Ron Paul tells it as it is, someone sure as hell needed to set the record straight.

The problem is that they are trying to resolve the crisis by spending money they don't have on a failed system and implementing more vacuous layers of bureaucracy. His solution - cutting excessive spending, trimming down needless bureaucracy, lowering taxes and balancing the budget (which could also help strengthen the US dollar) - is a much more advisable choice, as opposed to a cheap political stunt that will lead to further economic hardship.

He is right on the money (lulz) when he states that this $700b bailout will be little more than a means of propping up a failed system, not to mention dumping all the losses from Wall St speculators to the average taxpayer. I also love how, when Wolf queried him about workers' 401(k)'s (basically superannuation) he hit the point home that it's little good having superannuation or welfare payments when it comes in a valueless currency.

But the bailout passes on their losses to the average taxpayer. If you speculate and fail, it's your own damn fault.

Totally agree with Ron Paul. The banks and borrowers really have to learn that excessive borrowing cannot be sustainable, and that it will eventually lead to a crash such as what we are seeing now. And if they keep getting bailed out, they will not learn from what has happened, and we will once again keep seeing crashes such as this one. The Government can't bail them out forever.

Heres’ the real story.

Twenty years or so ago, the dipshits leftists in Washington made it clear to banks and other lending institutions that if they did not do something to bring more minorities and low-income Americans into the world of home ownership there would be a heavy price to pay. In typical Marxist fashion, Congress set up processes whereby community activist groups and organizers could effectively stop a bank’s efforts to grow if that bank didn’t make loans to unqualified borrowers.

Enter, stage left, the “subprime” mortgage. These lenders knew that a very high percentage of these loans would turn to garbage, but it was a price that had to be paid if the bank was to expand and grow.

Aside - Guess who was a big mover and shaker in one of the groups (ACORN) forcing banks into making these bad loans. The communist Barack Obama, whose campaign is now managed by the losers from the Democrat party who while working as directors, sent Fannie and Freddie down the tube at the same time as they paid themselves $90 million bonuses.

These garbage loans to unqualified borrowers were then bundled up and sold. The expectation was that the loans would be eventually paid off when rising home values led some borrowers to access their equity through re-financing and others to sell and move on up the ladder. Big mistake.

This is not a failure of the free market and capitalism. What we’re seeing is the inevitable result of political interference by dumbfuck socialists in free market economics.

ABC Bank didn’t want to loan money to Joe Homebuyer because Joe had a spotty job history, owed too much money on his credit cards, and wasn’t all that good at making payments on time. The liberal politicians (like Clinton, Obama) told ABC Bank to figure out a way to make that loan, because, after all, Joe is a straight up minority African American, or forget about opening that new branch office on the Southside.

The loan was made under political pressure and with millions like it, failed and thats why we ended up where we are. You won’t read it in the mainstream media tho. All you’ll hear is the same predictable claptrap. Over and over and over, the drumbeat of the Marxist propagandas and dogmatists, reaching as they always are for the hammer and the nails to fasten the lid on the coffin of capitalism

I agree with you but you haev to think of the banks here. If one bank gets in to the sub-prime market and is making money to begin with, then the shareholders of the other banks will be saying "where are our massive profits?" The bank then needs to find somewhere to invest that doesn't rely on property. That doesn't rely on trading with people who rely on property. What are some areas you can do that in?


So even reputable institutions say make hay while the sun shines

Dr Paul's already made it quite clear why that would be a disgraceful move.

Sounded like a bit of sour grapes at the end there. what do you Ron Paul fans think of Charles Krauthammer

Because Socialism was to blame for this to start with..i would suspect...no.

Ravages of capitalism? average taxpayer? You are aware that usually (estimate) the top 10% wealth earners "fat cats" as you call them...pay 90% of all tax right? So who is bailing them out again?

Agree with you for once.