_v_nov_5 ... total.html

So far he's at about 5.4 million for today alone

User avatar
3.14159265...
Irrational (?)
Posts: 2413
Joined: Thu Jan 18, 2007 12:05 am UTC
Location: Ajax, Canada

Re: So who's voting for the Ronpaul in the primaries?

Postby 3.14159265... » Mon Dec 17, 2007 5:37 am UTC

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republican_straw_polls

What do these polls represent?

They clearly show the Ronpaul winning.
"The best times in life are the ones when you can genuinely add a "Bwa" to your "ha""- Chris Hastings

Sunsnail
Posts: 166
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2007 6:44 pm UTC

Re: So who's voting for the Ronpaul in the primaries?

Postby Sunsnail » Mon Dec 17, 2007 6:34 am UTC

They don't mean much. It only means the people who support the Ronpaul are fanatical and actively support him. (Un)fortunately their votes count the same as everyone else's

User avatar
3.14159265...
Irrational (?)
Posts: 2413
Joined: Thu Jan 18, 2007 12:05 am UTC
Location: Ajax, Canada

Re: So who's voting for the Ronpaul in the primaries?

Postby 3.14159265... » Mon Dec 17, 2007 7:07 am UTC

How does the primaries work in the US.

Are people voted in by citizens, or by representatives within the party? How are those representatives picked?
"The best times in life are the ones when you can genuinely add a "Bwa" to your "ha""- Chris Hastings

User avatar
fjafjan
THE fjafjan
Posts: 4766
Joined: Fri Oct 06, 2006 12:22 pm UTC
Location: Down south up north in the west of eastern west.
Contact:

Re: So who's voting for the Ronpaul in the primaries?

Postby fjafjan » Mon Dec 17, 2007 10:14 am UTC

3.14159265... wrote:I am in Canada so no vote.

This guy is damn brilliant. He has nothing to do with democrats and republicans, he just has common sense and doesn't lie, which is crazy awesome.

Question: What are his chances like?

Also, check out his site, apparently today is a big fund raising day too. He is at $17.5 Million.

Did you read this thread? The man is a loony
The number of sheer crazy policies he advocates are really quite impressive, Letters of Marque, Gold Standard, Leaving the UN, etc

second his chances of winning A the nomination and B the election don't really exist. Because he is not seen as a threat the media havn't started digging into his really shitty voting history quite yet which would make him even more unelectable.

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2007/12/13/131540/47/78/420978 wrote:the Ronpaul is Still Nuts, That's Why
by MissLaura

Thu Dec 13, 2007 at 10:15:40 AM PST

the Ronpaul has been attracting support from some unlikely quarters, mainly due to ignorance of his positions on anything much but Iraq. You may know the man is crazy, but convincing others is the task.

So, without further ado, here (greatly condensed from the definitive take-down at Orcinus) are some concrete positions he's taken to cite when you want to push back against your Paul-bot in-laws, co-workers, and assorted acquaintances:

the Ronpaul wants the US to withdraw from the UN or at least from UNESCO.

the Ronpaul has authored legislation saying that life begins at conception, to prevent federal money from being spent on family planning (that would include contraception), and has tried to amend the Constitution to "guarantee the right to life."

the Ronpaul has tried to repeal the Occupational Health and Safety Act, to abolish the minimum wage, and to eviscerate Social Security.

the Ronpaul wants guns in schools.

the Ronpaul has tried to repeal the Davis-Bacon Act to guarantee employees of federal contractors the prevailing wage and wants to make it easier to decertify a union.

the Ronpaul wants to amend the Constitution to end birthright citizenship.

the Ronpaul wants to dismantle the Federal Reserve and prepare for a return to the Gold Standard, which would destroy the economy.
This is just the tip of a very big, very crazy iceberg. See the rest at Orcinus.

(Update: Also see this post at Orcinus.)

Update 2: the Ronpaul was one of 8 people to vote against the FTC being allowed to establish a do not call registry.
//Yepp, THE fjafjan (who's THE fjafjan?)
Liza wrote:Fjafjan, your hair is so lovely that I want to go to Sweden, collect the bit you cut off in your latest haircut and keep it in my room, and smell it. And eventually use it to complete my shrine dedicated to you.

User avatar
Torvaun
Posts: 2615
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2007 6:23 pm UTC
Location: 47°9′S, 126°43′W
Contact:

Re: So who's voting for the Ronpaul in the primaries?

Postby Torvaun » Mon Dec 17, 2007 3:37 pm UTC

I see the guns in schools thing as being a good idea. Consider that students can already bring guns into schools with the express purpose of shooting people. There is no reason that there cannot be a gun safe in the office. Such a thing cannot reduce the safety of the students, and can increase it.
Hawknc wrote:I don't know if you've never heard of trolling, or if you're just very good at it.

User avatar
lowbart
Posts: 668
Joined: Sun Dec 09, 2007 10:00 pm UTC
Location: northeastern USA
Contact:

Re: So who's voting for the Ronpaul in the primaries?

Postby lowbart » Mon Dec 17, 2007 5:17 pm UTC

Why the shit would he want to eliminate automatic citizenship by being born in the US?

[after thinking for a second] Immigration reform, to prevent people from having "anchor babies", I would guess. That's debatable in my opinion, but for any other reason than that would be completely ludicrous.
...a fish called the Henamo grunter, named because it makes grunting noises from its swim bladder.
v1nsai wrote:Yes, I'm Linux, how can I help you ma'am?

User avatar
Torvaun
Posts: 2615
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2007 6:23 pm UTC
Location: 47°9′S, 126°43′W
Contact:

Re: So who's voting for the Ronpaul in the primaries?

Postby Torvaun » Mon Dec 17, 2007 6:16 pm UTC

lowbart wrote:Why the shit would he want to eliminate automatic citizenship by being born in the US?

[after thinking for a second] Immigration reform, to prevent people from having "anchor babies", I would guess. That's debatable in my opinion, but for any other reason than that would be completely ludicrous.

That was the first thing I thought of. Problem is, it could lead to people who are not citizens of any nation. Let's say that my parents were illegal immigrants. I have kids with someone else who was born here, but is not a citizen. Our children are not citizens, but can't be deported, because they aren't citizens of anywhere else either. Even better, that hypothetical child will end up being without certain rights that are only granted to citizens. Right now we have such things as voting, and I'd bet on a few others showing up to discourage illegal immigration. We've basically reinvented castes.

This is a terrible idea, and would lose my vote if the rest of the candidates weren't even further from my views.
Hawknc wrote:I don't know if you've never heard of trolling, or if you're just very good at it.

User avatar
Umlaut
Everybody's a diacritic
Posts: 504
Joined: Wed Sep 13, 2006 8:48 pm UTC
Location: Longmont, CO
Contact:

Re: So who's voting for the Ronpaul in the primaries?

Postby Umlaut » Mon Dec 17, 2007 7:37 pm UTC

lowbart wrote:Why the shit would he want to eliminate automatic citizenship by being born in the US?

[after thinking for a second] Immigration reform, to prevent people from having "anchor babies", I would guess. That's debatable in my opinion, but for any other reason than that would be completely ludicrous.

It would only eliminate birthright citizenship. There are a lot of ways to become a citizen. One of those ways is to have a parent who is a citizen. Americans would still pop out American babies.
You will be baked and then there will be cake.

User avatar
Vaniver
Posts: 9422
Joined: Fri Oct 13, 2006 2:12 am UTC

Re: So who's voting for the Ronpaul in the primaries?

Postby Vaniver » Mon Dec 17, 2007 8:05 pm UTC

3.14159265... wrote:What do these polls represent?
Straw polls are done in every state as an informal check to see how much the candidates resonate with active party members and how much turnout they have among strong supporters.
3.14159265... wrote:How does the primaries work in the US.

Are people voted in by citizens, or by representatives within the party? How are those representatives picked?
Primary elections are held about a year before the general election. Turnout tends to be around 25% of voters, while turnout for the general election is around 50% of voters.

For the Republican party, each congressional district elects 3 delegates and votes for a presidential candidate. The delegates go to the Republican National Convention, where they vote for presidential candidate. In the first few elections (maybe just the first) they are forced to vote for the candidate their district voted for; if the election is deadlocked, then various things happen and the party (the candidates and delegates) figure out who the candidate is. RP groups (in Maryland, at least, I imagine similar things are happening around the country) are focusing heavily on getting delegates elected, so that if RP doesn't outright win the primary he still has a significant bit of influence and/or might win the primary anyway.

Torvaun wrote:Right now we have such things as voting, and I'd bet on a few others showing up to discourage illegal immigration. We've basically reinvented castes.

This is a terrible idea, and would lose my vote if the rest of the candidates weren't even further from my views.
Having a difference between citizens and non-citizens is in no way castes. The phrase "second-class citizen" hinges on the word citizen.

While not an expert in international law, it seems to me that the only way your hypothetical could occur is if the country that the parents are from is one that extends citizenship only to those born in its country, instead of to the children of its citizens. I don't know how many of those exist, and how many citizens of those countries currently reside in America.
I mostly post over at LessWrong now.

Avatar from My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic, owned by Hasbro.

User avatar
Torvaun
Posts: 2615
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2007 6:23 pm UTC
Location: 47°9′S, 126°43′W
Contact:

Re: So who's voting for the Ronpaul in the primaries?

Postby Torvaun » Mon Dec 17, 2007 9:16 pm UTC

This is why my hypothetical situation involved a 2nd generation citizen of nowhere. It was presumed that I could go back to wherever my parents were from, although illegal immigrants are generally not big on having lots of documentation, and it's not difficult to come up with a scenario in which I am completely incapable of proving who my parents are or where they were from. My hypothetical child would be even more unlikely to be accepted as a citizen on his/her word alone. Yes, they could apply for citizenship, but until then, what rights does a non-U.S. citizen have in the United States? Bonus question: What if there's no foreign embassy that will take them in, thanks to a lack of citizenship? They can't legally be hired. Places that might illegally hire them will almost certainly not be the kinds of places that the Better Business Bureau approves of. They can't go to school, so they will remain uneducated as to what rights they might have. Thus, the people who illegally hire them will be able to abuse them in a way people haven't been able to do openly since the 1860's.

Lower caste might be better than what my hypothetical child could expect..
Hawknc wrote:I don't know if you've never heard of trolling, or if you're just very good at it.

User avatar
Vaniver
Posts: 9422
Joined: Fri Oct 13, 2006 2:12 am UTC

Re: So who's voting for the Ronpaul in the primaries?

Postby Vaniver » Mon Dec 17, 2007 9:57 pm UTC

But, again, how significant of an issue is this? Things like the Alternative Minimum Tax show that it's a mistake to make special exceptions for what is (at the time of making the policy) an insignificant problem.

In either case, immigration reform shouldn't be done piecemeal, and is something where I tend to disagree with Paul (he's very 'strong countries need strong borders,' whereas I am much more 'if someone wants to come here, let them, especially if they're smart').
I mostly post over at LessWrong now.

Avatar from My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic, owned by Hasbro.

User avatar
bbctol
Super Deluxe Forum Title of DESTINYâ„¢
Posts: 3137
Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2007 10:27 pm UTC
Location: The Twilight Zone
Contact:

Re: So who's voting for the Ronpaul in the primaries?

Postby bbctol » Tue Dec 18, 2007 2:39 am UTC

Recently received this email from a Paul supporter:
"The price of oil in the 70's was $7 a barrel. One once of gold could by six barrels. Now, the price is $100 a barrel. One ounce of gold can by eight barrels of oil. Gold only increases in value over time! Vote Paul, and say bye-bye to inflation!"

And say hello to deflation? Way to disprove your own argument. Adoption of the gold standard leads to massive deflation leads to depression. Not recession, massive and crushing depression.

User avatar
Umlaut
Everybody's a diacritic
Posts: 504
Joined: Wed Sep 13, 2006 8:48 pm UTC
Location: Longmont, CO
Contact:

Re: So who's voting for the Ronpaul in the primaries?

Postby Umlaut » Tue Dec 18, 2007 3:57 am UTC

The current proposed plan by the Ronpaul isn't an adoption of a gold standard. It is to authorize the federal reserve to print notes backed by gold. This issue has been covered pretty thoroughly in the thread already.
You will be baked and then there will be cake.

mastapsi
Posts: 45
Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2007 8:16 am UTC

Re: So who's voting for the Ronpaul in the primaries?

Postby mastapsi » Tue Dec 18, 2007 9:26 am UTC

Umlaut wrote:The current proposed plan by the Ronpaul isn't an adoption of a gold standard. It is to authorize the federal reserve to print notes backed by gold. This issue has been covered pretty thoroughly in the thread already.


I'm going to jump in here and give a reason why this is a bad idea.

Even with a gold backed currency, the value of it is still affected by economic pressures, in particular, the interest rate. You see, you can't simply just tie the value directly to gold, because banks can lend money, and when banks lend money, the money supply grows until that money is paid back. So the same amount of gold backs a larger money supply, which is essentially results in a dollar with lower value. At the same time, you can't prevent the banks from lending outright because if you do, the economy crashes because businesses can't make any capital investment.

All a gold backing does is provide a flat rate that you can exchange your currency for to gold directly from the government. All this does is provide a minimum value, and if that minimum value is reached, then currency holders exchange their currency for gold . It is also an unstable solution, since the exchange to gold devalues the currency more by reducing faith in it, which results in further exchange to gold, ending with the currency failing.

Eventually, a gold backed currency will fail, and it will happen when the backing of the currency exceeds the real value of the currency. To prevent this, the gold reserve backing the currency must grow at the same rate the as the currency does, which will at some point fail. And to do this, the government will have to obtain the gold to do this, which will cost money. Essentially, alone, a gold standard will fail given time, and beside a fiat system, it will cost a large amount of money to maintain.

Another reason is the same reason that FDR made the exchange of dollars for gold illegal. When depressions/recessions occur, two particular things happen. Bank runs start on affected banks, which causes banks to fail. Coinciding with this, if there is a gold backed currency, currency holders will exchange their dollars for gold, since in the short run, gold is much more stable than currency. As more currency is exchanged, faith in the currency in question drops and more bank runs occur as people become desperate to exchange their dollars for gold.


Now something that would be okay is to print bonds that are backed by gold, but do not make them legal tender. That is already done though in the open market.

User avatar
fjafjan
THE fjafjan
Posts: 4766
Joined: Fri Oct 06, 2006 12:22 pm UTC
Location: Down south up north in the west of eastern west.
Contact:

Re: So who's voting for the Ronpaul in the primaries?

Postby fjafjan » Tue Dec 18, 2007 12:31 pm UTC

hey, you thought the Ronpaul was crazy already? Well he doesn't believe in evolution, so feel free to add another couple crazy points to that list.

At 2:20

Apparantly it's "only a theory". who'd have known he had no respect for science and considered his own faith and "feeling" above it?
Oh I know, everyone who has studied either economics, international affairs, history or just get that vibe from someone who thnks most good policies existed atleast thirty years ago.

I see the guns in schools thing as being a good idea. Consider that students can already bring guns into schools with the express purpose of shooting people. There is no reason that there cannot be a gun safe in the office. Such a thing cannot reduce the safety of the students, and can increase it.

It has two problems.
1 It means you can infact legally get the gun you want to shoot people with into school and it cannot be compounded untill you start shooting (or atleastin aiming)
2 If someone starts shooting and everyone else pulls their guns who are you supposed to shoot? If there is alot more "fire" there will be alot more friendly fire.
3 Children cannot and should not be dealing with armed murderers, nor should teachers. It makes them less secure, it makes tensions much stronger if you know people might friggin shoot you and not just punch you. Basically by the same reasoning having student armed with knives should be atleast FAIRLY good, but ofcourse any school where students do have knives will be incredibly problematic.
//Yepp, THE fjafjan (who's THE fjafjan?)
Liza wrote:Fjafjan, your hair is so lovely that I want to go to Sweden, collect the bit you cut off in your latest haircut and keep it in my room, and smell it. And eventually use it to complete my shrine dedicated to you.

User avatar
Umlaut
Everybody's a diacritic
Posts: 504
Joined: Wed Sep 13, 2006 8:48 pm UTC
Location: Longmont, CO
Contact:

Re: So who's voting for the Ronpaul in the primaries?

Postby Umlaut » Tue Dec 18, 2007 2:37 pm UTC

mastapsi wrote:Misinterpretation.

Actually, This will not become partially backed. There will only be as many bills printed as there is gold available to the federal reserve. These bills would be different from the existing FRNs and would still be legal tender.

@fjanfjan: Then he said it doesn't matter, is a theological discussion, and is best left exactly there.
You will be baked and then there will be cake.

User avatar
Torvaun
Posts: 2615
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2007 6:23 pm UTC
Location: 47°9′S, 126°43′W
Contact:

Re: So who's voting for the Ronpaul in the primaries?

Postby Torvaun » Tue Dec 18, 2007 4:05 pm UTC

fjafjan wrote:
I see the guns in schools thing as being a good idea. Consider that students can already bring guns into schools with the express purpose of shooting people. There is no reason that there cannot be a gun safe in the office. Such a thing cannot reduce the safety of the students, and can increase it.

It has two problems.
1 It means you can infact legally get the gun you want to shoot people with into school and it cannot be compounded untill you start shooting (or atleastin aiming)
2 If someone starts shooting and everyone else pulls their guns who are you supposed to shoot? If there is alot more "fire" there will be alot more friendly fire.
3 Children cannot and should not be dealing with armed murderers, nor should teachers. It makes them less secure, it makes tensions much stronger if you know people might friggin shoot you and not just punch you. Basically by the same reasoning having student armed with knives should be atleast FAIRLY good, but ofcourse any school where students do have knives will be incredibly problematic.

I seem to have been unclear. Students should not have guns at school. If a student does bring a gun to school, however, it should not be the only one. The fact that there is a gun safe somewhere that some staff members can access will provide a chilling effect, and prevent everyone except the truly suicidal from bringing a gun. Also, we need a level of sanity mixed with our current gun laws. I live in Wisconsin. During this past deer season, a student got expelled from the local high school when it was discovered that he had a rifle in the trunk of his car. The rifle in question was unloaded, bolt open, and secured within a gun case. All laws were being followed except the one about it not being on school property. He was not displaying it or talking about it, it was only discovered because one of his 'friends' told a teacher about it. I do not see this as grounds for expulsion.
Hawknc wrote:I don't know if you've never heard of trolling, or if you're just very good at it.

mastapsi
Posts: 45
Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2007 8:16 am UTC

Re: So who's voting for the Ronpaul in the primaries?

Postby mastapsi » Tue Dec 18, 2007 9:15 pm UTC

Umlaut wrote:Actually, This will not become partially backed. There will only be as many bills printed as there is gold available to the federal reserve. These bills would be different from the existing FRNs and would still be legal tender.

@fjanfjan: Then he said it doesn't matter, is a theological discussion, and is best left exactly there.


You fail to realize that currency does not equal money. Most money does not exist in currency form. Did you really think that that check you wrote the other day hand the exact currency laying around backing it? Most likely not. Currency accounts for less than half of the money in circulation.

This gold backed currency is a different currency from the US dollar and should be treated as such. Because the new gold backed currency is legal tender, banks will be able to loan money of that currency. Loaning money causes the creation of new money, and that body of money is still backed by the same amount of gold. Greater supply of money with a unchanged backing means that the value of the new money is diminished. However, the rate at which the government will trade gold for the new money is unchanged by definition. At that point, since the real value of the money is less than the value the government will pay, holders will exchange their money to gold, since it is more valuable than their money is. So to prevent people from exchanging their new gold-backed money for gold, the government must expand the gold reserves so that the money supply is fully backed. Like I said, this would require spending to do so.

Econ 101 is your friend.

Sunsnail
Posts: 166
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2007 6:44 pm UTC

Re: So who's voting for the Ronpaul in the primaries?

Postby Sunsnail » Tue Dec 18, 2007 9:30 pm UTC

I think what the Ronpaul meant when he said schools were colleges and universities.

User avatar
Umlaut
Everybody's a diacritic
Posts: 504
Joined: Wed Sep 13, 2006 8:48 pm UTC
Location: Longmont, CO
Contact:

Re: So who's voting for the Ronpaul in the primaries?

Postby Umlaut » Tue Dec 18, 2007 9:32 pm UTC

mastapsi wrote:Econ 101 is your friend.

That's the only part you got right.

Loans do not create new money. That's retarded. In the US, only the federal reserve can create money from thin air. There will be a fixed amount authorized for printing by the federal reserve, and that will be based on how much gold is available as backing. The federal reserve will either buy gold from the world market (and repay it with gold backed notes) or it will use the existing stockpile. The whole point of this is that gold backed bills generally will not significantly inflate or deflate in real value because A) there will be a limited number of notes B) the world economy grows faster than the world gold supply. This isn't to say that sharp increases and decreases don't happen, but the effect is less than with fiat currencies.
You will be baked and then there will be cake.

Rysto
Posts: 1460
Joined: Wed Mar 21, 2007 4:07 am UTC

Re: So who's voting for the Ronpaul in the primaries?

Postby Rysto » Tue Dec 18, 2007 10:01 pm UTC

Umlaut wrote:
mastapsi wrote:Econ 101 is your friend.

That's the only part you got right.

Loans do not create new money. That's retarded

That's Econ 101. Ever heard of the money multiplier? Or are yet another libertarian who pays only lip service to economics?

The whole point of this is that gold backed bills generally will not significantly inflate or deflate in real value because A) there will be a limited number of notes B) the world economy grows faster than the world gold supply.

Ah, we have our answer. If the world economy grows faster than the world gold supply, then by definition our gold-backed currency will face deflation.
Last edited by Rysto on Tue Dec 18, 2007 10:05 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.

mastapsi
Posts: 45
Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2007 8:16 am UTC

Re: So who's voting for the Ronpaul in the primaries?

Postby mastapsi » Tue Dec 18, 2007 10:04 pm UTC

Umlaut wrote:That's the only part you got right.

Loans do not create new money. That's retarded. In the US, only the federal reserve can create money from thin air. There will be a fixed amount authorized for printing by the federal reserve, and that will be based on how much gold is available as backing. The federal reserve will either buy gold from the world market (and repay it with gold backed notes) or it will use the existing stockpile. The whole point of this is that gold backed bills generally will not significantly inflate or deflate in real value because A) there will be a limited number of notes B) the world economy grows faster than the world gold supply. This isn't to say that sharp increases and decreases don't happen, but the effect is less than with fiat currencies.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Money_creation

Here! This article might help.

Edit: I totally didn't realize that your link went to the same place as mine Rysto until just now.

User avatar
fjafjan
THE fjafjan
Posts: 4766
Joined: Fri Oct 06, 2006 12:22 pm UTC
Location: Down south up north in the west of eastern west.
Contact:

Re: So who's voting for the Ronpaul in the primaries?

Postby fjafjan » Tue Dec 18, 2007 11:47 pm UTC

Umlaut wrote:@fjanfjan: Then he said it doesn't matter, is a theological discussion, and is best left exactly there.


He also said he didn't think there was a clear argment on either side. Now I would say not being able to distinguish a theory as well backed with evidence as that of evolution and some ancient creationist myth would not be a difficult choice, and is infact a matter of judgement. It's also interesting about that that alot of the Ronpaul supporters claim that he is oh so consistent but when push comes to shove he didn't want to speak up about not believing in evolution because he thought it would look bad.

Ah, we have our answer. If the world economy grows faster than the world gold supply, then by definition our gold-backed currency will face deflation.

I imagine quite alot of Randroids would think this is great though, you are making free money! I mean one of the arguments often put forth against the federal reserve is how poor granny can't afford to buy vegetables for a couple cents anymore due to inflation which is just another goverment imposed tax apparantly and only keeping all prices leveled will be acceptable.
//Yepp, THE fjafjan (who's THE fjafjan?)
Liza wrote:Fjafjan, your hair is so lovely that I want to go to Sweden, collect the bit you cut off in your latest haircut and keep it in my room, and smell it. And eventually use it to complete my shrine dedicated to you.

User avatar
Umlaut
Everybody's a diacritic
Posts: 504
Joined: Wed Sep 13, 2006 8:48 pm UTC
Location: Longmont, CO
Contact:

Re: So who's voting for the Ronpaul in the primaries?

Postby Umlaut » Wed Dec 19, 2007 1:08 am UTC

I said will not inflate or deflate significantly. The price of gold has fluctuated wildly, but the value has a predictable and small appreciation. Contrary to your statement, there is an increase in demand for gold (as there is less of it to go around, so to speak). Even though it isn't ideal (this has been admitted, time and again!), it is still better than money backed by fucking ghost stories.

Loans are temporarily creating money, yes, but that very, very rarely translates to an actual permanent increase in the supply. Banks absorb their losses due to defaults by charging higher than absolutely required interest rates. The potential issue can easily be alleviated by not letting the fed print extra gold notes, and that is the intent.

@fjanfjan: Yes. He's religious. I didn't say I agreed with his statement, as it is quite obviously wrong. Why you are harping on it is beyond me. He didn't care to talk about it because it isn't a political problem. IT DOESN'T MATTER. I don't want anyone to decide how to spend my money on education except for me. I want to choose how to best educate my children without subsidizing everyone else's as well.

As a side note, not telling you to just fuck off has been very difficult. You are generally a hostile nut-basket with ridiculous ideas of what people need and deserve (this is a personal opinion). Of course, that isn't enough. You still feel the need to blanket everyone who happens to share a set of political (not personal) beliefs with your hate. If you want to disagree with people, you can at least show the same respect these "asshole" libertarians show you while you dissect the minutiae of non-issues. I don't think you need to respond ever again to a post of mine, or I to one of yours. Everyone can just take it as writ that you think the opposite politically of everything I say and vice versa.
You will be baked and then there will be cake.

Rysto
Posts: 1460
Joined: Wed Mar 21, 2007 4:07 am UTC

Re: So who's voting for the Ronpaul in the primaries?

Postby Rysto » Wed Dec 19, 2007 1:48 am UTC

Umlaut wrote:I said will not inflate or deflate significantly. The price of gold has fluctuated wildly, but the value has a predictable and small appreciation. Contrary to your statement, there is an increase in demand for gold (as there is less of it to go around, so to speak). Even though it isn't ideal (this has been admitted, time and again!), it is still better than money backed by fucking ghost stories.

Any deflation is terrible for an economy. Proper monetary policy can keep inflation under control(see US and Canada for the past 15 years), while the gold supply is not so predictable.

Loans are temporarily creating money, yes, but that very, very rarely translates to an actual permanent increase in the supply. Banks absorb their losses due to defaults by charging higher than absolutely required interest rates. The potential issue can easily be alleviated by not letting the fed print extra gold notes, and that is the intent.

Bullshit. You just don't have a fucking clue about economics, do you?

User avatar
Umlaut
Everybody's a diacritic
Posts: 504
Joined: Wed Sep 13, 2006 8:48 pm UTC
Location: Longmont, CO
Contact:

Re: So who's voting for the Ronpaul in the primaries?

Postby Umlaut » Wed Dec 19, 2007 2:11 am UTC

I don't consider the current state of US currency to be "under control." Deficit spending is growing at an unsustainable rate, and having at least some hard backed currency is preferable to none.

In bank loans, money is created and destroyed regularly. This is all well and good, but it isn't relevant in a banking system where you can't buy gold backed notes with federal reserve notes. Either notes are only ever printed for the gold already in reserve or gold can be exchanged for legal tender backed by that same amount. If you take out a loan to buy gold and trade in the gold to get money to... it isn't a problem. It isn't terribly difficult to avoid the irritating situation of the fractional reserve.
You will be baked and then there will be cake.

Rysto
Posts: 1460
Joined: Wed Mar 21, 2007 4:07 am UTC

Re: So who's voting for the Ronpaul in the primaries?

Postby Rysto » Wed Dec 19, 2007 2:21 am UTC

Umlaut wrote:I don't consider the current state of US currency to be "under control." Deficit spending is growing at an unsustainable rate, and having at least some hard backed currency is preferable to none.

That's US fiscal policy. We're talking about monetary policy. Try to keep up here.

A gold standard doesn't preclude deficit spending. Why on earth would you think that it does?

User avatar
fjafjan
THE fjafjan
Posts: 4766
Joined: Fri Oct 06, 2006 12:22 pm UTC
Location: Down south up north in the west of eastern west.
Contact:

Re: So who's voting for the Ronpaul in the primaries?

Postby fjafjan » Wed Dec 19, 2007 2:30 am UTC

it is still better than money backed by fucking ghost stories.


So are you somehow trying to claim the past stability of a market and a predicted stability of that market is equivalent to a ghost story? There is no reason why suddenly the American economy would collapse and everyone knows this and this is why the dollar has been stable(you might complain that it's taken a dive but you might want to look at cases that are actually bad) despite there not being slabs of matter estimated at some other worth just lying around which the dollar can be traded in for.

@fjanfjan: Yes. He's religious. I didn't say I agreed with his statement, as it is quite obviously wrong. Why you are harping on it is beyond me. He didn't care to talk about it because it isn't a political problem. IT DOESN'T MATTER.

I would say that is very much open to discussion, I already pointed out that if his judgement is so poor he can't decide between creationism and evolution he is probably not very concerned about evidence which I think is a very bad quality.


As a side note, not telling you to just fuck off has been very difficult. You are generally a hostile nut-basket with ridiculous ideas of what people need and deserve (this is a personal opinion).Of course, that isn't enough. You still feel the need to blanket everyone who happens to share a set of political (not personal) beliefs with your hate. If you want to disagree with people, you can at least show the same respect these "asshole" libertarians show you while you dissect the minutiae of non-issues.

I don't think this rant is relevant to the topic, if you feel I am somehow breaking the rules you can bring it up with another mod. If you don't want to respond to my posts then don't do so, though it might get you a bad reputation for ignoring arguments. I would say in the future if you want to shout at someone then do it in a PM or some other private channel and any criticism which you feel is not just personal opinion but based in the rules can be brought up with a mod.

As far me being a nutbasket I believe the Human rights are infact a pretty uncontroversial base for what policy should attempt to extent to every citizen of any nation and I hold a special dislike for those who willfully propagate a kind of modern day feudalism. Libertarian is a term that has been used and abused by plenty of people though, just like liberty and all words that hold positive connotations.


In bank loans, money is created and destroyed regularly. This is all well and good, but it isn't relevant in a banking system where you can't buy gold backed notes with federal reserve notes. Either notes are only ever printed for the gold already in reserve or gold can be exchanged for legal tender backed by that same amount. If you take out a loan to buy gold and trade in the gold to get money to... it isn't a problem. It isn't terribly difficult to avoid the irritating situation of the fractional reserve.

How does this adress the problem of a very small amount of gold and a rapidly growing economy? Banks being able to create money is actually a good thing, it means you aren't stuck with X dollars in cirkulation which would be a problem since as you know real wealth is create all the time, and in part because people can take loans without it being crushingly expensive (deflation ofcourse benefits the people with money while people with loans get boned)
//Yepp, THE fjafjan (who's THE fjafjan?)
Liza wrote:Fjafjan, your hair is so lovely that I want to go to Sweden, collect the bit you cut off in your latest haircut and keep it in my room, and smell it. And eventually use it to complete my shrine dedicated to you.

mastapsi
Posts: 45
Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2007 8:16 am UTC

Re: So who's voting for the Ronpaul in the primaries?

Postby mastapsi » Wed Dec 19, 2007 3:06 am UTC

Umlaut wrote:I don't consider the current state of US currency to be "under control." Deficit spending is growing at an unsustainable rate, and having at least some hard backed currency is preferable to none.

In bank loans, money is created and destroyed regularly. This is all well and good, but it isn't relevant in a banking system where you can't buy gold backed notes with federal reserve notes. Either notes are only ever printed for the gold already in reserve or gold can be exchanged for legal tender backed by that same amount. If you take out a loan to buy gold and trade in the gold to get money to... it isn't a problem. It isn't terribly difficult to avoid the irritating situation of the fractional reserve.


Like another poster said, deficit spending is fiscal, not monetary. Fiscal policy is regulated by Congress with the power of the purse, and monetary policy is regulated by the Federal Reserve through the FOMC. The two are completely different.

Also, your assumption that loans create temporary money is false under the current system, since money is loaned at a fast rate than it is payed back. The result is that the money supply increases.

User avatar
Torvaun
Posts: 2615
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2007 6:23 pm UTC
Location: 47°9′S, 126°43′W
Contact:

Re: So who's voting for the Ronpaul in the primaries?

Postby Torvaun » Wed Dec 19, 2007 4:01 am UTC

@fjafjan
Human rights can get pretty controversial if you bring up the question of what counts as a human. Bring in things like capital punishment, and you've got a bigger can of worms than just about any other.
Hawknc wrote:I don't know if you've never heard of trolling, or if you're just very good at it.

User avatar
fjafjan
THE fjafjan
Posts: 4766
Joined: Fri Oct 06, 2006 12:22 pm UTC
Location: Down south up north in the west of eastern west.
Contact:

Re: So who's voting for the Ronpaul in the primaries?

Postby fjafjan » Wed Dec 19, 2007 2:14 pm UTC

Torvaun wrote:@fjafjan
Human rights can get pretty controversial if you bring up the question of what counts as a human. Bring in things like capital punishment, and you've got a bigger can of worms than just about any other.

Well the specifics of it can be, just like when is it murder in self defence etc can be, but the statement "murder should be illegal" is not a very controversial statement and it should be the goal to attempt to prevent murder as far as possible.
//Yepp, THE fjafjan (who's THE fjafjan?)
Liza wrote:Fjafjan, your hair is so lovely that I want to go to Sweden, collect the bit you cut off in your latest haircut and keep it in my room, and smell it. And eventually use it to complete my shrine dedicated to you.

User avatar
Vaniver
Posts: 9422
Joined: Fri Oct 13, 2006 2:12 am UTC

Re: So who's voting for the Ronpaul in the primaries?

Postby Vaniver » Wed Dec 19, 2007 3:44 pm UTC

fjafjan wrote:hey, you thought the Ronpaul was crazy already? Well he doesn't believe in evolution, so feel free to add another couple crazy points to that list.
fjafjan wrote:He also said he didn't think there was a clear argment on either side. Now I would say not being able to distinguish a theory as well backed with evidence as that of evolution and some ancient creationist myth would not be a difficult choice, and is infact a matter of judgement. It's also interesting about that that alot of the Ronpaul supporters claim that he is oh so consistent but when push comes to shove he didn't want to speak up about not believing in evolution because he thought it would look bad.
He thinks it isn't an issue for politicians to decide, and says so. Although it would be nice to have a candidate with more scientific literacy, that isn't the deciding question of the day, as much as regional school boards would want you to believe.

fjafjan wrote:Well the specifics of it can be, just like when is it murder in self defence etc can be, but the statement "murder should be illegal" is not a very controversial statement and it should be the goal to attempt to prevent murder as far as possible.
And yet, "murder should be illegal" is a very controversial statement when one gets down to the question of whether or not abortion is murder.

As for the whole fiat currency thing- yes, "hard" currencies aren't actually hard and a properly managed fiat currency is better. It is unfortunate that the issues of monetary policy (where Paul is as bad or worse than other candidates) and fiscal policy (where Paul is superior to other candidates) have been conflated so much by the Paul campaign and its supporters. This is the part where you keep in mind that you're not voting for a legislator in chief, but the holder of the veto pen; fiscal policy matters more than monetary policy (and I like to think Paul knows that what the gold bugs want is unworkable, even if it's something Austrian economics approves of).
I mostly post over at LessWrong now.

Avatar from My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic, owned by Hasbro.

mastapsi
Posts: 45
Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2007 8:16 am UTC

Re: So who's voting for the Ronpaul in the primaries?

Postby mastapsi » Wed Dec 19, 2007 4:30 pm UTC

Vaniver wrote:As for the whole fiat currency thing- yes, "hard" currencies aren't actually hard and a properly managed fiat currency is better. It is unfortunate that the issues of monetary policy (where Paul is as bad or worse than other candidates) and fiscal policy (where Paul is superior to other candidates) have been conflated so much by the Paul campaign and its supporters. This is the part where you keep in mind that you're not voting for a legislator in chief, but the holder of the veto pen; fiscal policy matters more than monetary policy (and I like to think Paul knows that what the gold bugs want is unworkable, even if it's something Austrian economics approves of).


The question of monetary policy is important since the President holds appointment power for the Fed's Board of Governors. Two positions on the Board are currently vacant, so this is a big deal.

And it would be wrong to assume that monetary policy is less important than fiscal. They tend to be of equal power, since the interest rate affects the investment portion of GDP, while fiscal spending contributes to the government portion, which are roughly equal, with government getting a slight favor.


As an added not, I'd like to point out that saying that the President's only holds the veto power marginalizes his role in legislation. The President is considered the most important lobbyist, and he often drafts bills up for consideration. He may not be able to directly propose the bills, but he still in essence does by getting a supporter in Congress to do it for him. Many people forget that even though the President doesn't have direct power, he does have a great deal of influence.


Return to “Serious Business”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests