The Consequences of No Ron Paul!

Some of the consequences of not electing Ron Paul are major and some are minor. The major ones are clearly addressed by Dr. Paul in his writings and speeches.

Bankrupcy of America is on the immediate horizon and, other than Ron Paul, there is no one who has the knowledge and courage to face this problem head on. Consequently no Ron Paul means financial ruin for America and there will be no one who can educate the citizens; instead there will be lies and scapegoating and propaganda, and subsequently increased pressures towards serfdom.

Welfare will be touted as what we need if there is no Ron Paul. The dependency on government (that was created by the welfare state) makes a complacent populace which is one of the reasons why it could be possible that there is no Ron Paul. The welfare state is a class society made up of two distinct classes: the dependents and the ego-driven interventionists. The ego-driven interventionists oppose Ron Paul and the ones who are dependent have to choose between righteousness and serfdom. Wake up!

War is the consequence of no Ron Paul. His voice has been ignored just like the Constitution and the counsel of the founding fathers have been ignored. Continuing down that road: loss of life and limb and sanity is the consequence; loss of civil liberties in the form of an expanded military draft and the ignoring of habeas corpus is the consequence; internal strife and chaos and a magnified exposure to revenge-seeking nationals who will come from nations that we have invaded are the consequences; complete loss of respect for America around the world is the consequence; and a crippling dependency on foreign governments in whose debt we are is the consequence of no Ron Paul.

The rich will get richer and the poor will get poorer as a consequence of no Ron Paul. Only Ron Paul stands before the people and stands before Congress and stands before the Federal Reserve and exposes the deceit. He is the only one who talks about the inflation tax and how it impoverishes most to enrich a few. Only he calls the counterfeiter a counterfeiter and demands an end to fiat currencies.

A cheapening of health care is the consequence of no Ron Paul as socialized medicine drains all decency out of 'health' and 'care.'

Education at all levels will be subject to even more pervasive propaganda as a consequence of no Ron Paul. Already the government makes sure that 'government' is seen as the solver of problems rather than as the source and cause of problems. Ron Paul is a true educator. He is teaching us that when our government ignores the Constitution it is immoral, it is unjust. It is tyranny.

There are other major consequences of no Ron Paul. And there are many, many minor consequences of no Ron Paul.

You can vote, which means that the consequences of no Ron Paul are fully within your control, fully within your grasp and not out of your reach. Vote for peace. Vote for prosperity. Vote for Constitutional government. Vote for civil liberites. Vote for true education. Vote for health and care. Who said you have only one vote? Make it count!

What Does The Nobel Prize Signify?

At first glance the Nobel Prize appears to offer recognition of work that advances science or the human condition. This is validated most of the time when researchers in the physical sciences like physics and chemistry receive the Nobel Prize for groundbreaking discoveries.

But what happens when the Nobel Prize is awarded for contributions to the human sciences such as economics, literature and for peace. The key here is understanding the correct methodology for the social sciences. The committee consisting of five members elected by the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences still clings to the empirical methodology (which is perfectly appropriate for the physical sciences) when evaluating economics, which sets the stage for evaluating the peace prize and the literature prize. In other words, no prize for peace or for literature could possibly go to anyone who would destroy the economy, or so you would think. But without a proper understanding of the subjective methodology how can scientific advancements in the social sciences be assessed?

Now let's look at the record. Have the winners of the Nobel Prize for economics advanced the science using the subjectivist methodology? No, almost exclusively they have been empiricists. Do these awards signify advancements? The awards simply represent a scientific bias, then given in the name of science. Hence, they signify and reward pseudo-science.

With this bias firmed entrenched it can be no surprise to see pseudo-science work its way into the other awards. This is one explanation of the awarding of the Nobel Peace Prize to Al Gore for his political campaign for global warming. If you think Al Gore understands environmental science then explain why his analysis differs from that of S. Fred Singer, Professor Emeritus of Environmental Sciences, University of Virginia.

The explanation is simple. Gore is a political animal and he is an ego-driven interventionist. The pseudo-science practiced in the evaluation process by the committee consisting of five members elected by Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences (in other words, the use of the empirical methodology in the social sciences) leads to them awarding prizes to those practicing pseudo-sciences (Al Gore and almost all of the winners of the Sveriges Riksbank Prize in Economics Sciences from its beginning in 1969 up to the present).

The point of this blog is to share economic wisdom. Economic wisdom is what enabled me to see the flaws in the selection of economists for these prestigious awards and it brings into question the other works considered worthy of Nobel Prize awards, at least for those in the social sciences.