I applaud him for that. He is certainly the rare politician who seems to actually understand the legitimacy of the #occupyWallStreet protest.
Of course, the last time I heard applause for him like this at one of these debates, he was arguing against bailing out people with catastrophic illnesses who have no health insurance.
It’s a shame, Ron Paul is so, so close to being the best politician we could hope for, but in the end he has as many nutty ideas as he does brilliant ones. Maybe the two things come from the same place. Every other serious candidate is scared stiff of proposing any kind of fundamental change to the structure of the economy that would address the cause of these bubbles.
Nowhere in the video posted does he say he “supports” it.
He said, “IF you had to give money out…”
Ron Paul was making a point. If we had to bail someone out, why did we bailout the banks that were pedaling sub-prime mortgages as AAA?
How about the people that were forced to overpay for rents, mortgages, property taxes?
You know regular folks that were not flipping houses, or using their homes like an ATM.
Ron Paul does NOT “support” bailing out either, but IF you had to give money out…
He’d win my vote if he flipped on this and gave his full heart to policies that would reinvigorate the middle class. I suppose he’s too much of a purist in his ideology to do that, however.
Libertarianism is such a mind-prison.