The Daily Paul is a community website with no official affiliation with Ron Paul. The content of posts and comments on the Daily Paul represent the opinions of the original posters, and are not endorsed, approved, or otherwise representative of the opinions of the Daily Paul, its owner, site moderators or Ron Paul. This site may contain adult language and adult concepts. If you are offended by such content, or feel you may be offended by such content, point your browser to a different site immediately. For more, read the Full Disclaimer
© 2007 - 2013 by The Daily Paul. Not paid for by, nor officially affiliated in any way with Ron Paul.
General Site Disclaimer | DMCA Disclaimer | Advert


Comment: Just like the social security throwaway arguments of old
Just like the social security throwaway arguments of old
To me, this is EXACTLY like when people were turning on him/trying to bash him for receiving social security.
Yes, he is against the policy of having social security as a representative, and in his political life, and for philosophic reasons.
But as a person interacting in this world, it would be a tremendous setback for anyone to not work within the existing framework to accomplish your goals. Not receiving SS because you believe there should be no SS does not get rid of SS, just like not using the mechanisms in place regarding domain names at the UN would not abolish the UN. It's weird to me that not everyone gets that.
I mean for pete's sake, this is the most elementary argument. Think about it.
"Well, if you don't like the government and don't think it should have a role, don't go to the hospital or drive on a road, etc. etc."
Same line of reasoning /\
Replies to this comment: