Alan Grayson and Bernie Sanders among progressives attack the Federal Reserve. They may not want to end it but they know many on the left wrongly associate the Fed with “bankster” conspiracy theories they help feed.
Ron Paul is just plain nuts concerning the Fed. Check out his big Fed meeting as the new Chair of Monetary Policy last summer. He was embarrassed by the Fed reps in that meeting. Other committee members walked out halfway through it.
You could find just as unsettling snippets about any of the republican candidates, Ron Paul is just the one that the party establishment and their funders are scared of the most. Not saying I love the guy, but after radically corporatist elitist president after radically corporatist elitist president I’ll take Paul in a second. He would mostly have a bully pulpit in any case as congress would block most everything he’d try to do, which is better for us than them doing stuff with an equally corrupt counterpart in the ignoble oval.
Well, AFAIK they just want the Fed audited. A bit more Congressional oversight, that’s all, no new gold-standard monetary system or private-bank monetary systems or state-bank monetary systems or whatever would replace the Fed if it were abolished.
But, Paul is a radically corporatist elitist. In effect, anyway. You think they’re not salivating on boardroom carpets and rubbing their naughty bits under the conference table whenever they imagine the . . . opportunities . . . under a Paul Administration?
Not for currently structured corporations, it could lead there again with his ideas but it would cut the current giants down first.
I have no illusions that the Libertarian fantasy actually enacted wouldn’t be a Mad Max hellscape, but Paul wouldn’t be able to do that anyway. What Paul would do is use his position to expose more fully corporate welfare, nonsensical exploitable complications in the tax code. He would reduce our military escapades, appoint people to federal jobs that were qualified, transparency ect. Maybe not as far as all hell but a ton more than any of these other goons. Guy actually has principles he sticks to, it’s why he’s easy to attack. He would actually rock the boat before being poisoned, and that could lead to something better. Anyone else you send and the noose just gets tighter and the smoke thicker.
[QUOTE=WikiPedia]
On September 18, 1889, Hill changed the name of the Minneapolis and St. Cloud Railway (a railroad which existed primarily on paper, but which held very extensive land grants throughout the Midwest and Pacific Northwest) to the Great Northern Railway.
[/QUOTE]
(Bolding added) Looks pretty government subsidized to me. The land grants may have been given before Hill took over and reorganized the railway, but the Great Northern still benefited from them.
And, once again: Government subsidy is not socialism. Industrial policy is not socialism. Even dirigisme (something America could really use a lot more of) is not socialism. None of this is libertarian, either, of course; but most government economic policies are neither libertarian nor socialist.
Libertarianism as a separate movement is fairly recent. I’m not sure in fact even “Libertarianism” really exists outside of the United States. However many libertarian ideas are basically classical liberal ideas which men across have fought and died for since at least the days of the Levellers in England.
No I’m not saying he’s defined by his support base,.
How is anything Paul plans going to downsize big corporations?!