Business Insider, Ron Paul destroying the Global economy !

Joined
Mar 14, 2012
Messages
260
The 13 People Who Are Destroying The Global Economy

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/people-destroying-the-global-economy-2012-7?op=1#ixzz203E7f8Rt
His continued insistence on slashing Government spending has informed the Tea Party movement, and any Republican member of Congress that strays too far from their orthodoxy is likely to be challenged in a primary. His rhetoric on returning to the gold standard has politicized the Federal Reserve, helping to constrain Ben Bernanke's actions. He is retiring from Congress in January, but he will continue to use his strong grassroots network to push for smaller government.

Read more: WHAT A CROCK

This whole artice basically states we need to create more money to save the world
try this new link sorry
 
Last edited:
Well, I guess I can see how you'd view destroying the "global economy" as a bad thing if you didn't realize that the economics are destroying us. :rolleyes:
 
Impact: Ron Paul's contribution to the gridlock has been to push the debate on monetary policy so far to the right that even mainstream Republicans are becoming anti-Fed.
His continued insistence on slashing Government spending has informed the Tea Party movement, and any Republican member of Congress that strays too far from their orthodoxy is likely to be challenged in a primary. His rhetoric on returning to the gold standard has politicized the Federal Reserve, helping to constrain Ben Bernanke's actions. He is retiring from Congress in January, but he will continue to use his strong grassroots network to push for smaller government.


Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/people-destroying-the-global-economy-2012-7?op=1#ixzz209tjR4VW

Must be the smell of winning in the air.
 
Hilarious list! Was this written by Paul Krugman?


Obama made the list, too, but not for the reasons he should have.
Position: The 44th President of the United States, 2009-Present

Impact: President Obama inherited a historically bad economy. He made several blunders along the way that made it worse than it had to be. First; the initial stimulus package was not large enough. Whether he underestimated the depth of the crisis, or overestimated his ability to pass more stimulus later, he missed an opportunity to shorten the downturn. Now declining public sector spending is holding back an economy that can ill afford additional headwinds.
 
The basic premise of this article: If only the government could spend more money, then we'd be out of this mess!

And a frighteningly large percentage of people believe that... truly and passionately
 
Business Insider founded Kevin P. Ryan.

Currently, Kevin serves on the board of Human Rights Watch, Yale University, the NYC Investment Fund and INSEAD, and is a member of the Yale International Council and the Council on Foreign Relations.

Gilt Groupe is an online retailer based in the United States. Founded by Ryan in 2007.

To date, Gilt Groupe has secured over $240 million in total financing since establishing operations in November 2007. Its investors include Matrix Partners, General Atlantic Partners , Softbank Group, New Enterprise Associates, DFJ Growth and Goldman Sachs.


Business Insider's CEO and Editor-in-Chief Henry Blodget

A Yale graduate who previously worked on Wall Street before being barred from the securities industry after a conviction for securities fraud.
 
Maybe 5 million would do it, but 1 million is not enough. :p

That would have been a better plan than bailing the banks out. So would be just forgiving the mortagage debt on single family, owner-occupied homes. Let the banks go under, get at some people back on solid footing, and move along.
 
I don't even understand what angle the author is coming from on this one. Most of the people are Keynesians. Merkel and Hollande are almost complete opposites. Democrats, Republicans, Socialists, etc. If the point was that political division is hampering the world economy, then what side is correct? The author has put both sides of the discourse on this list! It makes no sense to me!
 
That would have been a better plan than bailing the banks out. So would be just forgiving the mortagage debt on single family, owner-occupied homes. Let the banks go under, get at some people back on solid footing, and move along.

I'd prefer the same amount of money for everyone. I don't really take to paying for someone's house when I do not have one myself.
 
Back
Top