• Misrepresent me and mind-read over and over again, then pretend you didn’t, then refuse to admit it, then just repeat the whole procedure
• Pretend to know the future in which case there’s obviously no point in you discussing anything
• Declare that you’re “absolutely certain” Austrian theory is wrong, but when asked to represent what it is, cannot do so and evade answering the question what you understand of it.

So it’s not that you’re *probably* not approaching the issue with an open mind. You’re positively telling us you’re not! Obviously anything I could say would only receive more of the same senseless technique. The fact is, you’re not interested in an honest discussion. If you really want to know what Ron Paul’s policies are, and what difference they would make, look them up yourself!

David f having gone out backwards completely unable to defend his argument, now chimes in to admire Pericles whose argument consists of *nothing but* circularity and ad hominem. What a great advertisement for the statist ideology!

Passy, unable to answer my questions for obvious reasons, first tries to evade them, and then slinks off rather than admit the truth.

So the result is this:
• the libertarians have shown reason, both ethical and pragmatic, why Ron Paul would be better than any other Democrat or Republican candidate, in terms of the left’s own pretended concerns
• statists have no reason why war is better than peace, fascism is better than liberty, and institutionalized fraud better than honest money; all we get is the same rusted-on circular ASSUMPTION that governmental decision-making must be better in any given case without ever joining issue
• they have tried every diversion, evasion, slogan, and slimy tactic possible to try to squirm out of the self-contradiction and consequences of their views
• but still they shrink from admitting they actually prefer Obama’s mass killings, corporate cronyism and police state.

They’ve lost the rational and ethical argument big time; and we can only wonder at their intellectual circularity or dishonesty in promoting what they claim to oppose.

You appear upset, Peter Hume.

>>Obviously anything I could say would only receive more of the same senseless technique<<

I must try harder to meet your exacting standards.

>>Pericles Obviously there’s no point my wasting time explaining Austrian theory to you<<

Hmmmm. Given the circumstances, that sounds awfully like a cop-out to me.

For one, I have read widely on Austrian theory, so you don't need to explain it.

But I have to tell you, that every time I have ever asked a Mises-bot a direct question, they run a mile. Any vague, high-principled-sounding response, it appears, is preferable to addressing the Austrian School's Achilles heel: the theories don't - cannot - translate into actions. A dead letter.

Your list of accusations against me simply underlines this. Austrian School economics look great on paper, but suck when it comes to practical application. They seem to give you licence to bandy around vague concepts about "freedom" without reference to the reality of the world in which we live. We have government. We have had for many centuries. Learn to live with it, with all its frustration and fragility, it isn't going to go away.

>>If you really want to know what Ron Paul’s policies are, and what difference they would make, look them up yourself!<<

As Arjay can attest, I have made a thorough and detailed study of Ron Paul's policies, and would be happy to discuss them individually with you at any time. It was in fact his enthusiasm for the gold standard that reawakened my interest in Austrian School theories, so perhaps instead of throwing mud over the fence at each other, we can start with that one.

What do you say?

Ron Paul thinks that reintroducing the gold standard - or other specie-backed currency - is a good idea for the US economy. What are your views?

Or, if you don't like that one, let's go back to the one I have already asked twice, without luck.

When Ron Paul abolishes the Fed, what transactions will no longer occur, and how will that affect the US economy?

PHume, your viewpoints are interesting up to a point, but as I said, I won't bother you with any more questions.

You will have to find your oxygen elsewhere.

You may consider that a service rendered for free.