More Government Spending Leads to More Problems




Ron Paul discusses spending by the U.S. Government, the Federal Reserve, and the road back to fiscal responsibility.

Date: 10/14/2010

Transcript

Female News Anchor: Wow. Our nonstop coverage of “They’re burning your money” week continues with our next guest who says government spending will only worsen the current, very fragile economy.

Male News Anchor: Republican Congressman Ron Paul joins us on the phone from Clute, Texas. Congressman, I know it’s a drastic step, but do you think we’re at the point where we need a Constitutional solution to stop the deluge of government spending?

Ron Paul: Oh, it would be great, but nobody cares about the Constitution. So I don’t think that’s going to solve the problem. The other problem you have, even if you had a constitutional restraint, you would still have the Fed. Just remember, the Fed pumped in 2 trillion dollars off the budget. They just created the money and passed it out, and they can give money to foreign governments and foreign banks. So the problem is much bigger than having a legal or a constitutional limitation on what they can spend. I think it would be a good idea to make the point, but that’s far from the solution. The solution is what the people in this country think our government should be doing. As long as they expect this much from their government, that we can take care of everybody in the world and that we can have a welfare state here, you’re going to have this problem, no matter what the Constitution says, because they already totally ignore it.

Female News Anchor: Now congressman you, of course, have been quite vocal about your call for the Fed to be non-existent, basically. So I’m just curious about what you think would have happened had we had not had that first run of quantitative easing at the height of the financial crisis?

Ron Paul: We would have had more bankruptcies and if the Congress would have just kept their hands off, the whole correction would be over by now. But because we took it over and prevented the liquidation of the debt, this just delayed the inevitable. I’m not opposed to spending, it’s just that I’m opposed to government spending and the Fed spending. We want more spending, but that means you have to allow the people to have more money and the business people have more money, the spending has to come from them. But once the government takes over the spending, the only way they can do that is that it distort the markets further. That’s what the Fed does and that’s what the Congress does. But yes, it would have been a rough year, but it would have been over by now. I think all the liquidation would be done.

Now, with this mortgage scandal going on, that’s further delay. Everything they’re doing is delaying. And you want the liquidation to occur, the people can’t afford it, they have to give in and they have to go to somebody else who can afford it, and the prices have to go down. But this is what we did in the 1930s, we propped it up, we wouldn’t allow the market to clear the market, we didn’t believe that these corrections were necessary and the politicians can’t stand the idea of not doing something.

Male News Anchor: Well, speaking of politicians, Congressman Paul, we’ve got about three weeks before mid-term elections. Is there a consistent message out there from those on the right that would support curtailing spending?

Ron Paul: Well, it’s pretty good. I mean, I think everybody in the Tea Party Movement would say, “Yes, we want to curtail it”, but the Tea Party Movement actually originated during the last presidential race and they understood where I wanted to cut, and that was every place. The Tea Party Movement now has a lot of people in here that are picking and choosing. They say, “Well, we should cut this, but not that”. So we have a ways to go, but I think it’s very, very healthy. I think the consensus in the Tea Party Movement is to cut. I think there will be some more debates on exactly where to cut it.

Female News Anchor: Alright, Congressman Ron Paul, many thanks.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

78 Comments:

  1. So, when RP mentions incremenatlism he meant changing the Republican party itself ... he knew that his message is so mature and ripe that to be hijacked will be very natural ... and the GOP has taken the bait ... After Nov 4 it's either RP alone or just pure gravy (by any and every conservative estimate there will be at least 20 Paulites in Congress) ... in other words there is nothing to lose and everuthing to gain

    Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  2. "and that is what made the turn around for the recovery" .... only if you knew and your ilk could ....

    I disagree entirely what you said ... but on a differnt note and more on the lines a lot of folks are thinking today ...it was engineered to begin with and no other solution would be made to look like it is succeeding unless it was part of the "plan" ... got it? I hope you do

    Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  3. So true- they even started to have the debates during the playoffs with the same start times so no one would hear Ron.

    Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  4. Ron Paul's history is a little off. Coolidge and Hoover both promoted State power and no spending and low taxes in the 20's and early 30's it didn't do shit to help the Great depression... FDR came in with the New Deal in the 30's, which promoted Big "evil soclialist" Government... and that is what made the turn around for the recovery.... AND IT TOOK WELL OVER 2 YEARS TO DO IT. You can't fix your credit in 2 years let the countries.

    Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1

    • FDR averaged around 18 percent unemployment for the first 8 years of his presidency. He paid farmers to keep from planting crops on 14 acres of their land...he would have been better off having them plant then just giving the food away for free. FDR placed sanctions on Japan in July 1941 that cut-off 95% of that countries oil supply, and we wonder why they attacked us. FDR spent and spent and it did nothing. You have your history wrong and you should read up before you speak.

      As for Hoover...he implemented huge protectionist tariffs. Hoover was a self-described Progressive and Reformer and he denounced laissez-fiare thinking. He pushed farm subsidy and tariff bills through congress, just like FDR did. He cancelled private oil leases on government land, cause god forbid you allow companies to run their businesses they way they see fit. He proposed a Department of Education which wasn't enacted. His biggest mistake was the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act, which raised tariffs on thousands of imports. Now, how is a country supposed to get money to buy American products if you increase the cost of their products so much that American's don't buy them? Not only that, but in retaliation, foreign countries raised tariffs on American-made goods, hurting international trade.

      Read about FDR. He was a failure throughout his life. Anything he did, any business he tried to participate in failed. He was one of the worst presidents in history. He confiscated gold, making it illegal for private citizens to own gold, then raised the price of gold on his own. He was said to sit around with his treasury secretary in the morning and joke about what the price should be for the day. No rhyme or reason. That was FDR. Read the book "New Deal or Raw Deal?"

      And Coolidge? There's a reason the 20's were roaring. Coolidge was a good man.

      So Ron Paul doesn't have his history wrong, you do. You might want to study before you come on a site with Ron Paul supporters and assume that we're not a thinking-class of people. We research, read, and understand history, economics, past presidencies, and consequences of actions. That's because knowledge is power. We don't sit around campfires drinking beer taking for truth what one bumbling idiot heard from another bumbling idiot and chalk that up to fact.

      Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  5. How about a balanced budget amendment which INCLUDES eliminating (and barring future creation of) the Federal Reserve? And of course an amendment to repeal the income tax.

    Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

  6. They using Ron Paul to make the Republicans more popular and once it is time for voting again, they would simply drop him again.

    Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  7. They using Ron Paul to make the Republicans more popular and once it is time for voting again, they would simply drop him again.

    Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  8. They using Ron Paul to make the Republicans more popular and once it is time for voting again, they would simply drop him again.

    Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  9. you are sooooooo right on!!!!!

    Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  10. I luv ron paul but.... I hate Fox news. in 2008 when ron was running for prez he got little to no coverage at all and during the republican debate (which he kicked ass on btw) they tried to make him look like a crazy man when he spoke of the illegitimate/unconstitutional wars, low spending, and sound money.

    But now that the dems have the house and everything is going to shit according to Fox. Now they want to pay attention to Ron's message and he's has had more airtime than ever with them

    Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  11. I luv ron paul but.... I hate Fox news. in 2008 when ron was running for prez he got little to no coverage at all and during the republican debate (which he kicked ass on btw) they tried to make him look like a crazy man when he spoke of the illegitimate/unconstitutional wars, low spending, and sound money.

    But now that the dems have the house and everything is going to shit according to Fox. Now they want to pay attention to Ron's message and he's has had more airtime than ever with them

    Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0

  12. Go Ron Paul!!!

    Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

  13. i dont think they will try to do that anytime soon, because they know that the spoon fed morons are still in majority. RP's followers have still not reached critical mass.

    Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  14. i dont think they will try to do that anytime soon, because they know that the spoon fed morons are still in majority. RP's followers have still not reached critical mass.

    Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  15. Yeah she's pretty bad.

    Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  16. America's last redeeming chance: Ron Paul 2012!

    Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

  17. America's hope: Ron Paul 2012!

    Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

  18. A lot of people criticize Ron Paul as extreme, however both parties, with their illusory differences, are so bad now we need someo e extreme like Ron Paul. My friend thinks Ron Paul won't run 2012 though

    Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0

    • “The radical of one century is the conservative of the next. The radical invents the views. When he has worn them out, the conservative adopts them.” - Mark Twain

      Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0

  19. Wars are socialized for the benefit of private businesses. Make the corporations pay back the war debt.

    Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  20. Deflate the military bubble already!!

    Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


seven + 1 =

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>