0 votes

My Fight to convert an Intellectual to Dr. Paul

I know it is long and bloody, but thoughts and insight welcomed. It's an email thread, so you have to read from bottom up, my apologies up front.

From: Rodney
Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2008 00:57:25 -0500
To: Mike
Conversation: Road TRIP!!!!!
Subject: Re: Road TRIP!!!!!

We have excess dollars because our capacity to print exceeds our ability to honor it. We have excess dollars in the market in order to finance our empire building throughout the world, which is not our calling! You are correct, gold, relative to the dollar, has remained constant with the cost of oil, the worlds largest and most expensive traded commodity.

Ron Paul is not an isolationists, he believes in free and equitable trade with all nations, but recognizes that sanctions are an act of warfare, that we should not indulge.

Define “Superpower”, we are not a superpower because of our military might. To suggest such neglects to understand what caused the fall of the Soviet Union. It was not military weakness, but economic weakness, which we are mirroring. It is not our job to respond to international crisis; our forefathers argued against this "Peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations – entangling alliances with none." ~ Thomas Jefferson. To think China is not the Superpower on the basis of their economic and military power is naive and arrogant, in my opinion.

Having military bases abroad means expanding an empire; this is not the doctrine we were asked to follow by our forefathers. Our job is to defend our borders and protect the individual liberties of our citizens. Using military might as an invisible hand to influence “free market commerce” is no excuse. We do not need military presence in foreign lands to accomplish this. The real reason we have a foreign presence is to show a force of might to get our way, foreign bases do nothing to protect the sovereignty of our nation.

We do not need to aid allies, to suggest such is to admit that we depend on other nations for our sovereignty, this is a fallacious argument at best and is ill founded. The instability in the middle east is due to the fact that we give Israel 2 billion annually in foreign aid and 8 billion annually in foreign aid to Arab nations. Burning both sides of the political candle is not a responsible foreign policy.

As far as social issues go, individual responsibility should be our gold standard. We should end the racist “War on Drugs” (not because I want to consume them), and treat it as a disease. I agree that entitlement programs are way out of control, but the best way to address these are to stop the excessive military spending inherent in our nation building, and bring it home. We have spent $500,000 to have each of our brothers killed in a war against a tactic in Iraq. I believe the war in Afghanistan was just, but the diversion to Iraq was commercial, and wrong. To stay there to save face at the cost of our patriotic brethren is simply wrong. To fight when provoked, is our forefathers charge, to start a war under the pretense of “pre-emptive war” is no different than Hitler. This was stated by Eisenhower state “All of us have heard this term 'preventive war' since the earliest days of Hitler...I wouldn't even listen to anyone seriously that came in and talked about such a thing."

It’s time to pt our “face and pride” behind us and get re rooted in the principles that made this nation great. A position we have not enjoyed since 1913, but then again, maybe I’m old fashioned.
Enjoying the debate,


On 1/15/08 12:30 AM, "Mike" wrote:

i agree... but he has made comments of moving back to a gold standard more than once. as far as monetary policy...the dollar will fix itself to a true equilibrium. right now we have exess dollars in the market. as a result people will buy more u.s. good which brings dollars back to the states. in effect this will shrink the amount of dollars in other foreign banks/countries. this will strengthen the dollar(in a sense). if you are going to have a commodity back currency gold is the way to go. it is a hard tangible non consumable asset that is actively traded and does not have strong fluctuations.

world wars 1 and 2 proved that his isolationist type diplomacy will not work. it sounds goodin theory or in political rhetoric, but history has proven that it does not. while i agree that a lot of out foreign bases are not needed, more of them are. we are the last superpower. this means we are in a catch 22. if we do not have bases around the world people will bitch because our response time to an international crisis will be delayed. on the other hand they bitch because we have bases. since he is more of a libertarian than a republican he needs to accept that the governments biggest role is to protect its citizens. that means we have to have a military on bothe foreign and domestic soil.

as far as offering aid to foreign countries, i agree with you in most scenarios. we still need to offer aid to our closest allies. under no circumstances can we not stop our aid/relationship with israel and other close allies in eastern europe. with the rise of russia's central government moving towards the old soviet type beliefs and an unstable middle east we have to have allies in these regions.

military and foreign aid is not our problem. our problems lie in an ever growing social environment. we have millions of people that we do not collect taxes from, an ever growing welfare state and a growing base of citizens that think the government owes them something. if you offer substantial plans that fix domestic issues while still making the citizenship feel they are getting something for their money all other policies will fall into place.

On Jan 14, 2008 11:41 PM, Rodney wrote:
I apologies up front, some corrections:

150 billion in gold, not 150 trillion
716 bases on foreign soil

A simple, no thanks, I do not agree with his policies on x, y, z would suffice. I agree with you in a way, but this ignores the inflationary issue by acceptance. Understanding a fiat currency is critical ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiat_currency ) and a movement toward a commodity backed monetary policy is his stance on the issue. It would be naive for anyone to think this could be accomplished overnight. The statement being made is we can not trust our governments' credibility in backing our fiat system on "good faith", its a very high level issue.

A few simple illustrations include; http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=as3AYVzWmOI


Your friend


------ Forwarded Message
From: Rodney >
Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2008 23:19:54 -0500
To: Mike
Conversation: Road TRIP!!!!!
Subject: Re: Road TRIP!!!!!

If we stop the trillions of dollars of federal aid to the Muslims, Jews, and 47 other countries, remove our 700 bases from foreign soil and bring home all of our military that props up foreign governments, we wouldn't have to. And as it stands today, countries are starting to discontinue the purchase of our T-Bills. We have far outgrown the gold standard, but what we need is a commodity backed monetary system that exceeds the 150 trillion we have in gold. We have oil and we have products and services that if we have fair trade agreements, would more than make up for our international trade deficit.

To say that is to cut off out nose because it is bleeding, it is addressing the symptom, not the cause. We use inflation to debt finance our empire building and policing of the world.

You should know better than that, your an economist for suns sake

------ End of Forwarded Message

On 1/14/08 11:10 PM, "Mike" wrote:

let me know what his plan is to buy back all of the u.s. dollars, that foreign countries around the world are holding, when we switch back to the gold standard.

On Jan 14, 2008 5:30 PM, Rodney wrote:
Ron Paul, my man running for the Prez, is having a Veterans for Ron Paul
rally in Charleston SC. Friday at 7:00pm. I am planning on leaving here
about 10:00 that morning and driving up. We will get a hotel and spend the
day Saturday looking at the historical sites of that memorable city.

I am reaching out to see if any of you would be interested. We can have a
convoy, rent a passenger van or anything else you guys want to do. It is a
chance to get away for a day, participate in our convoluted political
process as well as take in some of the history that makes this country so
great (smirk).

If any of you are interested, let me know before Wednesday, that way we can
coordinate a rental van if need be, otherwise, we will send you pictures and
video when we return.

Love you all,



Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.


I think Mike won this 'debate'.

I enjoyed that little debate!

You brought out a lot of issues there, I enjoyed reading. Thanks for posting

A tactical suggestion

When I am in my better debating modes, I take a cue from Socrates...ask the opposition to defend their position, have them explain everything to you, point out an inconsistency, ask for their wise view in resolving this inconsistency for the both of you, point out further inconsistencies as they arise, repeat. I do this with my dad when we debate, the difficulty is that he is convinced he is right already.



If ever a time should come, when vain and aspiring men shall possess the highest seats in Government, our country will stand in need of its experienced patriots to prevent its ruin. Samuel Adams

End The Fat
70 pounds lost and counting! Get in shape for the revolution!

Get Prepared!

Is there a question here or something?

And where are you guys from...I see a lot of misspelled words for someone who is an economist. Just wondering...nice thread though.

"Vote for Paul if you want it all! Goodbye taxes! Goodbye big bro! Hello all my money! Oh! There you are freedom! What?! You have maryjane!?! Oh, wait, everything is fine now...the Doc saved America!"

"Vote for Paul if you want it all! Goodbye taxes! Goodbye big bro! Hello all my money! Oh! There you are freedom! What?! You have maryjane!?! Oh, wait, everything is fine now...the Doc saved America!"

The point

It was simply a discussion between two friends I felt others would appreciate.

Any comment will do

: )

for the millionth time...

RP doesn't want to go right back to a gold standard tomorrow. he is an economist, not an idiot. what he wants is a SOUND MONETARY POLICY. that means tie the dollar to a commodity. gold is a commodity. we have lots of it. yes, we can go back to a gold standard. but not immediately.

what he would do, is LEGALIZE competing currencies which are backed by gold and silver (like our friends at the Liberty Dollar company or others) and allow them to compete with the FED printed dollar. we compete with currencies all over the world all the time. we can do it here. and yes, it is possible. the euro still competes with several european countries' currencies.


"i thought what i'd do was, i'd pretend i was one of those deaf-mutes." -laughingman


"i thought what i'd do was, i'd pretend i was one of those deaf-mutes." -laughingman