"moneyed interests" - already control us. No need to trade anything. Ron Paul is the only candidate standing up to the "moneyed interests". You should educate yourself before you speak such non-sense. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ji_G0MqAqq8 http://www.ronpaul.com/on-the-issues/fiat-money-inflation-federal-reserve-2/

If you value liberty you need to suck it up and admit that Ron Paul is right and quit playing this dems/reps game. They are one and the same.

Austerity will help in the long run. In the short run they need to: A) Get rid of ObamaCare B) Get rid of all of the new EPA Rules C) Get rid of Sarbanes Oxley D) Vow to never ever ever bail out or grant favortism to any company EVER. E) Simplify the tax code (flat tax would be great) F) Get rid of or severely curtail the Federal Reserve

Lies lies lies.. Sorry, FDR was by far the worse president in the 20th century. The lies that have been made up about him are so easily looked up its astounding that so many people still believe them. These are the same people that believe you can get out of a recession by robbing from the poor through inflation and redistributing from a central bank to rich people.

You may have missed it - but we've been trying Keynesian solutions for a LONG time now.. QE1, QE2, Bush's stimulus, Obama's stimulus. All we have to show for it is ALOT of debt and extremely high food & gas prices.

Posts like this explain why so many people think printing money (stealing) helps in recessions. Just continue to bury your head in the sand and move along troll.

The point is although it fits your pattern we KNOW that the pattern is wrong because the recession was not caused by government surplus it was caused by a bust in bogus tech stocks. The government surplus was caused by the preceding boom which is why there is a pattern (all the taxes from the capital gains in the dot com bubble is why there was a surplus). It would better to understand WHY there is a boom and bust cycle instead of blindly concluding that governments should go into massive debt to keep the economy running. In the current recession/depression why was there a housing boom? Why were interest rates so low yet the risk so high? It's called government and bank intervention into the free market and it's NASTY when it crashes. The idea that government should inflate the money supply to help the economy is ludicrous. From a moral perspective alone it is wrong. When money printing/inflation raises gas prices to $3.90/4 gallon who does that hurt? The rich? The upper middle class? No - the poor. Keynesian economics is nothing more than an excuse for the banking and government class to take money from the people with the least power and control.

Lies, lies and more lies: http://www.cato.org/pubs/tbb/tbb-0508-25.pdf

"With the exception of the Clinton surpluses" Why exclude Clinton's surplus? We had a pretty severe recession at the end of the Clinton term which fits your pattern perfectly. Oh, I know why. It's because although it fits an extreme high level correlation it isn't true because you know there was a bubble at the time that was popped. Recessions are caused by booms and busts Keynesian style. The current one was caused by government / bank collaboration in the housing industry and it is being prolonged by that same monopoly intervening in the free market. Considering the US has done the exact OPPOSITE of austerity since 2008 I don't know how you can continue to argue that austerity is even related here.

So take the few remaining dollars from the poor and middle class and hand it to the rich to trickle back down? Liberals always claim to be for the poor but they don't realize that keynesian economics does the most damage to the poor and benefits the rich. And NO that is not what got us out of the great depression. It certainly prolonged it though.

Well how many recessions have been caused from over extension of debt? Sounds like your theory is missing some sample data.

"No plan under serious consideration cuts spending in the way you and I think about it. Instead, the cuts being discussed are illusory and are not cuts from current amounts being spent, but cuts in prospective spending increases. This is akin to a family saving $100,000 in expenses by deciding not to buy a Lamborghini and instead getting a fully loaded Mercedes when really their budget dictates that they need to stick with their perfectly serviceable Honda." http://www.ronpaul2012.net/2011/08/01/ron-paul-on-the-debt-ceiling-debate-just-freeze-the-budget/

They took other people's "altruistic" work. Used it as the basis for their billion dollar business and cut off the "free" part of free software. But I'm sure the people that donated lots of man hours for free feel better because RedHat's owners are loaded.

All of you lefties want MORE government and MORE statism to regulate everything.. Why are you complaining? Do you think YOU are above being regulated but everyone else isn't? You can't have more government AND more freedom. It just doesn't work that way.

If he had money to invest it might be a different story. This strategy is like stealing other peoples credit cards and buying stocks on the stock market because you know how to invest better than the owners of the credit cards you stole. Not to mention his "investments" are essentially bribes and payoffs to democratic cronies, political groups and pork.