Ron Paul is our last hope

Oh please! I do give him credit for being one of the few who has a consistent record against the war we started in Iraq.

However, what's his position on the two most important crisis facing the US? Education and health care. If we fix education for everybody then the rest will follow. An educated population is far less likely to fall for the manipulations of the few in power. If everyone has a good education then there's more chance of an equal voice at the table.

The lack of universal health care coverage is staggering for such an otherwise advanced country. The cost of health care is financially crippling as well as lethal.

Improvements in both education and universal health care are good financial investments in the future of this country. However, while they might improve the country as a whole they don't make the current batch of CEOs & board members (and tomorrow's board members - currently in politics) richer. So, they're a "hard sell" and because both will take decades to really "fix" the natural short term focus in politics means it's nigh on impossible.

Hmmm, perhaps JY racing was right after all - perhaps a Mad Max scenario is on the horizon? ;-)

"what's his position on the two most important crisis facing the US? Education and health care.

Ron Paul's position on these issues is to do nothing and let business be business. As an Ayn-Randite Libertarian, he believes that privatization of all public spaces and public resources and "free markets" are the solution to everything.

Been there, done that... The results of these "free markets" are well chronicled in the works of Charles Dickens, Upton Sinclair, and John Steinbeck. Or, if you want to see a modern-day example of Paul's philosophy, a visit to Guatemala, El Salvador, or Nicaragua will do.

To see an example of the results of rejecting Ron Paul's philosophy, visit most of western Europe - particularly Scandinavia.

http://hdr.undp.org/en/statistics/

I honestly believe that anyone not voting for him, is not listening to what he is saying.

Oh, c'mon... I have listened to him and I think he is off his rocker. But what you're saying here is implying that this guy can only speak absolute truth. The last time I checked anybody who is occupying a body has flaws and has limits to their understanding.

I saw him speak at a rally held on a lawn outside Google's campus last summer. The first half I agreed with and found it very exciting to hear a guy who agrees with my conclusions about the Iraq war -- that it's a total waste in terms of morality, that it distracted the U.S., that the guys who lied us into that war should be strung up as the treasonous bums they are. Oh, I better reel in that anger a bit or I might go overboard.

Anyway when he started talking about the evils of taxation he totally lost me. How can you pay for the government services and government infrastructure if you don't have taxes?

For example, John mentioned universal education etc.. I don't have any children so any money I pay that goes towards education services maybe is a waste to me, right? Well, no, it's not, because I believe that the better educated a citizenry we have the better this country will be overall. In other words universal education acts to help this whole country and it is a common good that I feel glad to help improve.

At the rally there were some John Birch society people handing out DVD's. I picked one of them up and watched it later. Ohmygawds what a load of XXXXXX. It sounded great, the DVD started with these wonderful myths about how wonderful U.S. society was in the 1950's and before. And this other myth about how enlightened self interest will guarantee that we all treat each other well, and that society will be great. Uuuummmm...

First, ask the Jews or the Negro's or others whether the 1950's (and earlier) were great. I understand (wasn't alive then) that there was rampant segregation and suppression of equality. One area I lived growing up, Johnson County KS, I understand that some cities in that county had laws prohibiting Jews from living in those cities. And it took the civil rights protests etc of the 1960's and later to establish any semblance of equality. Even today we're seeing the difficulty a black man has with being accepted as a valid candidate. And we had a candidate who is a member of the Mormon church, who also had difficulties because of that. And what about the recent treatment of people who believe in Islam?

I think the Birch people are lost in a myth-land and I think Ron Paul is right there with them.

I cant believe I am hearing a rejection of free enterprise. It needs to be regulated but is one of the best thing we have going in the US.

Ron Paul is making very important points that people are not listening to. If we continue to spend the amount of money we spend in the military and in foreign aid there probably will not be a United States in the future, were going broke. And forget universal health care this country is already broke with all the money we owe and are spending on or giant military. The best we can hope for in health care is that the government stops taxing people for the health care they are getting now. Ron Paul say he would stop that taxation. I pay for my own health insurance but still have to pay income tax on the money I earn to to pay for my health insurance. We should at least start here. The big question is why haven't we. I guess we are an all or nothing society no compromising.

Eric Fisher

brother electron wrote

Ron Pual is our last hope hope to get America back to its former glory and to return the power to the people.

I honestly believe that anyone not voting for him, is not listening to what he is saying.

More than one person is our last hope, not just Ron Paul.
We as people and communities need to take charge to its former glory and return the power to the people.
A lot of folks also do not believe in voting anymore because some of them think that it won't change anything.
I find this hard to believe because if you do not vote, a lot of decisions will be made elsewhere because you didn't vote.

The war on terror I also believe is a war on oil.
"He will abolish the federal income tax and the IRS will replace them with nothing?" Gimme a break!

Eric,

US military spending, direct and indirect, is equal to almost twice the military spending of the rest of the world combined. If we dismantled the MIC and reduced our military to the sane amount needed to defend our borders, we would have plenty of money for both for free healthcare and free university education - like Europeans take for granted.

But it is exactly the "free enterprise" system that drives the military industrial complex. Making war machinery is very, very, profitable.

But it is exactly the "free enterprise" system that drives the military industrial complex. Making war machinery is very, very, profitable.

Starting wars to create a market completes the circle.
Cheney Coordinated Halliburton Iraq Contract: Report

I agree with alot of what he stands for, but dont see it happening. Greed takes care of those who try to fix things. The founding father's didnt want us to have a central bank. So getting rid of it now would be a good thing, but how to do it? I have read that there is a buy out option, but I believe anyone who tries to get rid of the thing will end up dead.

It is supposed to be a limited government, and although I know things have changes and we have grown, I still believe it can be cut back a tad.

This government was created to help save our people from the dictates of a king who could make up any rules he wanted and take someones property, etc. Well, now we have a corporation (poorly run) and a corporation by term is a legal entity. Like a new person. You can't do anything against it as far as lawsuits etc, it has sovernty. And the state governments instead of being seperate from the Federal government, and each other, have become the new King's Lords and they copy what the king does. You have to pay for the privaledge of working to eat and pay for the privaledge of owning something. If you dont, it can be taken away from you. That is just wrong. I THINK WE HAVE GIVEN THE GOVERNMENT WAY TOO MUCH POWER OVER THE YEARS WITH THE GOVERNMENT SAYING WE WILL TAKE CARE OF YOU. The government cant take care of peoples every need, but the more we allow them to "take care of us" the more freedom we lose. We give up rights for priveledges and a priveledge can be taken away (ex:driving is a priveledge).

There are things we can do on a local scale to help one another, and our communities. Together strong communities make a strong country.

The federal reserve has inflated the monetary system giving credit to a corporation that hasnt been able to pay so far, Lets see a bank do that for us. And has printed extra money each year for the same corporation without increasing the gold to cover it (inflation)

With all our problems, we still have the best government in the world, but we as a people have to take charge again and let the government be there as a protector of our way of life. We need to make the changes together as a people. We have to, as a people, help each other as we once did. That way we dont need a government to take care of our needs.

An example of gold verses the dollar.
Back in the day when we used gold, a $20 gold piece bought a nice suit. Gold just hit an all time high, but it wasnt too long ago it was about $400 an ounce. at that time $400 would buy a nice suit, so the power of an ounce of gold is still about the same, but the Dollar which the fed keeps printing has become worth less and less.

Anyway, I'll step down from the pedestal and let some others take a turn :)

So I just read Ron Paul's position on health care on his website. I found it interesting that he is advocating a platform of removing Federal taxes and dismantling the IRS, yet the majority of his health care reform components involved tax breaks and incentives, such as allowing everyone to set up an HSA, or making all health care costs tax deductible. In the spirit of classic Ayn Rand Objectivism (as PJD alluded), this guy is so self-indulgent that he has developed compartmentalized laissez faire solutions to national problems that do not fit together as a whole.

If your tired of the corruption in the system, the answer is not to support someone who wants to dismantle it. We quite simply need to elect honest, intelligent people. I personally think it is a two-step process. Step one is to reform election campaign politics and make it so that we can actually elect honest, intelligent, moral people. Step two, as John pointed out, is to offer an equal, high quality education to everyone. Educated people tend to make educated decisions. Interestingly enough, Ron Paul's website lists education under "other issues" and in it, again, he talks all about removing public education and giving tax credits all over the place.

Do we honestly think that if we privatize everything that all of sudden corporations will start making moral decisions? Adam Smith made sense centuries ago. That time is over. If you privatize something like education, you may as well reinstate feudalism and round up all the poor folks into indentured servitude. What company will educate the poor? They have no money to pay for it.

Do we honestly think that if we privatize everything that all of sudden corporations will start making moral decisions?

This is where that "enlightened self interest" idea comes in.. The way the Birch Society DVD described it, enlightened self interest means a realization that my well-being depends on your well-being. And that enlightened self interest means that I will take actions to improve your well-being because it also helps my well-being. If on the other hand I am selfish and act only for myself then it will eventually bite me in some way.

I'm not sure I represented that very well.

It's an interesting and compelling idea, because I think there is some truth in it. However... where this fails is the long history of (especially) corporations acting in a way other than Enlightened Self Interest. Someone mentioned Upton Sinclair and I vaguely remember in junior high more years ago than I care to count reading this book about the horridness of meat packing plants 100+ years ago, and it was that story which led directly to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). But there's so much more.. for example the Tobacco companies who knew for 40+ years that Cigarettes cause cancer but they fought anti-smoking efforts. And more recently the way the home loan industry screwed the system to construct shady questionable home loans.

Hay you guys are depressing me , like even though I make all the changes that I can , The rest of the world Is going to continue on to the end well Isn' that what we wer told ??? take heart in your effort and just be a witness to the future !!!! and don't loose your hope !!!!!

enlightened self interest means a realization that my well-being depends on your well-being

This reads much like John Nash's cooperative game theory. The problem with it is that it does not take conglomerates and corporations into account. As you pointed out, tobacco companies had no problem killing their customers. Why? Corporate execs aren't in it for the long haul, building something that they can pass on to their children. The rise to the top with aggressive tactics (many are not at all qualified for the positions they hold), make mad bank, then retire early with all kinds of investment capital. Its not like Phillip Morris has had one CEO during the entire smoking boom...

Are you angry yet? I am.

No, I'm not, but I am slightly bemused by your thought processes...

Perhaps Ron Paul isn't getting the coverage he WANTS, but he is getting coverage. Anybody who has an interest in following the political discourse can find plenty of references and in the internet age folks can surf and find out a whole lot about any of the candidates.

It seems what you're really saying is that Ron Paul would like access to the media so he can pervert the media to his cause rather than have it perverted to someone else's cause. Did mama ever tell you two wrongs don't make a right?

Unfortunately for him, he doesn't have a snowball chance in hell of getting his party's nomination. However Ron Paul is not really a Republican is he? He's a Libertarian - so why is he trying to hijack the Republican party? He should run as an independent. Then he can not have a snowball chance in hell of getting the vote in November (just like Ralph Nader).

Here's a conspiracy for you "Ron Paul is trying to hijack the GOP". (That's a joke by the way).

Candidates aside for a minute.

Let's scrap the Electoral College and have proportional representation. Let's face it the Electoral College has served it's purpose. In case the legislators haven't noticed - no one rides on horseback to the capitol anymore.

If we have proportional representation then the guy with the most votes would end up in the White House - now there's a concept, eh? Oh yeah, and it would have saved us 8 years of George...

"Listen up America. We have been lied to, income tax is ILLEGAL! Thats right ILLEGAL!"

*opens mouth to say something, then closes it, shakes head, and walks away*

OK I'll say something we are in the end times this stuff is going to come to a screeching stop and most fools will not repent those who do are instructed not to try to flee or go underground for all have failed We are to be witness !!! and believe me Vietnam taught me a lot more about the tragedy of life Can you image no semis no food no fuel We are all animals and we kill our own kind to survive !! How long will a city last starved !!! I saw the face of evil and haven't trusted the Gov. ever since So talking about a problem is ineffective, acting on it is an accomplishment.

JCinStaunton wrote:

"With all our problems, we still have the best government in the world,"

Can you tell me where you have traveled that would substantiate that statement?

In a number of countries, thanks to their "big governments" people enjoy free healthcare, much healthier food, a cleaner environment, free university education, guaranteed 30 days vacation per year, a year of paid maternity leave, a $14 per hour minimum wage, clean cities with fast frequent public transit, 200 mph intercity railroads - all this, and somehow, in spite of all this socialism, their economies are doing just fine...

Do they pay higher taxes for all this stuff? Yes - especially if they are rich. But is it more than what Americans - especially poor Americans - have to pay on the private market for just healthcare alone? I doubt it.

Also, when I consider that the US government that has killed or sponsored the killing of many millions around the world from 1950 to the present, in support of US business interests, the word "best" is not what comes to mind - More like "criminal" or "immoral".

I mean, I don't want to belabor this point, but I have always found something very unhealthy in this national conceit that Americans are The Best, do everything The Best and always have been The Best... in everything, Amen.

PJDinPittsburgh

"Let's scrap the Electoral College and have proportional representation. Let's face it the Electoral College has served it's purpose. In case the legislators haven't noticed - no one rides on horseback to the capitol anymore."

I would be all for that. The electoral college can serve to discourage some people from voting. If you are a conservative living in a predominantly liberal state (or a liberal living in a predominantly conservative state), after a while you might start to think that it does not matter if you vote or not since your candidate of choice will never win in your state. I mean really when was the last time that a conservative presidential candidate won in California.

I don't know about the others on this forum but I did not sign up to talk about some crack pot. I signed up to talk about electric vehicles. I think this post (dead horse) has been beat to death enough. The idea of the politics topic, in this forum, is to talk about "electric vehicles in politics" NOT politics in general. If you want to talk about politics in general go to the political forums.

STOP!!!

Chas S.

We (the moderators) also decided to make this clearer, and change the name to 'EV Politics' ...

FWIW the information brother electron is posting about Ron Paul etc may be true even though it is not accepted by the mainstream public. Be that as it may, this site is clearly focused on electric vehicles. The political system has a role here in that politicians make society-wide decisions that impact the acceptance of electric vehicles.

"Listen up America. We have been lied to, income tax is ILLEGAL! Thats right ILLEGAL!"

"*opens mouth to say something, then closes it, shakes head, and walks away*"

When someone makes a post like yours i can see that they are ignorant and that they dont know what's really going on.
Income tax is un-constitutional, there are no laws requiring us to pay for it. None of the income tax pay's for education or infrastructure, it goes straight to the federal reserve

Watch these
Sherrey Peel Jacson ex-IRS agent
part 1 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c1jqLximBZI
part 2 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n1r1hNjxVfU

Extra proof
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aroN2uRbIMc&feature=related

If anyone tries to argue with me I'll know you didnt watch these video's.

So that other's are not disappointed I want to point out that I watched the first two videos and they don't offer proof. They show a nice lady, ex-IRS auditor who tells you that she did a lot of research and came to the conclusion there is no law requiring you to file your income taxes. The third video is about someone found not guilty in Illinois state court after being charged for not filing taxes. A juror says there was no federal law presented, therefore she voted not guilty. The last minute quickly mentions other cases of people charged by the IRS and found not guilty.

On the positive side, the videos are entertaining, although there is some conspiracy going on because they download extremely slow. :-) haha

>Income tax is un-constitutional,
What does amendment 16 to the U.S. Constitution say?

The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.

Thank You ALL , The bigest hurtle Is City , County < state Gov. laws were written before Ev trans . was around and to ride scooters or evcars over 24mph is regulated by each county and the state says they can' intrude on county rights with one person or a few the county is RELUCKTENT to change + city and county gov is already the old boy system Every ev'er needs to help speek up for change from state down and city up !!!!! idea State could create new class , for ev only ??? no spell check ! Later

Are you angry yet? I am.

"No, I'm not, but I am slightly bemused by your thought processes..."

You seam like someone who only listens to the media.

I should just listen to you instead? Or the nice lady who used to work for the IRS (thanks Dan for the report!)?

Actually I do listen to the media - but I also critique what they're saying and I listen to more than one source. How do you get your news? What you're really implying is that I only listen to the media you have defined as corrupt - which media outlets are those in particular? Or, if you really do mean all media then should we only get our news first hand? Have you been to Iraq lately? I assume not - so how do you get information about the conflict? Do you rely only on what Ron Paul tells you? That sounds risky to me. Do you only listen to service men and women who you've spoken directly to? Also that likely results in too small a sample size.

However, I'll play along though. Assuming we all stop paying our income tax then how will you pay for services? Are you implying that indirect taxation is enough? Are you a libertarian and reckoning that "every man, woman and child" for themselves is most appropriate? Are you a communist assuming that the state should control all resources? Or something else? Given the title post I assume you're a libertarian. So, without income tax how are you going to pay for things? Don't say "by pulling out of Iraq" because the military is paid for tax dollars and you're going to get rid of the biggest chunk of those by repealing the income tax (and I don't think you can sell off the military hardware already purchased on ebay!).

To respond to PJD's comments about governments - I think I like the Finnish one the best... (of course I only think this because of something I learned by my rabid desire to listen to media - but do you know which media source?) ;-)