points: 2

Ron Paul on the daily show.

Daily show interviews are never all that good.

featuredpolitics

by El_Wanko

submitted June 6th 2007

64 comments
what do you think? let everyone know!
tagged:
votes:
muchoworthymortepa
tr_willk
not muchoworthy
comments (64)
M
10 years ago
N
10 years ago
O
10 years ago
P
10 years ago
Q
10 years ago
J
10 years ago
I
10 years ago
Haha, I totally fuckin ruined this thread!!!!
10 years ago
No Mothh, JimPanse did. Good try though.
10 years ago
its very hard to say a politician has integrity, but Ron does seem a good man, and hes easy on the eyes
10 years ago
ya i would tap that
10 years ago
What, the reply button?
10 years ago
When did this become Homo Sucko?
10 years ago
When you joined.
10 years ago
Gah! Why do all conservatives want to get rid of public healthcare? Sure it doesn't make them any money but one of the purposes of the government is to provide things that people cant afford to buy from the private sector that are esssential.
10 years ago
Every dollar can only spend once. Public healthcare can only give what the state took from the people before. Of cause there should be support for those who really can`t afford essential things. But large bureaucracies tend to be corrupt and inefficient like the NHS.
10 years ago
Even if they are inefficient they aren't out to make a profit like a private firm, so the price stays reasonable or even free. There is a need for at least some kind of safety net when the price of medicine is beyond the reach of the people who need it. Damn I sound like some kind of socialist.
10 years ago
As I said: "there should be support for those who really can`t afford essential things". But remember for example the telecommunications industry. At least all around Europe there were governmental monopolies. The privatisation and free competition lead to better services and much lower costs. Bureaucracies move very slow and aren`t innovative for sure.
10 years ago
Yeah my mom got an MRI the day she asked for it. The average time for an MRI in Canada is 17.7 weeks. It takes the FDA an average of 15 years to approve a new drug and 1 billion dollars to pay for it and these are the people you want handling our healthcare? By the way, nothings free. Taxes would skyrocket to pay for national healthcare and more importantly, without fiscal incentive, there's no reason for innovations. Hence, the healthcare will stay stagnant like every national healthcare program. I'd rather pay a little extra outta my pocket and not die before I'm treated, than pay for everyone's healthcare-even the bums who don't work for it.
10 years ago
P.S. Ron Paul for President! He's are last hope. Register Republican and vote for him in the primaries. Nice job posting this!
10 years ago
Corporations are every bit as corrupt as governments, just less transparent and accountable. And every dollar gets spent over and over again until it wears out or ends up in some rich guy's bank account.
10 years ago
Oh noes! Taxes is a gonna go up when we get national health care! The sky is falling!

Me wanna stick with the current system. It is so cost-effective and patient-oriented, I can't imagine anything better. So what if 50,000,000 people have no coverage, and if the whole system is designed around profits, rather than people? I don't want mah fuckin taxes going up! Where's mah beer, bitch?
10 years ago
TiredGuy, you really seem tired.^^
10 years ago
Actually, like Ron Paul stated, corporatism is different than true free market capitalism. Corporatism is a byproduct of governments interfering in a free market and subsidizing big corporations, making trade tariffs, and passing legislations to hurt small business. Corporatism happens when the government teams up with big business. That's not what Ron Paul wants. God, the Democrats are so foolish. They think Hillary, Edwards, and Obama are against the "War on Terror". They're only against the War in Iraq. They still support the "War on Terror", just not in Iraq. And they wanna keep permanent bases there. Ron Paul is the only one that's actually against the whole terror war. Americans are like masachists. It's like we get turned on by having someone control us and deny us things. Democrats, Republicans, Libertarians, Independents, it doesn't matter what you are. A vote for Ron Paul is the only vote for you to have more control of your life.
10 years ago
Don`t forget that he`s the only one who spoke out clearly about the federal budget deficit and the foreign trade deficit, too.
10 years ago
What about a trade deficit? Deficit = bad does it?

All that can be said about fiscal deficits is that they are a de facto tax increase/spending cut in the future. In that way it raises an interesting point that long-term government projects should be funded by borrowing since the benefits will not necessarily be enjoyed by the present taxpayer.
10 years ago
Actually I didn't mean that I agreed it <should> be paid by borrowing. Poor choice of words. It simply raises an interesting argument.
10 years ago
Yes, the fiscal deficit you balance the way you said. The problem with the foreign trade deficit is that it is a great threat to the stability of the global economy. And you don`t win elections with the message consume less and produce more...
10 years ago
Jim: I agree that privatisation is generally very effective. In Australia we have done similar things to our telecommunications, power, gas, and water. Most if not all of these have provided excellent service after privatisation. However, the reason they buy into these industries in the first place is because they can make a profit, usually by cutting costs. In terms of medical care I think this would be a bad thing. When lowering costs is made the biggest thing on the adgenda it can lead to a drop in the quality of the service being provided. Or as I said before, unreasonable prices to counter the costs.


Insomniac: I'm not suggesting eliminating private healthcare or not paying pharmaceutical companies for the drugs they make. The government can use our money to buy the drugs. There is still a financial incentive. They don't have to artificially lower their prices.
10 years ago
Who says global imbalances are unsustainable? It is entirely possible for a country to have had a trade deficit for its entire existence without even coming close to a balance of payments crisis. A lot of evidence is out there to show that current accounts in surplus are not necessarily most desirable nor that they should return to 0 in any hurry whatsoever.

In fact it is highly amusing if, as has been asserted here, it is true that Ron Paul has warned about a trade deficit. It has been historically near-impossible for a government to narrow a trade deficit in an open economy not even near as free as he would like it to be. If intervention is not what he is on about, which I hope is the case, then he will respect ideas such as the Pitchford Thesis that deficits are caused on the one hand by consumption smoothing and rational expectations on the ability to repay in the future. Do you think individuals and business would heed his warning just because he says so? This isn't South Korea where people would back their country up to the point of voluntarily sacrificing their gold and jewellery to the government to replenish depleted reserves.
10 years ago
Health care: Are you responsible for your own life, or do you need the government nanny? Does it make sense to force the working man to work more to pay for the health bills of people he doesn't give a fuck about? Seeing as the biggest health care costs are heart and blood pressure related, do we need the working man working harder with less time to relax and less money to eat properly?
10 years ago
yeah i know here in canada we have a real problem with free healthcare.... lines at the hospitals and you have to wait literally years for any major surgery......... wait for it...... wait for it............ HAHAHAAHAHAHAAHAHAHAAHAHAAH oh that is just too good....
good people like bill gates trying to help america lololololol this guy is a moron.

10 years ago
Short: Maybe there is a misunderstanding. I don`t think that in general privatisation is better than public run infrastructure. For example communities in the UK made very bad experience with the privatisation of water and energy supply because the corporations only looked at short-term profits and let the infrastructure rot. One main reason for that is that there was no real competition. And it is the competition for the best products and services we need. Of cause the government should set quality standards. But there`ll be always the question, if the government really can organize all details of such complicated and always moving system as healthcare better or if not. I think as Paul said in the a really free and fair competition the creativity of businessmen leads to better results.

Chairman_of_the_bored: The foreign trade deficit isn`t just a consequence of free markets. It is mainly produced by the Chinese currency policy which leads to an overvaluation of the dollar in order to subsidize their exports. So the consumers follow bad incentives when they buy al those cheap foreign products. And that is bad for both sides in the long term. The Chinese can`t invest all the money in a reasonable way so there will be speculation and bubbles form on the capital market. And that would definitely be a threat to the global economic stability. A reasonable US economic policy would slowly try to convince the Chinese to upvalue their currency or there should be further foreign trade regulations. I don`t know any (major) developed national economy which could stand a 6% GDP deficit in foreign trade for a ling distance of time. Maybe you know one...
10 years ago
I think I will study Economics a bit more. This is one subject in which I am lost.
10 years ago
Currency manipulation doesn't appear to last in the long-term. As a fan of non-intervention in the affairs of other states it seems against principle to "convince". Besides who says the Yuan is over-valued? Various studies but it in the range of 0% to 50%. I think the telling indicator is that the exchange rate is rarely hitting the upper limits of the crawling band the Chinese have set.

There are the associated affects of restricting capital flows in China but a revaluation on paper isn't necessarily fix the American position.

How you may ask? First it has sustained American borrowing at cheap rates. Not simply because they buy American treasuries (which they are focussing less on anyhow). The low cost of their exports has effectively improved REAL wages globally since more affordable goods are more in the reach of more people than ever before. This has put a dampener on inflation which means monetary authorities have had less reason to raise rates.

Second the huge imbalance with China is NOT the be all and end all. A huge and I mean huge chunk of trade between China and the US doesn't simply originate from China. A lot of it is simply assembly or manufacturing. That means a lot of the output is still based on inputs from other countries. When you're importing from China it could very well be for a product which was essentially Japanese, Korean or European. It is simply showing up in the trade accounts between China and the US. China is a nice explanation for having a big trade imbalance with more than 1 country.

So the yuan appreciates a bit faster than it is currently, then what? Their exports become less competitive? Not so. The appreciation will also mean they pay less for their inputs such as materials and components which means they can export for less. Oh look, zero-sum game.

Asset bubbles is a nice argument to make the Chinese see reason, huge impact globally? I think not. Sure their financial markets are frankly a joke but it won't be easy to spook global markets. Sure you can point to a few weeks ago at a correction which sent jitters globally. Guess what, there was an even bigger correction this week and global markets barely noticed. The first time people were simply caught with their pants down. Oh but it will hurt the Chinese! Only 7% of the Chinese population owns shares. Even if it caused financial devastation to that 7%, China's industry is still very well geared to export rather than domestic consumption.

Yes China should let the currency operate at least a wider band but all the wrong reasons are being given.
10 years ago
Australia has run a current account deficit for every year except one year in the 70s and frequently nudged 5%. We are now around 6% and the alarms are not sounding. Foreign lending has not dried up, our dollar has not collapsed, default rates are still low.
10 years ago
I think the value of the chinese currency is far less of a factor than wages they're willing to work for. Double the value of the Yuan right now and most chinese shit will still be way cheaper. Americans work and expect it to cover a house, a couple cars, college for the kids, take-out food, satellite tv, and the occasional vacation to the nice part of some shit country. Chinese work and expect to feed their families.
10 years ago
Hey chairman_of the_bored,

it`s not so much about so much about interventions but about accepting of common problems. Target values set by Chinese government can`t be the basis on which to judge them. Of cause I know that there are plenty of opinions what imbalance in foreign trade with a single country is sustainable. So there are no absolute values of optimum exchange rate. But as you have mentioned the Chinese government has also realised that too much unused capital and speculation money is a risk to stability (remember e.g. Argentinian and Southeastasian crises in the past). But an export surplus in goods means an export of capital as well. That`s only possibly by buying US treasuries.

Sure it`s nice for US consumers to have low prices on goods (and I don`t doubt the effects on inflation). But I think the more honest reason for not lifting US interest rates is that the indepted US households couldn`t pay the mortgage interest for their real estate (another huge problem of the stability of US and global economy). I don`t say that the 6% GDP trade deficit only comes from the trade with China. But as far as I know it`s just a fact that most dollar treasuries are today bought by China (I guess it`s about 1.5 trillion dollars by now). And I think it doesn`t help to shift the origin of the products from China to Japan, Korea or Europe (I only talk about the currencies).

Is it really a zero-sum game to set higher export costs against lower import costs for raw materials, components and so on? As for as I know most raw materials are traded in dollars. So the Chinese will get a chance to reduce their vast dollar account, too.

And finally, I do think that serious problems of the Chinese economy would affect the US (and the rest of the world) more than you suggest. Calling the Chinese banking system a "joke" is still polite. The big Chinese banks (which are all state-owned) are considered almost all to be at the border to bankruptcy. Since the Chinese economy contributes with its growth rates about 10% the biggest share of global economic growth it will of cause hit US and others hard. As you said the Chinese stockholders should better consume (e. g. foreign goods) than gambling at the stock exchanges.

At least we agree on the point that the currency should adapt more to the economic necessities. Regards. ;)
10 years ago
Oh I forgot. When I speak about "major developed national economies" I mean e.g. the US or the EU. Australia isn`t that important to the global economy as it might seem from your perspective.^^
10 years ago
Everyone gets so worried. Debt is really easy to pay off - you just take a loan to cover it.
10 years ago
Actually China is just behind or just ahead of Japan in its accumulation of US treasuries and the Gulf states have not even been mentioned.

I don't believe the Fed is as interested in minimising mortgage defaults as you claim. Other developed countries were able to deflate property bubbles in a much gentler manner, borne out by a less steeper drop in median prices and less of an up-tick in defaults. In fact much of the danger lies not directly in the Fed's decisions but questionable lending practices. Besides the past couple of days in the bond market has hinted that the Fed might not carry the same clout for a while. Yields have steadily shifted in a downward band. Suddenly the yield has punched through that band and we wonder what will happen to the cost of borrowing even though the Fed just decided to leave rates on hold.

Purchases of inputs does little to change dollar reserves. When ideas were floated to replace reserves with some sort of commodity hedge, it was quickly calculated that it would make barely a dent. Besides an appreciation of the Yuan would make the exercise even more futile.

I never said anything about a downturn in the Chinese economy not having a negative effect. I questioned the impact on China and the rest of the world from a minority of Chinese losing out in asset speculation.

Chinese banking would in fact benefit from a freer exchange rate as monetary policy could be conducted via interest rates instead of the hopelessly blunt and ignored regulation in place to control lending.

Yet again something I didn't say. I never said Chinese shareholders should do one thing or another. Chinese should not have to have any particular consumption patterns. They should be allowed to use their money overseas if they wish, yes including investment. But why should they bother trying? The US is already doing a great job by blocking the sales of a number of its assets. If anything this vicious streak of preventing legitimate sales would send jitters to those with capital to invest, pushing up US rates in a needless fashion.

Fretting over a trade surplus is a nice distraction for the US from worrying about its own economy. Oh wait, Mr. Non-interventionist isn't supposed to touch the controls. I guess that means even after you strip out economic distortions, the market will tell private entities when the dance is over, not China, not the Fed, not lawmakers.

Australia isn't big in most economic measures but it mirrors a lot of what the US is going through and it's been doing it for all of its history, hence its frequent citation in studies on the matter.
10 years ago
Well, I still think that there`s way to much capital not only in China but also in the resources exporting regions like Russia, Arab world,... that is being used for speculations (and not for investing to develop their threshold country). But let`s see, if the free market can solve it all an its own. At least it will be interesting to watch how all those problems develop over next month.
10 years ago
Shit, chairman has learned the secret of lines between the paragraphs. The only way to stop him now is by making fun of his name. Chairman_of_the_Whored!
10 years ago
The Big Mac was inspired by the Big Boy, a similar double-decker hamburger sold by the restaurant chain of that name since 1936. The burger was invented by McDonald's franchisee Jim Delligatti at a location in Uniontown, Pennsylvania, before being picked up nation-wide. Frank Berardi, a biology teacher at Uniontown Area High School claims to have served the first Big Mac to a customer when he worked at the old McDonald's at the shopping center on Morgantown Street as a teenager. The McDonald's owned by Jim Delligatti was demolished around 2001, and a new restaurant built in the same plaza about 300 feet (100 m) away.[citation needed]
According to a famous advertising jingle, it consists of "two all-beef patties, special sauce, lettuce, cheese, pickles, onions on a sesame seed bun," though the most distinctive feature is a middle layer of bread used to stabilize contents and prevent spillage.
In some restaurants, McDonald's also offers a "Mega Mac" with four patties and an extra slice of cheese. In Canada, this is commonly available in most McDonald's restaurants under the name "Double Big Mac". In the United Kingdom, the "Mega Mac" was once available but has since been discontinued along with the Super-size option as a part of the healthier McDonald's menu. The "Mega Mac", however, has been for sale in Ireland since at least some time in 2004 and remains on sale. The Mega Mac began sale in Japan on January 12, 2007. In Europe, larger burgers and buns were used to make a "Bigger Big Mac" as part of a limited promotion to celebrate the World Cup 2006, held in Germany. The burger was 40% bigger (compared to the weight of a normal Big Mac), and contained almost the same amount of saturated fat as the recommended daily allowance for an active adult male.
The Big Mac is known worldwide and is often used as a symbol of American capitalism. The Economist has used it as a reference point to determine the cost of living in different countries — the Big Mac index — since it is so widely available and is comparable across markets.
In 2005, McDonald's began offering product placement rewards to hip hop artists who namechecked the Big Mac in their music, giving US$5 to the artist for every time a song mentioning the hamburger was played on the radio. [1] This offer quickly spawned a satirical reference from Hip Hop artist Mad Skillz, who references the marketing ploy in his track "2005 Wrap Up" by stating "And I'm beefin' wit' Mickey D's man, y'all dead wrong, Talkin' 'bout payin' rappers to mention Big Macs in their song, We do rap from the heart, y'all better have some respect, Alright, Big Mac! Big Mac! Big Mac! Now where's my check?"
When he was in the White House, U.S. President William Jefferson "Bill" Clinton said that Big Macs were his favorite snack.[citation needed]
In India, where Hindu and Islamic Sharia dietary laws prohibit Hindus from eating beef and Muslims from eating pork, the Big Mac was renamed the Maharaja Mac and was originally made with lamb instead of beef; however, along with the company's other meat items it is now made from chicken.[2] [3] In Saudi Arabia, the two meat patties are "100% grilled; inspected Halal; no additives, fillers, binders, preservatives, extenders, or flavor enhancers. Only pure forequarter and flank".[4] There are also variations in other countries, especially to the condiments.
Burger King made a competing product called the Big King (or "Big K") burger which had similar ingredients and taste to a Big Mac. Hardee's made a similar product called the Boss Burger complete with Boss Sauce in the mid 1990s.
On 19 November 2006 it was reported in The Herald-Sun[1] that some McDonald's stores in Melbourne, Australia had introduced Halal meat for their Big Macs and some non-Muslim customers were furious they were not told their hamburger meat was Halal. McDonald's Australia were reviewing if they were going to implement this nationwide.
10 years ago
Wanko, I've been inserting empty lines for months now. It was quite easy to stumble upon your technique by the way, so thank you.
10 years ago
lol Borracho. Hey all this spending and printing money is making our dollar worth less. Many economists have been predicting a terrible economic disaster in the next 10-15 years if we keep spending like idiots in Congress and borrowing like idiots from China. We just print it out or borrow it when we run out. That's why countries are not accepting our Petrodollar anymore. Most countries have switched to the Petroeuro. We have to stop invading other countries and start being more responsible. Right around 9-11, Iraq switched from the Petrodollar to the petroeuro and then we invaded them. Now they're back on the dollar. Guess who just switched to the petroeuro? Iran. :-/
10 years ago
Well, I guess it's for the best. I couldn't think of any other ways to make fun of your name, Wingman_of_the_scored.
10 years ago
have you tried with a giant purple dildo?
10 years ago
I don't know much about him... But his wife makes a damn fine fish stick.
10 years ago
A very good point....and a very good fish stick.
10 years ago
He seems like a fairly decent guy,which is the kind of person we need to get into office desperately.It sucks that the whole world hates america because of our asshole president,of which most americans hate as well
10 years ago
He's very much a libertarian with a bit of a Republican stain to him.

Pro:
He wants to end the drug war
Remove US troops from the mideast and other foreign countries
Reduce taxes
Follow a strict constitutional mandate.

Con:
He is very much anti-abortion.
10 years ago
He his anti-abortion, but points out that the individual states should be deciding that issue for themselves.
10 years ago
Too bad the media is trying like hell to banish Ron Paul from your mind...
10 years ago
And that's a damn shame really. I think he seems honest and level headed. I think he really does want to serve the public. I wish there were more people like him.
10 years ago
There are a few politicians in DC who really do give a damn. Unfortunately, they can't do a hell of a lot, since corporations are what really run the show. Anyone who doesn't believe that obvious fact really must have their head deeply imbedded in their ass.
10 years ago
ron paul truly is a libertarian candidate. it's a good thing he cozied up with the republicans. if he is nominated, that might truly be a choice. he has an air of honesty that is rare in either party, i hope he gets the nomination. " relax Harry, IV'E GOT AN ANGLE!"
10 years ago
hey, i'm watching jon stewart on tv WHILE watching him on the computer. neat!
10 years ago
Which one are you beating off to?
10 years ago
wow you should get some sort of award....
10 years ago
I dream of living in a world where awards are given out for beating off.
10 years ago
Ron Paul is the Sanjaya of the 08 election.
10 years ago
i agree, but can he do bukkake?
10 years ago
Ron Paul 2012
6 years ago
recover password
most discussed

below are mucho's most discussed submissions of the last 12 hours. join in on the discussion!

recent comments