Bailout Comedy Video HBO: Bill Maher interviews Texas Congressman Ron Paul

Update: One of the best Ron Paul interviews I've seen - Originally posted Feb. 21, 2009

This is an excellent 3-minute clip from Real Time with Bill Maher from last night (February 20).  Among his guests were Tina Brown, Maxine (batshit crazy) Watters and Texas Congressman Ron Paul by satellite.  This video is Bill Maher with Congressman Paul.

Paul says he would cut federal spending drastically and legalize all drugs but not tax them.  He advocates the dismantling of the Federal Reserve and wants to save $1 trillion annually by closing overseas military bases and bringing troops home.  It's a shame his presidential candidacy never caught fire as his supporters hoped.  The change Ron Paul would bring to this nation makes establishment politicians quake in fear.  He would move quickly to dismantle 75% of the federal government.  Might be fun to watch Washington attempt to deal wth a downsizing of this sort.

---

Related:

• MUST SEE - Bill Maher Stands Up For Ron Paul & Calls His Audience 'Brainwashed Liberals'

Comments

[DJF]

I question the “no tax on drugs” idea.

If that means no special taxes on drugs then I agree.

If that means that there should be no taxes on drugs while other products are taxed then I disagree.

I think that if we are going to have taxes then they should be equal across all products since the government should not encourage nor discourage one product over another. The saying the “Power to tax is the power to destroy” is true. However being able to tax one product or one activity or one person and not another is even worse power and even more likely to be abused.

[zack]

This is one of Ron Paul's best interviews. He just dropped some massive truth bombs on Bill Maher and his audience.

BTW - this is a great site. I will be checking it out on a daily basis - these bailouts are outrageous!

[Panacea]

that was phenomenal. i am convinced ron paul can be elected President in 2012, i'm one of his supporters who will not give up hope.

[Castro Is Cool Again]

I also wonder about not taxing drugs. However, Paul doesn't believe in many taxes and would cut gov't spending so dramatically that we wouldn't need such high taxes.

[gkj]

If Ron Paul were 20 years younger he would have a chance to be elected President.

[Waldo]

Y'know, I'm with Paul on all the social & foreign policy issues- drug war, empire-building, etc. , but history suggests the Keynsians are right that we're not spending enough to meet the lack of demand. It wasn't regulation but the lack of it that got us in this mess, and it is massive spending that will hopefully mitigate the damage somewhat.

Even Greenspan admits that he was wrong. Paul should probably rethink some of what he's saying too.

W

[Graphite]

"Y'know, I'm with Paul on all the social & foreign policy issues- drug war, empire-building, etc. , but history suggests the Keynsians are right that we're not spending enough to meet the lack of demand."

No, it doesn't, all that such history suggests is that in one particular period in American history, i.e. the Great Depression, high levels of government debt-financed spending *coincided* with a (very prolonged, drawn out) recovery from an economic collapse. There were plenty of other periods where cutbacks in spending and taxes coincided with recovery from deflationary contractions, including the highly comparable recession from 1920-1923. There is not any coherent theoretical basis, and even less empirical evidence, to suggest that the FDR administration's high levels of spending were, in isolation, the cause of the recovery from the Great Depression.

All that massive spending will do is ultimately cause our own government's debt to become distressed. The only damage it's going to mitigate will hopefully be in my own portfolio, if I manage to time my Treasury shorts well.

Oh, and Greenspan has been a deceitful manipulator for years and is continuing to act like one in blaming failure of "the free market" for his own inability and failure to technocratically manage risk out of the financial system. His idiocy is simply taking on new forms.

[Theo]

Dr. Paul makes some veyy good points. I do not agree totally, but as above I (as most people) are growing weary of all the tax bailouts.

[Joan Jett]

The lack of support for Ron Paul during the presidential campaigns is proof positive of America's stupidity. I want to split the country in two and elect Ron to run our half. Our half would have no housing gambler bailouts, our half would not try and police the world.

[Ed]

The markets are collapsing here. There is no faith in U.S. markets anymore.

[D Jones]

Mr. Paul has previously demonstrated his complete lack of any understanding about the monetary system, role of Federal Government and balance of power needed around the world. We don't have an empire, but we do have treaties with foreign countries to honor.

This pathetic video is just one more example of his extreme positions and campaigns of misinformation and misunderstanding. In a recent hearing in Congress he was very convincing in demonstrating he knows nothing about the powers granted to congress by the constitution. He is probably too old to go back to school and learn what he needs to know. But please, spare the rest of the educated world his uninformed dribble.

[spideydouble]

Full disclosure: I voted for Ron Paul and agree this is one of his better interviews. I originally supported Obama and truly believed he would be this generations JFK, but after his grandstanding with McCain in support of the finance industry bailouts I came to the realization that he was a typical establishment politician in "change" clothing. Friends and family I had convinced to support Obama were shocked at my sudden change, but voted for Obama anyway. Ron Paul's ideas are generally much more radical and philosophically salient to me personally. I would agree that Paul tends to be a little too simplistic, but his ideas could be implemented with the right people in place to debate and execute the details.

I would rather more special ops and counter-guerrilla teams be seeded throughout Afghanistan rather than the massive military buildup Obama is planning. I think this is the right path for future military spending, recruiting, training, and deployment. Way to keep the military-industrial complex gears greased for years Obama.

@DJF

"If that means that there should be no taxes on drugs while other products are taxed then I disagree."

I agree with you about the lack of equity in taxation of non-essential goods. However essential goods like food and water (and I would argue clothing) should never by taxed and in a protected category. Vitamins, minerals, and medically necessary drugs should be in a protected category as well.

"I think that if we are going to have taxes then they should be equal across all products since the government should not encourage nor discourage one product over another."

I believe government can and should serve a roll in encouraging and rewarding good behavior and discouraging and penalizing bad behavior. Taxation is a great tool for that, though it has generally been used to finance massive government expenditure like major wars. The good/bad behavior definition is up for debate and could change based on desired consequences.

[DJF]

Reply to spideydouble

I have three big practical problems with the special tax deal for special products, activities or people.

One is that it makes the tax system complex and usually only those with insider knowledge or the ability to hire people to manage their money can take advantage of a complex tax system. Many people in the US simply don’t have the financial knowledge or assets to take advantage of many of these tax breaks

Two is that it leaves the door wide open for corruption since anyone wanting a special tax break lobby’s or bribes or threatens until they get what they want. Usually with all sorts of justifications written up by their PR department. If you don’t want special interests running Washington or your State Capitol then you need to stop giving them the opportunity to get huge rewards for their lobbying.

Three, such special tax breaks often have unintended consequences. The housing bubble was helped along by the capitol gains tax break of $250,000 per person for housing after two years of ownership, but this simply allowed a two year flip to become popular.

[senior silverio]

"Mr. Paul has previously demonstrated his complete lack of any understanding about the monetary system, role of Federal Government and balance of power needed around the world. We don't have an empire, but we do have treaties with foreign countries to honor."

SS: Then why don't you share your complete understanding of the monetary system?

"This pathetic video is just one more example of his extreme positions and campaigns of misinformation and misunderstanding. In a recent hearing in Congress he was very convincing in demonstrating he knows nothing about the powers granted to congress by the constitution. He is probably too old to go back to school and learn what he needs to know. But please, spare the rest of the educated world his uninformed dribble."

SS: Perhaps you can tell us, using examples, where he is incorrect and what the correct ideas would be? It's very simple to call someone wrong with confidence and quite another thing to refute them. I find it interesting that when one goes back toward more simplicity, more freedom, more constitutional gov't, that it is considered extreme--very funny.

[golden rule]

...history suggests the Keynesians are right that we're not spending enough to meet the lack of demand. It wasn't regulation but the lack of it that got us in this mess, and it is massive spending that will hopefully mitigate the damage somewhat....

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA (gasp) AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.

Whew. I feel better now.

[austrain]

I am a Paul supporter and I found that the interview was far from his best. The previous interviews with Maher have gone better. Maher's comments/questions around drugs aren't doing him any favors as people over focus on this as an issue. Dr. Paul could do a better job explaining what he means by regulation causing the problem too because this is going to be lost in the nearly constant media biltz of the Keynesians in power. Simply put for those that fail to see, our economy is completely regulated as the money supply, interest rates, etc. are completely control by the government via the Fed. For instance, a free market would not have let the excesses of the housing industry build up in the first place as interest rates would never had been at the low rates they were for the length of time they were. Further more, true risk would have been considered/priced when giving the loans if there was no implicit guarantees on many of the loans in the system. Finally, those that behaved in a risky manner would be dealt with in a harsh fashion(bankrupt) for making bad loans so as to serve as an example for the future and clear out the system quickly.

For the one babbling about him not understanding the monetary system - spoken like a true Keynesian, utter nonsense, your instructors were Keynesians. Almost all are.

For Waldo, I'd like to add to graphite's excellent response - you only need to see what has happened in Japan's completely Keynesian response to a similar situation(a real estate bubble and stock bubble) to question Keynesian central planning. The US will not have it as easy as Japan though because Japan was not a huge debtor nation.

[Ain't Bullshittin']

Link to video


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M5lb0l3sYBo

[Go Lakers!]

Nice website. You have been bookmarked!

[mark mchugh]

Can't find a link for Ron, but Rand (freedom lite) opposes abortion even in cases of rape and incest.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rand_Paul#Abortion_and_bioethics

So white trash like them have the "freedom" to inbreed....nice

Why do you like them?

[Inurface]

Just telling you what you want to hear.