Ron Paul

[Asheran Mojomaster]

So am I the only one that thinks that this guy is the only chance we have of having a good president? I mean, its a far shot for him to get nominated by the Republicans, but hes the only politician I have ever agreed with on most of his views. He is a Libertarian in a Republican shell...and I hope that most Republicans(or people that think they are Republicans but dont stand for any of the traditional Republican values) are too stupid to notice the real party he is with and just notice that his policies will be good for this country in the long run.

[Xyun]

Mainstream republicans hate this guy. I saw on Fox news they were saying he should not even be allowed to debate with the republicans. lol.

[Xatrei]

He'd be great if great entails dismantling 80% or more of the federal government. That's not my idea of great, so I think he's a giant schmuck. An entertaining schmuck, but a schmuck none the less.

[Asheran Mojomaster]

Our goverment is too fucking big anyway. Cutting a lot of it isnt a bad idea. I guess thats because I am Libertarian, but I agree 100% with him. Most of the things he would cut or change are because they should not have been there in the first place. The federal government is way way way too fucking big. Most things should be handled at the state, county, or city level.

[Nick]

So am I the only one that thinks that this guy is the only chance we have of having a good president? I mean, its a far shot for him to get nominated by the Republicans, but hes the only politician I have ever agreed with on most of his views. He is a Libertarian in a Republican shell...and I hope that most Republicans(or people that think they are Republicans but dont stand for any of the traditional Republican values) are too stupid to notice the real party he is with and just notice that his policies will be good for this country in the long run.

Despite being the only Republican contender that isn't a Grade A Shithead, he has zero chance of winning the nomination.

If America really does vote for Guiliani in 08, assuming he gets the Republican candidacy, they are essentially inviting another 4 years of being considered the most retarded nation on the planet.

[noel]

Not saying I'd vote for him, but you could do a hell of a lot worse than Guilliani.

Hint: George W. Bush

[Nick]

Guiliani looks as if he'd be just as bad as Bush.

[Al]

Our goverment is too fucking big anyway. Cutting a lot of it isnt a bad idea. I guess thats because I am Libertarian, but I agree 100% with him. Most of the things he would cut or change are because they should not have been there in the first place. The federal government is way way way too fucking big. Most things should be handled at the state, county, or city level.

"The bureaucracy is expanding to meet the needs of the expanding bureaucracy."

The other day a professor in the State University of New York system got a $142,000 raise to make him (still) the highest paid state employee in New York (he was the highest paid employee before the raise, and I believe the raise was given to keep him in employment). His current salary is listed at $666,995, and that is on top of his aproximately $300,000 salary for being The SUNY Foundation's "principal investigator", plus benefits and perks. My tax dollars at work, as I drive on pot-hole filled roads to go to work at a job that will likely be outsourced to China primarily because of the heavy tax burden in New York State.

I am 100% for the trimming of government expenditures. From the top to the bottom, we as Americans have allowed rampant spending to ruin this country. I challenge one person on this board to say that they are truly debt free.

[Asheran Mojomaster]

Yeah, fuck Guiliani. If you watched the debates you can see that even God doesnt want him lol. Did you notice the only times the mic cut out were when he was talking lol. And he said he would be willing to use fucking TACTICAL NUKES pre-emptively on North Korea...motherfucker is gonna start World War 3.

Edit: I know Ron Paul doesnt have much of a chance, but if the American people are smart enough (I know, thats a stretch) to see the path most of the Republicans want to take us down, maybe they will vote Ron in the primaries. While the party itself may not like him, I'm betting a lot of old school Republicans, true Republicans, agree with him more than any other candidate.

[Asheran Mojomaster]

http://www.ronpaul2008.com/

[Xouqoa]

I saw him on Bill Mahr and was impressed. I might vote for him if he got the nomination, but I don't think he will. He should seek a VP nod from one of the Democratic front runners. That would be an interesting ticket.

[Knarlz]

I miss read this thread as Ru Paul for president.

[Asheran Mojomaster]

Hahaha, but yeah if he doesnt get the nomination that would be a good route for him I think. He could do a lot of good even as VP.

[Sueven]

On Giuliani: Rudy is a complete fuckhead. I would vote for a constitutional amendment for a third term of Bush before I would vote for Rudy. I would vote Dick Cheney president-for-life before I would vote for Rudy (at least Cheney's old). I can't imagine a worse disaster than putting that worthless cocksucker into office. However, I don't want to shit up the Ron Paul thread anymore, but I'd be happy to discuss this elsewhere!

On Ron Paul: I enjoy Ron Paul quite a bit, he's one of the few people who is advocating some serious and intelligent positions that need to be advocated. That said, not only do I think he's unelectable, but I think he'd be an utter disaster as a president. He'd either be ineffective (because he couldn't get the rest of the government to go along with his ideas) or destructive (because he could). He'd make a much better vice president or advisor of some sort.

To demonstrate why I think so, I have questions about two of Ron Paul's major issues. Perhaps one of his supporters can explain why his positions are not as disastrous as they sound to me.

1. Ron Paul advocates abolishing the federal reserve and returning to a gold standard. Why wouldn't this be an international economic disaster? I'm not overly fluent in issues of political economy, so I could probably be convinced by a clear, coherent explanation. I've asked other Ron Paul supporters this before, though, and have never received such an explanation.

2. Ron Paul advocates a fairly isolationist foreign policy, including withdrawal from many major international institutions. My opinion is that recent history has taught us important lessons about the ability of connectivity and international engagement to provide enormous benefits in terms of economic prosperity, international security, and the promotion of human rights worldwide. Why do you think that isolation is a good idea? Is it because you disagree that international connectivity is a good thing, or is there some other reason?

[Nick]

My opinion is that recent history has taught us important lessons about the ability of connectivity and international engagement to provide enormous benefits in terms of economic prosperity, international security, and the promotion of human rights worldwide.

Well from an international perspective, it's preferable to get the USA out of the current joke of "international engagement" they espouse because it's simply unilateralism posing as international engagement. A quick look at the USA's voting record in the UN is absolute concrete evidence of this.

Maybe if the USA rethinks its attitude to multilateralism and its place in the world, and more importantly its actions regarding pre-emptive war and its inaction towards things like human rights, it can come back in with a slightly less ridiculous leader than Bush.

I agree completely with you that Guiliani is the absolute worst choice. However, given everyone's total lack of faith or hope in the American peoples opinion based on the last 2 elections I won't be surprised if he wins the overall Presidency. Asking Guiliani to be President is literally begging for another 911.

As for the economics, I have no clue.

If the following sort of attitude seen in this interview doesn't click with America, and prick talking points from the likes of Guiliani and McCain does, then America can only blame itself for its inevitable downfall (as the only superpower). This is course whats been happening, and everyone else can see it. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2mb7aiM9K9Q

[Sueven]

Well from an international perspective, it's preferable to get the USA out of the current joke of "international engagement" they espouse because it's simply unilateralism posing as international engagement. A quick look at the USA's voting record in the UN is absolute concrete evidence of this.

Disagree. The interests of the United States are very, very heavily aligned with most of the 'developed' world-- Europe, most of Asia, Canada, Australia, some places in Latin America. The interests of the United States are closely aligned with most of the undeveloped world. Generally, American intervention has aims which are shared with the target of the intervention. And we're not simply talking about intervention here-- we're talking about basic engagement.

Also, Israel is a small part of the overall international picture. Citing our behavior with regard to Israel to prove some more general proposition about our behavior seems insufficient to me.

Maybe if the USA rethinks its attitude to multilateralism and its place in the world, and more importantly its actions regarding pre-emptive war and its inaction towards things like human rights, it can come back in with a slightly less ridiculous leader than Bush.

Sure. We could use some reform in the way that we approach diplomacy. I think the necessary change is largely one of attitude, though, not some sort of structural reform. And yes, having someone other than Bush in office will be very helpful in this regard.

However, given everyone's total lack of faith or hope in the American peoples opinion based on the last 2 elections I won't be surprised if he wins the overall Presidency.

I wouldn't be totally shocked. I'd be kind of surprised, I find it hard to believe that an authoritarian asshole (pisses off the liberals) who is on his third wife, has kids that hate him, is pro choice cross dresses on saturday night live (pisses off the social conservatives) and doesn't even have strong support among firefighters and police officers (should worry everybody) could actually win the presidency. It seems almost as far out as a woman or a black man.

[Zaelath]

Our goverment is too fucking big anyway. Cutting a lot of it isnt a bad idea. I guess thats because I am Libertarian, but I agree 100% with him. Most of the things he would cut or change are because they should not have been there in the first place. The federal government is way way way too fucking big. Most things should be handled at the state, county, or city level.

"The bureaucracy is expanding to meet the needs of the expanding bureaucracy."

The other day a professor in the State University of New York system got a $142,000 raise to make him (still) the highest paid state employee in New York (he was the highest paid employee before the raise, and I believe the raise was given to keep him in employment). His current salary is listed at $666,995, and that is on top of his aproximately $300,000 salary for being The SUNY Foundation's "principal investigator", plus benefits and perks. My tax dollars at work, as I drive on pot-hole filled roads to go to work at a job that will likely be outsourced to China primarily because of the heavy tax burden in New York State.

I am 100% for the trimming of government expenditures. From the top to the bottom, we as Americans have allowed rampant spending to ruin this country. I challenge one person on this board to say that they are truly debt free.

I'm debt free, I was also debt free when I lived in the US... but then, I don't drive a wank tank around an urban environment.

[Winnow]

I'm debt free, I was also debt free when I lived in the US... but then, I don't drive a wank tank around an urban environment.

The word's out on you Aussies!

http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/s ... 32,00.html

Aussie men not on top of sex

By Leah Creighton

May 17, 2007 12:00

MOST Australian men love to crow about their sporting prowess on the field, but a new survey shows their love of finishing first has extended to the bedroom.

Despite having the world's number one cricket team and some of the best sports stars, the national survey found more than half of men last only two minutes in the sack.

The research by men’s health practitioners, Supplemax, found a staggering 57 per cent of Australian men had suffered from premature ejaculation.

And the two-minute statistic throws an interesting light of truth on the Heinz speedy soup ad, which features a couple having nookie for a mere two minutes - all the time needed for the woman's soup to warm up.

[Aslanna]

I am 100% for the trimming of government expenditures. From the top to the bottom, we as Americans have allowed rampant spending to ruin this country. I challenge one person on this board to say that they are truly debt free.

I'm debt free, I was also debt free when I lived in the US... but then, I don't drive a wank tank around an urban environment.

Well how are you defining "truly debt free"? I'd consider myself debt free. Sure, I have monthly expenses like rent, food, and utilities. But I wouldn't consider that 'debt'. So I also accept your challenge and say I am "truly debt free". Other than those recurring expenses I have no other debt. Not even a car loan. It's not really that hard a task to accomplish with a little self-discipline. "Don't spend money you don't have" is always sound advice.

[Zaelath]

Heheh... so a company that sells a solution to premature ejaculation ran a study that found it's a major problem. Astounding!

[Keverian FireCry]

So is Ron Paul for or against pre-mature ejaculation? I'm confused.

[VariaVespasa]

I challenge one person on this board to say that they are truly debt free.

Also debt free- car was bought outright, mortgage was killed off 7 years ago, the maintainance fees for the apartment are paid up for the year, I have no school debts or any other loans outstanding, I keep my one credit card with a small credit on it, all my taxes and insurances etc are paid up, all my monthlies are on autopayment and I even have 2 weeks of food in the house:- I dont owe nuffink to nobody. How much more debt-free would you like?

[Winnow]

I'm 100% debt free. Feels good. Low stress.

Working on the + side in the stock market!

[Xyun]

I'm not debt free but I very easily could be. I've got more than enough to cover the debt I do have, but its all in the market since I'm making 25% there and the interest on my debt is not near that. regardless, car will be paid off before the end of the year. I have no other loans. I don't own any credit cards either. There are a few minor things on my credit report that I'm working on, but that's about it.

[masteen]

What market are you in that's making 25%?

[miir]

Other than our mortgage, my wife and I are debt free.

I know too many people who think that living on credit is an acceptable and normal

[Traz-KOE]

I know too many people who think that living on credit is an acceptable and normal

Agreed, but I also know too many people that think that living *without* credit is equally acceptable.

[Xyun]

What market are you in that's making 25%?

The stock market! Here is my current portfolio:

Personal
GOOG: bought at $460, is now at $515 - (12%)
GS: bought at $197, is now at $220 - (12%) (i was up 17% just a few days ago on this bitch)
CHL: bought at $49, is now at $46 - (-6%) (i've taken a small loss on this one but I have no doubt I will make at least 20% on this by the end of the year).

Business
VWO: bought at $74, is now at $85 (15%) (cha-ching!)
SPY: bought at $143, is now at $149 (4%)
FXI: bought at $111, is now at $114 (3%) (this is my most recent purchase last month)

In any event, I'm up 12% so far in 4 months, so I'm on pace to make 36% for the year. I'm very pissed because I was going to buy Nintendo at $33 but went with Goldman Sachs instead, nintendo is now at $44, which is 25% in 2 months flat. CHL is the only one I took a loss on and it was my very first purchase before I knew wtf I was doing, and like I said, it will be at $60 by year's end.

You may think that 4 months does not really qualify me to claim 25%, but I have a friend helping me out a little, and his portfolio made 40%+ 2 years in a row. Not that hard if you invest in China! 3 of my 6 holdings are in Chinese.

edit: tryin to figure out how to upload an image attachment, but I don't know how. I was going to post my portfolio graph.

[masteen]

Ah, you're figuring annual.

[Xyun]

Well that's how the interest on my loans are figured.

[masteen]

But credit cards get compounded monthly.

[Winnow]

I'm up 61% so far on my high risk play (micro cap with no earnings yet) since accumulating shares January through March of this year.

My average Share price for MVIS: $3.49 Current Share Price: $5:70 61% (up .02 in after hours trading)

Best of all, with the indexes taking a shit the past two days, MVIS has been up both days:

MVIS vs NASD and DJIA:



Hard not to like this chart!



Anyways, I talked about this stock back in January on this thread:

http://www.veeshanvault.org/forums/view ... 25&t=19386

but nobody seemed to care or be impressed with the tech. Basically their "sexy" product is a projector the size of a thin mint that they will be integrating into cell phones which will rid people of tiny screens so you can do shit like this:



So you have a full blown laser based projector built into your cell phone which has infinite focus (meaning it's always in focus no matter what the surface or distance) Best of all, it will only add $100.00 initially to the cost of a cell phone and will drop from there.

We need a finance/stock forum! Or at least maybe a thread.

[Xyun]

We need a finance/stock forum! Or at least maybe a thread.

agreed

[Al]

Our VV community is better with money than the average American community, it would appear. I too am debt free, but I am the only person I know who is. Even my parents, who are close to retiring, have car payments and mortgage. My brother has 5 figures worth of credit card debt, 2 car payments (1 for him and 1 for the old lady) and a mortgage on top of that. I don't have a clue how he makes ends meet with 5 kids in the house, but he gets by.

Of course, I am driving an 88 Caprice that needs almost $1000 worth of engine work, so I'm in the market for a new car. I may have a car payment before long.

[masteen]

We need a finance/stock forum! Or at least maybe a thread.

agreed

I call upon the minions of the fnord™ to make it so!

[Deward]

To demonstrate why I think so, I have questions about two of Ron Paul's major issues. Perhaps one of his supporters can explain why his positions are not as disastrous as they sound to me.

1. Ron Paul advocates abolishing the federal reserve and returning to a gold standard. Why wouldn't this be an international economic disaster? I'm not overly fluent in issues of political economy, so I could probably be convinced by a clear, coherent explanation. I've asked other Ron Paul supporters this before, though, and have never received such an explanation.

2. Ron Paul advocates a fairly isolationist foreign policy, including withdrawal from many major international institutions. My opinion is that recent history has taught us important lessons about the ability of connectivity and international engagement to provide enormous benefits in terms of economic prosperity, international security, and the promotion of human rights worldwide. Why do you think that isolation is a good idea? Is it because you disagree that international connectivity is a good thing, or is there some other reason?

Let em try to answer these two questions. I am not a financial expert but I have studied the markets quite a bit and I am a Libertarian.

1. Right now the government and its citizens are holding trillions of dollars in debt. Last I heard there was only $800 billion in paper currency with no backing. The only way for the government to cover it's current debt is to feverishly print more money. This lessens the value of money already in existence. By returning to the gold standard, we limit the inflation that is currently occurring against the dollar. As things stand right now we are headed for a pretty major collapse that will make the great depression look like a slight market dip. Having a gold standard also insures that governmetn spending is kept in check and we can start reducing that deficit.

2. First isolationism does not mean zero foreign policy. Libertarian views call for the departure of troops in stable countries like Japan and Germany. The American people should not be responsible for the defense of countries that can afford their own miltaries if they desire one. Also the US should not be involving itself in other countries business unless we are asked to through an organization like the UN (worthless piece of shit that it is). Right now the US is doing things unilaterally and are receiving the brunt of the displeasure for good deeds.

One other point I would like to discuss is the downsizing of government. Most people are under the false impression that Libertarians want to to tear the federal government apart. What they actually want to do is return many of the functions back to the state governments. For instance, the federal government's department of education sucks up billions of dollars every year. Most of that money does not directly benefit american school children. Instead that money or a portion of it could be given directly to the state governments to use (waste?) on actual useful programs.

To end, I really like Ron Paul. He is probably the only person I would vote for right now. Does he have a chance of winning? No he is about $200 million short of buying...I mean winning the presidency.