Doubt there will be enough morons to by that many weapons.
America needs 15 trillion dollars. That is a lot of money. And I believe US only gets about 2-3 trillion dollars from the taxpayers per year....
Now they are trying to bail out Europe? Are they crazy? They can't even pay their own debt and they are trying to help someone else. That is like a baby trying to change a dipper for another baby.
Ummm... we don't need to pay of $15 trillion. The Us has $15 trillion in debt, and a $15 trillion GDP. That's a lot of debt, but not catastrophic. The UK has about 65% of its GDP. It's a large debt, and a long-run issue, but not yet the great existential catastrophe it has become in some European countries. It's a huge issue, but there are bigger issues than present debt financing: unfunded liabilities in the future, for example.
And, to my knowledge, the US has not offered any material support in the Euro debt crisis.
Do you really have separation of church and state now? They aren't as tightly interwoven as they could be, but are they truly completely separated?
They're not perfectly separated and, constitutionally (and historically), a complete separation is neither legally necessary nor inherently desirable. I'm thinking, for example, of the role of German churches in vergangenheitsbewältigung. Actually, I'm not really, I just wanted to use that word. Consider many American churches in the civil rights movement. Many also had negative influences, but it's worth noting the prominence of the prefix "rev." in civil rights leaders.
If you honestly think that the gold standard is an acceptable economic basis in the 21st century, you don't know anything on the subject. I'll leave it at that.
So you're anti-Euro?
Because the Euro is almost indistinguishable in its mechanics from a gold standard, except it's
even less flexible. The Euro is a fiat currency, true, but a fiat currency governed by an institution
with no authority to significantly alter its value, and with little authority to intervene in debt markets (though that is being changed) which are the traditional playground for fiat currencies.
A fiat currency not controlled by a national government is very strange. And why gold standards were adopted: because banks were issuing their own de facto fiat currencies, and governments wanted to reclaim control of money markets.
Going to the gold standard would be fantastically difficult. Any type of representational money would be. There are pragmatic issues. But suggesting that fiduciary, commodity, or representative money is just some kind of idiotic anachronism seems the height of folly when fiat currencies haven't even proven their ability to last a single century, when commodity moneys have served humankind for thousands of years.
My heart just broke a little.
Don't get me wrong; I'd vote for him over Obama. And if the primary is still competitive when it comes to KY, I'd be very tempted... but I just don't think Paul would be effective as President. At all. And that wouldn't achieve a sort of implicit accomplishment of "small government" policies in the way an ineffective congress does; it would just be 4 years of frustration, humiliation, and government-by-bureaucracy.
