Wednesday, January 04, 2012
Ron Paul is not a progressive
*** begin quote ***
Paul was right on both wars, on the bailout of the banks and continues to be right about the need for transparency at the fed. He is right about gay marriage and he is right on most civil liberties issues and the drug war.
But Ron Paul is not a progressive. Ron Paul is not anti-corporate. He believes that empowering business is the best way to accomplish all good things and that government has no role to play in ensuring a level playing field. It was Paul’s dismissal of a government role in health care that elicited the shout of “let him die” during the Republican debates.
*** end quote ***
AND A COMMENT
*** begin quote ***
Anonymous Anonymous said…
Excellent points by Hank K. Ron Paul would destroy Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and any social program that helps ordinary folks. He would probably be for assisting the privatization of our public schools. Libertarianism is filth, a despicable bunch of garbage that’s great for the greedy millionaires and greedy billionaires (as opposed to the responsible and altruistic millionaires and billionaires) who don’t want to pay their fair share in taxes. Under libertarianism, if you become disabled and can no longer work, then tough luck or go out in the street and beg for charity. Libertarians say, let the charities take care of the millions who are disabled, elderly or too poor. It’s an idiotic notion to think that charities are even close to being able to help the 50 millions uninsured. Dialysis costs about $150,000 per year and there are many thousands of people in this country with kidney disease or kidney failure. Medications cost thousands per year, there aren’t enough charities on earth to deal with these numbers. I would not vote for Ron Paul even if you put a gun to my head.
*** end quote ***
And, everything today is just working perfectly and at costs we can afford?
Ron Paul hasn’t said anything about destroying everything. He has said that we need real cuts in Gooferment spending. Do you dsagree?
For example, he says the Federal Gooferment should have no role in education. Let the States do it. So we send money to Federal Gooferment to send back to the state Gooferment. There’s a swag that says ½ of any money passing through a Gooferment entity loses ½ its value due to the cost og handling. Sending a dollar to the Feds gets maybe 25¢s back! Eliminate the overhead.
Of course that will totally destroy the education establishment. And, maybe we can have a national and state discusion on “education”. Personally, I authored a paper for Hands Across New Jersey on how to transition “education” from Gooferment to parents over 40 years. (Under the theory that parents are in a better position to educate their children. And cheaper and better. They made the decision to have them; they should provide for them.) I’m frustrated because if HANJ wasn’t subverted by the duopoly, we’d almost be out of the problem.
You bring up charity, charity care, and the cost of medicine. But you ignore the role of Gooferment in driving up the cost of healthcare. Just like it drives up the cost of “education”.
I think that Ron Paul represents the essence of the Taft Republicans. It’s been lost for decades and we have a 15T$ debt, deficits for as far as the eyes can see, unfunded liabilities somewhere between 50T$ and 150T$ depending upon who counts what, and a dismal economic future.
Perhaps, you might consider that Socialism doesn’t work. Didn’t for the Soviet Union. And, won’t for the USA.
“everything is fine. move along citizen. nothing to see here.”
# – # – # – # – #