Ron Paul attempts to correct Paul Krugman’s ideas about history and the economy. Note that Krugman never counters Rep. Paul’s basic ideas about the economy and the Fed. The Professor really fails to make any good arguments. I have to admit though, that Rep. Paul often gets lost in the trees and fails to hammer home the big picture. It’s a fun debate though.
Hat tip to Derek Au.
Wait wait wait, which one is the economist and nobel prize winner? Which one professionally convinces naive youth to power a useless campaign with their extremely limited dollars?
I hear they give Nobels away for next to nothing, and it’s hard to call someone an economist when their agenda really only points to equalizing wealth. That just sounds like bad philosophy to me.
Also, last I saw Ron Paul was still making money bombs, and running a debt-free campaign.
Ron Paul is clearly not good at debates. His points are meandering. Here’s an example: he says post-WW II is an excellent example of libertarian philosophy at work.
Here’s David Frum clearly debunking that with data:
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/05/01/ron-paul-krugman.html
Is it a libertarian paradise when marginal tax rates are as high as 91%?
I guess it’s hard to say the same thing differently for 30 years, when the message doesn’t need to change.
Although, I’m not sure why he’d call it a libertarian paradise. And it was 94% in 1945: http://dailycapitalist.com/2012/03/01/the-sad-history-of-the-income-tax/
I think it may have had more to do with the diminished regulations to start a business, rather than taxation.