Thursday, April 8, 2010

So I went to Rand Paul's University of Kentucky Rally...

The University of Kentucky is my school, so when a politician comes to my school advocating 19th century norms and values I figured it should be captured on tape.

Rand Paul came on 4/7/10 and I was there. Here are the videos with a few thoughts:



No federal funding for higher eduation? Because the proof is in the pudding that federal funding has benefited EVERYONE in the south (that's us Kentucky), and if you live in the south you'd better support the Democratic agenda because you take in more federal tax dollars in than you put out.



Kentucky, we don't have all that much oil. And I can tell you this, conservative policies of increasing domestic oil exploration/production while driving prices higher with speculation makes no sense. Companies like Exxon-Mobile have managed to dodge American taxes altogether in 2009 while making massive profits.



What makes currency valuable? Our trust in it, do you really think there is any value in gold beyond the fact that it's a shiny metal? There isn't, the idea that a metal that backs up paper is any more valuable than plain paper is beyond batty.

"[Gold] gets dug out of the ground in Africa, or someplace. Then we melt it down, dig another hole, bury it again and pay people to stand around guarding it. It has no utility. Anyone watching from Mars would be scratching their head. -Warren Buffett"



Seriously Rand? Aren't you aware of Kentucky coal slurry ponds? They are devastating to Kentucky's environment.



Yeah, America's global imperial interests are jacked, there are states that are more capable than others. Are we Americans, or should we relate to what state we live in like we did before and during the American Civil War?



So... here's where I step into the debate about guns. For those of you who aren't aware, Rand spoke at a gun rally at our state capital. Militia leaders were there speaking about civil war and hanging journalists who didn't write what they wanted. And there will be more video as they continue to upload.

Guns fall under "Private propety"?, really, I promise you this, I'll ask one of the most pronounced historians in the country about this issue, I doubt the 2nd amendment was about property rights...

58 comments:

  1. So you think it is okay to take more money from the poor in California because they produce more taxes for the Federal government and give it to Kentuckians? That's nice.

    And I think I can only laugh at your reasoning behind the fiat currency defense. "Our trust will back it up! Gold is nothing but a shiny metal!" As if thousands of years of economic history can just be snapped away like that. Gold has proven to be the most valuable commodity in exchange for goods over thousands of years. Money has never had such a lifespan, indeed, fiat currencies often crumble upon the arrogance of the money makers and inflation runs abundant to the point that the currency is no longer valuable.

    Though I am glad you recorded the event, seeing how there are plenty of Rand Fans out on the internet :).

    ReplyDelete
  2. "And there will be more video as they continue to upload."

    Can't wait. Your short-sighted and ill-informed commentary notwithstanding, it is good to see documented the candidacy of Kentucky's next senator.

    ReplyDelete
  3. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  4. You understand that gold has intrinsic value because it has a limited supply right? And that the problem with paper is that it can be essentially printed without limit by our government?

    If the supply of gold was limitless, like paper, it would be batty to consider it to be a more sound form of currency; however we live in reality, and in reality gold isn't limitless.

    I really think the problem with most liberals is either they have no understanding of economics, or they've been given a very poor understanding of economics.

    ReplyDelete
  5. are you kidding? gold backed money is batty? gold has only been the standard of wealth since the beginning of time. hows that for "our faith" in it?

    ReplyDelete
  6. Wow you people are batty at times, let's forget about all the advancement we made in the 20th century?

    ReplyDelete
  7. Well, considering you're forgetting about all of the advancement made during the 19th century...

    ReplyDelete
  8. And inflation is at all time lows.....

    The 'gold is great' argument just doesn't hold up:

    http://liberalinkentucky.blogspot.com/2010/03/krugman-warns-we-need-more-inflation.html

    ReplyDelete
  9. Umm... right, like central banks? The 17th amendment?

    ReplyDelete
  10. Its not about "gold" being great, its about implementing a sound currency that has high resistance to manipulation.

    Krugman is generally on crack.

    ReplyDelete
  11. "Krugman is generally on crack."

    How can you argue with genius arguments like that? I'm sure you know much more about economics than Paul Krugman.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Krugman argues monetary policy similar to that of Zimbabwe = Krugman on crack.

    ReplyDelete
  13. And obviously given my slack attack on Krugman, I'm not interested in having a legitimate argument over the smelly sludge that comes out of his mouth.

    However, if you'd like to advise me on why a sound currency that isn't easily manipulated is bad, please do.

    ReplyDelete
  14. "I'm sure you know much more about economics than Paul Krugman."

    I may not know more about the witchcraft Krugman refers to as economics, but I do know more about common sense.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Why don't we go a step further than reverting back to just gold? Let's go back to salt, that was the Roman armies currency.

    Or we could just assume society has evolved a bit?

    ReplyDelete
  16. Paper currencies have a long failed history.

    Gold has never failed; its only been replaced or diluted by those in power.

    Like I said, the goal should be implementing a sound currency with the highest resistance to manipulation.

    Even if you argue against gold, you cannot argue for paper...especially if you're a bleeding heart liberal. Paper currency is controlled by those who steal wealth from the poor. Who benefits most when money is printed? The well connected... AIG, Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan. As the new money enters the economy two things happen: 1. It works its way from the richest to the poorest slowly and unequally. 2. Prices gradually go up (inflation). Those that spend the money first have the benefit of lower prices. Those that spend the money last (the poor) already feel the affect of the higher price. Therefore its a transfer of wealth from the poor to the wealthy. This is why Ron Paul refers to it as the "Inflation Tax".

    "And inflation is at all time lows"

    Have you looked at health care costs? education costs? the general cost of running government? Examine the cost of milk, fruits, and vegetables over the past 10 years. Anyone that has to heat a home certainly feels inflation. Just because the government tells you the CPI is at all time lows doesn't mean inflation isn't there. Inflation is everywhere.

    "Inflation is the opiate of the masses" - Hazlitt

    ReplyDelete
  17. Oh... and the reason gold makes a better currency than salt is that salt cannot be coined. Ideally, any commodity could be used as currency if it doesn't degrade in quality over time and is easily transportable. For instance Oil could be a currency, but because of the cost to house and transport it, it doesn't make sense to use it as a currency for everyone.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Well spacebucks are clearly a better alternative, besides, we can always mine more gold:

    http://www.southparkstudios.com/episodes/220763

    ReplyDelete
  19. Metals degrade over time, but gold does not degrade. Gold is often found in pristine quality from thousands of years before without being tarnished or rusted or degraded.

    Dollars lose value over time because our government creates a lot of money and gives it to the financial industry to gamble with.

    If you were a true progressive you would want to end corporatism, and the best way to do this would be to end the Federal Reserve and have an honest monetary system. A monetary system that does not degrade a person's savings and wages over time. That is why people buy gold, because the government cannot degrade the value of gold no matter how much currency they print for their wars of aggression and corporate handouts.

    ReplyDelete
  20. By guaranteeing student loans, the government is driving up the cost of education because Universities can raise their prices and students can just take out more and more loans.

    This degrades the value of education because it costs so much, and students are almost required to take out loans rather than work and pay for their education. This puts students further into debt, and the only people this really helps are the Universities.

    ReplyDelete
  21. In the words of one of the wealthiest men alive:

    [Gold] gets dug out of the ground in Africa, or someplace. Then we melt it down, dig another hole, bury it again and pay people to stand around guarding it. It has no utility. Anyone watching from Mars would be scratching their head.

    -Warren Buffett

    ReplyDelete
  22. Universities are expensive to run. Why does the right always aim for the bottom? Currency inflates, so what? Disinflation and deflation are far more destructive to those who have loans.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Pieces of paper and digits on a computer that can create wealth out of thin air is worse, at least gold and silver are rare.

    Legalize competing currencies and let the free market sort it out. For some reason our government has a problem with that.

    ReplyDelete
  24. "[Gold] gets dug out of the ground in Africa, or someplace. Then we melt it down, dig another hole, bury it again and pay people to stand around guarding it. It has no utility. Anyone watching from Mars would be scratching their head.

    -Warren Buffett"

    If you want to take your advice on how to create a society that benefits the common man opposed to one that benefits the rich, I would suggest not taking your advice from the rich (especially if he thinks there are people on Mars :).

    I don't disagree that gold doesn't have its faults, but tell me, which is more stupid, placing in the hands of a relative elite few absolute power over our money supply, or implementing an incorruptible currency based on a limited precious metal with little actual utility?

    ReplyDelete
  25. "Universities are expensive to run. Why does the right always aim for the bottom? Currency inflates, so what? Disinflation and deflation are far more destructive to those who have loans."

    America was built on savers. Savers provided the capital that fueled the industrial revolution and the rise of the greatest middle class known to mankind. Debt is rotting the US economy. You're right, people who borrow money would suffer in a deflationary spiral, but the economy shouldn't be built on debt. . . another result of the fiat currency we currently live with.

    Why are universities so expensive to run? We have a greater amount of technology at our hands. Professors should be able to lecture to more people than ever. Universities should be able to downsize and streamline the education process. Its not that universities are so expensive to run, its that they can charge enormous tuitions to students who borrow the money through government guaranteed loans. Government need to get out of the student loan business. The amount of loans available would be seriously limited, university revenues would drop, and the serious restructuring that we all know our high-education system needs would begin to take place.

    ReplyDelete
  26. In the short run, the number of individuals able to attend university would drop, but in the long run tuition prices would drop and would be available to more people than ever before.

    ReplyDelete
  27. "America was built on savers. Savers provided the capital that fueled the industrial revolution and the rise of the greatest middle class known to mankind. Debt is rotting the US economy. You're right, people who borrow money would suffer in a deflationary spiral, but the economy shouldn't be built on debt. . . another result of the fiat currency we currently live with."

    Let's swap out "savers" with a few letters, let's add an 'l' before 'a' and drop the 'r', yeah, slaves that's historically accurate, that and cheap immigrant labor.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Oh my God... are you seriously advocated the idea that the Guilded Age created the largest middle class? Have you picked up a history book?

    ReplyDelete
  29. "Professors should be able to lecture to more people than ever. Universities should be able to downsize and streamline the education process."

    So you're advocating for more mega classrooms with less one on one student teacher time?

    Are you aware that the most effective universities have smaller classrooms with fewer students per professor?

    ReplyDelete
  30. Yeah, savers built America during the industrial age, that correlation is just about as accurate as this one:

    http://liberalinkentucky.blogspot.com/2010/03/source-of-american-moral-decay-tommy.html

    ReplyDelete
  31. Let's see when America had the largest middle class:

    http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_1e4CUh7LhbU/S6qr-qIKOrI/AAAAAAAAAFA/lba4HIDfkfw/s1600/30iraq_wideweb__470x308,0.jpg

    ReplyDelete
  32. "This Gilded Age is most famous for the creation of a modern industrial economy. A national transportation and communication network was created, the corporation became the dominant form of business organization, and a managerial revolution transformed business operations. By the beginning of the 20th century, per capita income and industrial production in the United States led the world."

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gilded_Age

    Yes. I am arguing the gilded age created the largest middle class in the world.

    Also, unless I'm reading your graph wrong, it appears the middle class had a large share of something after the gilded age..and lost that share of whatever the graph refers to after Fed induced depression.

    ReplyDelete
  33. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  34. By the way, you still haven't told me how placing in the hands of a relative elite few the power to print money is less stupid than using a commodity-based currency.

    ReplyDelete
  35. The chart shows the share of the richest 10 percent of the American population in total income.

    ReplyDelete
  36. Are you saying we shouldn't have a national bank and printing press?

    ReplyDelete
  37. I'm not crazy about the Fed, I think we should bypass the giant banks and allow the small business administration to directly lend money to small business'.

    ReplyDelete
  38. A commodity based currency would allow credit to be distributed based on market forces, which would place the lending of capital in more local hands (i.e. the more of the commodity your community has saved in the local bank, the more credit available to be borrowed...credit wouldn't be distributed by a printing press in D.C.) which would support local small business which create jobs, innovation and wealth. It would completely bypass the giant banks, which is why the giant banks instituted the Fed in the first place.

    ReplyDelete
  39. I'd like the source of the data that graph is made up with; it would be interesting to see it pre-1917 considering the guilded age, from what I understand, is considered to be late-19th century.

    ReplyDelete
  40. "Are you saying we shouldn't have a national bank and printing press?"

    Yes.

    ReplyDelete
  41. National Banks and printing presses fuels wars. Lincoln printed greenbacks to pay for the civil war, the US went off the gold standard to pay for WW1, Nixon took the link to gold away to pay for Vietnam, and think about how much money has been printed to murder hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians in Iraq. Absolutely, National Banks combined with the power to create money provide this world no good.

    ReplyDelete
  42. I'm busy trying to break these videos down, I'll be back to the discussion.

    http://liberalinkentucky.blogspot.com/2010/04/rand-at-uk-pt-2.html

    ReplyDelete
  43. Ok, Mr. Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada,

    I'm really perplexed at your interest in this discussion being that you don't reside here.

    Canada has a lower cancer death rate per capita than the United States, that must be nice.

    When my country limits corporate influence maybe we won't invade oil rich countries for their resources, we are a Democratic-Republic. There is nothing binding us to free market capitalism, the constitution calls for market intervention through tariffs and banks.

    Now, I don't want to carry gold around in my pocket, everyone loves the idea of the wild west but the wild west was never what the movies portray.

    I trust a democratically elected government, and the more democratic my government is the more equal it is.

    We have 1 vote per person, in the eyes of the law it makes us 1/300 million. As soon as we curb this nutty system of economics that Rand thinks can work in the 21st century the better off everyone here will be.

    ReplyDelete
  44. The graph is from Krugman's blog, follow the numbers to the US census office:

    http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/09/18/introducing-this-blog/

    ReplyDelete
  45. BTW, you left a few thinks out maple leaf:

    -BANK PANICS

    "The end of the Gilded Age coincided with the Panic of 1893, a deep depression. The depression lasted until 1897 and marked a major political realignment in the election of 1896. After that came the Progressive Era."

    -DISPARITY IN WEALTH

    "The wealth of the period is highlighted by the American upper class' opulence, but also by the rise of American philanthropy (referred to by Andrew Carnegie as the "Gospel of Wealth") that used private money to endow thousands of colleges, hospitals, museums, academies, schools, opera houses, public libraries, symphony orchestras, and charities. John D. Rockefeller, for example, donated over $500 million to various charities, slightly over half his entire net worth."

    " excess of America's upper class during the post-Civil War and post-Reconstruction eras of the late 19th century"

    Advocate this system for your own country.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gilded_Age#Urban_life

    ReplyDelete
  46. "Canada has a lower cancer death rate per capita than the United States, that must be nice."

    We don't eat as much processed animal protein ;)

    I grew up in Maine (I am Canadian); I grew up being fed American history and politics.

    America was founded on some very idealistic principles that are hard not to fall in love with once you understand how it all pieces together; though, it does take some acceptance that government cannot provide the utopia that we all crave and typically makes things worse.

    You attacked the guilded age, but, this is the same age in which millions of immigrants fled their homeland to move to the land of opportunity your founders built. Your republicratic dominated government is destroying it. Is Rand the answer? I do not know, but in a time as fragile as today, when it seems the corporatists are at the public trough taking as much from the taxpayers as possible, don't you want someone that you can trust will fight tooth and nail to get some back? Don't you want someone that can't be bought? Can you really trust the other democrats? Hasn't their story been told before?

    ReplyDelete
  47. "Now, I don't want to carry gold around in my pocket, everyone loves the idea of the wild west but the wild west was never what the movies portray."

    No reason when using a commodity based currency that you couldn't use a debit card.

    As well, if the alternative to allowing a few bankers print money was to carry some coinage around...please tell me you're not that lazy...

    ReplyDelete
  48. Movements influence parties, not the other way around.

    The progressive era was a response to the Guilded Age, things weren't working.

    WE are the government:

    "The only sure bulwark of continuing liberty is a government strong enough to protect the interests of the people, and a people strong enough and well enough informed to maintain its sovereign control over the government." -FDR

    Now while you watch this from afar, I live it. Thanks to the businessmen who believed they owned our government they launched a 30 year campaign to discredit the institution of Democracy and invest more faith in markets, and they done very well until the election of a Democratic Populist came into power, they're scared to death of him and they damn well should be.

    Now as soon as I can hack one of these videos up (it's too big for youtube) you hear Paul advocate a system where few win and most fail. I'll be damned if I'm going to live in a country where some citizens can drown others out because they're able to net more capital.

    ReplyDelete
  49. On, and since you brought up our health care system...general rule of thumb...if you don't have to use it, you think its great, once you have to use it, you realize what a shit hole it is.

    ReplyDelete
  50. Here's what deregulation, less democracy and more private power got the United States:

    http://liberalinkentucky.blogspot.com/2010/04/look-back-on-politics-of-enron.html

    ReplyDelete
  51. "Democratic Populist came into power, they're scared to death of him and they damn well should be."

    Lol. Dude, seriously...Obama a populist? I'm sure you meant corporate puppet.

    ReplyDelete
  52. I'm not against private insurance, but you have a system where people don't go bankrupt over medical emergencies, we "had" that here.

    ReplyDelete
  53. He could be meaner, no argument there, but healthcare was one hell of a victory.

    Next up, financial reform.

    ReplyDelete
  54. You think the massive giveaway to the insurance companies was a victory? Man...hopeless..

    ReplyDelete
  55. It ain't perfect, but it better regulates the industry, extends medicaid, and covers more people.

    We couldn't even get a Public Option through the senate much less singlepayer medicaid for everyone.

    ReplyDelete
  56. Yeah, and more evidence about government's role and taxs:

    http://liberalinkentucky.blogspot.com/2010/04/inequity-is-on-rise-and-has-been-for.html

    ReplyDelete