Almost 8000 diggs, more than I have ever seen. The election is still way off, but what do you guys think?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FG2PUZoukfA
From what i've seen, go Ron Paul.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FG2PUZoukfA
From what i've seen, go Ron Paul.
yeah hes had my vote for a while
He supports tighter border security and ending welfare benefits for illegal aliens, and opposes birthright citizenship and amnesty; he voted for the Secure Fence Act of 2006.
Paul calls himself "an unshakable foe of abortion", and believes regulation of medical decisions about maternal or fetal health is "best handled at the state level".
i really like his limited government
then also consider libertarians
Yeah , welfare sucks I want to end it, atleast for all illegal aliens.
holy shit i just saw the video up above and all i have to say is..
DONT TAZE ME BRO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
ref: 3:38 in above video and: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xzkd_m4ivmc
DONT TAZE ME BRO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
ref: 3:38 in above video and: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xzkd_m4ivmc
Fuck Ron Paul.
I thought he was cool until Larz posted that link. At least Barack believes in Gambling.
I thought he was cool until Larz posted that link. At least Barack believes in Gambling.
I also believe in Abortion
Yeah but barak is backed by CARE and I really can't approve of politicians with ties to hamas.
tp> Yeah , welfare sucks I want to end it, atleast for all illegal aliens.
why?
why?
weird i thought barak was for the home team, don't know nothin' about CARE and hamas.
Because people should not rely on government and tax payer money to save them.
Welfare would not be necessary if there wasn't a history of discrimination against minorities in this country. If that stigma wasn't there, it would just as easy for a non-affluent minority male to get the same job as a WASP.
err CAIR... I can't spell.
> Because people should not rely on government and tax payer money to save them.
do they? and why did you target illegal aliens in your statement?
do they? and why did you target illegal aliens in your statement?
Let me tell you, if illegal aliens relied on government welfare, you wouldn't see day laborers outside of home depot or on the street corner willing to work for 60 bucks a day.
or making delectable tacos at 3am in a cart on some random street in LA
Taco Buses are an untapped market for investment opportunity.
The only reason I targeted illegal aliens is because of what you posted earlier
"He supports tighter border security and ending welfare benefits for illegal aliens, and opposes birthright citizenship and amnesty; he voted for the Secure Fence Act of 2006."
But truly I believe it should end period.
"He supports tighter border security and ending welfare benefits for illegal aliens, and opposes birthright citizenship and amnesty; he voted for the Secure Fence Act of 2006."
But truly I believe it should end period.
why?
i think it's interesting that we don't want an influx of labor to boost u.s. production. here's what i suggest: allow immigration to everyone, and make it really easy to get residency. with the insane amounts of additional tax revenue, fix the structural unemployment and wage changes experienced by the americans that were here first. over the next decade, taper off the welfare program for the americans that were hurt by the influx of labor. then our country has a much larger productive population to help see the baby boomers through the social security and medicare stage of life.
i think it's interesting that we don't want an influx of labor to boost u.s. production. here's what i suggest: allow immigration to everyone, and make it really easy to get residency. with the insane amounts of additional tax revenue, fix the structural unemployment and wage changes experienced by the americans that were here first. over the next decade, taper off the welfare program for the americans that were hurt by the influx of labor. then our country has a much larger productive population to help see the baby boomers through the social security and medicare stage of life.
Don't forget that illegal immigrants also pay taxes, be it sales or income. Someone using a fake SSN will still get a W-2. Also, immigration debate is worthless because although people are talking about increasing border control to curtail immigration, actually getting naturalized is harder than taking a chastity belt off of a medieval princess. How is an immigrant supposed to get a legal job and save up about 639 dollars to get naturalized? This is just the application fee. What about the background check and the interview that takes about 2 years to get? These people come to America for a better life, like many of your ancestors. What is so different from modern day immigrants and immigrants that came at the beginning of this country?
not much, they are still working for bottom of the barrel wages and getting treated like shit.
taxes * number of immigrants
no...that's not a lot. Ron Paul needs more exposure.
no...that's not a lot. Ron Paul needs more exposure.
Too many people. I wanna know what the candidates are going to do about population growth control?
kill the first born male child in every family?
that would just make us fuck machines for the chinese
Oh I have my own policy ideas... and they aren't bad at all. But I really do wonder why no one brings this up at all in campaigns when it's such a blatantly obvious national crisis.
how about we end subsidies for children, like the child tax credits (i know it's not a true subsidy, but still..)
why is it such a national crisis, anyway?
why is it such a national crisis, anyway?
300 million people, and a growing population + increased immigration from southern nations.
It's having a horrific toll on our economy.
It's having a horrific toll on our economy.
why?
well primarily because we can only feed, clothe, house, educate ... and provide other basic necessities as pertaining to our social contract. as we ramp up our efforts to support a growing populace the idea of sustainable interaction with our natural resources and the environment in general takes a back seat. this leads to relatively massive negative impacts on our planet. additionally being unable to meet growth needs at any point in the process leads to a massive decrease in quality of life for a great many people.
focus our best and brightest on food and housing problems and other social imperatives will suffer.
in short quality of life, as well as the security of our civilization is best served by a massive reduction in the population.
as for the exact numbers we need / want we need to establish a body to study the resource footprint as well as incindiary affects of our society on our environment, and ourselves.
that's just my opinion.
focus our best and brightest on food and housing problems and other social imperatives will suffer.
in short quality of life, as well as the security of our civilization is best served by a massive reduction in the population.
as for the exact numbers we need / want we need to establish a body to study the resource footprint as well as incindiary affects of our society on our environment, and ourselves.
that's just my opinion.
Population Control will never gain ground in the United States. It's a basic human rights issue to decide how many children we want. However, I lack the desire to procreate so whatever.
It's not a basic human right issue at all. It's a social responsibility. Same as driving a car safely, or being allowed to practice medicine. Raising a child requires that you be capable of doing so and don't infringe on anyone else's inalienable rights. We can't have people procreating all willy nilly. That simply isn't fair to anyone. A child has an inalienable right to a fair shot at the american dream. Allowing a kid to be born to a crack addicted methhead isn't fair to the child, and it's not fair to the tax payers if we somehow manage to save the kid from their parents before he's completely fucked up in the head.
We don't let people drive cars if they are unsafe drivers. We default to you not being allowed to drive. And we then provide a method for certification. With birth control we don't even need to be that harsh off the bat. We can start by forceably steralizing certain people... namely repeat violent felons, pedophiles, rapists, and drug addicts.
There's a barrel of worms in here for sure, but to discount the discussion based on "basic human rights" is absurd.
We don't let people drive cars if they are unsafe drivers. We default to you not being allowed to drive. And we then provide a method for certification. With birth control we don't even need to be that harsh off the bat. We can start by forceably steralizing certain people... namely repeat violent felons, pedophiles, rapists, and drug addicts.
There's a barrel of worms in here for sure, but to discount the discussion based on "basic human rights" is absurd.
> There's a barrel of worms in here for sure
sooo you want us to have a department of prcreation, and you must get certified to be able to have kids. I'm sure this will fly with the majority of americans.
I totally agree that only certain people should be able to have kids and that trailer trash, drug addicts and others of the sort who have them for all the wrong reasons shouldn't. but looking at the reality of it, no one really wants to go against human rights groups who would be outraged at anyone who even spoke openly about trying to implement something like this.
I totally agree that only certain people should be able to have kids and that trailer trash, drug addicts and others of the sort who have them for all the wrong reasons shouldn't. but looking at the reality of it, no one really wants to go against human rights groups who would be outraged at anyone who even spoke openly about trying to implement something like this.
how would you regulate this?
the bottom line of this procreation issue is that you've gotta compare the negative effects of unregulated procreation to the right of people to decide when, why, and how they want to have a kid.
I'm not convinced that regulating procreation by law would be the most effective way to deal with the problems of overpopulation, especially considering the ridiculous amount of popular opposition I imagine this type of regulation would have, the infrastructure to enforce it, the agencies for the testing, etc.
I'm not going to touch the issue of illegal immigration other than to say you can't form an opinion about illegal immigrants without considering the US's role in the conditions that drove them to come here.
I'm not convinced that regulating procreation by law would be the most effective way to deal with the problems of overpopulation, especially considering the ridiculous amount of popular opposition I imagine this type of regulation would have, the infrastructure to enforce it, the agencies for the testing, etc.
I'm not going to touch the issue of illegal immigration other than to say you can't form an opinion about illegal immigrants without considering the US's role in the conditions that drove them to come here.
This is not a Ron Paul Thread. I suggest a Derail substitute.
huh?
yeah, my thread has been vanquished
yeah I don't even know who Ron Paul is.
Ron Paul is a Texas Representative who is throwing his name in to the Presidential Race:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ron_Paul
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ron_Paul
meh, I'm just saying we have an overpopulation problem and no one wants to discuss it. It's like global warming all over again. Only heavily related.
wikiwiki--ron paul!
haha
nny, make a documentary like al gore, you may get the nobel peace prize!
I'd deserve one.
Ron Paul seems to be summed up like this: The government has no place telling us what to do ... unless it's about immigration or abortion.
He's pretty cool otherwise.
He's pretty cool otherwise.
Ron Paul seems to be summed up like this[...]
He's pretty cool otherwise.
haha
I'm glad someone got it...
apparently not all phi_'s words are absurdist in nature?
Everything except that.
And that.
And that.
...
And that.
And that.
...
apparently ron paul pulled in $3.5m on Nov 5
Last I heard it was $4.2 mill
This just in, phi_ pulled in a whopping $60 on November 5. Sources say this has diminished his once high ego and threatens to topple is hard-working campaign for civil rights for all woodland critters.
No official comment has been made from phi_'s offices as of this writing.
No official comment has been made from phi_'s offices as of this writing.
dude, old peeps just rolled into city brew and started handing out ron paul brochures. another lady started going off on them for it... apparently not a ron paul fan
you at the one at 24th st. w. and king ave. w.?
i saw a bunch of ron paul peoples at the intersection.
larz went to the city brew on grand (ftw, obvs).
i saw a bunch of ron paul peoples at the intersection.
larz went to the city brew on grand (ftw, obvs).
i was, i'm totally locked into the one on king otherwise i would've gone elsewhere.
locked in?
yeah, i get deals there. free drinks and such for being a regular.
Yeah, I got a flier from this kid at the cat griz game.
I feel like bringing this up again. I have been enjoying some Ron Paul words about the economy recently, so I'm bringing this thread back to life.
As you know Ron Paul won't be president in '08, but he's doing some other things. I've decided I want to start acting politically. I don't agree with his stance on abortion or care to support the sealing of borders as posted early on in this thread. I do want to help bring attention back to supporting The Constitution and libertarian ideals as well as conservative economic policy, and I think Ron Paul is a decent figurehead that embodies most of those things for me. Maybe there are others too, so I want to start keeping up with politics and government in a bigger way so I might find them.
I don't know why you think we have an overpopulation problem. I think we have problems of inefficiency, and consumerism. We have enough resources and land to support our population, care to explain?
p.s. fuck machines for chinese: i'm hilarious
As you know Ron Paul won't be president in '08, but he's doing some other things. I've decided I want to start acting politically. I don't agree with his stance on abortion or care to support the sealing of borders as posted early on in this thread. I do want to help bring attention back to supporting The Constitution and libertarian ideals as well as conservative economic policy, and I think Ron Paul is a decent figurehead that embodies most of those things for me. Maybe there are others too, so I want to start keeping up with politics and government in a bigger way so I might find them.
nny: meh, I'm just saying we have an overpopulation problem and no one wants to discuss it. It's like global warming all over again. Only heavily related.
I don't know why you think we have an overpopulation problem. I think we have problems of inefficiency, and consumerism. We have enough resources and land to support our population, care to explain?
p.s. fuck machines for chinese: i'm hilarious
I'll make a new thread for it.
re: rand paul and the recent "controversy": http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/joe_conason … index.html
worth a read I think.
worth a read I think.
and the links to the new republic and reason are worth checking out too.