Korean Job Discussion Forums

[Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee]

Using such a small sample early in the campaign does shows very little or nothing.

There are like 2.5 Million in the US armed forces out of that 1/ 2000 gave money to Paul still early in the election campaign

And since Paul doesn't understand why Al Qaeda fight and opposes US govt support for alternative energy he isn't a candidate with a clue on national security.

[ontheway]

joojoo, the only one who doesn't understand Al Qaeda is you. They lied to you, but you bought the lie. You would buy anthing that any slick salesman sold if you liked the lie.

And it has been demonstrated that you know nothing about economics. No economist supports subsidies for alternative energy ... only wackos and greedy socialists support subsidies that are doomed to failure at best.

The entire current energy/oil/transportation/global warming/pollution problem is a result of the last round of subsidies which you want to expand, redirect and make worse and thereby worsen the problems that already exist.

And no, your constant nonsense about the internet, space and GPS is also wrong. These things were all developed by private contractors and the fact that government money was involved only means that the technological advances that could have been made cheaper and would have been more useful were, at a minimun, slowed or delayed, which is actually the best possible outcome of such subsidies.

The donors have voted with their dollars in numbers from the military. It constitutes a valid sample. You know that they support Dr. Ron Paul and they agree with him. It galls you, so you keep denying the truth. The numbers are there. Ron Paul with more support than all other Repubs combined and nearly as much as all candidates. Yeah, it's only 1 out of 2000, but that's a much higher sample size than other national polls use in nationwide polling out of the whole voting population.

[Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee]

Questions

If the US had a gas tax would people use more of it or less or it?

IF the US had coal to oil plants would the US then have more oil or less oil to make use of?

If the car companies had their pensions taken off their hands so they could invest in more R&D would their R&D investments be less or more?

IF the US was less dependent on mideast oil would the US be more secure or less secure?

Simple questions please answer.

Libertarianism is a cult.

[ontheway]

[Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee]

These are not so simple, but you are simple minded, so you think they are:

[ontheway]

Joo, I can't teach you because you lack the background.

Teaching you economic policy is like teaching a first grader who can't add to do calculus. Your comments are inane.

[ontheway]

February 4, 2008 8:29 pm EST

Former State Representative D i c k Randolph Endorses Ron Paul for President

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

February 4, 2008



ANCHORAGE, ALASKA�Former Alaska State Representative D i c k Randolph has endorsed ten-term Texas Congressman Ron Paul for President of the United States:



�I enthusiastically support Dr. Ron Paul�s effort to become the next President of the United States because he is the only candidate who clearly understands the fallacy of this policy and has the ideas and moral strength to attempt to correct it. Until about 70 years ago our foreign policy was, correctly, one with as few foreign entanglements as possible and as Dr. Paul states, 'Peace, commerce and honest friendship with all nations.' We must return to that policy or our imperialist posture around the world will leave us bankrupt both economically and morally.�



Di ck Randolph previously stated, �Ron is an outstanding individual, has the highest of moral and ethical character and understands the critical issues and their solutions and should be elected the next President of the U.S.�

[Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee]

[ontheway]

After Huckabee drops out, the conservative/christian wing of the Republican Party will swing behind Ron Paul. He will will the delegates from those caucus states that have previously voted but not yet chosen actual delegates (Iowa, Maine, Nevada, Louisiana, and many of today's caucuses have only begun the process):


ChristianBusinessDaily.com Endorses Ron Paul for President

by David G. Johnson
February 4, 2008


Christian Business Daily has long stood for policy that is rooted in solid Biblical principles � sound stewardship of financial and other resources, rewards for fruitfulness and productivity, and environments that allow for enterprise to flourish without undue taxation or public theft masquerading as compassion. This is why our editorial team has chosen to support a presidential candidate in the Republican primaries, Ron Paul.

The reasons for our selection of Congressman Paul are numerous, but can be summarized by what we esteem in his personal character, ethics, integrity, consistent sound economic and monetary policy record, and his grasp of foundational concepts that promote the freedoms that were hard-won by the Founders and codified by the framers of the U.S. Constitution.

We recognize a number of disturbing trends within the ranks of so-called "conservatives" in recent history, including a near-Socialist commitment to furthering the creation of a paternal State promising its people health care and other entitlements traditionally supported by liberals. The field of Republican candidates in the current election cycle is dominated by supporters of unhealthy taxation and wealth redistribution schemes that fund unethical and immoral initiatives, promote dependence over personal responsibility, and contribute to the further degradation of liberty.

We recognize that it is only in a free society that we, as Christians and as businesspeople, will be able to live out our God-given individual purposes without ungodly restraint of over-intrusive government, without having our values and freedoms trampled upon, and without theft of our families' resources � whether via direct taxation or through the creation of additional burdensome national debt.

Ron Paul, as a physician who has delivered over 4,000 babies, has taken as strong a pro-life stance as has any candidate for public office in the history of the debate over this issue. As a Congressman, he has demonstrated an unwavering commitment to the Constitution, to limited government, to individual freedom, to property rights, and to sound economic policy. His positions on issues facing our nation today are most closely aligned with what we believe to be the Biblical positions.

We recognize that there are questions regarding his ability to win the nomination of the Republican Party � particularly in light of the strong media spin which has virtually ignored his candidacy and his record-breaking support. We also recall from history the Presidential election of 1860, in which there were four strong Republican candidates for President. Abraham Lincoln was elected to the highest office in the land in a strongly-contested battle. He won only 39% of the popular vote.

We urge our readers to give thorough consideration to the field of candidates and cast their vote in favor of the liberty that made our nation great. Cast a vote for Ron Paul.

[ontheway]

The free market would save the whales, if the free market was allowed to operate. The whales should be privately owned like other animals. The private owners would have the incentive to save and expand the herd.

This is in fact the only solution to the overfishing and over harvesting problems in the world. We need to establish property rights in herds, schools, flocks and other groups of fresh and salt water fishes, birds, ducks, deer, whales etc. Such rights can be established based on species or based on dry land, wet land and submerged land property rights. The governments of the world have failed in their stewardship of natural animal and plant resources. The free market, including the charitable sector of organizations concerned with species preservation such as Ducks Unlimited along with private farmers, fishers, hunters will do the best job.

This is how the American buffalo was saved. When essentially all of the government owned, socialist buffalo had been hunted and killed, there were only a few hundred buffalo left, all in private herds. It was the private buffalo farmers who preserved the buffalo. This breeding stock in the free market saved the buffalo.

The destruction of species is nearly always a result of socialism (other than the significant amount of extinction brought about through acts of nature itself). Private property rights must be established to enable the preservation of species.


Thousands of books are available on these economic topics Joojoo. You should try reading at least one book on economics or take one class. Try one business and one accounting class too. It's obvious from your inane comments about policy that you haven't and that you don't have a clue.

[Pluto]

[ontheway]

Buying a 300ha plot in the middle of the ocean would be as foolish as buying a 1 square foot "plot" in the middle of Manhattan. So of course that wouldn't work.

However, buying a 3000 square mile plot might make a lot of sense. You and your fellow investors could invest in the protection necessary. Your property would likely be part of some significant "nation" as well, and the Japanese have not resorted to attacking cattle farms in Iowa lately, so they probably wouldn't attack a US owned whale farm that was part of US territory. (In fact, they haven't yet attacked Dokdo.) The oceans, rivers, lakes etc. of the world need to be privatized anyway, so it's time to get on with it.


Since the socialist model has failed totally, and since the species are currently "unowned," it is perfectly possible to set up appropriate stuctures of ownership based on the particulars of each species. In the case of whales, the herd itself should be privatized into one or more privately owned herds. The individual members of the herd can easily be tagged and tracked. The harvesting would be limited by the owners. Should groups of individuals organize to own some herds of whales with a zero harvest rate, that would also be possible. The species would flourish in either case. They would be forever safe from extinction.

Japanese corporate farmers might be the best managers of a "herd" of whales. They would profit from increasing the size of their herd and would limit their harvest to maximize the growth of the herd.

[Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee]

The last time the free market went to work whales were almost wiped out.

Some won't even make it back. The blue whale is so rare almost no one can see one.

The Buffalo were not government owned. Nobody owned them and the free market nearly wiped them out.

Look at the free market for Tuna , the populations are collapsing.

[ontheway]

[Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee]