FOREX TRADERS

[Worn_Buffet]

After doin a lil more Ron Paul diggen....

not so sure I like his stance on the environment...

in short he feels that since the govt can't seem to do a very good job at it (or maybe it's simply cuz they choose not to?) it should be left up to the genl population to deal with....are you kidden me?

"his libertarian presidency would, among other things, allow drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, boost the use of coal, and embrace nuclear power. Moreover, it wouldn't do diddly about global warming because, Paul reasons, "we're not going to be very good at regulating the weather."

Nuke power...OK fine...but come on....lets also at the same time try to work on reducing carbon emissions....sounds like he'd never sign The Kyoto Pact either.

& it goes on....

"On environment, governments don't have a good reputation for doing a good job protecting the environment. If you look at the extreme of socialism or communism, they were very poor environmentalists. Private property owners have a much better record of taking care of the environment. If you look at the common ownership of the lands in the West, they're much more poorly treated than those that are privately owned. In a free-market system, nobody is permitted to pollute their neighbor's private property -- water, air, or land. It is very strict."

Sounds like an environmental cop out to me.

His stance however on econ policy....now that I can handle.

http://www.grist.org/feature/2007/10/16/paul/