Paul advocates the position that says the bailout's infusion of government money will lead to inflation, that our current monetary system is coming to end, and the market, not politicians, can best solve the economic crisis.
Paul objected to the government intervention in that the complex plan expanded to an inflationary inducing, 450 page, $850 billion, $5 trillion debt levied on the American taxpayer, and, he stated: "I don't think it's going to do any good whatsoever."
Paul believes the bailout is an "attack on the dollar system. . . . the end of a monetary system that we've had since 1971."
Paul stated: "It's an immoral system. You're asking the poor people to bail out the rich. You're asking the innocent people to bail out the guilty. You're asking people to just totally defy the Constitution because there's no place in the Constitution that says that we can do these things."
Paul makes an analogy to a drug addict receiving a fix, the junkie feels tood for a day or two but it is an addiction that does not work.
Neither presidential candidate is offering a solution. There are some good parts to both candidates financial programs, but ultimately, but voted with the Bush bailout. Paul said: "how can we trust anybody?" For the record, Paul voted against the bailout.
Paul was asked about the likely scenario in the election, Democrat control of Congress, both houses, and the White House. What are its implications?
Paul responded: "it's a disaster for the country and everybody because, even with all the shortcomings of John McCain, his strongest argument to be president is keep the Congress and the presidency in separate hands."
The only thing that Paul has going for his position is that the government should get out of the way, quit spending money, balance the budget, bring our troops home, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution, while letting the American people keep the money they earn. This may not be enough.
Posts
