Schiff on Fascism

[react1200]

If Pauls's austerity cuts to education and health were implemented, who would help the poor? Who would vaccinate them in order to stop pandemics? We know capitalism cannot function without a lower class. Who will look after them to make sure they are able to educate/sustain themselves?

Case in point, Mexico's collapse, which started after US and British waged economic war against them via de-industrilization and debt via IMF (as in Argentina), has decimated their health care system. Now we have a pandemic and that is global. Government is not inherently corrupt if properly regulated, corrupt deregulation, such as repealing Glass Steagal, has caused much of our woes. We need a new FDR style Pecora commission to root out the corrupt financiers. Anyone who thinks privatizing public infrastructure such as utilities only needs to look at Enron to see what these corporations are capable of.

Most of our current vital infrastructure only exists because of the New Deal (electricity, damns, super highways, etc.) so how can we say FDR was evil as did Amity Slaes and the American Liberty League (who openly supported Hitler) did. We have British financier operatives, such as George Soros, in our midst bringing down our system and thus our way of life. They are murderer's as was JP Morgan, Dupont, Rothchilds, Bush, Alcoa, etc, who financed Hitler. Austrian economics will serve to throw the majority of the population in extreme poverty, private capital will not invest in infrastructure or anything that is beneficial to the greater good, they are only interested in profits. These policies will only serve to depopulate the world, which the Queen of England has openly stated as the agenda.
We know the system is bankrupt due to the estimated quadrillion or so credit default swaps. We need to put it death now and restart in coordination with other countries. In order to have a sustainable economy and society we need to invest into nuclear and desalination of water.

My question to Peter, how do his policies address the issues people living in extreme poverty, the disabled, the handicapped, the sick? Also, volunteerism will only work IF people actually decide to intervene, judging from our culture, and what is happening in Africa, we wont.

[thasre]

Wow, this is the worst rant I've ever read. Which is why the only thing I'm even going to dignify with a response is:

What the $#@! about not intervening appropriately in Africa? We send billions upon billions of dollars in systemic aid to Africa and they're more $#@!ed up than ever. Read "Dead Aid" by Dambisa Moyo. She's Africa's leading economist who actually BLAMES our financial assistance for keeping Africa down.

[Omphfullas Zamboni]

YouTube - How Not To Help The Poor

[brandon]

You ask the question "How will we help the poor?"

If you are so worried about the poor, the real question you should be asking is "How will I help the poor?"

What if I don't care about the poor? Do you really think that you have authority over me and my life and can force me to do as you say using a threat of violence? Is that your philosophy? If so, what makes you an different than a slave owner?

It is not the role of government to help anyone, plain and simple. The government cannot help one person without stealing from another. Stealing is wrong. The ends do not justify the means.

[react1200]

You guys are very passionate people, who are keen to see the issues that lie before us, however your solution (along with Obama's) are totally incompetent and will throw us into another dark age where pandemics run rampant and nation's lose their sovereignty. Please research trade wars of 1907, Andrew Mellon who worked under Hoover and the tariff acts he implemented (the depression was engineered as a British coup to destroy the US.

Consider this:

http://wlym.com/%7Eleesburg/larpac/2...webcast_en.mp3

[CUnknown]

I am going to go ahead and actually debate the OP.

If Pauls's austerity cuts to education and health were implemented, who would help the poor? Who would vaccinate them in order to stop pandemics? We know capitalism cannot function without a lower class. Who will look after them to make sure they are able to educate/sustain themselves?

Your question's foundations are false. First.. what do you mean by "austerity cuts"? I'd want you to get as specific as possible. Ron Paul talks first and foremost about eliminating overseas spending on war, why are you focusing on the domestic side? But anyway, what specifically has Ron Paul said he wanted to do that you oppose on the domestic side?

I would really rather not go any further with this part until you clarify yourself, to do so would be to conceed your main argument. But I can comment on the other parts:

Case in point, Mexico's collapse, which started after US and British waged economic war against them via de-industrilization and debt via IMF

Stop right there. IMF? Ron Paul ardently rejects anything to do with the IMF. Try again.

Government is not inherently corrupt if properly regulated

Ron Paul of course agrees with this. We need regulation of the seperation of governmental powers and of the Federal Reserve

corrupt deregulation, such as repealing Glass Steagal, has caused much of our woes.

Speculative. Anyway, did Ron Paul vote for this one? You didn't even mention his vote. If you're going to attack someone with a charge, please examine the evidence first. It's very possible that Ron Paul voted against it, since he votes against everything.

We need a new FDR style Pecora commission to root out the corrupt financiers.

Are you saying that Ron Paul disagrees with prosecutions of corruption? If people have broken the law, of course they should be prosecuted.

My question to Peter, how do his policies address the issues people living in extreme poverty, the disabled, the handicapped, the sick? Also, volunteerism will only work IF people actually decide to intervene, judging from our culture, and what is happening in Africa, we wont.

People living in poverty will be aided by Schiff's voting to end the wars, greatly reducing government spending. That money can be spent on us at home or used to reduce the debt and tax burdens. Also, Schiff's policies will bring stability to our monetary system, providing people with the ability to save for their futures. The financial crash that so many of us are worried about will be reduced or maybe completely avoided if Schiff's policies are implemented. And yes, that does affect the poor-- if they are going to ever become less than poor, they'll need jobs. Schiff's policies will be designed to provide as many jobs to as many people as possible.

Honest money, stability in our economic systems, and sane spending priorities will surely benefit every American regardless of economic status.

[heavenlyboy34]

OP-what makes you think capitalism cannot function without a lower class? I've never heard this (except from jealous communists)-please explain.

[torchbearer]

You ask the question "How will we help the poor?"

If you are so worried about the poor, the real question you should be asking is "How will I help the poor?"

What if I don't care about the poor? Do you really think that you have authority over me and my life and can force me to do as you say using a threat of violence? Is that your philosophy? If so, what makes you an different than a slave owner?

It is not the role of government to help anyone, plain and simple. The government cannot help one person without stealing from another. Stealing is wrong. The ends do not justify the means.

This. Answer these questions.
Then ask, if Obama cares about the poor, why doesn't he help them himself?

[torchbearer]

OP-what makes you think capitalism cannot function without a lower class? I've never heard this (except from jealous communists)-please explain.

Functionalist Sociologist state that "social stratification" is necessary for society to function. Even the Marxist Sociologist don't refute the findings of the Functionalist.

[heavenlyboy34]

Functionalist Sociologist state that "social stratification" is necessary for society to function. Even the Marxist Sociologist don't refute the findings of the Functionalist.

And they say I've got some crazy ideas! Thanx for that, Torch.

[torchbearer]

And they say I've got some crazy ideas! Thanx for that, Torch.

I was showing that the Functionalist school would agree with your assessment.
Different economic situations are functional.

[CUnknown]

Hmm..I was interpreting the "capitalism cannot function without a lower class" thing as meaning something like "If the poor all were dying of starvation it would destabilize society too much to survive". But maybe he meant something different. It's hard to tell.

The OP has a lot of unproven (even unsupported) assumptions, and then asks questions based on the assumptions. That React1200 guy needs to build up his case some before he can even begin to question Schiff about it.

I mean, to draw a rediculous analogy, you could just as easily say to Schiff, "It's well known that your policies will destroy the earth within a few years of your taking office. So my question is, which planet are you going to take us to, and are there enough spaceship seats to transport everybody?"

React1200, do you know what I'm saying? Tell us why you think that Schiff's policies would be harmful first, before asking what he's going to do about it. Because we're not following you.

[Danke]

I am going to go ahead and actually debate the OP.

The LaRouche gentleman hasn't been on the forum since this thread:

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=190656

[eduardo89]

I hate these stupid arguments against capitalism...companies are not going to want people to stay in poverty just to exploit them as cheap labor, it's in their best interest to raise the living standards of everyone so they can increase their customer base and sell more expensive (higher margin) goods!

[SamuraisWisdom]

OP-what makes you think capitalism cannot function without a lower class? I've never heard this (except from jealous communists)-please explain.

Think about it. In capitalism, there will always be more than one economic class of people since some will make more money than others. So in effect, in a capitalist society there will always be at least an "upper" and "lower" class.

[eduardo89]

The whole objective of capitalism is for you to strive to become one of the upper class. The more successful you are, the more you are rewarded.

[G-Wohl]

You ask the question "How will we help the poor?"

If you are so worried about the poor, the real question you should be asking is "How will I help the poor?"

What if I don't care about the poor? Do you really think that you have authority over me and my life and can force me to do as you say using a threat of violence? Is that your philosophy? If so, what makes you an different than a slave owner?

It is not the role of government to help anyone, plain and simple. The government cannot help one person without stealing from another. Stealing is wrong. The ends do not justify the means.

YouTube - Ayn Rand Mike Wallace Interview 1959 part 2

Spoken elegantly and with objectivity, by one of the greatest minds America ever had the honor to house.

See her wonderful explanation as to why the welfare state (domestic or abroad) is contrary to a successful government

[Stary Hickory]

Capitalism does not need a lower class to function at all. It only needs people willing to work and trade. The peaceful process of working and trading increases the amount of goods available in the US more and more. Laborers will see their purchasing power rise as comapnies bid for the scarce labor that is available in the country.

This I guess is where the OP is lost. Labor is a scarce factor, it get's bid up like any other product. In a free market all stops are removed and the market can allocate resources unhindered thus utilizing every aspect of our economy to the maximum. This means higher employment, higher prodcutivity, and as a consequence higer wages as every buisnessman will need workers, and must compete against other buisnessmen for these workers.

Wages always crowd out profits in a free market, when the government gets involved and makes competition difficult, then wages are now no longer being bid up. Hence lower wages, and poorer quality, less productivity.

Socialism is truly the only system which requires a lower class or peasant class. In fact Socialism is built on the few benefiting at the cost of the many. It turns into an unsustainable system of special interest groups who do not compete to make better and cheaper products but only for favor of the political elite.

The promise of socialism is plenty for all, but the reality is plenty for some and poverity for most. I suppose it would help if the OP would drive this fairy tale out of his head first, and really look at what socialism is: robbery and theft.

No civilization can advance with a society full of thuggery, robbery, and corruption. But this is the promise of socialism, it always leads to this route. As the promised dream of socialism fails we always venture down this path. We can see it today, and to the extent America allows it to continue we will see even more.

[heavenlyboy34]

Capitalism does not need a lower class to function at all. It only needs people willing to work and trade. The peaceful process of working and trading increases the amount of goods available in the US more and more. Laborers will see their purchasing power rise as comapnies bid for the scarce labor that is available in the country.

This I guess is where the OP is lost. Labor is a scarce factor, it get's bid up like any other product. In a free market all stops are removed and the market can allocate resources unhindered thus utilizing every aspect of our economy to the maximum. This means higher employment, higher prodcutivity, and as a consequence higer wages as every buisnessman will need workers, and must compete against other buisnessmen for these workers.

Wages always crowd out profits in a free market, when the government gets involved and makes competition difficult, then wages are now no longer being bid up. Hence lower wages, and poorer quality, less productivity.

Socialism is truly the only system which requires a lower class or peasant class. In fact Socialism is built on the few benefiting at the cost of the many. It turns into an unsustainable system of special interest groups who do not compete to make better and cheaper products but only for favor of the political elite.

The promise of socialism is plenty for all, but the reality is plenty for some and poverity for most. I suppose it would help if the OP would drive this fairy tale out of his head first, and really look at what socialism is: robbery and theft.

No civilization can advance with a society full of thuggery, robbery, and corruption. But this is the promise of socialism, it always leads to this route. As the promised dream of socialism fails we always venture down this path. We can see it today, and to the extent America allows it to continue we will see even more.

qft! You make some good sense.

[skyorbit]

Yes. you will have people who are less wealthy and people who are more wealthy.

However in a free market -- the poor will be much wealthier too. The disparety of income might actually be greator. But while the wealthiest entrapreuneurs might have the buying power of $100 Billion (current) the poorest amoung the population will be living a lifestyle that previously only multimillionaires enjoyed.

And the Millionaires will still be wanting to steal form the Billionaires because "it's not fair" or whatever, not realizing it was the work of the Billionaires that made their lifestyle possible.

The poor get wealthier too in a free society. And I suspect they'll get wealthier at a faster rate then the already wealthy (who will also be getting wealthier.)

Tracy

[TGGRV]

It is amusing to me that people don't realize that welfare is the way to trap the poor into poverty. And I'm amused by people who believe Democrats would want the poor to stop being poor. I mean, wouldn't they lose all their voters? lol.

I'm also amused about the fact that people want others to do things about the poor, not themselves. Everyone who is for welfare, wants welfare on other people's money.

[eduardo89]

I'm also amused about the fact that people want others to do things about the poor, not themselves. Everyone who is for welfare, wants welfare on other people's money.

Exactly, if you're so concerned about the poor why don't YOU do something about it

[TGGRV]

Exactly, if you're so concerned about the poor why don't YOU do something about it

What's hilarious is that I'm poor. I have to live on 2500$ plus my crap wage while in college(my wage will be around 300$ a month), yet I donated to a lot of things, some even unrelated to what happens to me, like the cross for freedom. I donated for a private clinic here for newborns because the government doesn't give a $#@! after they take our money and so on. And I'm against forcing rich people to do it because it's immoral. This is similar to why Democraps are for affirmative action. It's just a guilt trip that they were the ones lynching blacks before.

[Daamien]

Wow, this is the worst rant I've ever read. Which is why the only thing I'm even going to dignify with a response is:

What the $#@! about not intervening appropriately in Africa? We send billions upon billions of dollars in systemic aid to Africa and they're more $#@!ed up than ever. Read "Dead Aid" by Dambisa Moyo. She's Africa's leading economist who actually BLAMES our financial assistance for keeping Africa down.

I hate to bump old threads, but Dambisa Moyo was on the Peter Schiff Show today and they discussed this topic extensively.
http://schiffradio.com/programhighlights?date=20110310

[Sola_Fide]

Thanks!