Ron Paul Answers Your Questions, Part Two


When we solicited your questions for Congressman Ron Paul shortly after the election, so many questions came in that we split Paul’s answers into two batches, the first of which was published last week.

Here is the second. Like the first batch, they are well-considered and interesting throughout; they will surely make many readers continue to wish fervently for a Paul presidency.

Thanks again to Rep. Paul for his time and insights, and to all of you for the good questions.

Q: What is the first thing the country should do about its monetary policy?

A: We should immediately audit the Federal Reserve. I am the ranking member of the Monetary Policy subcommittee in the U.S. Congress, yet I can get more information about the internal workings of the C.I.A. than I can about our central bank. This secrecy is fundamentally wrong, and I believe that people from all over the ideological political spectrum can agree on that.

Bloomberg News this month has gone to court compel the Fed to disclose securities the central bank is accepting on behalf of American taxpayers as collateral for trillions of dollars of loans to banks. Expanding transparency is critical and could be done very quickly.

Q: What are your expectations for the next four years under an Obama administration? How might President Obama’s interventionist economic policies impact our lives?

A: Unfortunately, I don’t expect many good things. I do expect a lot of spending and even more debt. To really cut spending and balance our budget, we need to change foreign policy. Obama’s rhetoric on foreign policy is better than what we have gotten recently, but don’t expect any real change.

He may be more likely to wind things down in Iraq, but he’s still planning on keeping troops there for a least 16 more months. He wants money for Georgia and more troops in Afghanistan. He isn’t going to bring home our 30,000 troops from Korea or our 50,000 soldiers in Germany, and he won’t close any of our 700 foreign bases. At the same time, he is planning even bigger spending here at home. I hope I’m wrong, but if this spending and debt continue, the dollar is going to crash and we will see the middle class in this country take a grave hit.

Q: Do you deny global warming? Is Obama right to invest money in green technology? If you don’t deny it, and don’t think Obama is right, what is your solution?

A: I try to look at global warming the same way I look at all other serious issues: as objectively and open-minded as possible. There is clear evidence that the temperatures in some parts of the globe are rising, but temperatures are cooling in other parts. The average surface temperature had risen for several decades, but it fell back substantially in the past few years.

Clearly there is something afoot. The question is: Is the upward fluctuation in temperature man-made or part of a natural phenomenon. Geological records indicate that in the 12th century, Earth experienced a warming period during which Greenland was literally green and served as rich farmland for Nordic peoples. There was then a mini ice age, the polar ice caps grew, and the once-thriving population of Greenland was virtually wiped out.

It is clear that the earth experiences natural cycles in temperature. However, science shows that human activity probably does play a role in stimulating the current fluctuations.

The question is: how much? Rather than taking a “sky is falling” approach, I think there are common-sense steps we can take to cut emissions and preserve our environment. I am, after all, a conservative and seek to conserve not just American traditions and our Constitution, but our natural resources as well.

We should start by ending subsidies for oil companies. And we should never, ever go to war to protect our perceived oil interests. If oil were allowed to rise to its natural price, there would be tremendous market incentives to find alternate sources of energy. At the same time, I can’t support government “investment” in alternative sources either, for this is not investment at all.

Government cannot invest, it can only redistribute resources. Just look at the mess government created with ethanol. Congress decided that we needed more biofuels, and the best choice was ethanol from corn. So we subsidized corn farmers at the expense of others, and investment in other types of renewables was crowded out.

Now it turns out that corn ethanol is inefficient, and it actually takes more energy to produce the fuel than you get when you burn it. The most efficient ethanol may come from hemp, but hemp production is illegal and there has been little progress on hemp ethanol. And on top of that, corn is now going into our gas tanks instead of onto our tables or feeding our livestock or dairy cows; so food prices have been driven up. This is what happens when we allow government to make choices instead of the market; I hope we avoid those mistakes moving forward.

Q: Will you run for a leadership position in the House Republican caucus?

A: I have no plans to do so. I don’t cut deals and trade votes, which is exactly what a role like that requires.

Q: What are your thoughts on abolishing America’s income tax and switching over to a consumption tax such as the fair tax?

A: I want to abolish the income tax, but I don’t want to replace it with anything. About 45 percent of all federal revenue comes from the personal income tax. That means that about 55 percent — over half of all revenue — comes from other sources, like excise taxes, fees, and corporate taxes.

We could eliminate the income tax, replace it with nothing, and still fund the same level of big government we had in the late 1990’s. We don’t need to “replace” the income tax at all. I see a consumption tax as being a little better than the personal income tax, and I would vote for the Fair-Tax if it came up in the House of Representatives, but it is not my goal. We can do better.

Q: Did former Federal Reserve Chairman Greenspan really believe in free markets or did he fail to practice what he preached?

A: In my book The Revolution: A Manifesto I talk about an encounter I had with Greenspan when he was still Fed chairman. I had come across an old Objectivist newsletter Greenspan had written in the 1960’s supporting a real gold standard. It was great stuff!

At a gathering we both attended, I presented the booklet and asked if he still believed in its subject. He said he remembered the piece and still believed every word. I can’t profess to know what is in Mr. Greenspan’s heart, but his own words lead me to believe that he knew better than to pursue the policies he did.

Q: What policies should have been put into place in 1932 to stimulate the economy instead of the confiscation of monetary gold?

A: A trust in free markets and sound money would have made the 1930’s much less rough. Inflation caused the Depression, and the big government policies of Roosevelt exacerbated the problem. Murray Rothbard wrote a masterpiece on the cause of the 1929 crash and the Great Depression, and I highly recommend it to anyone with a deep interest who wants to read the authoritative view.

Q: Is there any part of the Republican Party reaching out to you? At what point do we dump the G.O.P. and leave it for dead?

A: The leadership in the House of Representatives and at the N.R.C.C. has been cordial, and I as a ranking subcommittee member am myself in leadership. Other national leadership bodies largely ignore me.

Where I get the most attention, though, is from rank-and-file members. Dozens of Republican congressmen from across the country asked me for money and support in November’s election. I was happy to support and contribute to several deserving individuals through my Liberty PAC.

As far as quitting or staying with the Republicans, everyone will have to make up his or her own mind. There can be value in choosing either path. I myself have no plans to leave the G.O.P.

Q: Why is it that, even in the midst of unimaginable deficits and an economic crisis, both our enormous military and our policy of drug prohibition remain sacrosanct? Do you think this reflects actual democratic opinion, or is it the work of powerful, but numerically small interest groups?

A: I think that it might reflect democratic opinion, but only because each issue has been demagogued.

Take military spending. I believe in a strong national defense. I want our troops here, defending our territory; I want nuclear submarines and an adequate arsenal of weapons that can repel any conceivable attack. What I don’t want to do is spend a trillion dollars a year maintaining an empire.

Today, our troops are in 130 countries. We have 700 foreign bases. We can spend far less and have a stronger national defense than we do right now. But if you question our foreign policy, you are branded as un-American. And we’re told that if we don’t “fight them over there, we’ll fight them over here.” That’s absurd.

On your second example, the federal war on drugs has proven costly and ineffective, while creating terrible violent crime. But if you question policy, you are accused of being pro-drug. That is preposterous. As a physician, father, and grandfather, I abhor drugs. I just know that there is a better way — through local laws, communities, churches, and families — to combat the very serious problem of drug abuse than a massive federal-government bureaucracy.

There are certainly some powerful special interests that benefit from our flawed foreign and drug policies. Now, do I think they openly conspire together to deceive and manipulate? No I don’t. The system is much too complicated to think a few puppet masters control the strings. But I do think we’d be a lot better off if we listened to our founding fathers and obeyed the Constitution. The founders would never have formed a D.E.A., and they would be horrified if they saw our troops spread thin around the globe.

Q: What do you think were your biggest mistakes in the primary race, and what would you now do differently?

A: I was always pessimistic and never thought we would get to where we did. My regret is that we couldn’t see how quickly things would grow and were not adequately prepared for the explosion in money and support when they came. There are dozens, hundreds of things we could have done better, but we all worked hard and did our best. And I know we built something that will only get stronger in the years to come.

Leave A Comment

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.



  1. Daniel says:

    Ron Paul, eloquent as always.


    Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
  2. Jon P says:

    This guy should run for President.

    Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
  3. Mark says:

    Ron Paul, what a great guy. I hope he runs for President in 2012.

    Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
  4. Andy says:

    Thank you, Ron Paul.

    I’ll definitely be picking up your book.

    Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
  5. pete says:

    for all his talk of change, obama will perpetuate the same disasterous foreign and monetary policy. he won’t even touch the drug the failure of the drug war with a 10 foot pole. that’s change we can believe in. *cough*

    Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
  6. thomas says:

    I always find it interesting when people claim that the founders would do this or that. First off, they could barely agree with each other on the basics of foreign/monetary policy. Second, they lived 250 years ago. We just elected a guy who probably had distant relatives working on their plantations as slaves getting a 3/5 vote through their master in the electoral college.

    I love the founders and absolutely appreciate what they did, because I am a beneficiary, but I do not want to base policy decisions on what someone says the would have thought about it. Use your own logic to justify your positions; don’t speculate about long dead people’s positions.

    Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
  7. frankenduf says:

    “a trust in free markets… would have made the 1930s much less rough”

    Ron Paul, sarcastic as always.


    Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1
  8. Jamie says:

    Amazing. Simply Amazing. Some of the Most intelligent answers to hard questions I have ever heard. I am starting to believe this country really needs Ron Paul. To bad I did not find out soon enough to support his run for President.

    Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
  9. Scott Fox says:

    Americans needs to listen to this man with an open mind.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  10. Michael P. says:

    Ron Paul is the smartest, most honest politician that we have. The primary reason he is not President is because the media beat him down, even though the public thought he won the majority of the primary races.

    Big Brother Government is getting bigger and badder and we are being enslaved very quickly these days. I want to have control over my life as long as I don’t infringe on the basic, unalienable rights of others. I don’t need the government to redistribute my hard earned wealth to programs I find morally reprehensible, practically unachievable, and fiscally insane.

    Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
  11. Derick says:

    I think it’s useful to say what we think the founders would have done because we agree with their principles and would like to think of how those principles should be implemented. It’s not because we’re thankful and like them and trust their opinion.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  12. Brian says:

    Actually Thomas, Ron Paul bases a lot of his “founding father” comments on things said by the founding fathers themselves. By using their own writings, plus the writings of the Constitution, we can come away with a very good idea of what the founding fathers were thinking when they created this great country.

    Also, while logic is very important in guiding someone on their decisions, ultimately we must follow the rule of law, which is the Constitution. If something in the Constitution doesn’t make sense for this day and age, then amend the Constitution. That’s why the founding fathers created that process. If our lawmakers just decide to go against the Constitution because their logic says they should, then we have no law at all.

    Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
  13. Jamie says:

    Thomas Said:

    “I always find it interesting when people claim that the founders would do this or that. First off, they could barely agree with each other on the basics of foreign/monetary policy. Second, they lived 250 years ago. We just elected a guy who probably had distant relatives working on their plantations as slaves getting a 3/5 vote through their master in the electoral college.

    I love the founders and absolutely appreciate what they did, because I am a beneficiary, but I do not want to base policy decisions on what someone says the would have thought about it. Use your own logic to justify your positions; don’t speculate about long dead people’s positions.”

    I always find it amazing that people can take this position.
    The Pythagorean theorem has been around for thousands of years, does this mean it is no longer applicable? That is crazy. People who discount things as not relevant to modern day because they are old need to wake up.

    Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
  14. PainfullyAware says:

    Ron Paul Rocks !!!

    Fools are their rights are soon parted.

    To assume benevolence is foolish.

    Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
  15. j. s. crockett says:

    One of the few sane voices in washington

    Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
  16. Joe says:

    I’ve read nearly everything Dr. Paul has said over the course of the last 16 months. I must say, this is perhaps the most concise and strongest argument of his beliefs I’ve seen. Very well said, very well backed up. Onward and upward, Ron Paul.

    Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
  17. tanGeng says:

    um Founders wouldn’t have a DEA or put up with an income tax because they fought a war to institute a radical new government. They also wrote opinions that opposed the tyranny of a large bureaucratic central government over the sovereignty of the states and the people.

    They also couldn’t imagine cities, but I don’t think that matters.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  18. Christopher Hightower says:

    We need part 3!

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  19. Nathan says:

    Thomas, the founding fathers were split into 2 camps, the Hamiltonians and the Jeffersonians. I just finished the Federalist Papers and I’m about to hit the anti-federalist papers / constitutional convention debates and you can’t honestly say that we dont’ know how they felt, we most certainly do.

    Ron Paul and myself follow in the tradition of Thomas Paine, Thomas Jefferson, and Andrew Jackson. The pro-statist politicians follow in the tradition of Hamilton, Lincoln, and pretty much every other president since Woodrow Wilson.

    Btw, Obama’s dad is from Kenya, he had no relatives that were slaves in america, he is a true african american.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  20. PaulM says:

    Ron Paul is right, and the more you learn about history and economics the more aware you will become of how urgent his message is.

    He is a true conservative, and yet a classical liberal. He is a traditionalist in his support of limited, constitutional government, and yet a radical in demanding the rebirth of such a system.

    He is a patriot, an intellectual, a statesman, and an inspiration to a entire generation of young people who are waking up by the thousands to the reality that our political system is an ugly monster veiled behind the mythology of “democracy”. The men behind the curtain should be afraid, very afraid.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  21. James says:

    Furthermore, the thoughts of the founders are essential to interpreting our Constitution. Many parts of the Constitution are vague and require courts to look at what the founders were saying at that time, especially in the federalist papers.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  22. Matt says:

    The reason we should look to the Founders for advice is simple. History always repeats itself. The Founders understood this, and that is why we have the Constitution. It protects us from runaway government spending, reckless taxation, abhorrent foreign policies, and infringements upon our civil liberties. These are the very things which led our predecessors to separate themselves from English rule. Never forget that those who we elect to office are PUBLIC SERVANTS. They work for us. I conclude with a quote from a Founder. This rings just as true now as it did at its conception.

    “In questions of power, then, let no more be heard of confidence in man, but bind him down from mischief by the chains of the Constitution.”
    -Thomas Jefferson

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  23. Jamie says:

    They also couldn’t imagine cities, but I don’t think that matters.
    — tanGeng

    Rome was quite large and I believe they could imagine that.
    Ignorance is bliss. Hope you are happy.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  24. Andrew says:

    Thanks to Mr. Dubner for even having this discussion. Ron Paul presents the liberty message so clearly and honestly.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  25. Jamie says:

    “In questions of power, then, let no more be heard of confidence in man, but bind him down from mischief by the chains of the Constitution.”
    -Thomas Jefferson
    — Matt

    Here here.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  26. UncleSim says:


    We don’t have to speculate. Those ‘long dead people’ were, unlike many Americans today, literate, and wrote their ideas down. They wrote things like the Declaration of Independence, their state Constitutions, and the US Constitution. We don’t have to speculate, we can read what they thought, and we can tell that they were willing to lay their lives on the line for what they thought.

    What about you? Can you read, or are you still waiting for someone on TV to read that stuff to you? Can you use only your own logic to refute any argument, or do you eventually fall back on the work of past thinkers?

    I see the way you mindlessly worship the founders because you’re a ‘beneficiary’, rather than because you understand the value of freedom, or the meaning of their words. It seems the church and school of Infallible American Government is alive and well.

    Also, about the guy we elected – his dad (the darker-skinned of his parents) was from Africa, so I doubt his ancestors ever were American slaves.

    Sorry to let so much reality into your worldview.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  27. 22YearOld says:

    Thank you, Ron Paul, for everything you do. As a young American, you are the only one that gives me hope. I can’t wait until 2012. Even if Ron doesn’t run, I know there will be a candidate I can fully support, even if they are third party. The country is waking up slowly from a deep deep sleep……..

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  28. Kathy says:

    interesting comments. especially that we are “maintaining an empire”.

    is that ever a good thing?

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  29. Michael Woods says:

    He would have been the best president this country had ever seen. Kind of makes you question the democratic system of government when Obama and McCain end up being the main candidates over someone who actually believes in the Constitution and Liberty like Ron Paul.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  30. Michael says:

    thomas said:

    “I always find it interesting when people claim that the founders would do this or that. First off, they could barely agree with each other on the basics of foreign/monetary policy. Second, they lived 250 years ago. We just elected a guy who probably had distant relatives working on their plantations as slaves getting a 3/5 vote through their master in the electoral college. ”

    His old man is from Kenya, I think. So it is doubtful that he is descended from slaves. Indentured servants, more likely, and on his mama’s side.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  31. UncleSim says:

    Matt said, “The reason we should look to the Founders for advice is simple. History always repeats itself. The Founders understood this, and that is why we have the Constitution. It protects us from runaway government spending, reckless taxation, abhorrent foreign policies, and infringements upon our civil liberties.”

    Um, have you been paying attention? The Constitution has FAILED to prevent such infringements.

    That’s what happens when we stop expecting politicians to live up to their oaths, I think.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  32. D Morris says:

    Thank you, Dr. Paul.

    Sadly, a large segment of our society has exchanged freedom for “free.”

    As long as our government is intent on handing out “something for nothing,” we will continue this spiral down.

    I hope everyone has noticed that President-elect Obama can’t shake the lobbyists who have attached themselves to his coattails – as they have to every other administration.


    D Morris

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  33. Raskolnikov says:

    thomas said:

    “We just elected a guy who probably had distant relatives working on their plantations as slaves getting a 3/5 vote through their master in the electoral college.”

    Obama’s family is from the other freaking side of Africa (his father came from Kenya after WWII.)

    In fact, it’s actually likely Obama’s family/tribe back in Kenya owns slaves right now, considering the resurgence of human trafficking after decolonization.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  34. Craig Royce, Boscobel WI says:

    “Q: What do you think were your biggest mistakes in the primary race, and what would you now do differently?

    A: I was always pessimistic and never thought we would get to where we did. My regret is that we couldn’t see how quickly things would grow and were not adequately prepared for the explosion in money and support when they came. There are dozens, hundreds of things we could have done better, but we all worked hard and did our best. And I know we built something that will only get stronger in the years to come.”

    Q: Conditions are likely to worsen over the next four years, leaving the voting public yearning for sensible government. Will you be prepared with a top notch team in place for 2012?

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  35. Luther says:

    I’m proof positive that hard-headed people can be educated. I was convinced for the first 36 years of my life that democracy was good – only in the last 6 months have I realized that democracy is tyranny by majority. The Constitutional Republic that our country was founded as is the answer to nearly every malady from which we currently suffer. I’m excited by Ron Paul’s message of liberty and consitutional government and will assuage my guilt for not supporting him in the primaries by sacrificing my resources to defend the Constitution.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  36. Texas Chris says:

    I notice that here are fewer anti-Ron Paul statements this time around. Are we winning? Or did they just get tired of trying to convince us the current system is working…?

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  37. Matt says:

    D Morris-

    Good point about Obama not being able to ‘shake the lobbyists who have attached themselves to his coattails’. I am not sure why he made a commitment to run the lobbyists out of Washington, while he so clearly depended on them for campaign financing. Well, he is in charge now and it’s time to return some favors. He raised $639 million over the course of the campaign ($50 million MORE than all Republicans combined). That’s a lot of government contracts. Here comes the NEW New Deal, and the New Depression.


    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  38. J.P. says:

    The only thing I would change about Dr. Paul is his age. While I would vote for him if he were 110 I don’t think the media will let you forget that he’d be 76 while running for POTUS in 2012. If only he’d been born 10 years later this nation would have a shot at freedom after Obama gives us 4 years of Clinton Lite.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  39. Kyle says:

    The reason this man is not president is b/c he didn’t serve the interest of money.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  40. Justin Y says:

    The thing about Ron Paul is even if you don’t agree with everything he says, at least the reason he’s saying it is because he believes it, not because he is influenced by special interests. I loved his message, and then when I researched his voting record, I was stunned. He actually practices what he preaches and I am preaching everyday about his message. I have loaned out his book to at least a half dozen people in my workplace alone and the message is growing. People are fed up. Now that he is getting media exposure and will end up a prophet when the economy really tanks, I expect big things in the future.

    Waiting for 2012 in Iowa!! Go Ron Go!!

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  41. Milan says:

    Wait till 2012, the economy will be almost fallen apart, the dollar at the all time low, and the government at the all time largest. There will be a revolution, and Ron Paul will be our inspiration. He got the wheels rolling, but it is us who must lead the way. People should not be affraid of their government, the government should be affraid of the people!

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  42. Jeff Herron says:

    I believe the appropriate term for one of Dr. Paul’s stature is “statesman”, rather than “politician”.

    No mere politico, he. We could use more like him! I join many in hopes that we are about to see an explosion of them in the coming years.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  43. R. Shirtz says:

    Ron Paul is a man for all seasons. Read his books, listen to his interviews, and check out his voting record in the two decades—You won’t find his position flip-flopping to cater to special interests or political fads. The man is a rock.

    As he stated, we need to shut the Federal Reserve, which has no congressional oversight, and is too generous with our money for big business. The US Government is too big, too intrusive, and into the business of too many countries. We will meet the same fate as the USSR, imploding under the weight of maintaining our warfare/welfare state.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  44. granny miller says:

    Ron Paul is the ONLY man fit to be President and I will NEVER regret that I voted for him on November 4th.

    My God bless & keep him always

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  45. Louis says:

    Godspeed to lovers of individual liberty and the Constitutional Republic the world over. Godspeed to Ron Paul and his efforts. Godspeed to the Campaign for Liberty and its efforts. May we, with the principles of liberty and justice, overcome the enemy who has encamped around us.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  46. Mike M says:

    Check out BJ Lawson and Mark Sanford for some pro-liberty up and comers

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  47. tom says:

    Thank you to the above posters for setting the record straight for all those who try to claim the ideals of liberty and individual freedom are some how outdated!
    the ignorance and failure of logical thought by the American public can be suffocating.
    To think that limited government and liberty are outdated because we have the internet is a clear example of the failure of the top down, bureaucratic education system. It has failed to tech kids about the purpose of the Revolution and the Constitution and made the masses obieient to authority and believe that central government planning is a solution to their problems.
    only through pervasive ignorance can a cartel of private bankers maintain a monopoly on the creation of US dollars. With all of the bailouts and the efforts of Paul, Peter Schiff and Jim Rogers, more and more people are waking up the sham of the monetary system of this nation.

    governments are too large and have too much control. that is why they start wars people oppose and bail out failed banks despite overwhelming opposition. When all of the energized people from the Obama camp realize he is a statist the ranks of liberty loving individuals will grow (I hope).

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  48. Colorado Running says:

    Ron Paul is a great man! I can’t think of any other politican who has the guts on vote his convictions like he does. Even if you disagree with him, he is not and has not ever been a flip flopper.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  49. nanny_govt_sucks says:

    We definitely need to freeze Ron Paul in carbonite and thaw him out when we’re ready for his wisdom and leadership. I think after we see the continued failures of government intervention and the death of the GOP we’ll be ready for a return to solid American principles. Then it will be time for light sabres and a raid on the Hut’s enclave.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  50. Jon Lauro says:

    This man is my hero. Thank you Dr. Ron Paul, you have changed my life, keep fighting the good fight!

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  51. James says:

    Thank you Mr. Dubner for organizing this Q/A with Dr. Paul

    I never had a doubt that Dr. Paul is a real genius, a man of honor, a true patriot and the real defender of the constitution and freedom in wahington

    Thank you Dr. Paul, please please keep us informed

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  52. Bill Moore says:

    Ron Paul’s principled stance on the issues are up there with the likes of Gary Johnson and Thomas Jefferson. I’m encouraged by his response that he doesn’t seek a leadership role because he would have to comprimise his votes in order to take that position.

    It makes one wonder about those that end up taking that role.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  53. misterb says:

    The world has changed in fundamental ways since the time of Jesus Christ, Thomas Jefferson and Adam Smith. While many of their words are still valid, and their wisdom is still wise, other parts of their experience just don’t correspond to ours. What Ron Paul doesn’t seem to grasp is that our world is significantly more inter-connected than the world of the early 19th century. And I mean that we are inter-connected in ways that were not only unimaginable to our founding fathers, but actually change the way our minds work. That means we need institutions to keep our information supply as unpolluted as we should keep our water and air.
    I agree with Dr. Paul on foreign policy and drug policy, but disagree with his fundamental disregard for the value of government. I would ask any libertarian: would you rather live in the hills of Pakistan where there is no government or in statist Scandinavia?

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  54. Russell says:

    I just visited his campaign for liberty site and signed up immediately after reading this amazing article. The man seems way to good to be true. Why didn’t I pay more attention to him before??

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  55. Marcus says:

    I’m glad to see that despite Ron Paul’s unsuccessful presidential bid, his message has opened the eyes of not only a younger generation, but even some who have been waiting for someone like him to come around for years. I hope he inspires the younger generation of politicians to demand America returns to a free country, where you’re free to do what you wish so long as you don’t infringe upon the liberties of another individual. If it weren’t for Ron Paul, I could care less about politics. But knowing there’s someone like him in Washington it tells me that there actually is hope for this country. I really hope he runs again in 2012.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  56. JaimeInTexas says:

    Q: Will you run for a leadership position in the House Republican caucus?
    A: I have no plans to do so. I don’t cut deals and trade votes, which is exactly what a role like that requires.

    I proposed the above question, although, not as succinctly.

    I am very dissappointed at your answer Dr. Paul. I think that the question merited a little more explanation. You do not have to cut deals if you do not wish to do so.

    Do you then always raise a voice from the outside?

    At some point, hopefully, if we get a majority of Ron Paul’s in the GOP someone would have to be Minority Leader. Or do you suggest to eliminate the post?

    Dr. Paul, you should give this question a little more thought.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  57. mfw13 says:

    Although I am an ardent Democrat and do not agree with Dr. Paul on many issues, the one thing that I do agree with him about is the bloated size of our military, which is a direct result of the corrupt military-industrial complex that has taken over much of Washington.

    To have 700 overseas bases in 130 countries is patently ridiculous. We could probably cut that figure to 100-200 bases in 20-30 countries with absolutely no negative impact on our ability to defend ourselves.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  58. MCG says:

    It’s interesting that some posters view our current financial and monetary troubles as a failure of the free market, and propose a solution more government regulation and intervention.

    The United States isn’t a free market economy and hasn’t been for quite a while. Approximately 45% of the $14 trillion earned in this country in 2008 was spent by federal, state and local governments. That’s not free market, it’s socialism.

    Moreover, since 1913 the supply of our money has been monopolized and controlled by the Federal Reserve System, a privately-owned corporation unaccountable to government, but whose monopoly of production of money is protected by government.

    A country cannot have a central bank and still claim to run on a free market. This is why the one issue that galvanizes Ron Paul supporters more than any other is abolishment of the Federal Reserve.

    So don’t look at the current mess we’re in and blame capitalism or free-market economics. Look at it and blame the politicians who steal and squander too much of the American people’s money — and the existence of a central bank that allows them to do so.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  59. Dennis Johnson says:

    Something that I have not heard Dr. Paul comment on is the ability of each state legislature to call a constitutional convention (by 2/3 majority), re-write our Constitution (3/4 majority to pass) in modern English with words so plain and simple that the Supreme Court could not misinterpret what it says, and downsize the federal government to the size our Forefathers had envisioned. The feds would have no power to overrule and America could become great again. If Ron Paul would take up the challenge and with his advisors, write a rough-draft of a new Constitution in line with the intent of the old, we would have a starting point and rally point to move this ahead within every state of the nation.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  60. Andreas says:

    Think I’ll check out your book and Murray Rothbard’s book on the Great Depression…

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  61. pdubya says:

    Thank you for fighting to keep us free. Peace.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  62. steven says:

    I would ask any libertarian: would you rather live in the hills of Pakistan where there is no government or in statist Scandinavia?
    — misterb

    what kind of question is this? neither Pakistan nor the Scandinavian countries adhere to the Amercian Constitution

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  63. Fudwamper says:

    — misterb

    What Ron Paul doesn’t seem to grasp is that our world is significantly more inter-connected than the world of the early 19th century. And I mean that we are inter-connected in ways that were not only unimaginable to our founding fathers, but actually change the way our minds work.

    Actually they knew how interconnected the world was then. It was interconnected then because of natural resources and still is today. Yes we have unimaginable travel and ways to communicate but we are still interconnected the same way. They knew what happened when you in gross your country in this political game, common people lose their lives for the gain of a few. Even worse other countries have their natural resources and people raped and plundered. That’s what we do today.

    To be honest we never really paid to much attention to the constitution since the start, we have always been a country of hypocrites and we continue to do so to this day. Hopefully a generation can see this and change it.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  64. denis bider says:

    Meh. :-(

    Great responses by Dr. Paul, but no one gets around to answering the question about banking. Fiat currency exists to provide banks last-resort financing during bank runs or liquidity crises. But fiat currency can survive only if non-inflationary alternatives such as gold are prevented from competing. Permitting non-inflationary currency alternatives means removing last-resort financing for banks, which brings about a 19th century-style series of bank crises.

    Are stable banks an important factor in economic growth?

    If stable banks are important, don’t we need to keep a fiat currency – even if perhaps a better designed fiat currency, founded on different principles?

    Or does everyone who supports returning to the gold standard think that bank stability doesn’t help economic growth? If so, what is the reasoning?

    I have yet to find an answer. :-/

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  65. Drew says:

    I think you mean “hear, hear.”

    I hope you are happy.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  66. Ken says:

    I found Ron Paul 8 years ago, we need 300 Ron Paul’s in Congress right now!

    Some good posts on #2 here, there is hope for America.

    Since we’re quoting my favorite founder TJ, I submit this one for the misguided marxists who posted in #1:

    “Those who wish to be ignorant and free, believe in something that never was and never shall be.”
    – Thomas Jefferson

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  67. 1timePaulSupporter says:

    I am so glad I’m able to get in on thi early, before the coments grow to 9 pages long like last time. Am I going to get called names from what I’m about to write, sure. Are people going to point out my typoes to make me look dumber absoluetly.

    But I was a Ron Paul supporter, an avid one too. I watched all the debates, phoned in, voted for the guy in the primaries, all the works that was me. But then I kept reading and the deal breaker for me was addressed last post:

    The Department of Education. It seems to me that Paul is too much a believer in the ability of states to do what’s rights for their citizens. Does he not know how bad some areas of the country is in terms of education, and why failing schools after failing schools that have been literred by local school board poltics, fall through the cracks. Why is it that certain schools get money and other schools don’t. Local education basically boils down to which PTA yells the loudest and who’s located in the right area. I live in Mont. Co, MD, on of the richest counties in the nation. But all the LOCAL money goes to the schools in the richer areas but not to the poorer minorities areas. Dr.Paul, you think states can educate our kids, did you see any videos of dessegration in schools where they had to bring in the National Guard. Oh and what about all of the federal grants for college that the ED distributes. Who will distribute that, or do you believe that because that’s not in the Constitution it shouldn’t be allowed?

    See this is when I realized that Dr.Paul and I are two seperate people. I’m progressive, and he’s static. The Constitution wasn’t even written for all americans, it was written for the right to happiness of white men who didn’t want to pay taxes.

    The founding fathers couldn’t foresee the population size, global warming, etc. So please the Constitution is not the answer to all our problems. What we need is for the consititution to become more progressive with new amendments, or maybe a new outstanding document in general.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  68. Aaron says:


    Why does a world being more interconnected turn economic principles upside down? I hear people use this as a justification for Keynesian ideas, but I would like to hear how that conclusion is stumbled upon. How does the world today show that government regulation and interference with the markets is now good? I would recommend going to and learning Austrian (real) Economics. There are plenty of free books that discuss economics at a level that supercedes how “inter-connected” the world is.

    You asked: “would you rather live in the hills of Pakistan where there is no government or in statist Scandinavia?”

    I am not sure which I would prefer.

    I would like to ask any interventionists: “Would you rather live in the hills of Pakistan or in the USSR in the 80s?”

    You see, just comparing two situations with countless variables does not make your point.

    Ron Paul, rock on.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  69. Ben Straub says:

    Outstanding answers to thought provoking questions. Ron Paul is all about integrity and truth.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  70. EP says:

    I take issue with the repeated Libertarian assertion that the US having troops in 130 countries constitutes an empire. While the US does have troops in 130 foreign countries, only 30 foreign counties have more than 50 US troops in them, and 11 of them are directly related to the two wars current being conducted. The other 100 consist largely of the Marine detachment at the local US embassy.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  71. James Orleans says:

    Thanks Ron, for waking so many people up. Maybe when the sheep babyboomers finally die off the government can be remade as it should be.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  72. Levi says:

    “He is a patriot, an intellectual, a statesman, and an inspiration to a entire generation of young people who are waking up by the thousands to the reality that our political system is an ugly monster veiled behind the mythology of “democracy”. The men behind the curtain should be afraid, very afraid”
    Very well put PaulM.

    I believe that very few people today have true wisdom but the more you understand about Dr. Paul you can easily see that he is one of those few. When others will just say that these are new and different circumstances(only new to them because they don’t have a thorough knowledge of it) he looks back with clarity for guidance. I find that the only people who attack him are ones that have not allowed him the time to explain his positions. Most have positions based of a limited amount of knowledge of the subject or what the majority think. Dr. Paul’s policies are well thought out and based on history to best provide the freedom and liberty our original countrymen died for.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  73. Jim Whitehead says:

    What makes a true American. Someone that believes in the Constitution or someone that belives in government taking care of everyone. If it is the latter then we are all doomed.

    My guess is the average person is too ignorant to know the difference. Thank you Media and No Child Left Behind and every idiot professor at every university in this country.

    Government IS THE PROBLEM!!! People, True Citizens (not SHEEP)) are the ANSWER!!! Politicians are the problem! Democrats and Republicans are the problems. God belss Ron Paul

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  74. Nathan Cox says:

    I’m wrapping up a 14 month deployment in Iraq right now; and this man has given me more hope and inspiration than anyone I’ve ever met. I’m 27yrs old, getting out of the Army now, and because he cured my apathy, I’m considering a run in a congressional district back in VA sometime in the future.
    I hope and pray he runs in 2012, because I’ll be campaigning for him from now, until then.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  75. Matt says:


    I am not going to call you names or point out any typos, as this does not lead to any sort of civilized discussion. The issue here is the Department of Education. It has been in place since 1980. 28 years is more than enough time to accumulate the required amount of information to perform a thorough analysis of its effectiveness. Can you honestly say that the quality of education has improved since the ED was conceived? As of 2006, the discretionary budget for the ED was $56 billion. With an average of more than $1 billion which could be allotted for each state’s educational systems for FY 2006 (assuming the money was proportionately distributed), you would think you would see some sort of appreciable improvement in the quality of education. It is not surprising to see this is not the case. Failing schools are getting the most money. Poor education is being subsidized, and as an (ex) Paul supporter you must know better than most that if you subsidize something, you get more of it. Schooling IS handled best on the local level, but it DOES require the diligent efforts of parents, teachers, and local officials to make it work. Public school is becoming a glorified day care at the behest of the nanny state.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  76. Nate says:

    Wonderful articulation of all these various issues, and I agree.

    Now if only I could effictively articulate these points when my friends attempt to instruct me that only the government is capable of doing anything in society…

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  77. Matt says:

    oops – my comment at 4:45pm was directed toward 1timePaulSupporter, not Aaron. Sorry for the confusion.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  78. Roberto says:

    Gary Johnson 2012!
    (I think RP would agree)

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  79. Tim says:

    Comment #20 said it best. Hell yeah, PaulM. Wake up, America’s Youth – it’s our time to take back our country and restore The Republic. The enlightenment has begun and you can’t stop an intellectual movement grounded in such a logical philosophy laid out for us by our forefathers. This stuff gets me fired up – I love it.

    Note to all who see this: Ron Paul is passing the torch and it is our responsibility to protect ourselves as a people and grab that torch and raise it to the sky.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  80. Mike M says:

    Nate –

    To answer this question you simply have to ask … where does the government get its power from? The answer to this question leads to the answer to another question – why does the government continue to grow? Government spending once took a hundred years to double, now it takes decades. What have we got to show for it? Does the marginal benefit make sense?

    OK – now to the answers. The government (well, ideally) gets its power from the people. Groups or institutions don’t have rights, the people that comprise them DO, however (this leads into other conversations, like why corporations get extended rights above and beyond those afforded to individuals). If the government gets its power from the populace, than who really are the capable ones? It’s us, because we are, or should be directly responsible for what the government is or is not doing.

    However, we expect the government to do more and more, slowly ceeding more of our individual rights to be taken over by the supposedly benevolent government. This type of malaise gives the government more slack to govern, more jurisidiction, and ultimately more power. To effectively wield this power takes more money. My little theory on why government is exponentially growing – essentially, our attitudes and general non-chalance towards intrusive/destructive/ineffective policy is in of itself a policy which transfers rights and duties which used to be ours to the government.

    Lets escape the future outlined in 1984 below…

    “There will be no curiosity, no enjoyment of the process of life. All competing pleasures will be destroyed. But always—do not forget this, Winston—always there will be the intoxication of power, constantly increasing and constantly growing subtler. Always, at every moment, there will be the thrill of victory, the sensation of trampling on an enemy who is helpless. If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face … for ever”

    Things to ponder …

    “This is why our situation feels so schizophrenic. Of course as we go through this presidential election the contradictions are heightened almost to the point off nausea because what is under discussion is what manner of fine-tuning shall be applied to the social machinery in order to make it possible to hold together the illusion of business as usual – and the answer is there is no such fine-tuning, it’s all finished. Instead what is needed is a radical openness to new ideas of all sorts.”

    The Federal Reserve will remain unaccountable to nobody, the military industrial complex that Eisenhower warned us about will continue to thrive, 40% of our federal income taxes will support the miltary and military portion of national debt, our sovereignty will continue to be ceeded to supranational organizations, morality will continue to be legislated, candidates will continue to pander to the religous/evangelical zealots and make decisions based on what a bearded invisible man in the sky tells them, we will still have troops in 170/200 countries, we will still act like the policeman of the world, the surveillence society will continue to grow in the name of the threat of terrorism, we will continue to support Israel as our 51st State, we will never look into the causes of our foreign policy disasters, our foreign policy will continue to be financed through China and Japan, our financial system will continue to become more socialized, we will continue to see the world as moral black and whites, ridiculous thought crime legislation like hate crimes will continue to be on the books, laws against consuming plants will still exist, the War on Drugs will continue despite American’s growing weariness of this…I could go on forever, but you get my point.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  81. Kara says:

    Ron Paul rocks! If you’re tired of waiting for the nanny state to “change,” come join a movement of liberty lovers in New Hampshire. The Free State Project was endorsed by Ron Paul and he has spoken at many of our events, including Liberty Forum and our Porcupine Liberty Festival. Visit:

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  82. Todd O says:

    1timer –

    Matt, #75 above, did a fairly good job of telling us why we should do away with the Department of Education. It is an argument based on observed ineffectiveness.

    I will now attempt to present an argument based on principle. Why are primary and secondary education treated differently than post-secondary education? Post-secondary education is delivered as a service at will and on demand after all. The idea that the state owes my children or any else’s an education is nonsensical. When it compels attendance, it inhibits liberty. And finally when it taxes property to pay for educating the children, the state uses the tyranny of democracy to impose its will and steal. Keeping education socialized stymies innovation and pigeonholes students. Having a federal bureaucracy oversee the state bureaucracy simply adds insult to injury.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  83. Cheyne says:

    How is it that people distrust the government so much, yet turn to it to solve all there problems and continue to elect big government politicians?

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  84. Lester Hunt says:

    What thoughtful and cogent answers. My thanks to Steven Dubner for doing this!

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  85. Mike M says:

    Education should be treated as a local issue for a couple of reasons.

    1) Efficiency of resource allocation
    2) Ability to make changes at the local level v federal level
    3) Getting the federal government out of ciriculum
    4) Constitutional grounds
    5) The fact that since Federal meddling in the system, the quality has decreased when compared to the international stage

    Ideally, I would like to see a situation where education is treated as locally as possible and the best ideas/methods formed at a local level would be adopted by others. Ideas would spread like genes, with the best ideas winning out and being adopted by other organisms (school systems).

    This (the best ideas) could be measured quantitatively by objective and independent third parties based on alogrithms which would take into consideration the policies in place and corresponding output (graduation rate, college acceptance rate upon graduation, % of students taking ap classes, etc). If your inputs (policy structure), leads to better output (noted above), ceteris parabus, you have a winner! I realize it’s not so simple and nothing is ever ceteris parabus, but that is how I think educational system should work.

    The absolute worst things we can do is currently are, restrict choices for parents, disallow vouchers, continue standardized testing, and throw more money at the Federal level.


    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  86. John says:

    Ron Paul, a true American hero. How can anyone disagree with Ron’s message of decentralized government, anti-war, limited taxes, liberty and personal responsibility?

    Apparently Boobis Americanus disagrees. They vte for consolidation of power to washington, preventive wars, increase taxes, police state laws, and handouts time after time.

    Obama is the latest chapter in big government. At least comrade Obama will lead us to a workers paradise.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  87. Andrew M says:

    Such simple and eloquent principles. His book is a must read, and it is in many ways common sense for our generation. Ron Paul’s message was enough to win over this progressive democrat.. it seems as if time has flown by as i have tirelessly sought to spread the message of liberty. Im in such admiration for Ron Paul and his courage to speak truth to power time and time again. Its time to take our country back.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  88. pearl says:

    thanks for taking the time, NYT

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  89. Adam Miller says:

    Dennis Bider;

    You asked:
    “Great responses by Dr. Paul, but no one gets around to answering the question about banking. Fiat currency exists to provide banks last-resort financing during bank runs or liquidity crises. But fiat currency can survive only if non-inflationary alternatives such as gold are prevented from competing. Permitting non-inflationary currency alternatives means removing last-resort financing for banks, which brings about a 19th century-style series of bank crises.

    Are stable banks an important factor in economic growth?

    If stable banks are important, don’t we need to keep a fiat currency – even if perhaps a better designed fiat currency, founded on different principles?

    Or does everyone who supports returning to the gold standard think that bank stability doesn’t help economic growth? If so, what is the reasoning?

    I have yet to find an answer. :-/”

    The only reason people do runs on the banks is because the banks are inflationary. They spend the money they do not have. If banks only lent out credit through the capital they aquired through payments they received from savers to hold their money/gold or from the cd deposits they pay interest on to the investors. They can only lend out money that can be claimed as their asset. They cannot and should not be able to claim savings deposits as assets. The depositer expects his or her money to be in that account at all times, however it isn’t due to fractional reserve lending.

    To answer your other questions, yes stable banks are important, but true credit expansion can only be achieved by means of invested capital, not deficit financing or fractional reserve lending. These are fraudulent and immoral. If we would have sound money (commodity backed currency) we all would be much more prosperous soley because we would eliminate inflation and therefore be able to budget for our future needs much easier. A car would cost the same or more likely less due to technological advances in 20 years. We would not be required to put our investments at risk (stocks) in order to combat inflation. Infaltion is the silent tax.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  90. Jason says:

    I guy who actually sticks to what he believes in no matter the situation. He knows he is shunned by most in govenment but he sticks to his principles and doesn’t worry what others say about him because he won’t go along with the status quo…
    Thank you for publishing this, very well done.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  91. Some Guy says:

    As many people have said over the years, the US Constitution isn’t perfect, but it’s better than what we have now.

    We have a written constitution in this country, and despite its having been routinely ignored whenever government found it inconvenient, it is nevertheless the entirety of the legal basis for the government’s existence. If the government doesn’t want to follow the constitution, then the government has no legitimate authority, at all.

    Maybe someone can make a compelling utilitarian argument for some of the unconstitutional activities that the federal government engages in, and if so, they should propose an amendment, let’s have that national debate, and maybe you can get your amendment ratified. Until and unless that happens, the federal government has no legitimate prerogatiive to harass sick people for using marijuana, to take our hard-earned wealth and give it to failed banks, to “redistribute” our earnings, to interfere with the choices we make for our health care, to prevent us from traveling to any country we care to visit, or to draft us into “national service.”

    I supported Ron Paul, because he was the only candidate in either party who convinced me that he is committed to the rule of law, and returning the federal government to its constitutionally limited powers.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  92. Brock says:

    Without a doubt, Ron Paul represents the future and the past; he honors and understands our founding principles, and yet he looks to preserve our freedom for the future. He is more than a patriot, he has started a movement to reform and refine of our corrupt political system that no longer sees the constitution as the authority of government.

    Freedom and liberty – Ron Paul embodies this spirit with honesty, integrity and is a voice of reason it today’s society.

    I will pray that Ron Paul runs in 2012; it makes me happy that his message still strikes a chord within the hearts of Americans. Ron Paul’s movement won’t be stopped; this was just the beginning.


    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  93. MCG says:


    I went to Montgomery County schools too!

    Take a look at DC public schools — they spend 14K per year per kid, far more than any other state, and have the worst results of any state. But when charter schools try to open in DC, who fights them tooth and nail? The teachers’ unions, backed by the NEA.

    For 14K per kid for 9 months of school you could simply shut down the entire DC Public schools system and hand it over to the private sector. Give each parent a 14K/yr voucher per kid and let private schools charge in there and flourish (I don’t think anyone would argue they’d do a worse job than DCPS).

    But it won’t happen, because the educrats and the useless teachers with seniority fight change. And the US Department of Education, not simply useless but harmful and very expensive to run, will continue to serve as a job bank for uselss education PhDs to provide 200-page reports “analyzing the data” out of DCPS and other failed school systems around the country.

    Here’s the solution: close them! And the ED. Both hurt the kids. No kidding.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  94. Madison Classical Liberal says:

    Thank you Stephen J. Dubner for this interview with Ron Paul you published. Keep up the great work.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  95. Grant says:

    We must sadly admit that what began as a radical and heady experiment in self-government back in 1787 has, by almost all measures, failed. It was not wiped away by war or revolution. It failed quietly as the tyranny the founders so carefully tried to protect us from crept back into government one stealthy step at a time.

    Today we stand at a crossroads, with an economy on the brink of collapse under the weight of a pervasive, oppressive government that embodies the excesses which the founders tried so hard to prevent.

    We can choose to continue to listen to those who brought us to this point; to “stay the course” of ever-increasing government authority and expense, defying the definition of insanity and believing that “this time”, things will be different.

    Or we can choose something else. If the words of Ron Paul and our founders seem to be more relevant today than ever, perhaps it is because they are more relevant.

    If the principles of personal freedom and responsibility have taken hold of the imagination, perhaps it is because the imagination has become the last refuge of these principles.

    We are late in the game, but time has not quite run out. We have a few plays left. We have the Constitution as our playbook. We have Ron Paul to call the plays. And we have each other to execute them.

    When asked about the outcome of the Continental Congress, Ben Franklin remarked that we had been given “A republic, if you can keep it.” I wonder if we can.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  96. Tom Paine says:

    Great questions and answers.

    Obama promised ‘change’ but what kind of change will we get? 1 cent from a dollar?

    I’d like to think that things will ‘change’ for the better, but experience tells me that the next President will continue to support having US troops and bases overseas – which is nothing more than military welfare. Why can’t those nations defend themselves?

    And one would think that Prohibition would have taught us that if you make something illegal, it will create a black market economy – with the result that criminal organizations will sprout in abundance. Unfortunately, there are too many ‘do gooders’ around trying to tell me and you what to eat, drink, and consume.

    But Liberty will NOT die in my Heart and Mind.

    Yours in Liberty.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  97. Fephisto says:

    “Ron Paul, sarcastic as always.”

    frankenduf, sarcastic as always.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  98. Vincent says:

    The more research you do, the deeper and deeper you go into history, the more you learn about monetary policy…the more you see that only free people and free markets bring prosperity and that the greatest form of regulation is free and agressive competition. Modern Americans fail to see that the principals in the Constitution are very new ideas to the world. Depostism and totalitarianism are the norm for all of human history. Americans fail to see the dangers because they have become too comfortable, they fail to see that a crisis could bring us back to the bloody past where those who spoke freely were murdered by the powers that be. They think it can’t happen again but human nature has not changed.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  99. Shannon says:

    Wow. I’m a democrat but I’m really wowed by this Q&A. It just left me wanting more. If he had answered questions from democrats earlier in the game I would have probably voted for him.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  100. Henry says:

    Finally everyone is starting to wake up. If you want to learn more about his views and how consistent he has been then you need to pick up “The Revolution” and “A Foreign Policy of Freedom”. If you were blown by this Q&A just wait until you read these books. Long Live Liberty, Freedom, and Ludwig Von Mises!

    ENDTHEFED.US 11/22/08
    ENDTHEFED.US 11/22/08
    ENDTHEFED.US 11/22/08
    ENDTHEFED.US 11/22/08
    ENDTHEFED.US 11/22/08

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  101. Josh says:

    I supported your campaign all the way and was so very sad to see the media ignore you as much as they did, I’m glad they are giving you some exposure now even though it is to late for 08,
    Please Please Please Run in 2012!!!!
    Please you are so humble and such an amazingly enlightening man.
    God bless.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  102. Matt says:

    Thanks, Mr. Dubner for talking to Ron Paul and spreading the message!

    We need all of the exposure that we can get!

    People have trouble hearing the truth.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  103. Paul says:

    Ron Paul Ron Paul

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  104. Paul says:

    I’m pretty sure all politicians can give vague, evasive answers and tell us how they’ve never been wrong. He’s still nuts.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  105. AmericanCitizen says:

    Who is Ron Paul?

    hmmm… maybe I should google him?

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  106. JohnJay says:

    Ron Paul had a chance to come out in support of Candidate Gore in 2000 and continue the slow-govt-growth and balanced-budget policies of President Clinton. His REFUSAL to acknowledge Clinton’s extraordinray achievement in this area is the reason borrow-and-spend politics have won for the past 8 years.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  107. CamilaCMS says:

    Great answers to some questions. Especially the mess that was created from the government with increasing the demand for corn and ethanol biofuels. The government is not good at micromanaging the economy so it just shouldn’t. That would solve a lot of the problems that have arisen since, like inflation in food prices, a surplus of many crops, etc.

    However, I don’t see how he expects the government to continue with all its spending and to fund everything that it needs to without taxpayers money. He said “About 45 percent of all federal revenue comes from the personal income tax.” Especially with America’s huge deficit, how could the government simply cut back 45% of its budget? While taxpayers might initially be happy about this, once hospitals, public schools, public transportation and a lot of other government-funded facilities start falling apart, people will notice the gravity of the situation. Furthermore, consumption taxes wouldn’t a quick fix either, and probably cause more public contempt towards the government.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  108. Aaron says:

    Ron Paul always amazes me with his insightful, well thought out comments. Many members of congress would do well to follow his example. This country should value bookishness over platitudes, discourse over arguments, and scientific investigation over demagoguery. These are virtues that can help piece this country back together.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  109. Paul Jones says:

    My god America, what have we done? Will our children, living in the ruins of a third-world America, forgive us for having turned our backs on this man?

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  110. C Bachrach says:

    Whenever I read blogs such as this, CLEARLY in favor of Ron Paul’s message(s), I am perplexed.


    What gives?

    TRUTH is universally appealing. That is why many recognized the truth and power (backed by steadfastness) of Dr Paul’s philosophies.


    C Bachrach

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  111. Dan Beaulieu says:

    we all need to work hard for the 2012 election.

    Ron Paul is my leader

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  112. Talbert says:

    Clear and concise as always!

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  113. Edward says:

    For #99 Shannon the democrat:

    If you are wowed by this Q & A, then you’ll be wowed much more than you can imagine if you read Dr. Paul’s book “The Revolution: A Manifesto”

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  114. Ken says:

    1timePaulSupporter wrote:

    “The Constitution wasn’t even written for all americans, it was written for the right to happiness of white men who didn’t want to pay taxes.

    The founding fathers couldn’t foresee the population size, global warming, etc. So please the Constitution is not the answer to all our problems. What we need is for the consititution to become more progressive with new amendments, or maybe a new outstanding document in general.”

    The Declaration of Independence, Constitution, and subsequent Bill of Rights contain preservations of human Liberty that span all time. The basic will to be free from control is not something that requires the intelligentsia of self important progressive officials.

    The crafters intentionally made it possible yet difficult to amend the document in foresight of unaccounted future events.

    Founders such as Ben Franklin were very much tuned into progress and how it would effect rightful Liberty. They also understood the timeless human desire to be free AND the challenges of keeping our Republic from becoming a pure Democracy.

    “Democracy is 2 wolves and a lamb voting on what to eat for dinner. Liberty is a well armed lamb contesting the vote.” Benjamin Franklin

    The ignorant American masses have sacrificed their Liberty for security.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  115. David Elton says:

    I think that it’s inspired that Obama won president and I was routing for him the whole time. Mostly just so that Paul can run in 2012.

    I get so enthused when I read or watch him speak, and excited at the potential of our country if he can ever become president and talk sense into people.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  116. Mike says:

    I love Ron Paul

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  117. Aaron says:

    Thank you for doing this 2 part interview. What everyone can love about Ron Paul is that he is thoughtful and clear with his views. What a breath of fresh air! I hope many of you will attend the End the Fed Rallys at every Federal Reserve Bank this Saturday. Ron will be speaking in Houston…I’m going to be in San Francisco. I’ll be selling some awesome t-shirts, yep, I’m a capitalist:

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  118. Mark S. says:

    I’m impressed with a lot of the comments. Now, how to we get the rEVOLution rolling? Seems like anything that can be done will be beaten down by Big Brother!
    I also became a Ron Paul supporter to late. Hope we can find someone like him in time for the next election.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  119. Will says:

    “for all his talk of change, obama will perpetuate the same disasterous foreign and monetary policy. he won’t even touch the drug the failure of the drug war with a 10 foot pole. that’s change we can believe in.”

    If the American people wanted the kind of drug and foreign policy that Ron Paul supports, they would have voted for someone like Ron Paul. Whatever Obama might personally believe about how the U.S. should be run, in order to stand a chance of getting elected he, like every other politician, has to adjust and moderate his position so that it falls within the very narrow spectrum of what is palatable to the voting public at large. Anyone whose advocates views that fall outside that spectrum cannot be elected. Pressuring the viable candidate you hate the least to change his position to one that voters will not accept simply guarantees that you will end up with the candidate you hate the most.

    As they say, in a democracy, the people get the government they deserve. If you want to change the kind of presidents you elect, you have to change the zeitgeist in America.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  120. Tom says:

    I voted for the Libertarians to try to send a message to the Republican party on what direction I wished them to follow. I would much rather have voted for Ron Paul.

    I would argue that in terms of taxes, I’d like to see a consumption tax replace payroll taxes first — I think there is room for an income tax on the upper income bracket, but it would resemble the current alternative minimum tax rather than the standard income tax, with all of its loopholes and deductions. Those making the most in this country benefit greatly from the institutions, legal system and regulatory structures that make up our democracy. It’s not too much to ask them to pay more in return, and at least the appearence of populist economic justice is important to many people’s sense of fairness.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  121. maria says:

    “We just elected a guy who probably had distant relatives working on their plantations as slaves…” — thomas

    Thomas, don’t know what you are talking about. Obama did NOT have any ancestors who were SLAVES. His mother “white” was American, so his maternal ancestors where most likely slave owners themselves: AND

    “What he isn’t, not a genetic drop of, is ‘African-American,’ the descendant of enslaved Africans brought to America chained in slave ships. He hasn’t a single ancestor who
    was a slave. Instead, his Arab ancestors were slave owners. Slave-trading was the main Arab business in East Africa for centuries until the British ended it.

    Let that sink in: Obama is not the descendant of slaves, he is the descendant of slave owners.”

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  122. Tom says:

    Ron Paul is 73. He isn’t a plausible candidate in 2012. I hope his efforts and ideas will inspire others to follow his lead. This is the direction the Republicans need to turn to, not the know-nothing populism of Palin. I want a presidential candidate with some intellectual heft behind their slogans.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  123. Petru says:

    For Jamie:
    Actually the Pytagora’s theorem , despite its “old ” age, is true only in a framework of Euclidian Geometry. Outside that , and under other assumpitions of reality ,other than the two dimensions, it is what it is i.e. “platitude”.
    What has this to do with the Constitution ‘s validity?
    Nothing. Unless we assume that the Constitution is a Theorem.
    Is it?


    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  124. David Rasmussen says:

    He loses a lot of credibility with his answer on global warming. He could say it is not a priority now, and list reasons. However, writing that global warming “could be natural, could be man-made,” demonstrates a preference to be a demagogue.

    Bush ignored science. Paul ignores science. That is not the only similarity between the two.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  125. Kate Lipper says:

    As a liberal Democrat, I have been impressed with Dr. Paul since I first became aware of him during an Republican debate in early 2007. His viewpoints on our failed economic policies deserve the ears of all the key players. But I cannot support his position on education and the environment. Just as Ron Paul would never support a viewpoint that the economic events we see today are simply part of our “natural cycle,” I cannot begin to believe the scientific evidence out there is debatable.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  126. Regina says:

    Thank you for spreading the message, Dr. Paul, and I hope that it will continue to spread like wildfire.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  127. blakmira says:

    As the word “politician” has become synonymous in today’s government with corrupt, pandering liar, Dr. Paul stands out as a true diamond among thieves

    Visionary. Genius. Prophet. True Gentleman and Statesman. Humble and Wise Speaker of Truth.

    This is the Ron Paul I have come to love, respect and admire. There is simply no other like him in politics today.

    I do wish my question of what to do about election vote count fraud had been posed to him, however.

    If he is to run again in 2012, we would like to be able to have our votes count. As everything he has prophesied has come true and more people have come to know him, and as Obama proves himself to be as bad if not worse than Bush as far as starting wars and stealing from the people, by then, I’m sure it would be a landslide victory if the playing field were leveled.

    But if things stand as they are now in our farce of an election, we will still have to contend with the same media bias/marginalization/black-out and ridicule, the special interest lobbying money, and the Diebold DRE machine vote-flipping fraud that crushed our hopes this time.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  128. Doug says:

    It is a fact that the earth is in a 900 yr cycle of heating and cooling. Greenland was named Greenland because it was Green. It is also a fact that right now is, according to record, in the tail end of a heating cycle.

    Kate you do not need to prove to me or anyone else that global warming is natural, man made, or the result of anything. It has been happening. Period.

    Likewise Kate, aside from Global Warming, It is obvious that we are destroying our planets ecology in many ways other than Global Warming. I can see it every morning when I come to work in the nasty Brown dirty haze that hangs over the city where I live.

    The Problem with putting all your eggs in the Global Warming Basket for trying to bring change is that if GW is debunked what are you left with.

    It is just as easy to find other reasons for proving the need to treat our planet with more respect.

    Hope this made sense.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  129. Don Crossland says:

    While I don’t agree with Dr. Paul about the dangers of climate change, he is absolutely correct about government interference short-circuiting any real innovation in alternative energy. The corn subsidies have had terrible consequences and the government actively keeping oil prices down instead of letting the market set the price is now coming back to bite us. Hopefully, the $4 a gallon price on gas will be enough incentive for us to get off our asses, innovate and stop sending our money to prop up countries and petro-dictatorships that hate us. We are a better country than that. Read Hot, Flat and Crowded: Why America Needs a Green Revolution and How It Can Save us by Thomas L. Freidman.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  130. PC says:

    “We just elected a guy who probably had distant relatives working on their plantations as slaves getting a 3/5 vote through their master in the electoral college.”

    Actually his distant relatives owned slaves.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  131. Brook Oleski says:

    I wouldn’t care if he was 90, I would still vote for him. He knows his stuff and could school ANYBODY at my university.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  132. Grant Morris says:

    I highly reccomend Ron Paul’s book. A true eye-opener. I think I’m going to purchase another copy because since I finished it, I’ve lent it out to so many people!

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  133. A says:

    The founders are relevant because they formed a wildly successful country. I guess you didn’t notice where you live or what newspaper you are reading. The success of this country is due to their ideas. Wouldn’t we want to understand what they did so right?

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  134. Petrus from London, UK says:

    We need part 3!

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  135. Mike F says:

    Ron Paul is very insightful on many issues, and I’m glad that he’s in Congress to keep the rest of em honest. But he is also dead wrong on several issues: the gold standard is neither workable nor desirable at this point in time; the Depression was not prolonged by a lack of faith in “free markets”; and his answer on global warming is very weaselly. Of course we should continue to study the issue, and of course there are natural cycles of warming and cooling. None of that refutes the clear scientific consensus on the issue.

    It certainly would be nice to have a sane drug policy and a smaller overseas military presence, though.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  136. Xenophon says:

    He speaks in complete sentences!!!

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  137. Cralos says:

    “the public thought he won the majority of the primary races. ”

    ah, yes, thats why they all voted for him!

    liberatarian philosophy is simplistic and essentially says this: FREE MARKETS GOOD! OTHER PEOPLE BAD! MORAL HIGH GROUND!

    I think perhaps the current and overwhelming success of the free market system proves your hypothesis correct, sir! And, yes, by all means, let us abolish the income tax. Then truly we can take your argument about Barack Obama’s potentially ballooning deficits to heart.

    Good talk.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  138. Tiber says:

    I respect the man’s ideas, but I personally couldn’t vote for him. Still, he didn’t deserve to have his campaign ignored the way that it was.

    Personally, I think the problem with libertarianism and republicans is they oversimplify the world. Free markets do not solve every problem; they merely solve some and create others. Similarly, governments are not the cause of all our problems, and governments are capable of doing good. In their attempts to make the government as small as possible, I believe they will throw the baby out with the bathwater.

    The founding fathers were wise, but they were not omniscient. We can know their thoughts and intentions as they have written them, but we can not know their mind. We can not definitively say what they would do, or how they would react to new information and circumstances. They also do not know us. They did not have the benefit of seeing all the pitfalls that America fell into before becoming the nation that it is today.

    Would the founding fathers have instituted the Food & Drug Administration if they had read “The Jungle”? Would they have made labor laws if they had lived through the Industrial Revolution? Would they have enacted environmental laws if they saw the pollution we live with today? All of these things came about because we let capitalism work, and they lead to mistakes; mistakes which were then corrected.

    Wanting to return the American government to how it began is merely just scrapping all your work and starting over. Yes, you can fix some of your mistakes, but you won’t fix them all. History will repeat itself. What we need to do is reform it. Where did we go wrong, and where can we fix it. In that, I think Ron Paul has the right idea, but the wrong method. Don’t blame the government as a whole, find the source of the infection and remove the tumor.

    While I have the utmost respect for the founding fathers, the government exists to serve our needs, not the needs of men long dead. The world is not the same today as it was then. Our free market is no longer men interacting with men, it is mice scurrying among giants. Computers have changed the very concept of property. Technology has changed how consumers and businesses communicate with each other. The foundations of the world are unchanged, but the complexity has grown exponentially. There aren’t always simple solutions for complex problems. Mr. Paul seems incredibly intelligent, but I don’t think his ideas would translate well into reality.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  139. Aaron says:

    I encourage the liberals and progressives out there to consider the connection between empire abroad and empire at home. This is what Ron Paul calls the welfare/warfare state. He’s not like the other Republicans and fake conservatives. For me the conversion point was realizing that it is the Nature of centralized authority to oppress and kill.

    Just a note on energy and transportation:
    The free market provided affordabe train transportation over 100 years ago…My great-grandmother could hop on a train in Vincennes, Indiana and ride to San Francisco. It was, believe it or not, big government (military industrial complex) that mandated the building of large highways everywhere–partly leading to our country’s addiction to oil. There’s another side to the story they tell you in school.

    Corporations = Evil
    Government = Good

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  140. Chuck says:

    Would that the Republican Party would listen to this man. It’s the only way forward for them. Otherwise, they are doomed to become the party of a small minority of Southern and Mid-Western theocrats.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  141. YerMawm says:

    Ignorance of history seems to be perpetuating the notion that 200+ years on, the wisdom of the founders was little more than quaint horse sense, and we are so advanced with all our technology, that none of that horse-and-buggy knowlegde applies any longer.

    Our times are not special. We have not really advanced so far since Roman times. Rome faced the same problems we face today. Humans, and human nature. Technology won’t ever change it, and this is the reason that the wisdom of the founding fathers is as valuable, today as it was over 200 years ago, and will be 200 years from now. We are not special, only a fool would believe that.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  142. Scott says:

    In the complext world we live in there are numerous market failures. I believe in the government staying out but there are times when those market failures need to be corrected or at least countered. This can only be an art not a science though. To Ron Paul I say, what will you do about market failures?

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  143. bo says:

    Grant us liberty and may the people grant us Ron Paul in 2012.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  144. Thackery says:

    In order to ask a curious question and make a point about Mr. Allan Greenspan related to Dr. Paul’s comments, I need to digress at the start and ask those who have read Atlas Shrugged to recall Francisco d’Anconia to mind. Those of you familiar with Atlas Shrugged might remember Francisco d’Anconia as the charismatic president-owner-operator of d’Anconia Copper in Argentina and erstwhile lover of Dagny Taggart.

    Collectivist-types in high positions of influence in the U.S. have been busy for years strangling the last remnants of the semi-capitalist mixed-economy– already close to death throes under the double-whammy of massive regulations and the feverish looting of its last sources of wealth to fund altruistic do-good programs and railroads-to-nowhere. But the collectivist mentalities were not too busy to notice a yet-to-be-tapped source controlled by Francisco d’Anconia. In his late twenties and in a remarkably few years, he built up his deceased father’s proud beginnings into a massively profitable giant of world class copper production.

    So, when the famous, soon-to-become infamous, copper king appears in New York City flirting around with morally questionable women at parties, flaunting the recklessness expected of useless playboys, they found themselves beside themselves with bewilderment. Caught off guard by this apparent contradiction– the seeming clash between Francisco’s success as a prolific producer and his behaviour as an amoral, wealthy bum– they didn’t know which to hate more, his brain or his fun: the first because they needed it; the second because they envied it. But they were dead sure of two things, they hated him and they needed him.

    The single error of their character estimate soon proved catastrophic. They thoroughly missed the metaphor of Francisco’s embodiment of the law of non-contradiction. One cannot kill the golden goose if one expects to reap its golden eggs. But their decision had been made high above the city in some smokey darkened space. He was the copper king; no one in world could match his production of copper. That meant money and they wanted some of it. Heavy investments flowed into d’Anconia Copper stocks, made by aliased buyers to cover who it was expecting to cash in on Francisco’s brains. He was a sure bet. And likewise, they had been assured by their “Man” in Washington that their looted money would find safe haven in the Democratic Socialist Peoples State of Argentina. Not to worry, they had great respect for property rights, it was said.

    Little did they know that Francisco had assumed the farse of enigmatic playboy and gone on strike with Galt. Francisco had turned off his own motor of production, devoting his mind instead to the clear purpose of systematic mis-management to protect both his achievements, and the great honor of producers, from the looters. Hours before Argentina’s Dictator was to seize the mine in a merciful act of Nationalization for the Benefit of the Democratic Socialist Peoples of Argentina who needed it, it exploded, shipping docks and all. When the authorities arrived, they found a worthless shell with no equipment. The well-paid employees had been dismissed and were gone.

    Back in the States. Well you can imagine. Which is exactly what I’ll ask you to do right now: imagine.

    Mr. Greenspan is an intelligent man. Though his early training was in music, he left it behind as a career, not because he quit music– he still plays– but because he discovered his fascination with economics. As Dr. Paul stated, Mr. Greenspan wrote an article supporting a gold standard which appeared in the Objectivist Newsletter circa 1960’s (this needs a citation, but I can’t locate my copy at the moment). Not only did he articulately support a gold standard monetary system, he made an impeccable case against fiat currency and for the essential monetary discipline that gold provides. Mr. Greenspan emphasized in unusually clear terms, considering his later characteristic mumbo-jumbo during the House Financial Services Hearings, the dangers that lurked in the usual shenanegans endemic to fiat paper; and he strongly warned against its use. I was much younger then, and less informed, but the logic of it, I thought, was irrefutable.

    Fastforwarding to present day, it looks as though he was right about the dangers of “paper issue” as Jefferson and Jackson called it. But the point here is not so much what he said then, but his then-connection with Ayn Rand and her “collective” as it was ironically called, the group that gathered not only to bask in the light of Atlas, but to discuss and write about current events interpreted through the lens of the new Objectivist philosophy. Mr. Greenspan was part of it. For how long, I don’t recall. So here’s where the imagination begins.

    Assumption number one: Mr. Greenspan read the novel. Dah! No, he devoured it. Read it times over. His brain understood every principle, applied every one with lightning speed, and drew every conclusion from every conceivable angle. And that would be alot of angles. No, he absolutely loved Atlas Shrugged. Of course, he did!

    Assumption number two: Mr. Greenspan admired Francisco d’Anconia. Very, very, much. Don’t forget, we’re using our imaginations now. So let’s imagine also that he felt a secret desire to emulate the grand, cunning intelligence and behavior of Francisco. Let’s just suppose.

    Assumption number three: Mr. Greenspan was/is right about gold and fiat paper. It’s not conjecture or a cauldron of Keynesian equivocations. It’s the reality of money as used for human existence. He knows that market surges in productivity and periodic rallies in the stock market, and employment shifts, and consumer indices all vary and bounce up and down, and that all claims to the contrary by Presidents and Fed Chairmen and talking-head-apologists of the printing press cadre, cannot wipe out the economic facts of the comparative value differences between paper issue and gold or their substanially different results in even a semi-free marketplace.

    Assumption number four: Mr Greenspan thoroughly understands that money is the life blood of human commerce. It’s a worn out metaphor, I know. But stay with me. He also knows that it’s the mind that actually the runs the economy, not the money. Atlas thoroughly dramatized that bit of self-evidence(?). But the mind cannot work without the proper type and flow of blood. I have O, you have A, they have AB, etc. No blood? Well, you’re dead and so is the economy. You get the point: proper blood type, i.e., gold money, that supports the mind, i.e., the motor of the economy. Take away the mind, no economy. Use the wrong money, the ecomony gets very sick and then croaks. Let’s imagine that Mr. Greenspans get’s this. He might spout some mumbo-jumbo retorts, but he gets it.

    Assumption number five: Mr. Greenspan knows that the minds of this country will not go on strike. That was imaginary. Oh, for sure there’s been a slowing down effect but it’s caused more by the massive burdens of regulatory proscriptions on our backs than by quitting. Those regs act much like the retardance factor of a speed governor attached to a motor’s back. But Mr.Greenspan also clearly understands that controling the lifeblood, first through its type, then by the retarding or easing of its flow, or the tweeking of it’s transfusion costs, are a very powerful tools indeed. Could that be some of the shenanegans to which Mr. Greenspan earlier alluded earlier, that he attributed to fiat paper? But importantly, could he have used his non-elected power for some other special purpose? Well, we could imagine he did.

    Assumption number six: Mr. Greenspan emulated his hero. He became the Fed King, then he quit and hung around. While he couldn’t control the minds of Americans, he could certainly come close to it by manipulating the lifeblood they needed to produce and flourish. And he surely did that along with the help of the other infamous form of taxation. But he also clearly knew what any nation, and especially our nation, required to restore and maintain freedom and a vibrant economy. He always knew what we desperately needed: a sound monetary unit to facilate and support free commerce, and to complement and reward the efforts and achievements of producers, from the street sweeps to the industrialists to the inventors at every level of ability. But not only did he say nothing to help correct our errant course toward an economic vortex, he effectively lashed the helm to a cleat. He did not use his knowledge in the best interest of the sick economy, albeit he inherited the sickness from his predecessors going back to 1913. As Dr. Paul mentioned here and elsewhere, Mr. Greenspan has not reputiated what he wrote. You ought to read Francisco’s speech on money given to a crowd at the first party at Reardon’s house. Mr.Greenspan, we can imagine, was excited to his bones by it. Truth can grab you like that. Let’s all say it, and pretend for just a couple seconds that it’s not imaginary:


    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  145. Jay says:

    Ron Paul just makes sense. Why did the media destroy is campaign. Smells fishy to me.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  146. Lee says:

    How did it happen that inflation *caused* the Great Depression? The 70’s should have caused another one, too, in that theory.
    This is a guy who claimed in a presidential debate that skyrocketing health care cost was caused by inflation. He didn’t even understand that when people said increasing health care cost, they meant after controlling for inflation. That cost is eating a bigger and bigger chunk of corporate profit in this country, which is why it’s a concern that has nothing to do with how much an ounce of gold is worth on the new york mercantile market.
    Every time someone explains economic policy by a one-liner, that person doesn’t know what he’s talking about. I’m not trying to insult anyone, but Ron Paul is one of them.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  147. DLW says:

    Good post, Tom deSabla.


    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  148. Daniel says:

    Look, the Constitution was forged out of the pit of an awful brutal English empire, and us Americans who stood up to tyranny to rule ourselves created this grand document so that history, in this country and for all men, we would not be ruled by a dictator. A Stalin or a Mao. Yet, popular thought is that we should just forget history. People seem to forget, and I know I do to on occasion, but to forget history is to repeat it. I would ask anyone who thinks that the words of our founding fathers to be of no use for today, to go ahead and read what they wrote through long and tedious hardships in life. Read the bios of the Authors. See if you have any of thier grit, guts, fortitude, perseverance, dedication and love of country and sweet liberty. Im willing to bet that you dont because you are a filthy pinko.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  149. Mike says:

    How are the Republicans going to maintain their culturally homogenizing oil empire abroad without the Fed? How are the Democrats supposed to finance their New New Deal without the Fed? How are we going to eventually go to War with Iran without the Fed?

    This is why the Fed will continue to exist. 2 sides of the same coin these parties are – using different means to achieve the same ends. All policies end up with the growth of government at the expense of your individual liberties.

    Oh and this green jobs BS is nothing but a wealth transfer. It’s not creating anything, rather it is transferring wealth from one group to another. Many government programs will either inadvertently, or explicitly do this.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  150. Timbo says:

    Great insights from Dr. Paul. One question though … What economist provides the best defense for the gold standard?

    Many thanks.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  151. Tom deSabla says:

    Timbo, the gold standard needs no defense. It is a matter of historical record.

    Economists are mostly all corrupted anyway. They are not educated on the gold standard at all. Finding an economist who defends the gold standard is like finding an accountant who will argue with the IRS.

    Economic expertise, particularly monetary economic expertise, must come from outside the official field of economics these days.

    It’s sad but true. Even the most free market economists of all, Walter E. Williams and Thomas Sowell don’t talk about the gold standard much. You’d have better luck with economists like Thomas J. DiLorenzo -but there are few like him around anymore.

    The freshest newest scholarship in the field comes from non-economists – people like Ron Paul, Antal E. Fekete, and Hugo Salinas Price.

    Then go read that old Greenspan Essay – try googling Greenspan the phrase “Gold and economic freedom.”

    He’s an economist, or he used to be anyway.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  152. Becky Rogers says:

    Thank you for publishing Ron Paul’s comments and opinions. We are in a major crisis. Why would any news program waste time talking about Mrs. Obama’s clothes, or their kids or Rosie O’donnel. Let’s talk about what can be done to save our monetary system. Let’s talk about Ron Paul and his speech calling for the end of the Federal Reserve. There were rallies in 23 cities and no coverage on the NEWS. We don’t have time for fluff and apathy. Please be responsible and rally the American public into engagement, understanding and support for change that will actually help us survive.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  153. Greg Cottrell says:

    Thomas- the founders were able to create this government because they were all experts in history and previous forms of government (especially Athenian Democracy). In fact they were knew more about EVERYTHING than people do today. Ever read up on their other areas of interest? Botany, astronomy, electricity, history, you name it. These men were just plain better educated. I’ll take a word of wisdom from Ben Franklin or Thomas Jefferson over the ignorance of today if it is 250 years old or not. A little more expertise in history is EXACTLY what we need now.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  154. Jerry Citti says:

    Thank you Congressman Dr. Paul. Your contribution has been and continues to be nothing short of marvelous. It may be presumptuous of me, but I’d like to suggest your leadership and wisdom be applied to another set of tasks.

    Perhaps the greatest of these that confronts us now is to rebuild the Republican Party. It is crucial in my judgement that someone reflecting the Classical Liberal view surface as a candidate for the Republican nomination next time around. In order to do so he or she will need a reasoned program of ideas on how to begin rebuilding America.

    I expect that by that time the highest priority will be to stabilize money. That might mean something drastic like returning to the gold standard. There needs be a convincing argument and logical path that gets us from where we will be at that point to where we need to go.

    Next in priority might be a foreign policy that makes sense and the same will apply: Not only a different policy than what we have today, but a reasoned argument describing why and how we get there.

    We probably need a series of five or six major priorities such as the above the others being economy, energy, education, et al. One strategy might be to not only settle on a leader but also to arm that person with a series of sound bites relating to these or other selected priorities that are catchy and inescapably true.

    Settling on a leader and a strategy may be possible; turning it into a winning exercise the next time around may be impossible that soon, but we must start somewhere.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  155. Jerry Citti says:

    David Rasmussen, what science are you referring to? Near as I can tell these is consierable scientific controversy re global warming. Not so political or media controversy of course.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  156. Jerry Citti says:


    A long time ago I though Greenspan was doing it deliberately. I did not draw the comparison to Francisco as you did, but I would have had I thought it through. The private comment to Dr. Paul was a dead giveaway.

    It remains to be seen whether or not his efforts, if that’s what they were, were enough. The American economy is not a copper mine, and it may very well take much more than one Mr. Greenspan to bring it down.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  157. Warren says:

    The founding fathers understood what it took to be a good citizen, but they seemed to have taken for granted the idea that people would persue that premise in the future. I know they warned of greed and power mongering in high ranking offices, and yet the “nature of man” many of them spoke of, unfortunately has wormed its way to the top of the political food chain.

    I appreciate the message of personal responsibility that Ron Paul advocates, the coals are largely on the heads of the people for allowing the Government to expand. It would be logical to once again regain that understanding of what made a “good citizen”.

    We the people have allowed the Government to indoctrinate us into believing they know how we should live our lives, even to the point of what we should believe.

    Thanks Ron for standing I hope people will catch the liberty bug and stop playing the politics that is destroying our country.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  158. Felipe says:

    Thank you for the real approach you take to politics. It seems just the work politics is sprinkled with glamour and the promise of a better tomorrow. I admire real-ness in a politician and that’s exactly what the world needs at a time like this. Not some false expectation of a quick turnaround to this crisis.

    Thank you Ron Paul.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  159. grusilag says:

    Nicely summarized by the man himself. If it wasn’t for Ron Paul I would have never learned or been interested in monetary policy. Since becoming an admirer I’ve come to realize that monetary policy is probably the most important issue we as citizens need to educate ourselves about. Though I’ve come to conclusions that may differ from his I credit him for bringing these issues out into the open and spreading them to the masses.

    Oh and he’s also one of the only truly honest men in Washington.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  160. pete dimovski says:

    Congresman Ron ,I did not know nothing about yourself and what you stand for until recently . Ever since I’ve been listening and paid close attention to your speech with amazment.Keep doing the good work and if you would, tell me where can I get bumper stickers that sayRon Paul a man of integrity . Pete

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0