Bitcoin Forum

Amongst important US politics, I think Ron Paul is the more likely to ever introduce bitcoin in mainstream media.

I'm curious to have your view on this.

I presume he'll wait long after bitcoin turns into a commodity recognized by the american market place before mentioning it

Ron Paul is no spring chicken.  ;D

I'd be willing to bet his son Rand does first.

After all, it was Rand that was willing to bitch about how his toilet in Kentucky has to abide by California's water conservation laws, and doesn't work on a single flush.

No idea if he'll mention it but it is certainly in our best interest that he gets elected president because he would probably block any attempts by the government to attack Bitcoin during his term. He may even push and pass his Free Competition in Currency Act.

Wrong, he does care:

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h111-4248

Can't wait until Ron Paul is president of the US!

When people start seeing Ron Paul break his promises, they'll have no choice but to think for themselves :D

So basically you ignore evidence that he doesn't only care about gold and repeat the exact same thing? K, nice talking to you.

Ron Paul has actually accepted the idea of competing currencies in refutation of just a single gold standard.

Government likes a currency it can confiscate easily.

 :)

Be careful of confirmation bias.

I bet he'll mention it in passing sometime. Maybe before the next presidential campaign (which is coming soon) I'll bring it up. We have a thing here in Florida every year, the Liberty Summit, which always has Ron Paul as a speaker. I'll try to get it in there.

Unintended consequence? I hope you are trolling. Section 2 is the bill, the rest of the stuff about no tax on metals are just a bonus, they could be scraped and the effects of the bill would be the same. He is basically saying 'let there be free banking'. Also you have to be extremely brainwashed to think that currencies can't be successful unless someone else forces you to use them.

"I have no idea" because I've never heard of Ron Paul.

Isn't he a drag queen from the 90's?

What promises has he broken so far?  You do realize how long he has been making promises, how long he has been acting upon those promises, and how long he has been in government right?


Anyhow,

I don't see why Ron Paul would have any reason to mention a start up currency unless he just some how learned all about it and got really excited about it.  I doubt he'd make himself that easy of a target on TV though.  Basically *every thing* he says is rock solid, which is why the media has to just sound retarded to try and make him look bad.   Sure I disagree with him about religious stuff, but most people are actually religious, while I am not.

If on the other hand he got a really strong understanding of bitcoins and understood the beauty behind it, he might have some terrific insight into what kind of impact a prolific bitcoin market could have on the economy.

He may not have broken any promises yet. I just think he will. And if he does, I think it'll be better for society than if he keeps his promises. Because faith in the idea that we can pick other people to do all our thinking for us will start to erode.

Good point.

Thanks for having thought of that for me ;)

The problem with electing Ron Paul for President is not so much that he will break his promises, but rather that he won't be able to fulfill them.  There's a difference.  Even if he manages to get elected he will likely have a hostile congress to contend with and will find it very difficult to accomplish anything.  Presidents don't have as much power to change the system as we like to think.

Very true. It's not like he hasn't been an elected official for 11 terms. He's had plenty of opportunities to go back on his principles, be bribed, or play that game of politics. But one thing he will be able to do is slow the "progress" of government by vetoing bills. Even if they eventually end passing anyway, it will take time to constantly have to go back and vote on vetoed bills.

Agreed.  And I would vote him in solely for the purpose of vetoing every fucking bill that crossed his desk.  And as a statement to the people who say he's "unelectable".  But I do wonder if perhaps slowing down the decay of the system is worse than just letting it collapse so that new life can occur?

It looks like someone else is doing your thinking for you and injecting this opinion into your head.  Your are summing everyone who supports Ron Paul as people who aren't thinking about anything and just worshiping him or something.  I don't understand where you have come up with this.  You are on the wrong track, see, you're talking about how people feel about presidential candidates like Obama was that were plastered all over the TV.  People who supported Ron Paul did so because the things he was doing and saying were what they actually wanted and when Ron Paul says something it's not like a salesman trying to screw you over to get into office.  He has history of how he has acted in government.  There's no sheep quality inherit to agreeing with him and supporting him unless you are truly doing it without thinking and I don't know *ANYONE* that falls into that category who supports Ron Paul but I do know dozens of people who supported McCaine and Obama who fit that category.  If you analyze his work (you know, thinking for yourself instead of defaulting to "he is going to break his promises even though he hasn't thus far" lol), you'll see he's a useful politician to back.


Yeah that is a an important point but wouldn't it be nice to have someone who was already on the side of the individual citizen though instead of there for big business interests?

Oh absolutely.  Don't take my post as a criticism of Ron Paul.  I have a ton of respect for the man.  I'm always telling my friends to vote for him in 2012 if they love America.  I lean towards anarcho-capitalism (and thus shouldn't vote) but if Ron Paul runs in 2012 I will vote for him.

Has Ron Paul ever said the words "Liberty Dollar" in a public speech or TV interview? They even made a coin with his face on it, so if they didn't get him to say their name, I doubt Bitcoin will.

Good point. I'd also say that he definitely seems to be the most honest and trustworthy polititican I've ever seen or heard of. I do like the guy, I think he's nice, I like what he says. I agree with you that Ron Paul supporters are absolutely nothing like Obama supporters. I wish I'd actually said this:


I do however think that when this ^ happens, we'll be better off in the long run. Because Ron Paul believes in the constitution, and “Either the Constitution authorizes such a government as now exists, or it was powerless to stop it. Either way, it is unfit to exist.”

I heard a question posed to him with that Spooner quote. Basically, he agreed. I think any libertarian would look at anarchy as a Utopian ideal. Government is the negation of liberty. Just because it's small, doesn't mean you're not still sacrificing something.

I think the differences between LD and BTC are numerous enough to not really draw that line.
LD is a competing currency but Bitcoin has so much over it, P2P, digital etc etc

I don't think it's fair to compare the two. Also to be fair to LD they had silver back (right?) physical coins etc so it's got a few things BTC doesn't, not saying I think that makes it better though.


Edit: basically I mean btc is a lot more revolutionary, especially technologically than LD.