SamuelRSmith said:
He wants to eliminate the FED and various departments like education!
The Federal Reserve is one of the main players in the economic crisis. They set interest rates too low, and print too much money, which results in a vast expansion of credit and high inflation, which leads to greater mal-investments, and, thus, larger recessions/depressions.
The department of education has a terrible track record, and is illegal. Under the constitution there are no provisions for such a department, and the department also violates the 10th Amendment. Ron Paul wants to give the ability to educate back to the states. You will still have your public education systems, but they'll just be run a lot better, and your local schools won't be dictated to by some pencil-pushers in Washington.
Ok, I get that you have some very liberterian view points. But please explain to me why this obsession with a 225 year old document? It was visionary and bold at the time but the world has changed since then. Nowhere, does it explicitly deny the department of education. And don't you think the founding fathers had other concerns than setting up a school system in a world which was hugely different than the one we are in today? There are so many issues to discuss in this context (e.g the 2nd amendment). It just escapes my mind how people cling to the constitution and deny all the changes that have taken place since then (reminds me of the literal interpretation of the Bible, these documents were never meant to be taken literally/serve as the law for the next millenia)
Do you really believe the states would do better when fighting for themselves? How would the overall school system be better if it was handled by the states? There are already vast differences in terms of quality. No doubt, the system has to be improved but you have to explain to me how the quality of education can be improved by giving the "right to educate" back to the states? Btw, why stop with state level? Why not give the authority to counties?
Read the tenth amendment, the Federal Government can only exercise the powers explicity given to it in the Constitution. So, if it doesn't specify education, it can't do education. If the Federal Government should wish to do education, it should amend the Constitution, so that the States can actually vote to give away this power, if they so wish. It should not be just taken away from them, without their say.
As to why Libertarians love the Constitution so much, it's simply because the Constitution is one of the most sublime documents ever written in terms of recognising the natural law, and constraining Government. America became great because of this Constitution. It's been stepping away from it in recent decades, almost certainly at its own peril.
And, actually, I agree, Schools should be managed as locally as possible. However, the States should have control of the education system. Some will keep it higher, some will lower. Some states will be better at providing education than the Federal Government, some will be worse. However, parents vote with their feet. Whatsmore, its far easier to change education policy if its at state or local level, than it would be if it was provided at Federal level.
He doesn't believe in Climate Change (granted, the whole Republican Party hates science)
What does it matter if he doesn't believe in climate change? The free market naturally decarbonizes, anyway, so let it be. I'm not going to get into this, anyway, as the point of Ron Paul's philosophies is that it doesn't matter what he believes in.
The whole issue is that Climate Change is nothing you can believe in or not. It's just a fact and science. If you have ever taken any economic classes, you would know that the market fails to take into account so-called externalities, for the simple reason that there impact is hard to measure and usually affects the whole population.
Don't talk to me about economics classes, I know about externalities. However, markets naturally decarbonize, they take the most profitable route, the most profitable route is always the most efficient route. Our energy has been naturally decarbonizing for hundreds of years. Starting with burning wood, then coal and oil, now we're moving into a gas and nuclear age, after that, perhaps our technologies will be ready to embrace renewables. Forcing people to skip a generation of technology is forcing people to be poorer, both now and in the future.
He is against the Civil Rights Act!!!
http://www.ronpaul.com/on-the-issues/civil-rights-act/
I know his position. It's the same as his son's. He argues that it's a violation of free speech, government interference etc. I'm sorry to be inpolite but this is just BS. He would allow private businesses to segregate their costumers if they wish to or deny service to any minority if they feel like it. Of course, he is against racism but his position would open the door once again for open racism with the excuse of free speech and personal liberty.
Well, I'm not going to argue with you on this, as it's not so much about facts, and more entirely about opinion on property rights.
|
