It's a good interview. I agree with much of it....The solution needed most is the distribution of the money supply. It needs to be dispersed to all equally at creation instead of being given to the banksters first. This will solve the equal opportunity issue and along with equal distribution of currency at creation ( preferably a debt free coin); a new education system needs to be implemented teaching financial and ecological literacy...
The only thing I disagree with in this interview is on his medical stance. The primary needs of all individuals: housing, food, education, and health care do need to be addressed in a socially responsible collective way. Demonizing the words social and collective is silly because humans are social animals living collectively in groups...He's dead on, though, that it is The Corporatocracy which is the primary driver of most of the dysfunction when it comes to many of these issues.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
Collectivism is the antithesis of everything Ron Paul stands for. Please go to www.mises.org and start reading the daily articles. They will introduce you to a trove of thinkers in the Austrian School of Economics, which Paul is from.
Collectivism is subjugating the individual to the whole, which actually doesn't exist as a living organism. Collectivism is tyranny against the individual. It says that one owes something of one's labor or property to someone else. Take health care for example, if health care is a "right," then what happens if no one wants to go into medicine? The state would have to conscript people into the field. That is slavery. Health care is therefore not a right, nor is food, education, or anything outside of the integrity of your person and property.
Oh, please, I was reading Mises 20 years ago. How presumptuous! Mr. Paul is simply wrong on issues pertaining to humanities basic needs ( please read where I said he is correct). A socialized currency issued equally to all in a non-debt manner would solve the issue...Why did you misrepresent my saying humanities basic needs with human rights?
And please, go somewhere else if you want to argue this tired old capitalist/communist trope...Bored to death of it.....
I apologize. Happy to agree to disagree about basic needs.
Do you think trillions of dollars given freely to about 2000 oligarchs is in anyway merited? The money for nothing making the casino owners who run civilization enormously wealthy via vast systems of unmerited wealth? Do you give these people a free pass while so easily denying and dismissing the basic needs of humanity? Please read Abraham Maslow. Everyone is capable of becoming healthy and functional as long as the foundational issues of their life are met. Mises and Paul, on this issue, are wrongly transferring a false understanding of Darwinism into the field of economics and especially, Mr. Paul has an extraordinarily faulty understanding of The Golden Rule--the only thing that really mattered from our mythological past.......
Thanks for the apology.....
BTW, in agrarian societies, those needs were met by having 'free' access to the land; in complex modern societies those needs can only really be met by money; hence the equal distribution of the money supply to all at creation. This will solve the problem of the Pyramid Scheme Central Banking Swindle.....See, I sound just like Ron on that one:)
I'm also curious: as a mother, if you are one, at which point did you decide that one or some of your children didn't have to have their basic needs met?
Because, hypothetically, one of your children could have a chemical imbalance which is prone to one becoming a psychopath? So you starve this child instead of seeking medical help? And I could offer up thousands of justifications for starving one's child....It doesn't make it a healthy ethos....