It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Why Ron Paul makes me nervous

page: 1
8
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 18 2011 @ 06:54 PM
link   
I don't understand why Ron Paul is so popular. Yes, I agree that the U.S. is over-regulated. That much is self-evident. But everything that I see says that he is for little to no regulation at all. How is that not just as bad?

If there are no regulations, what is going to stop the companies from fleecing consumers even more, stop them from putting poison or unimaginable nastiness in their products, or creating a corporate monopoly so complete that you have no choice? What's going to stop the companies from bringing back crap like paying you in "company store credits" so you don't have a choice?

The FDA and the EPA suck, but they at least offer some minute level of protection, some paper-thin level of regulation on industries that could otherwise be doing a lot worse things to your food and the environment.

What's going to stop them from taking what little wealth we in the bottom 90% have left away from us? If you're in the top 10%, what's going to stop the 0.1% (the real problem) from taking your wealth and hoarding it?

Has anybody ever read "The Jungle"? Read that book, and you'll get a good picture of life before all those pesky regulations went into effect.




posted on Dec, 18 2011 @ 06:59 PM
link   
Yeah, I didn't read the whole The Jungle but I read excerpts from it before, I get your point. I think as long as the media works properly and the internet is still free, we will be able to regulate by ourselves. It is not something that will happen over night, sure, but I think we'll be just fine. Besides the fact only a partial part of Paul's vision will be realized because he will have to deal with a bought congress.



posted on Dec, 18 2011 @ 07:01 PM
link   
I think some people believe his actions will turn the USA into some kind of anarchist country because he talks about over regulation.

I think his main aim is to return power to the states and foremost the people instead of having the FED decide everything.



posted on Dec, 18 2011 @ 07:02 PM
link   
reply to post by AnIntellectualRedneck
 


You make some really good points. Food for thought....you have helped me to expand my mind...once more...and look into things further...thank you.



posted on Dec, 18 2011 @ 07:03 PM
link   
Time to grow up as a species. Why put a power in charge when we can see from numerous times in the past, that the power in charge would abuse said power. Why cant we, as a collective species, monitor and control ourselves?



posted on Dec, 18 2011 @ 07:04 PM
link   
reply to post by AnIntellectualRedneck
 


Do you just focus on the corporations? I want RP in office to end Team America World Police, and then work on our Gov't's irresponsible spending (major cuts Defense, Big Gov't, etc), work on the economy, the Federal Reserve, give more power to the States while reducing the size of the Federal Gov't (aka Big Brother), and of course to actually pursue major White Collar crimes. He's really the only candidate who is talking about real change. The rest are just mouth pieces.
edit on 18-12-2011 by Swills because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 18 2011 @ 07:06 PM
link   
He is the best choice there is, and there are laws in place that keep him from doing certain things.



posted on Dec, 18 2011 @ 07:08 PM
link   
Unfortunately 95% of what he would like to do will not happen, because of the current members of congress. He will prevent the Fed from taking additional liberties from us.



posted on Dec, 18 2011 @ 07:08 PM
link   
That's what the state governments are for. It should be pretty obvious that federal bureaucracies all do a wonderful job of wasting money and not actually getting much done. It's easier to manage a local system than try to control the entire country don't you think?



posted on Dec, 18 2011 @ 07:08 PM
link   
reply to post by Swills
 


As they have a huge affect on the economy and the health and wages of people, yes I do.

I care little about his foreign policy and crap when the removal of those regulations could end up with us being poisoned here in the U.S. even more than we already are.

Why in God's name should I care about anything else when I see the very easy potential for the U.S. to be taken back to a reality that resembles that book?



posted on Dec, 18 2011 @ 07:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by AnIntellectualRedneck

Has anybody ever read "The Jungle"? Read that book, and you'll get a good picture of life before all those pesky regulations went into effect.


Upton Sinclair.


I read The Jungle in school back in the 70's, it made a tremendous impression (it should be required reading for some of the ATS membership who bemoan contemporary society)

I agree with your assessment and am not a Ron Paul supporter either.



posted on Dec, 18 2011 @ 07:14 PM
link   
reply to post by AnIntellectualRedneck
 


He isnt nescessarily saying more, or less regulations. He is just stating the fact that it isnt the Governments job to set such regulations! It is up to the States, and your community to vote on your rules. Thats how it should be...

To many people forget I think, we are the 'United States'. People should be proud of their State.



posted on Dec, 18 2011 @ 07:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by AnIntellectualRedneck
If there are no regulations, what is going to stop the companies from fleecing consumers even more, stop them from putting poison or unimaginable nastiness in their products, or creating a corporate monopoly so complete that you have no choice? What's going to stop the companies from bringing back crap like paying you in "company store credits" so you don't have a choice?


Free enterprise would kick in. Think about this. Without so many regulations, small start up cable companies could begin business and offer dsl, internet at good prices. As it is now, there are only a few companies and they all can charge an arm and a leg as there is no other choice. With more choices, lower prices, they would have to lower their prices to compete. DO you see? Free market system compared to Gov. regulated monopolies. I hope that makes sense to you.
I have two choices here in Cal. Some places there is only one choice. So I think you need to rethink your stance.
Where did all the mom and pop stores go, the local hardware store. Wal Mart happened. You used to be able to start a business doing whatever you decide, and make money at it. Now you cannot even get started without being regulated and taxed to death so you cannot make a profit.
Peace



posted on Dec, 18 2011 @ 07:19 PM
link   
Actually, Ron Paul wants to reinstate the Glass-Stegall act and put even MORE regulations on the banks.

The regulations he wants to remove are the restrictions on personal and civil freedom.



posted on Dec, 18 2011 @ 07:20 PM
link   
i'd rather have freedom to choose than having a rigged system choosing things for me by lobbyists. the big flaw in our system is that anything and everything can be bought. do you think regulations actually help the general public?



posted on Dec, 18 2011 @ 07:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by AnIntellectualRedneck

If there are no regulations, what is going to stop the companies from fleecing consumers even more, stop them from putting poison or unimaginable nastiness in their products, or creating a corporate monopoly so complete that you have no choice? What's going to stop the companies from bringing back crap like paying you in "company store credits" so you don't have a choice?


Look a little deeper.
These "regulations" and monopolies you speak of are already in place and functioning. The only thing to do now is the final last tweaks of the system to lock everything into place.
edit on 18-12-2011 by Skewed because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 18 2011 @ 07:22 PM
link   
reply to post by bemorphy
 


Way back when, there were a couple of companies that colluded to keep the little guy down in many industries and keep prices high. The corruption that happens today? It could be ten times worse. And with no regulation, there'd be nothing to stop it.



posted on Dec, 18 2011 @ 07:23 PM
link   
reply to post by Skewed
 


That's kind of my point. It's the exact same situation that we have now, only in the other direction. It's just as bad.



posted on Dec, 18 2011 @ 07:23 PM
link   
reply to post by AnIntellectualRedneck
 


To be honest, there are many what I call "absolutist" libertarian views that make me very nervous as well. I'm a guy who believe's you leave me alone, I leave you alone. But frankly, the world is just a dangerous place to live. And to reduce our military "footprint" around the world, I would also love to do that, I know it would save my country a lot of cash. I'm all for that. But to crank down our military and intelligence community to the extent people like Ron Paul would like (who I like by the way but disagree on this issue BIG time.) could be suicide. We tried that before in the 1930's. It's utter madness to think it would work now when we are more interconnected then ever.



posted on Dec, 18 2011 @ 07:35 PM
link   
reply to post by AnIntellectualRedneck
 


The Jungle... One of my favorite books!


You make great points, but like several others have said, it is the states' governments that should be regulating with minimal interruption from the federal government.




top topics



 
8
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join