Ron Paul Revolution!!!!

[Decyferon]

sorry AOD just so I understand are you saying that if someone chooses to home school their child there should be reviews of the parent to see if what they are teaching is actually correct?

 

I know here in the UK schools are subject to audits etc by the education regulator, homeschoolers would also have to fall under that audit requirement. Otherwise people could be teaching theirs kids the world is flat and 4 + 4 is 10.

 

I think the US laws need to be changed, it isn't hard to get rid of a teacher who is underperforming same as in any job if you are underperforming it is eqasy to be fired

[angelofdeath]

i cant remember the name of the movie/show at present, but it detailed pretty well how the teachers unions and various labor laws protect the bad teachers from being fired. its a pretty shitty system/racket they have going on.

 

i dont think the radical notion of parents having control over their childrens education is that silly.

after all, since the schools are doing such a bad job, it couldnt possibly be any worse at home. but this aside, its a rights perspective. some people do bad things in the eyes of others. you think my beliefs are bad and dangerous. i dont.

why not just have the state take over kids completely and house and school them until they are grown perhaps only giving parents visits on the weekend for an hour or two. do you really think that if you were given freedom to teach your kids, you would teach them 2+2=5? is that why you favor these laws because you might do the wrong thing?

 

after all, parents could keep the kids in a dirty room, make them eat the wrong food, tell them racist things and instill it in them, not give them enough play time, tell them that corporations or evil and they only eat food raised on their land...i mean the list is endless. to think that sending a kid to a school 6 hours a day is going to be the end all be all and correct all the perceived mistakes made by the parents is just silly.

what next, putting a compliance officer in every house to make sure kids arent eating to much salt, HFCS, and to make sure they are brushing their teeth properly? to make sure the kids room is properly cleaned? to make sure the house is OSHA compliant to assure no possible harm could come to the child? regulate how much and what type of TV they can watch? i mean the ideology of ownership you place on everyone in society is appalling and never has a logical end unless its the total state controlling and micromanaging every single aspect of human life. and they are well on their way.

[Soup forgot his password]

i dont doubt your statistics are right.

but what you are talking about is the productivity of workers. things constantly change. this is life. especially life in the world where we have such a high standard of living compared to life before the industrial revolution when we had hundreds of generations of farmers essentially doing the same thing.

 

if you have a college education, you generally have a higher productivity than someone who dropped out in the 9th grade. this is a given.

There is that about a college degree: it shows you're capable of completing something and therefor you look more productive, but that's not the only difference between a highschool dropout and a college grad. Highschool dropouts generally have social problems so a college grad also has a level of social adeptness. A highschool drop out would rather work than continue being a part of school. That work is unskilled labor and their skillset is easily replaceable. Most importantly a college graduate is a professional in a field of study and therefor is far more employable than a highschool dropout.

 

when the car came out, it put black smiths, farriers and buggy whip makers out of business. it pushed these people to pursue different career paths. the question then becomes are americans better off with the car that everyone can afford, or should we of retarded the advent of the car in favor saving the inefficient jobs of the blacksmith, farrier and buggy whip maker?

 

Before the industrial revolution everything was hand made, which meant only a supermega rich few could actually afford anything. The industrial revolution was a middle finger to high society and their highly ornate and decorative clothing/houses/furniture as things could now be produced modestly and cheaply with an emphasis on practicality, rather than furniture with fucking lions feet for legs. It was also the rise of the blue collar worker as every new factory employed hundreds of workers who could make a living by just using their bodies. Look at modern architecture vs anything before the 1900's. We went from victorian houses to boxes by Frank Wright because we wanted to make beautiful and modern things for the working man and say fuck you to the wealthiest 1%. Eames invented the first plastic chairs and lamps because he wanted to make things as cheap and functional as possible for your everyman.

 

 

Before industrial revolution

 

After industrial revolution

 

Same with clothes. Pre industrial revolution people had ONE set of clothes. Now we have goodwill for all the shirts we dont wear because we're all too fat (except for me).

 

The overall quality of life for the working man VASTLY improved because of the industrial revolution. There was the largest redistribution wealth in American history. The problem is that we praised the wrong people. We praised and glamourized the entry level blue collar worker, as you see in sculptures and depictions all throughout detroit. We should've been praising and glamourizing those who invented the assembly lines, the adequate power grids, the city planners and engineers who made it all possible because those are the jobs that have survived all these years.

 

Now the issue americans have is buying things beyond their means. But that's a high class problem that only happened because of the success from the industrial revolution. Lower and Middle Classmen started to buy that poncy high class lions feet chair bullshit again because it's human nature to be a bunch of peacocking douchebags. The focus from practicality shifted back to pre-industrial revolution ornate bullshit. And the market did what it always does, makes whatever people want to buy.

 

If we still had that early industrial revolution mentality, cars and houses and chairs would be cheap and practical. But they're not and we've created a market of shit we can't really afford, because we like to pretend.

 

I think of it like this: Right now the biggest contributor to market bubbles are the "high beta rich" these are guys who, within a year, start with nothing and make a few million. There's a culture amongst the high beta to buy lots of houses, yachts, planes, lambos, etc even if only a couple years ago they hardly had cab fare. This behavior created an artificial bubble of luxury superyachts with helicopter pads and submarine bays. You're a yacht company. One year you get an order for one superyacht. You prepare for next year and make/sell ten super yachts. Next year you make 40 super yachts but nobody buys any because your customers was really just one customer that went fucking bankrupt. And now you went bankrupt too because you have a bunch of luxury yachts for a market that didnt really exist. That on some level is the state of the world's ENTIRE economy.

 

So yes. We are all better off because of the industrial revolution. We are also a lot dumber with money because of it too.

 

 

i still dont see why you feel the need to decide for kids, and their families what is gainful employment or what should be done to pass leisure. look, i used to go next door and work on my neighbors little farmette. he would pay me. he also ran an electrician business off the property. a business owned the land, what i was doing was illegal. it seems very high and mighty to sit back and feel that you have a right to decide what is best for others, their families and tell someone what they can and cant do.

 

I agree with you that kids should by law be allowed to mow their neighbor's lawn, paint their fence, all the shit every kid did when they were growing up, but to allow a kid that age to become a full-time employee at a company is where I draw the line. Can you imagine working a cotton gin while learning your shapes and colors? That's too oldschool for me.

 

 

I'll come back to this in a bit and respond to the other parts of the post.

[angelofdeath]

There is that about a college degree: it shows you're capable of completing something and therefor you look more productive, but that's not the only difference between a highschool dropout and a college grad. Highschool dropouts generally have social problems so a college grad also has a level of social adeptness. A highschool drop out would rather work than continue being a part of school. That work is unskilled labor and their skillset is easily replaceable. Most importantly a college graduate is a professional in a field of study and therefor is far more employable than a highschool dropout.

 

i wouldnt go as far as saying that someone who drops out of high school will always remain unskilled.

it used to be high school drop outs (and its still true today) could get a job say, doing something like changing oil in a shop. in a year or two if he works hard and wants to learn, he'll be a full fledged mechanic. in a few more years he'll be making as much as the guy who taught him and it doesnt matter a lick whether he passed algebra 2 or learned 2 foreign languages in high school.

 

im not arguing with you at all that someone with more skills or a higher level of education is tends to have a higher productivity. in fact is reinforces what ive said in many of my previous posts.

 

all im critiquing is the very idea that just by getting a college degree you will be successful.

lets not forget most of the college graduates, just skated through, got 4 years of partying out of the way insulated from the real world and then you get in the real world only to find out you have to go back to school to get more education to do what you really want, or you just go do something that hardly lives up to your education.

 

 

Same with clothes. Pre industrial revolution people had ONE set of clothes. Now we have goodwill for all the shirts we dont wear because we're all too fat (except for me).

 

The overall quality of life for the working man VASTLY improved because of the industrial revolution. There was the largest redistribution wealth in American history. The problem is that we praised the wrong people. We praised and glamourized the entry level blue collar worker, as you see in sculptures and depictions all throughout detroit. We should've been praising and glamourizing those who invented the assembly lines, the adequate power grids, the city planners and engineers who made it all possible because those are the jobs that have survived all these years.

i dont disagree with any that and have said similar things in my past posts, however i dont think 'city planners' had much to do with it.

 

 

I think of it like this: Right now the biggest contributor to market bubbles are the "high beta rich" these are guys who, within a year, start with nothing and make a few million. There's a culture amongst the high beta to buy lots of houses, yachts, planes, lambos, etc even if only a couple years ago they hardly had cab fare. This behavior created an artificial bubble of luxury superyachts with helicopter pads and submarine bays. You're a yacht company. One year you get an order for one superyacht. You prepare for next year and make/sell ten super yachts. Next year you make 40 super yachts but nobody buys any because your customers was really just one customer that went fucking bankrupt. And now you went bankrupt too because you have a bunch of luxury yachts for a market that didnt really exist. That on some level is the state of the world's ENTIRE economy.

this is good.

however, i think what you are leaving out is that the federal reserve which gave us the housing bubble from cheap below market interest rates and cheap credit, fueled the housing bubble which made the average american feel rich and gave them ability to use their house as an ATM. they counted how much their house went up every year as part of their income.

but other than that omission, you are pretty much accurately describing the federal reserve induced bubble economy.

 

I agree with you that kids should by law be allowed to mow their neighbor's lawn, paint their fence, all the shit every kid did when they were growing up, but to allow a kid that age to become a full-time employee at a company is where I draw the line. Can you imagine working a cotton gin while learning your shapes and colors? That's too oldschool for me.

i dont think a kid could run a cotton gin when they cant spell, but i realize you are still trying to make this point about child labor. which you neglect to realize wouldnt happen unless you lived in a card board box behind a grocery store.

 

the problem with all these regualtions is because the bureaucracy that writes them doesnt take into account all the variables and we end up with a case such as you are making, 8 year olds picking cotton after being sold into indentured servitude, being the basis to make it illegal for a neighbor operate a cordless drill on the weekends your farm stead. so we end up making the 'child slavery' illegal which hardly anyone would protest, but we also make it illegal for normal every day things that all parties consent to illegal, like a neighborhood kid sorting corn or watermelons on the weekends in order to fill up his piggy bank.

 

these regulations arent scalable. the pro government person only sees 4 year old slaves and monsanto. they dont see a neighbor's kid that plays with your kid, coming over on the weekend to gather eggs and getting some monetary compensation in return.

 

i think there is a subtle ommission here on your part...

it ultimately boils down that you believe people are either evil or stupid a combination of both. and because of that, we need to create an organization with a monopoly on violence that can force people to do certain things. yet, at the same time, what prevents those same evil and stupid people from taking the helm of the state and governing? if people are stupid and evil, then so is the government. which actually makes the situation worse in my opinion. atleast when you just have stupid or evil people, they have no affect on the rest of the world or anyone elses rights. but you put them in charge of an institution with a monopoly on violence and you have a recipe for disaster.

[Decyferon]

I would go with the people are evil and stupid comment, because generally speaking they are the worst you can think of them

[angelofdeath]

so, it makes sense then to appoint these evil and stupid people to rule over us and make them our masters? that dog dont hunt

[Decyferon]

AOD I agree most if not all politicians are idiots and scum just like the people they represent, you seem to think that my belief in having a welfare state and public education as some sort of endorsement for the current situation, which I do not endorse in the slightest.

 

Thw whole system needs to be changed, politicians should not be able to get rich from working in politics, there needs to be some kind of drive to make for a better place which none of them have at the moment. Business should not be allowed the power to lobby government and have their own personal interests and agendas pushed forward, because they are companies NOT people.

 

Just because I say I agree with being taxed for these ends does not mean I am happy with the situation as it stands, I personally wish we could burn it all to the ground and start over.

[angelofdeath]

interesting concept, burning it to the ground and starting over. you dangerous heretic!

 

i still think my point is crystal clear, but i realize it brings into question an entire world view. i'll repeat one last time:

 

if people are dangerous, stupid and evil, why should we appoint them to rule us?

[Decyferon]

I said most not all, there are good people out there but there is also a lot of ignorance and stupidity. Dont ask me how to get the good people into politics though!!

 

I just think that if you look to those countries with weak governments there is rife corruption, crime no social help and the countries are going to shit (look at most of Africa). If you removed that in America what would stop armed gangs just plucking up bits of land and claiming it their own (pretty much how things worked before we had governments). A criminal or someone prepared to commit crime doesnt care about your rights whether written in law or not. So why would they care about your property rights?

[angelofdeath]

the reason why a criminal would be concerned about my property rights is because he'll have to meet resistance in order to attain my property. i've always been a firm believer in pointing out that a peice of paper stops no crime, even in situations like where we use the constitution to tell politicians we have a right to free speech, etc.

 

i think its a sort of bad comparison to compare say somalia, a third world country with a destitute population, with a rich country like america. i've had this debate dozens of times, so in keeping more on the topic, i'll leave it at that.

 

but it is a very telling position you let loose in the first line of your last post. the part about not asking you how to get the few good people in politics and remove the rest of the idiots, and dangerous and stupid people. well, tell you what, when you figure that out, give me a call, until then, i'll just go ahead and stay to myself.

[ILOTSMYBRAIN]

Didn't know where to throw this, so I decided to throw it in here...

 

http://www.lewrockwell.com/lewrockwell-show/2012/02/07/253-secret-police-murder-and-cover-up/

 

Unreal story.

[ILOTSMYBRAIN]

[ILOTSMYBRAIN]

 

This guy is fringe. Bat shit crazy, and has been supporting the KKK secretly for decades.

 

He talks about freedom, just so he can throw black people back into slavery and have all women in whorehouses and children working in farm fields and factories.

 

White Power!

[ILOTSMYBRAIN]

 

Say what?

[McLovin]

guy looks like kevin smith

[Aerosol Farts]

 

Ron Paul seems like a stand up guy. I found this site that listed off each candidate's cars and personally I think you can learn a lot by what someone drives. Douchebags usually drive douchey cars. Case in point, Newt and Rick.

 

 

 

Personally, I think the President of the United States should be driving American made whips, eating American Made Beef and fucking his interns with an american made cigar.

[Decyferon]

I don't like Santorum or Gingrich but they drive nice cars whereas Ron Paul drives what looks like a piece of crap!

 

American cars are poorly made, usually with very cheap interiors (especially in comparison to european cars) and outdated technology, which is why they tend to be so much cheaper.

[Aerosol Farts]

First of all I am sorry that most of the American cars you get in London are pieces of shit...like Ford Escorts and all that crap. But, the reason why American cars are more expensive than whatever European manufacturer you speak of is because of wages and tariff's. European countries tax outsiders heavily so European cars sell better in Europe and support jobs. In America European cars are way more expensive which is why people buy American...except for Asian brands, and Asian brands are the cheapest because they pay their employees in rice and noodles. I agree that German cars are probably the best in the world, but what kind of a message does it send to have the president of a country driving an import? What does the Queen drive and the PM?

[Decyferon]

im not talking shit like ford escorts etc I am talking Chrysler 300C/ Ford Mustang/ Cadiallac /Corvette etc

 

I wouldnt care what car the leader of a country drives, I think it says more that they drive something good rather something not as good just because it comes from their own country. I dunno what the Queen or the PM drive because they are both fucking idiots that I really don't care about, probably Jaguars, or mercedes, what does it matter they are all pretty much owned by German companies anyway!

 

Also American cars are not more expensive that the german cars even in europe, they might be more expensive than they are in America but American cars are still cheaper than the Mercedes, BMWs etc

 

I am not saying I don't like American cars I am saying they are known for using cheap materials, look at the corvette, it is plasticy as shit whereas it's European equivilents are technologically better, made with better materials (carbon fibre body panels not molded plastics etc

[Aerosol Farts]

Look man, for the most part I agree with you...American cars do not have the same fit and finish as let's say even a volkswagon, however, you have to define which European cars we are talking about. No one would ever put a Ford Mustang in the same class as a Mercedes Benz...not even a C-class, they just aren't made for the same uses. What I will say is this...the Chevrolet Corvette (a car I really don't like because only middle aged balding gym rats drive them) is a bad-ass piece of machinery for the price. Sure the interior is plastic and ugly, but it will woop most cars asses on the road and on the track and that has been proven by the boys over at Top Gear. As tested by Top Gear TV show

 

1:17.6 – Koenigsegg CCX (with "Top Gear Wing")

1:18.4 – Pagani Zonda F

1:18.9 – Maserati MC12

1:19.0 – Enzo Ferrari

1:19.5 – Ariel Atom 2 300

1:19.8 – Porsche Carrera GT

1:19.8 – Lamborghini Murciélago LP640

1:20.4 – Koenigsegg CCX [2]

1:20.7 – Ascari KZ1

1:20.9 – Mercedes-Benz SLR McLaren

1:21.2 - Ferrari 599 GTB Fiorano

1:21.9 – Ford GT

1:22.3 – Ferrari 360 Challenge Stradale

1:22.3 – Porsche 911 GT3 RS

1:22.4 – Chevrolet Corvette Z06 <-------------------------------------------------

1:22.5 – Noble M15

1:22.9 – Ferrari F430 F1

1:23.2 – Ferrari F430 Spider F1

1:23.7 – Lamborghini Murciélago (retested)[3]

1:23.8 – Pagani Zonda C12 S 7.3 (mildly moist)

1:23.9 – Aston Martin DBS

 

 

Faster than Ferraris? Lamborghinis? You gotta at least respect that. All for $75,000 USD.

[Decyferon]

Yea I am not denying corvettes are fast, not so great on the corners but shit hot in a straight line.

 

If you look at the price point of the high end caddies they are in competition with C class mercs, BMW 5 series etc and the Mustang is also quite pricey over here so in comeptition with the smaller 3 series etc

 

The fit and finish of most of the American cars I have seen and been in has been comparable with the cheapest Renault or Peugeots, it is like they try to have a quality finish without using quality products so it all seems flimsy and superficial.

 

Bit of a derail of a RP thread, but like I said I do like American cars (maybe old ones more than new but hey I wouldnt say no to a new mustang or Challenger).

[McLovin]

[nsmbfan]

still doesn't deter from the fact that he's the best of the worst

 

maybe your 5 posts validate this claim, but imho you probably aren't gonna vote anyways. due to your status.

 

amirite?

[ILOTSMYBRAIN]

So, only people who think that people should become citizens automatically, when crossing the border or get amnesty for being here illegally (and I'm not even referring to your specific case) aren't racist's?

 

I'm not RP but I think his problem is, someone comes here illegally, and they have children and now their children are citizen's, I would imagine he looks to this as a loophole in the system. Why should someone breaking the law (regardless of skin color I may add, you can be white and do this as well) upon entering the country automatically have their children become citizen's?

 

I think it's an interesting position and question. I won't even start to point out several points that counter the fact that he is a racist, but they are abundant if you open your eyes.

 

You don't have to like the position or agree with it, but to just throw it out there that he is a "smart racist" is basically saying there is no grey area on the issue.

 

Would you even say there is a immigration problem in the U.S.?

 

EDIT:

 

Also, there is this guy who get's a pass for some odd reason even though he wants gay's thrown onto a space ship and hurled into the sun (obvious distortion) and slips up and does things like this...

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y1L63_ERDW8

[Soup forgot his password]

Yep. Only people who think immigrants, regardless of visa, should be allowed to stay in america and raise their families here with all the benefits you or I have, are unracist, unclassist, and politically correct. It also makes way more economic sense.

 

Immigration, inclusion, taking care of the poor and needy, and constitutional rights for all are REAL American ideals. Consitutional rights for SOME and tough immigration laws are ideals of modern right wing religious morons who want to reap all the benefits of other people's hard work.

 

Regardless of politics, if what you want is whatever makes sense economically, then you don't want to make immigration laws any harder, or too easy. The way things are, for the most part, weed out the people who come here to just reap benefits. If you've immigrated here to america, legally or illegally, you've undoubtedly come here to work hard. That in of itself makes what they're doing honest.