I'm curious about Ron Paul...? Can I get some assistance understanding?

He seems very intelligent and makes very good points. The think is, I%26#039;m 23 years old, so the only presidents I have know are Bush and Clinton. I like Barack Obama, but many conservatives say liberals are bad on the economy because they promote big government and higher taxes. From what I have seen in my life, Clinton was a much better president. I%26#039;m just on the fence about this big government/small government thing with the economy. It seems that the assistance that the government gives to the poor would help the money circulate throught the economy so long as the unemployment rate stays low (which it has in the past). So why would Paul be better with the economy and why don%26#039;t more conservatives, who seem to care so much about out economy vote for him. I mean it%26#039;s pretty obvious that of all the candidates, John Mccain would be the worst for the economy.

I%26#039;m curious about Ron Paul...? Can I get some assistance understanding?emergency loan

He is endorsd by Zeightgeist the movie.

watch the movie

I%26#039;m curious about Ron Paul...? Can I get some assistance understanding?

loan

This is a pretty cool webite that lists the different politicians views. http://www.issues2000.org/default.htm|||maccain will destroy the economy

for me 1- is ron paul 2 is Obama|||Republicans always used to be all about fiscal responsibility. They were pro-business and believed in running the government like a business. This used to be what conservatism was all about.

Well then Ronald Reagan came along. He had a plan that he could balance the budget by cutting taxes. This would stimulate the economy and make tax revenues rise. It was a very popular plan because everyone wanted tax cuts. He also promised to cut spending and make government smaller.

But in fact his plan didn%26#039;t work. In his first term, Reagan cut taxes but also hugely increased spending, as a result he tripled the entire pre-existing national debt. In one term! Well into his second term, Reagan was still promising that his tax cuts would stimulate the economy enough to pay for his expenditures. It didn%26#039;t happen.

George HW Bush, who was Reagan%26#039;s VP and the next president, had originally said %26#039;Reaganomics%26#039; was %26#039;voodoo economics%26#039;, but when he ran for president in 1988 he had converted to Reaganomics. (Some people called it %26#039;deja-voo-doo%26#039;.)

Amazingly, Bill Clinton was the first president after Reagan to cut the size of government and reduce spending!

One theory is that Republicans want to push the nation so far into debt that we will decide we can no longer afford social programs like Social Security and Medicare. There are other theories explaining why it is that huge govt. debt benefits conservatives or corporations or whomever.

Ron Paul was originally a Libertarian. I don%26#039;t agree with Libertarians but I have great respect for them because they tend not to peddle snake oil, simplistic solutions like the idea of cutting taxes and raising spending to bring the budget back into balance. They believe in the very least government possible. They don%26#039;t believe in social programs either, but at least they also don%26#039;t believe in %26#039;corporate welfare%26#039;. They have always been the ONLY party who will actually tell you up front what govt. departments and programs they plan to cut. And consequently, they have never recieved more than 1 or 2% of the vote. We don%26#039;t WANT an honest president. 8^)

Paul managed to get himself elected to Congress as a Republican in Texas. I like to listen to him because he really has his own ideas. But the GOP hates him for the same reason. All the other candidates don%26#039;t have their own ideas, they all push the party%26#039;s ideas and agenda.

And the GOP is not about individual thinking, it%26#039;s about the Party Agenda. This is why GW Bush made such a good candidate for them, a man with not a single idea in his head, who would just read what they put in front of him.

The real GOP agenda is about concentrating wealth and power. Since Reagan, wealth in the US has grown progressively more and more concentrated. Even the Bush tax cuts do this, the richer you are the bigger break you get (proportionately). They even want to eliminate taxes paid mostly by rich people, like inheritance and capital gains. They feel it%26#039;s just immoral, somehow, to tax rich people.|||The problems with our economy are due to shortcomings in our monetary system. Our money supply is controlled by the Federal Reserve, which is owned by private banks. Governments can make money to spend. We don%26#039;t do that, We borrow it from the bank. They charge us interest. They never lose. They loan out billions, sometimes on very risky projects. They only need a couple grand to loan many thousands, even millions. If you or I did this, we would be jailed. Essentially. they buy bills from the government for pennies on the dollar, and keep all the profit. Every American need to learn how the Fed CAUSES inflation by it%26#039;s very existence. It is a corrupt system designed by bankers to divert wealth from the working classes to the wealthy bankers. It was pushed through Congress on Christmas Eve in 1912 after most of it%26#039;s opponents had left for the holiday. Lobby your representatives to abolish it and adopt a sound money policy. The end result would be that everyone would have more money, and many of our social problems would take care of themselves. Google %26quot;fractional reserve banking%26quot;, you should find some interesting reading.|||Your points are good and accurate and your concerns are in line as well. Similar to my own.

Let me say first, the DEMOCRATS are making promises that I don%26#039;t believe they can keep. Why have they not done this before now? They want to make our government bigger and have us pay more taxes. Our current government isn%26#039;t taking care of biz now. We have been invaded by illegal immigrants in the millions. Our government is not protecting our borders. We are at war and it turns out we went to war for false reasons. Big, fat rich America has no health care for it%26#039;s millions of citizens. Our life spans are shorter here in this country because of that.

We are about to quadruple our population if our current rate of LEGAL immigration is continued in the next 15 years. Four times as many people for you to compete with for work, or to find a home, or to get fuel, water, food etc.

All of those new people will be immigrants (legal) roughly 60% of them will need social welfare to some degree. It will be roughly 10 years before any of those new folks are productive inthe USA as you are now.

Guess who is going to get to pay for all of this?

It would be robbing Peter (you and me) to pay Paul the new citizens.

We have huge problems in the USA due to the way our economics have been mishandled. Our dollar is worth HALF of what it was a year ago.

I could go on but the point here is that these problems are the kinds of problems that should have been better dealt with my OUR GOVERNMENT.

What sense does it make to beleive in false promises by DEMO%26#039;s about what they will do ...when they havent%26#039; done it yet to ANY degree. Do you want a bigger government and to pay more taxes to get more of the same thing?

I don%26#039;t want this.

Dr. RON PAUL wants to go back to the Constituion and start afresh but on the old standard. The one that ran this country well for the last 200 years or so.

Don%26#039;t have the space to explain RP and his policies here. Check out his web site.

I hope this info will at least get you to think on the above concerns. We don%26#039;t really have ANY good choices except for Ron Paul. Both parties will rape, rob and beat the American public into the ground ...just as they have been doing for the last 20 years. I suspecty Ron Paul MIGHT be able to change that. But there are no guarantees for even that, I%26quot;m afraid.|||Being only 23 you have not ventured into life just yet but I will give it a shot. First my bio: 34 white male who just bought his first house 1 year ago married no kids and a decent job 35k a year combined with wifes income.

The reason you do not %26#039;give%26#039; money to the poor is that they become dependent on the money and will never work for their own income. Never is a strong word but my mother works in goevt housing and has seen litterly 4 generations all living in the same projects all in the same housing complex. This promotes a dependency similiar to alcohol or drugs. You do not give a bum a buck because he will just buy booz and this is called enabling.

High employment comes when componies grow and prosper so taxing them at high rates means their profits are less so they can not spend money on research or expand their business. Best Buy for example can not build more stores and thus can not hire more people to work. This works the same for the Oil Companies, Car manufacturers and such so Dems usualy want to tax evil corporations so they can then spend the money of entitlement programs such as food stamps, housing assistance and unemployment benefits. This is not the function of government but we seem to accept this. Taxing people is the same thing as robbing people. People who are successfull or make a lot of money are taxed higher. This is bad because they can buy things that are expensive:cars, homes, boats, furs,jewlrey, property, businesses and all of these have people who are employed so they actually meaning rich people put a lot of money into the economy. When govts tax successful people where is the incentive to be successful if the govt just takes the fruits of their work? There is none.

Barrak and Hillary are both BIG GOVT candidates meaning they feel the Govt can solve the problems of people where as Reps feel people can bring themselves up.

Bush%26#039;s presidency saw a lower unemployment rate than anytime in the Clinton years but that is never mentioned but it is true. Right now the US has the 2nd highest corporate tax rate just with Japan being the first. Why is this important? Coprorations will move where the tax rate is lower because after all they are in business to make a profit but if the govt takes too much of the profit then they can not expand do research....employ more people. Sound familiar? It should.

Neither Obama nor Hillary have ever worked in the private sector or run a business. Yes Hillary was on the Wal Mart board but that was a favor to Bill but she had no power to make decisions. Barrak was a lawyer for a few years and has NEVER worked in business. Neither of them has any EXECUTIVE EXPERIENCE. Romeny and Huckabee are the only two Candidates with any executive experience and why is this important? Senators just vote, executives manage and this is important.

Clinton was a terrible President because he was ineffective in many areas and governed by polls but the times were good until the tech stock crash and the mini reccession that Bush inherited then turned into one of the biggest economical growth periods since the 80s and all of this during war time so do not be so quick to diminish what Bush has done. I hope this helps and I know people will give me a thumbs down but I tried to be as unbiased as possible.