Friday Fun: Twitter Users #AskRonPaul

Ron Paul and the Liberty Report appreciate the many great comments and questions that keep flooding in! Today Dr. Paul is going to answer a few of them.

Ron Paul: Hello everybody and thank you for tuning in today to the Liberty Report. Before I start today, we have a special program today, but before we start I want to remind you if you miss seeing this program live, you can always find this program on, because these programs will be there and you can get to them if you miss a program live.

Today is going to be different, because I am going to take live tweets from the audience and we haven’t really done this with the Liberty Reports, but I want to get the viewers more engaged.

I see the first question that comes in is Garrett Waits, who writes to me. He says “Ron Paul is conservation something the government should be involved in? For instance the National Park System.” I think it’s a good question, because if you are a true, true libertarian, you have no government ownership over land, but that might be an idealistic world that we will never reach. He asks specifically about the National Parks System. I think that moving in that direction, if we had even a good Republic, we wouldn’t have a National Park System, what we would have is have individual states and they would have parks if they wanted them, but in a true Libertarian state, parks could be very well managed by private organizations and yet, today most people believe the government has to take care of that and we don’t think that the government should be the sole responsibility for taking care of parks, but in a free society there would be parks and I think it would be best if there were more local control, but I think nevertheless we should recognize the fact that we should move in a certain direction, so the least amount of government involvement, the better.

I don’t think we are going to see the day when there is going to be so minimal amount of government. I don’t think that should dispel the idea and the effort to talk about the perfect free society, even though we recognize that we don’t reach that. The far left and the authoritarians and the globalists, they have all kinds of goals which they are not going to achieve, but they never give up on them.

I’ve always argued that you should have a goal, you should have a precise definition of the role of government in a perfect free society, even recognizing that we are not going to see that achieved, because if you don’t have a goal based on a perfect idea, I think what you do is you don’t sit in the middle and you have the other side wins out, because if you start from the middle and say ok, yeah, we don’t have what we want, so we will argue the case that we just want to slow down the globalists. I don’t think that works at all, so I would say that do our very best to make things local, including parks, you have local parks at the local level, local communities have them and there’s nothing wrong with the idea and the concept discussed about even having private parks.

Now, we have another one coming from the Libertianen and he writes to me and says “Ron Paul do you believe in global warming?” Of course, the very fast answer, which is complete, is sure I believe in global warming. Global warming has been going off and on for centuries, if not for thousands of years, there’s evidence of Ice Ages and warm ages and all that. We do know that there’s climate change and the globe gets warmer and then gets colder. I think what is implied is do I believe in the fear-mongering of the radical environmentalists who are saying the end is coming, the end is coming and Al Gore was right and the whole world is going to be destroyed because of the modern age.

I don’t think that’s true, I think it’s a lot of hype, a lot of fear-mongering, I think that there’s a lot of false information out. For instance, if you look at the last hundred years you find that some people will come up with statistics showing the globe is getting warmer and warmer and there’s so many problems. Between 1910 and 1940 the average temperature went up 5 degrees centigrade, between 1910 and 1940, thirty years. From 1940 to 1970 it was essentially flat. From 1970 to the year 2000, it went up another 5 centigrade and you can say the last hundred years has gone up gradually. What’s happened in the last 15 years in this century? Actually it’s very static, it’s flat.

There’s a lot of deceitful information out there. I think there’s a lot of hoax in it. I think that people are fudging the figures and we do know that some of the scientists are on the defensive now, because they have fudged the figures and they have not been up front with us. I think it’s a political tool that a lot of people use to get control of property. I don’t think we can say the globe has not warmed up, but it’s interesting to see that in the middle part of the century when we were fighting World War II and when we were dropping all these bombs and nuclear and atomic weapons, when there was a lot of CO2 in the atmosphere the temperature was flat. I don’t think there’s any relationship with CO2. You can go back thousands of years and find ice with huge amounts of CO2 and yet they lived in an ice age.

Here’s another question, another tweet from VereSapiens and he says “Ron Paul do you favor the rights of states, communities and individuals to secede?” We could get into a discussion whether states actually have rights, but I think the gist of this question is do they have the authority and should they be able to. Yes, the answer is yes. I think the Founders of this country believed that the states should be able to secede, they went together voluntarily, it’s a voluntary contract and they should leave, but of course, that principle was destroyed with the Civil War, but the community is this whole idea that communities get bigger and bigger and they are looking for more tax revenues. It’s really a harm to the people, so big government whether it’s international government or whether it’s our federal government or whether it’s the state or very, very large cities taking over all of neighboring communities.

The real issue is, what about individuals to secede? It will be real nice, but will that ever happen? Probably not, but you should be able to, the principle of liberty is that you should be able to lead your own life and if sustaining means that you take care of yourself and live in a community and you promise you won’t hurt anybody, yes, we should absolutely push for that and just think, if every individual who seceded, took care of themselves, it would be a wonderful world. You wouldn’t have to take care of them, there would be no welfare state, there would be no militarism around the world, so under those circumstances that would be very good. Unfortunately though, the authoritarians are in charge and they are both conservatives and liberals and they like to take control of the situation and not allow you to leave. This is the most important thing right now, it’s getting harder to leave even this country with your money if you don’t think things are going well here, because they don’t want you to expatriate or secede or even leave and certainly in most authoritarian systems like in Russia that was the case and they put, build walls around individuals like that so they can’t leave.

I have another question here from Jesus Sanchez and this is an interesting question. He says “Ron Paul why we should or should not raise the minimum wage? Russia has one of the lowest; Australia one of the highest. Thank you Mr. Paul.” I first look at this whole idea of minimum wage as a freedom principle and a freedom of association and if you start with that and end with that, things work out very well in protecting liberty, as well as protecting the economy. Force control of wages by government never works. It seems to work on a short run. Even today we are putting up with seeing what’s happening to the minimum wage going from doubling, going from 7 dollars up to 15 dollars and there’s already evidence of prices for consumer goods that the very people who are pushing for minimum wage are suffering the consequences, because they pay more for their food. The most important thing is it interferes with the voluntary contract.

Let’s say one individual comes and he knows he’s a marginal worker and he needs to learn the job and he’s willing to go to work for 8 dollars an hour. He says yeah, I will go, put me on and I will learn this and I will work my way up and the government says no to the businessman, you can’t do that, you have to pay him 15 dollars. That’s a prohibition against a voluntary employment situation. That is the basic flaw in it. Then, when you get into the economics, no matter what they tell you about, minimum wages never hurt employment. No, the evidence is out there that it really does and I think these recent raisings of the minimum wage are going to be very detrimental to our economy. Wages are going to go up and the purchasing power of the dollar will not follow and that will be a problem. It’s going to be added burden on the economy and help drive this economy down once again.

I have another tweet here from Art Vandelay and good question on foreign policy “Why are civilian targets in Yemen being bombed by Saudi Arabia, with the backing of the UK and America?” Darn good question. I think it’s wrong, they shouldn’t be doing it, but the question is why, why are we doing it, why Saudi Arabia? Saudi Arabia might want to do it because they fear a rebellion in Saudi Arabia, because they have been overly friendly with us and we protect their oil and we are a close ally and we violate some of their belief by putting troops on their land. Yemen has not benefited quite as much and there’s a rebellion there, which actually threatened Saudi Arabia.

The big question that we as Americans should answer is why are we supporting that? We can see this is being a border war going on and yet here we are supporting it. Saudi Arabia couldn’t bomb anybody if we weren’t providing the weaponry for them to fight. To me it’s absolutely wrong for this and many times it’s commercial, it has to do with finances and the bigger question is why are we such close allies of Saudi Arabia? They are the strongest proponents of Sharia Law, they do a lot more beheadings than ISIS does and yet we are bosom buddies with Saudi Arabia and we are backing this bombing. Most Americans don’t know about it and they don’t care about it and it’s going to really be part of the serious problems that we have in the coming years, the next decade or even longer until this is ironed out. I think the violence in that area is going to escalate. We, as I’ve said so many times, we have no business being over there, let alone picking sides and picking sides with people that we know should be very cautious about trusting. There’s a close relationship with Saudi Arabia and 9/11.

Now, interestingly enough, I have another tweet here dealing a little bit with this very subject. It says “Ron Paul will you sign and share the White House petition to declassify the 28 pages and petition the White House?” Certainly I would, I think we should do anything possible. These are the pages that were classified, we are not allowed to read and the Senate investigation that most people have now figured out the close association with 9/11 and the Saudis. I can remember very clearly being in Washington when this happened, if I had to guess right it was on a Tuesday and it was trouble getting out and I had to go to Baltimore to get out and it was just horrible to get out of Washington DC, yet we did know even that early, on that very day that it was happening, that Saudis had their private planes and they were practically ushered out and given free rein to leave the country, not even questioned once by the FBI.

The pages that they won’t declassify tells a lot about that according to those individuals who have looked at it. Yes, we should and we should do whatever we can to find. This is once again is trying to make government transparent, but our problem today is that governments are secret and we have no privacy left and we need to reverse that and we should know about the secrecy of government and when we finally try to protect the whistleblowers like the various ones, Edward Snowden and others who tell us the truth, they become the criminals and they are considered traitors. This is the problem that we have, is getting the truth out.

Very simply, if we would honor our 4th Amendment to make sure the American people have their privacy and, of course, decent politicians should limit the secrecy of government, but right now it looks like we are moving in the wrong direction, because there are serious problems seen after 9/11 and guess what? The attack since 9/11 has been on the American people. It’s almost like the American people were guilty. There is no doubt and just talk to Edward Snowden, he says that there is no doubt that the information was buried in there to know everything about what was to happen on 9/11 and he blamed in on the inept bureaucracy of having just way too much information and it’s never put together. At least, that’s their explanation, they couldn’t act on it.

His point is just getting more information from more Americans and innocent people won’t do any good, it will complicate the matter and that of course gives our government too much free rein and this is why we should always question what they are doing. Whether it’s the lies they told leading up to the Iraq war, the lies about needing to take over Afghanistan and right now the lies we hear about Ukraine and also the many lies that are being told about Syria. This is the real answer to that and to really try to understand Saudi Arabia and Yemen is to get more transparency from our government. We don’t get it, we need to change our government.

I want to thank everybody for tuning in and participating in this episode of ask Ron Paul questions and do it through live Twitter. It’s a lot of fun doing in and let’s hope we can do it again and come back to the Liberty Report soon.