"I am an imperfect messenger, but the message is perfect"
– Ron Paul
One thing is certain of Dr. Ron Paul, he is not a sound-bite candidate. That is, he often speaks over the heads of voters which causes a lack of understanding. It is in my personal opinion that Ron Paul cannot be understood in the 30 seconds allocated to him in debates. His ideas must be studied; however, once one does understand Dr. Paul, they often stick around.
Ron Paul does not want to eliminate Social Security, which is set to run dry in 2036. Although he personally doesn’t believe in the Social Security program, he does believe in keeping the promise to those who have been paying into the program. Ron Paul advocates an “opt-out” for people 25 and under from the system so that those individuals can keep more of their money each week, this immediately benefits the economy.
Ron Paul is also the only candidate who will guarantee Social Security lasts well beyond the projected 2036 deadline by reducing the size of government immediately and eliminating our overseas expenditures.
This is a direct quote from Ron Paul's Plan to Restore America regarding entitlements.
"Honors our promise to our seniors and veterans, while allowing young workers to opt out. Block grants Medicaid and other welfare programs to allow States the flexibility and ingenuity they need to solve their own unique problems without harming those currently relying on the programs."
As most Americans go about their daily life they seem to miscalculate the dire situation we face; impending global financial meltdown. It should be well understood by now that in 2007 there were very intelligent economists from the Austrian school that predicted the housing market collapse in vivid detail. Those same Austrians are predicting a greater collapse in the near future; the collapse of the dollar. Which would be the worst crises, economic or otherwise, the world has ever seen. Remember in 2007 when America laughed at the Austrians predictions? Will we risk making the same mistake again?
In light of this knowledge America has a distinct choice to make, one or the other: 4 more years of Obama and possible global market collapse or just 4 years.
4 More Years of Obama
If the American people vote for Newt Gingrich or Mitt Romney it will be 4 more years of Obama. This is not a difficult notion to arrive at. America is upset, voters wanted change in ’08 and they need change now. However, neither of the two candidates offers any real change for America nor do they offer a departure from our current path to collapse. They both advocate big government, large scale militarism and they both cater to large corporations rather than to the people (meaning they can be bought). They both also have skeletons in their closet which Obama and his $1 Billion can easily exploit.
The independents would not vote for Gingrich or Romney, nor would the democrats… but let me get to the point, nor would the Paulites which are roughly 15% of the republican vote. This may be frustrating or seem irrational to you. It may anger you to no end… but it doesn’t change the fact at hand. The fact is that 95% of Ron Paul supporters, when asked, say they will not vote for the Republican nominee if Ron Paul does not take the nomination. This alone spells certain doom for the GOP in 2012.
However if the Republican Party chose Ron Paul as the nominee he would win most of the independents, a large percentage of democrats (see ‘blue republicans’), and the GOP. Ron Paul has no skeletons in his closet for Obama to exploit. His voting record is constitutionally pristine and he doesn’t cater to large corporations for money.
Just 4 Years
In just 4 years the Austrian economist Dr. Ron Paul could balance our budget and return us to financial sanity, he could pave the way for the return to prosperity. Not for just us but for the whole world. So I ask America. Why risk financial collapse when the solution lies in this wish 76 year old man?
Can’t we try the Austrian philosophy on monetary policy for just 4 years? Can’t we go back to sound money for just 4 years? Can’t we engage in peaceful trade instead of militarism for just 4 years? Can’t we cut back on government for just 4 years? Can’t we end crony-capitalism for just 4 years? Can’t we hang up our war hammers and our petty reservations for just 4 years so we can get through this mess?
The funny thing is, regardless how you vote, if we don’t fix our financial problem the collapse is inevitable. That means our government shrinks anyway and our militarism and foreign aid ends anyway.
Ron Paul or No One.
For a deeper understanding of Ron Paul and his philosophies please this series.
"I am an imperfect messenger, but the message is perfect" – Ron Paul
One thing is certain of Dr. Ron Paul, he is not a sound-bite candidate. That is, he often speaks over the heads of voters which causes a lack of understanding. It is in my personal opinion that Ron Paul cannot be understood in the 30 seconds allocated to him in debates. His ideas must be studied; however, once one does understand Dr. Paul, they often stick around.
$25 billion per year in foreign aid seems like a drop in the bucket to our annual $2.7 trillion dollars national revenue, however, one should put into perspective that our budget is over $3 trillion per year and our national debt is over $15 trillion. A rational person understands that this is simply unsustainable, in its most basic math. However, this is the obvious argument and I don't find it necessary to dwell upon the obvious. I will, however, stay on the argument of economics for the time being as I feel we are missing something that should resonate with American’s and is consistently ignored. That argument is a rudimentary economics lesson written by William Graham Sumner, called the forgotten man.
The Forgotten Man Applied
As we all understand, the $25 billion dollars has to, at some point, come from the productive sector of society; the taxpayers, whom we will call group A. This money is then provided as financial aid to foreign bureaucrats to their benefit alone, we’ll call this party, group B. We, as a species, have a predilection for considering only what we can immediately see in front of us. We can see the charity of group A (albeit a forced charity) and we can see the benefits reaped by group B. However, no one stops to consider that what we cannot see, which is group C; the forgotten man.
Group C is the car manufacturer, the clothing maker, electronics manufacturer, the bread maker, the paper miller, the restaurant owner, the bookseller, the small businessman; the list goes on ad infinitum. Since our government took the money from group A and gave it to group B, group C was never realized. Essentially we are giving charity to the foreign group B at the loss of what group C would have had to offer. Let me stress the magnitude of productive loss and potential unemployment we suffer due to this forced “charity”.
Putting this into a perspective that we all can relate to, let us say that a $1 million a year company employs 75 people, some have more some have less. These 75 people have to care for 75 families, let’s assume families of 3 for this example. So this single $1 million dollar company directly affects 225 people’s lives. Now let’s extrapolate this figure to $25 billion. That’s roughly 1,875,000 workers who take care of a total 5,625,000 family members. Not all of these workers encounter job loss per say, but productivity loss eventually becomes job loss.
Since 1970 we have spent well over a trillion dollars on foreign aid (link). Irrefutably, this money never went to the forgotten man, denying hundreds of thousands of jobs; perhaps entire industries from ever coming into existance.
Immorality of Foreign Aid
Since this document is regarding Ron Paul's views, perhaps its said best in his own words. Please listen to this 8 minute chapter from Ron Paul's audiobook "Liberty Defined" for his personal view on foreign aid.
"I am an imperfect messenger, but the message is perfect" – Ron Paul
One thing is certain of Dr. Ron Paul, he is not a sound-bite candidate. That is, he often speaks over the heads of voters which causes a lack of understanding. It is in my personal opinion that Ron Paul cannot be understood in the 30 seconds allocated to him in debates. His ideas must be studied; however, once one does understand Dr. Paul, they often stick around.
We hear about government spending daily, we hear it from radio hosts, TV pundits, from President Obama and we hear it countless times in the GOP debates. However, the government must spend some money, so what is good spending and what is bad spending? I honestly don’t believe that any other political figure understands this better than Ron Paul.
Essentially, when our government spends money, say, to create a jobs for instance. They go about it differently than the private sector would. As the private sector creates a job purely out of demand, the government creates a job simply to create work. This is counterproductive and actually creates job-loss in the private sector. To understand this notion thoroughly I offer a short chapter from a book written by Henry Hazlitt titled “Economics in One Lesson”.
(more chapters on youtube)
As Mr. Hazlitt illustrates, government cannot create a job without first taking one from the private sector. This simple notion can be easily proven through elementary mathematics, the government cannot magically create jobs. If the government takes money, for any purpose whether it be for foreign aid & war or be it research & development it is always at the peril of the tax payer and private sector jobs.
To reiterate, when the government takes money from the taxpayers pocket, it results in less money that can be spent as a consumer in the private sector. If your buying power is diminished then fewer products are sold and there is less demand for production. When production falls, layoffs ensue shortly after. Unemployment rises.
Ron Paul would decrease this by doing away with 5 extremely wasteful bureaucracies. Departments that when scrutinized are obvious failures and ultimately job destroyers.
"I am an imperfect messenger, but the message is perfect" 