Rath said:
Viper1 said:
I'll cover your points one by one to better clarify things.
1. Civil Rights - His point against the Civil Rights Act is modern in thought. If you were to establish a white only business today, you'd be out of business in a week. It would a disasterous venture. While the business is given the right to choose whom they cater to, the consumer has the right to ensure his establishment fails. I, nor Dr. Paul, are sugesting it a good idea to create discretionary businesses but we also understand that if you did, you'd only be setting yourself up for failure and allowing a business to fail is a concpet America has a hard time grasping lately.
In some places in America those businesses wouldn't fail. That's where the problem is, you're assuming that racism is gone but it's not - there are plenty of people still out there who think that blacks are inferior to whites.
3. Leaving NATO and UN - The US government has started taking orders from UN and many UN policies are now laws that supercede our very own laws. They drag us into wars we have no business being in, use us as a global police force, violate soveriegnty of other nations and their laws. Fact is they do far more harm to the world than good and we're losing our soverignty to them.
BAHAHA. The USA is the one behind most of the wars and they use the UN to try and make them legitmate. (Though they don't always succeed as with Iraq).
4. Gold standard - He doesn't want a complete return of the gold standard but the option to allow competing currencies such as gold. Right now, gold is illegal as a currency despite it being listed in the Constituion as the only currency (plus silver). More to the point is that it would keep the value of the dollar honest instead of continually losing value as it does under the Federal Reserve.
It also wouldn't work. The very concept of money has changed significantly since the gold standard was dropped and with the way a modern economy works I can't see the gold standard working currently.
8. Free market education - We had it before and it worked just fine. I also think you are mixing concepts on this one. He still wants public education just governed from the local and state level, not federal. But free market education is also known as private schooling. Right now it's expensive because a public option exists. There is no market for a private school at that level whena free school already exists. If ALL schools were private based, the market would cover all levels simply because demand for it would exist. But again, you're mixing his policy on this one.
The market would cover all levels, poor people would get shitty and cheap education and the rich a good and expensive education.
|
I only commented on the parts I actually kind of cared about. But he is an impossible idealist and would make a rubbish President because of it, he wouldn't know how to compromise and he would never gather enough support in both houses to push his ideas through. He'd be reduced to using his power of veto against bills he didn't agree with, which would be most of them, and as such gridlock the government (which to be honest seems mighty easy to do in America).
|
1. Sure, ther would still be a few places with problems at first but I gurantee you that no business would last 2 years with that kind of discretion even in the hearts of Mississippi and Alabama. The public outcry from eneighboring towns and states, media inundation, and more factors would force them to close. You simply could not operate that kind of business without the business getting publicly ostracized and criticized. How many other local businesses do you think would ban him from their stores on that account? Basically put, the people would force the owner to accept everyone.
3. Of course the US is behind most of them but I'm not goign to use the excuse that just because the US itself does it that it's OK for the UN and NATO to do it. I don't want the US doign it either as you can see in notation 7 in my post.
4. Again, I nor Paul says he wants to go back to the gold standard but rather option gold as a competing currency. A full return to the gold standard could never work now for the fact we've inflated the currency far beyond the gold reserves we have (which is infinitely smaller than when we had the gold standard in place). It's about allowing gold as a competing currency. This prevents the dollar from fluctuating in value as dramatically as it currently does by giving it a finite valued object to compare value to and prevent to the Federal Reserve from inflating the supply of money. No more frikkin quantitative easing and bullshit interest rates.
5. Hey, that sounds just like education today anyway. Public education in the US is some of the worst in the industrialized world. All US government enterprizses either fail, provide poor service or are insolvent. Give the market a chance at it and history has proven it will be a better service, more economical service and innovative service.
