Rand Paul – Embracing Honest Capitalism in “The Case Against Socialism” | The Daily Show

Welcome back to The Daily Show. Man, it’s good to be here. I can’t believe more Republicans
don’t want to come on. -It’s weird, right?
-That must… Must be… -Must hurt you right here.
-It-it hurts me so… -(laughs) -You know why?
Because more Republicans came to the show than Democrats
before Trump was president. And then Trump won, -and then all of a sudden,
you guys… -You think… It’s almost like
you were afraid to come back. You think there’s a cause
and effect between the two? -Somehow they’re related?
-You think that… Wait. -(laughs) -You guys are, like,
afraid of what Trump will think if you come here?
Is that what it is? Hmm. I… (laughter) -(cheering and applause)
-No, regardless, can I tell you, I appreciate it.
I appreciate it. I appreciate you coming here, because I love
having conversations. Um, we’re gonna talk
about the book, The Case Against Socialism,
but I would be remiss if I didn’t talk
about the news of the day, um, Donald Trump
pulling the troops out of the region in Syria. You supported Trump’s decision
to withdraw the troops. Why? As you and I
have talked about before, um, I’ve been opposed
to regime change and war in the Middle East
for a long time. I agreed with President Obama’s
decision to come out of Iraq. I never thought the Iraq War
was a good idea to begin with. Um, I think it was one
of the reasons he built… he beat Hillary Clinton. I think it’s also been one
of the things where there could be
some agreement between right and left, but I think people
have kind of gotten distracted with the things they don’t like
about President Trump. But do we really want
another war in Syria? There’s, like, five
different countries fighting, and are 50 soldiers
going to stop the advance of tens of thousands
of, uh, Turkish troops? But they did, though.
They-they did, and they were. Like, let’s-let’s argue it
this way. There were 50-odd
American troops in that region. -Right.
-Right? And the Turkish forces weren’t attacking
the Kurdish forces. -Well, no, they were…
-But literally within hours, -they have now.
-No, they were getting ready to, and that’s why we moved
the 50 troops. -But here’s my point. -So
you’re saying President Trump did that to protect the troops -because that was about
to happen? -Well, I think so. -I think so, but the thing is…
-You think so or you know so? -Well, I…
-No, no, honestly. I’m asking. No, I haven’t had a discussion
with the president over it, but what I would say
is that I think 50 troops are not really what
you go to war with. And so if you talk
to our generals or you talk to our soldiers,
they’re sort of of the belief if America’s gonna go to war,
let’s go to war. But you don’t go to war
with 50 people. -There’s also…
-But at the same time, the Pentagon has said–
to that point– the Pentagon has come out
and said, “No, but this was strategic. -We didn’t want a war.”
-Oh. ‘Cause it doesn’t always
have to be war or nothing. It can also be just people there -providing presence and support.
-But 50 people in the middle of a war
can be a calamity. You remember what happened
in Beirut. We had 300 people
in our barracks. -We had a bombing,
and it was a calamity. -Mm-hmm. And even Reagan back then said, “Well, gosh, now we could go in
with an all-out war, or we can decide that
the Middle East is very messy.” I would say that right and left
agreed for a long time that regime change
didn’t really help us in Iraq. It didn’t really help us
in-in Libya. And many of us… Look, I’ve agreed
with Bernie Sanders on Iran. We shouldn’t be going into Iran
without Congress first voting. -Mm-hmm. -We should have a vote
to declare war. But here’s my question. Lindsey Graham and the Cheneys
are running around the place, and now we have the left
agreeing with them. I mean, here’s the…
Where’s the opposition? They’re running around, saying, “Oh, we need to have
a resolution “next week in Congress “supporting
that the 50 U.S. troops should stay in Syria.” And I think we should have
a resolution saying… Are we going to declare war? Are we going to be involved
in a war? But if so, who are we fighting? We’re gonna fight the Turks? Do you know who’s allied
with the Turks now? The Free Syrian Army. They were our allies
for seven years. We trained them. So, the Free Syrian Army
is allied with the Turks, who are allies
who we’re supposed to support. So if the Kurds and the Turks
get i-into a fight, by law, we’re supposed to
actually be supporting Turkey. You’ve got Iran in the mix.
You got Russia in the mix. You’ve got Assad in the mix.
But really, it all stemmed from the same philosophy
that we did in Iraq. In Iraq, we were gonna get ri…
rid of Hussein, and democracy
was gonna break out. It was gonna…
The Middle East was gonna be this wonderful place. It’s the same with Assad. Maybe it’s
a faulty sort of notion that regime change is good
for the country and… or good for the world. I think you get less stability
and you get more terrorism every time we try to topple
these governments. Right. But in this case, it feels like what you’re saying would be perfectly fine and true were you not dealing
with previous actions. And I understand
where you’re coming from, and you have been fairly
consistent in this regard, where you’ve said,
“I don’t want to go into wars.” But America has already placed
itself in these positions. The Middle East is what it is -partly because
of America’s actions. -Right. -Right.
-And so are you now saying, “Walk away,
despite what has happened”? -Because-because now what if…
-Well, like I… -what-what if the Turkish…
-like I said… -what if the Turkish people
-I-I supported… -wipe out the Kurds?
-I supported– I supported, across the aisle,
President Obama’s, um, decision -to leave Iraq and
to lower the troops -Yes. Right. and say the war’s over.
I-I support -the same thing in Afghanistan.
-Do you think it’s worth it -if ISIS comes back?
-Well, see, here’s the problem. Everywhere you go–
and this is what the neocons and the right wing
and the Cheneys and all the crazy warmongers
want– they say, “If you ever leave,
terrorists will come back.” But the problem is that argument
could go on forever. These same people
would still be in Vietnam. They-they would never have left
Vietnam. These people never get over and they never understand
that these wars aren’t working. You can’t spread, uh, democracy
through military means -and at the point of a gun.
-Mm-hmm. And we can say,
“Well, we could save the Kurds.” It’s complicated. You know,
there’s four different sets of Kurds. There’s Iraqi Kurds,
there’s Syrian Kurds. There’s two political parties
in Syria. Some of them have
been considered to be terrorists -and have had terrorist acts
on Turkey. -Right. There’s a Turkish political
party that are Kurds. And the thing is
is it’s sort of working in Iraq, but I don’t think
that we’re going to be able to– If we wanted to carve out
a region of Syria and say, “Kurds, you can have it and we’re gonna stay with you
forever,” we’d have to put 10,000,
20,000, 30,000 troops in there. And I’m not for that. I’m not
really for getting involved in the Syrian Civil War. I don’t know
who the good guys are or the bad guys are over there. It’s a very, very complicated… It is– it is a complicated war. And like I say,
you have been fairly consistent, which makes this-this stance that you’re taking
strange for me. Because, in 2015, you advocated
for the arming of the Kurds. You said, you said specifically, you said that you think
that they are the most effective and significant fighters
that America has and if the Kurds fight
to push out ISIS, that Americans
should give them a homeland. -And, really, essentially…
-Like, I mean, that-that would have required
creating– cutting out land. No, essentially,
we have advocated for– -and I have supported–
within Iraq, -Mm-hmm. a-an area of autonomy. I would prefer
to be their own country. It’s one of the few things that Biden actually had
a good comment on. At the end of the Iraq War, we should’ve divided it up
into three countries. And, really,
a lot of the problems that come from the Middle East
actually stem from, right at the end of World War I,
what happened is, you know, Western powers
carved up all these countries r-regardless of who lived there
and what their religions were and who
their tribal affiliations were. And so we got stuck
with a map like this. But, yes,
I have advocated in Iraq for a place of autonomy
for Kurds, but I haven’t advocated
or said it would be practical to create one in Syria. And, in fact, I think the same
problems that we got into with regime change in Iraq,
we have the same problems. Hundreds of thousands of people
died in Syria. And maybe we shouldn’t have
gotten involved in the beginning at all
in trying to topple Hus– uh, Assad. Maybe it’s not
the job of America to always decide
who runs every country. That’s an interesting– that’s
an interesting standpoint. (applause) Let me… let me ask you this,
with, uh, regards to the news that is happening now,
a-aside from Turkey. The impeachment scandal
is-is growing every single day. Now, you-you– you know, you’ve
had your-your point of view, and you’ve said, you know, you think the Bidens
should be investigated. You think that America should be
looking into what Trump– Donald Trump has said
is a corruption that is happening
somewhere there. So I understand your standpoint,
and I’m not ignoring it. That aside though,
do you think that Donald Trump was appropriate in the way
he handled that? Do you think he did it
in the right way? Because if he believed
that there was a corruption, why did he not go
through the FBI? Or why-why would he put pressure
on a foreign leader with the promise
of American aid? Was that in my contract?
We were gonna– I was gonna talk– I have
to talk about the impeachment? -(laughs) No, no, no, no.
-No, I’m just kidding. -I’m just kidding. -‘Cause you–
I don’t talk to many senators. No, I’m just– I’m– Yeah. -I’m just… -I would’ve asked
Will Smith yesterday, -but, I mean, you were more
appropriate. I mean… -Yeah. I would say that there is
not anybody from either party that has not tried to manipulate
the aid of Ukraine to get what they want. And then there’s a broader
question you could ask, and you could say,
“Well, should aid– “When we give money
to a country like Ukraine, should it be contingent
on us getting what we want?” And then you can say,
“Well, is it appropriate “that he actually told ’em to
investigate a particular person that he’s running against?” Well, was it appropriate
for Joe Biden to ask– say, “Well,
we’re not gonna give you “a billion dollars’ worth of aid “unless a prosecutor
quits investigating a company that my son works for
and gets $50,000 a month”? -I think you could argue…
-So you’re say– you’re saying the two cancel each other out? -I-I’m…
-If two people do a bad thing, does it cancel each other out
then? I-I’m saying that most people… -A lot of us are partisans
on either side. -Uh-huh. But I’m saying, most people
in America want people to be judged
with the same sort of law. So if it looks like we’re going
to judge Trump with one law, and we’re going to judge Biden
with another law, some people are gonna say
that’s unfair. Some people will retreat into
their corners and say it’s fine. Would you then…?
So then would you…? Okay, so if you were
with those people, then would you support
both of them being judged if they’ve both done
something wrong? Well, what I would…
No, what I would say is “yes.” I would say that we can judge
what they did, whether it was right or wrong. I don’t think either one
of them are things that we should
impeach someone over. So, the fact
that the president said, “Well, you know, you ought
to investigate Hunter Biden and the 50 grand he was making
a month… a month,” you know,
there’s no specific law. There’s no specific thing
saying, “Well, we should impeach people
for doing that.” There’s another thing. You know, you mentioned earlier that over half of the public now
wants-wants impeachment. But if you ask the public,
ask them, you know, “Are you in favor “of actually sending money
that we don’t have to Ukraine in the first place,” I think you’d find 75%
of Americans aren’t really for sending money
to Ukraine anyway, ’cause we actually have
to borrow it from China to send it
to Ukraine. So I think there’s a lot
of different viewpoints on this, but I think in the end,
what’s gonna happen with this impeachment thing is people are gonna retreat
into their camps. And then, the people
in the middle are gonna say, and finally make a judgment, “Is it fair
to treat people differently?” You know, is it fair?
Do we dislike other things… -Mm-hmm.
-…about the president enough that we’re-we’re fine
with going on this? I think there is a danger… This is why I’m against most
of these special prosecutors, whether they’re going after
Republicans or Democrats. I think they have too much power
to go after a… after a person’s entire life that I think really,
we’re gonna devolve into where
we criminalize elections. And when the Democrats win,
they’ll go after Republicans. When the Republicans win,
they’ll go after the Democrats. And so, I think there’s a real
danger to becoming a country where everything’s
so criminalized. We’re gonna have an election
in a year. Can we not just sort of wait
for a year to decide who-who…
who gets to run the government? -(audience groaning, booing)
-No! I hear your point. Your book is self-explanatory. The Case Against Socialism. Straight into it.
You are clearly against it. The question is, why? Well, I think
that if you review the history of the last 100 years, and every
time we’ve tried socialism, it seems
that time and time again, it ends in authoritarianism,
ends in genocide and famine. When you say “we,”
who are you referring to? When… when you look
at the cases of socialism over the last hundred years, whether it be Hitler
or Stalin or Mao or Pol Pot or a Castro,
or currently in Venezuela, what you see is famine, what you see is a disaster
of epic proportions. And I think
we have to be careful that we don’t somehow think, -“Well, it’s gonna be different
this time.” -Mm-hmm. And that’s one of the questions
of the book, and the question is,
“Is violence– is state-sponsored violence
an anomaly?” Was it just accidental
that we got Stalin? Or as some economists
and philosophers have said, if you’re going to take
all of the property from private ownership, and the government’s going
to take it over, there is a point
at which people will resist. And that’s what happened. You know, when Mao came
to take the farms, and the farms were
collectivized, people resisted, and they were
killed by the millions. Same happened with Stalin. Hitler was different.
He was socialist, also. His was sort of…
was racially motivated, as well as confiscatory
in nature. But now, today’s socialists say,
“Oh, that’s not what we mean. “That’s not what we’re for. We’re for Scandinavia.” So we spent a lot of time
in The Case Against Socialism looking at Scandinavia
and asking the question, “Are they socialists?
Are they successful?” And one of the conclusions
we came to is that, actually, Bernie’s actually too socialist
to even get elected in Denmark or anywhere
in Scandinavia. In fact… And-and he’s American,
but, yes. -(laughter) -Yeah,
that’s a problem, too. That is a problem, too. But when he…
when he was bragging about how great socialism was
in Denmark, the prime minister of Denmark
came forward and said, “Well, we’re not socialists. “We’re open for business. “Don’t let Bernie,
you know, mislead you. -We’re not socialists.”
-Okay, but, right. So then, let’s talk about that,
because it does feel like everybody
has a different definition of what they think socialism
or capitalism is. -It genuinely feels like that.
-All right. So, for instance,
you bring up Venezuela. What’s interesting to me
about Venezuela is, when people have
that conversation, they always ignore the fact
that Venezuela is plagued by multiple other issues.
So people go, “Look at what happened
to Venezuela: socialism.” Then I go, “Does the corruption
not count at all?” -Right. -Right? Because,
as I understand socialism, -if the people at the top are
taking everything… -(applause) is that then…
is that then truly socialism, or is it now
a corrupt form of socialism which is more an oligarchy? Is that…
is that not what it is? Well, socialism is
when the government owns the means of production. They can either own some of them
or a lot of them. The oil industry is owned
by the government down there. But all the prices
for all the goods and services are set as well. So what you have are massive
and profound shortages. But if you want to see
how devastating… Exacerbated
by the corruption, though. Once the crisis happened
with the oil price… But here…
but here’s the question. In a market economy
like ours, uh… people become rich because they
sell something that people want. In an economy like Venezuela,
what happens is, you become rich if you control
the reins of government. And so as power becomes
more and more centralized to a few people,
the possibility for corruption is much greater
unless the power is defused. One of the great principles
of our country is, we have always resisted
centralization of power. We didn’t like a king, and we didn’t like
a powerful president, -(groans, murmuring)
-and we still resist… we still resist the idea
and we promote the idea of separation of powers
and checks and balances. -This is interesting, because,
no, no, no, to… -(laughter) no, no, no, to this point,
though, but this is interesting. ‘Cause I-I do like
what you’re saying there about America
has resisted that idea. But could one not argue that… capitalism has gotten
to a point in America where you do in fact
have kings and rulers? -(applause, cheering)
-You do in fact have people who define how
other human beings can live because of how much capital…
‘Cause what you just said was, people become rich
because they sell something other people want.
but oftentimes we’ve seen, with capitalism,
you can also become rich because you control a certain
resource in a monopolistic way -where you can then
force people… -Right. So, like, let’s just talk about,
for instance, just the medicine industry
in America. -Right.
-We’ve seen opioids, they know who to get
the people addicted to them. They can then set the prices,
they can then figure out -how to keep you within that
loop of staying with… -Right. So now, you’re in a world where
you don’t have a choice anymore. If you’re a diabetic,
you don’t have a choice about the insulin you buy,
and so that’s-that’s… that seems like it’s-it’s a…
it’s a corrupt system masquerading
as just pure free market. When you have honest capitalism,
people do get rich based on merit
and based on selling something that consumers want–
Sam Walton, for example. The, uh, the people
who have started things that become incredibly popular. But there are examples
of crony capitalism as well, where the, uh,
system has been corrupted. But the system’s been corrupted
by taking… people taking and using
government to their advantage. So Big Pharma
and the pharmaceutical industry -has done that.
-Right. I’m not a big fan of it. I think they’ve really corrupted
the patent system. I think they’ve abused
the patent system. And that needs to be fixed. But that’s not real capitalism. -(applause)
-That’s people using government -to corrupt the system.
-I agree, I agree. But time and time again,
what you’ll find is that the freer people are,
the less central power there is in government,
the richer they are. And it’s amazing, when you look
at the progress we have. There’s a website called
humanprogress.org, and if you look at poverty
over the last 200 years, it’s amazing what
we’re doing to poverty. In 1820, 90% of the world lived
on less than two dollars a day. When I was born
in the early 1960s, it was down to a third of the
world lived in extreme poverty. Today, less than ten percent, including all of the poorest
countries you can imagine, less than ten percent of the
world lives in extreme poverty. That’s because of capitalism
and freedom and trade. Let me ask you this,
then, to that point. In the book, you talk about
how young people in America are less in favor of capitalism
than ever before, -and they support
socialism more. -Right. Now, you don’t seem to
acknowledge in the book the why. You say, like,
oh, they don’t understand the why’s of capitalism,
they don’t understand that they’re living better
lives, et cetera, et cetera. But… but… are young people
not just witnesses to what capitalism did to their
lives and their parents’ lives through the crisis? So, for instance,
when people were trading freely with, you know,
credit default swaps, that’s capitalism
running rampant. That’s people going, “You can
buy a thing that doesn’t exist and nobody understands it and
you don’t have to regulate it,” and then all of a sudden,
the markets crash, people lose their houses. -Isn’t that also capitalism?
-Actually, I think there are many that would argue
that that was a form of crony capitalism as well. When the regulations came upon that created that marketplace, there were people like my father
who voted against that, because he saw that
as a crony system -that was being created
by the government. -Right. And he actually voted
against that. It was called
a deregulation bill, it was a thousand pages long, and he thought it was gonna lead
to these things. And so there were people who
believed in limited government who did predict these things
would happen in the credit-default swaps. But when you look at it,
when you look at socialism and the history of socialism,
and you look at that versus what we’ve had in this country, I think
the-the younger generation that’s saying,
in majority numbers now, socialism would be a good idea, I think that, um, some of that is a misunderstanding
of what socialism is. They say, “Well, the world
should be fair.” -Or “We should be more equal.”
-Right. But they’re not
really understanding that socialism,
in its definition, is the government owning
the means of production. And when they finally come
to own it, when they come to take
the houses, the farmland, the factories,
there has to be violence. Nobody’s gonna give it up,
just sort of, uh, voluntarily. I think that’s an extreme
definition of what socialism is. Especially if you talk about
democratic socialism. And I say that because I think
any extreme can be used as the cherry pick
that defines your argument. Because when you look
at America– let’s just look at Republicans
in America– look at how many people voted
for Donald Trump and why did they vote for him? Why did they say
they voted for him? They said because they haven’t
moved in their lives. -Their wages are stagnant;
they have no money. -Right. Factories have moved
to countries -where it is cheaper
to make things. -Right. Companies have found ways
to pay less tax, pay their workers less. And wages in America
have been stagnant for half -But the interesting thing…
-a century, essentially. -But the interesting thing…
-But is that not capitalism? -Well… -That’s what I’m
saying, ’cause I understand, like, if we go socialism, bad,
but then, -is capitalism great then?
-But the interesting thing is since President Trump
was elected, the median wage
has gone up $4,000, unemployment
is at historic lows, so there’s a lot of progress
that’s happening in our country, but we’ve become so polarized that people are unwilling
to look at that. -But things are better.
-Unemployment– -Things are much better.
-No. No. Unemployment, people– No, unemployment,
people have acknowledged. But in terms of wages
in America, -wages are stagnant in America.
-(stammers) People are not–
People are not better off versus the previous generation
in America. They absolutely are.
They absolutely are. -I mean, the numbers…
-People– No, no. -But more people are liv–
-The numbers are amazing. More people live at home
than ever before. -No, I’ll give… -People cannot
buy their own houses. Oh, it’s just– The statistics
are overwhelming. I’ll give you a couple of them. A hundred years ago,
when– if you were to take a certain amount of money,
an average worker’s pay, and buy goods, you’d get
one basket of goods, or one container of goods. You get seven times as much
for the same price now. -The-The amount…
-(audience reacts) -The amount that…
-No, no, no. This is true. -I get– Yes. That’s true.
-The-The amount… -of your income–
-That’s true. That’s true. Yes. -The amount of your income
that you paid, -Right. -uh, as a percentage
of your income -Right. -for food in 1919
was like, 35%. -Right. Yes. -It’s down to 12%. -But then
the difference as well is the amount of income that you
pay for medical care and essentials now
has also gone up -an insane amount versus
that time. -Right. Exactly. So-So then the argument that
you’re basically having– No, no, I’m with you.
But then the argument I’m– The one thing I’m having
with you– and I know we can’t talk about it forever
’cause we have the book, we want people to read it,
but this, -I’m just asking you this
then… -But the next argument, -before you get any further…
-No, no. I’m not arguing. -I just want to ask you this.
-No, no, no. No, but… I just want to ask you this.
Just this. Just this. -(laughter)
-Just this. Before you get away
from health care. Yes, health care has risen. Health care and education
are the two things that are rising and almost
everything else has been going down in cost. But what is the commonality
between the two? Government involvement. They’re not great
capitalistic experiments. They’re not great examples
of capitalism. Health care,
over 50% of health care is provided
by the government now. The prices are largely fixed
in conjunction between big government
and insurance companies. There’s very,
very little capitalism in the delivery of health care. So we could say, “Well,
government’s so good, we want more government,”
or we could say, “Government’s not working
very well, -and we’d like more capitalism
in health care.” -Right. And there are ways to bring
prices down in health care. I would let all consumers
get together, all individuals who have to buy
insurance by themselves, I’d let them join a group,
an association like Costco or Sam’s Club,
buy their insurance together. And what would happen
is through sheer numbers of collective bargaining,
we’d drive the prices down. There are ways to fix it, but that’s a market mechanism. Or you can say
we’ll subsidize people because the prices are too high, but when you subsidize them,
and the prices are going up, guess what, the prices go up
even higher, so it doesn’t work. That’s what we’ve been doing
is giving people money, and the money goes
to the insurance company. So since we passed Obamacare
the insurance companies profits have gone from six billion
to 15 billion. -They know how to play
the system. -That is true. -We have a racket. -They do know
how to play the system. -We have a racket.
-Yes. That is– It is true. And I think what you’re saying
has a lot of merit in that, uh, corruption within capitalism/cronyism
doesn’t help the system. Um, the book is fascinating. I love having you on the show
because we argue -and we just…
-Oh, no, no. We just… -We just go back and forth.
-We-We just go back and forth. But I-I appreciate
that you come here. Thank you so much for joining us
on The Daily Show again. The Case for Socialism
is available now. Senator Rand Paul, everybody.

100 thoughts on “Rand Paul – Embracing Honest Capitalism in “The Case Against Socialism” | The Daily Show

  • as if the popularity of socialism wasn't a direct consequence of republicans throwing around the word to mean anything they don't like, forcing the left to adopt the word socialism even though it has nothing to do with the policies they support.

  • He makes some good points about America shouldn’t be in wars 👍🏽 it’s better for everyone, and saves BILLIONS of dollars, and Millions of lives

  • Can we not skip over the fact that he said "there isn't anyone from either party that hasn't tried to manipulate the Ukraine to get what they want." Uhhhhhhh wtf?

  • What happens in Venezuela is that you become rich if you control the reigns of government."


  • 9-11 was a sham. Here is video proof (from the DOD itself):

  • What is failed to come about out of this exchange is the fact that no socialism has been good. It has produced higher prices of goods and services and less economic advantage or hope. Capitalism, or better put Free Markets allow voluntary exchanges, meaning prices are set at what people are willing to pay. Crony capitalism is socialism living within the smoke and mirrors of a free market system that is not free market at all. The price of mowing your grass is set at what people in your area are willing to pay the people mowing it. And everything should work in that way to ensure real freedom and fair prices. Government power has always produced cronyism because over time, the public becomes entranced with what killed Rome in the end, which is that famous term "Bread and Circus", which means the people value entertainment more than they value actual education and knowledge about that which directly impacts their daily lives. The two party system is a brilliant means to obtain obedience for instance, and this factoid was found to be true long ago, and was yet another example of Rome with the Colosseum and the games within. Sports is a fine example of what our system of politics has turned in to. Selective outrage is the name of the game with allegiance to a team rather than that of common sense and facts with a strong hold on values revolving around good nature being right and wrong for example. Today we have a right for one but wrong for the other. The legal system has been morphed in to a political weapon with people cheering it on. Clinton being impeached for getting a BJ under the resolute desk to Trump for suggesting corruption be investigated is all nonsense quite frankly. It is a fart in the wind in the political cosmos. While they keep taking power and money from the people, they entertain you with this nonsense so real questions are not asked.

  • Look at all these useful idiots in the comments talking about how Rand doesn't know the difference between socialism and communism. Name one country that has successfully implemented socialism. Name one. Can't do it. It fundamentally centralizes power and human beings are corrupt in their very nature. You all need to read a book.

  • This guy has been privileged his whole fucking life. He has no idea what it's like to live paycheck to paycheck and struggle as a working class citizen in this country.

  • But, Rand, we didn't leave Syria. We're staying to protect the oil fields. You also don't seem to know how our special forces, AKA green berets, work. It only takes a unit of them to train local fighters. That's why we send them and don't put "boots on the ground" everywhere. Also, more soldiers are being sent to Saudi Arabia and Iraq–to guard the OIL as human shields. Trump isn't bringing anyone home. He's just no longer using our soldiers to keep human lives safe. It's all about the oil. It's all he cares about and really, all democrats and other republicans care about, too. It's at least refreshing, though disgustingly evil, that Trump is willing to say it's all for the oil and human life means nothing to our leaders. Never has and never will. Why do you think we were only in northern Syria, where the oil is? When we went to Iraq, we were all over their country–because they produce 4 times as much oil as Syria and their oilfields are all over. It's never been about democracy or preventing casualties and few of us are stupid enough to buy those stories of American Freedom Fighting anymore.

  • Love how Rand equates the myth of Joe Biden getting rid of the Ukrainian prosecutor to protect his son with the fact of Trump trying to get the Ukrainian gov to announce a fake investigation of the Bidens. Whenever anyone trying to pretend that Joe Biden really did shut down an investigation of the company that was paying his son, just ask them for proof. Their response is the same "someone" should investigate it. The Republicans still control the executive and the Senate – just do it – investigate the Bidens.

  • ONCE TREVOR pointed that out that PAUL wanted to side with KURDS before now he says no…then stay out of others countries completely !!!!!!!!

  • Ron Paul also sounded like he made sense from time to time. Then he says something completely insane like "the money we send to Ukraine is borrowed from China" and you realize he just has literally no idea how the world works at all.

  • "Capitalism needs to be broken like a good horse, in order to serve the people." This is Democratic Socialism. Rand Paul is a dupe for the capitalist oligarchy. Libertarianism is a farce.

  • Idk, I'm like. Super left. But I still cringe every time the audience has a super bitchy response to any republican on there. It always feels like Trevor is trying to have a real dialogue and the audience insists on attacking the guest. IDK.

  • I cant listen to this bullshit. I used to be a supporter of Rand because of his Father, Ron Paul, but he's shown his true partisan colors when Trump became elected. First, he wants to wait out Trumps term til the 2020 election, I'm glad that the audience yelled out their disapproval. Trump should be impeached NOW. The difference between Trump and the Biden's is that Trump IS currently president, AND HIS family are the ones CURRENTLY in the White House doing the same things that Biden is being accused of, and doing it on an even worse level beyond indicative implication (he's implicated himself on Live TV!)! Ivanka and Jared made $82 million last year ALONE!

    2nd: In the 2nd segment after they brought up his book is where i stopped the interview, because I just couldn't listen to anymore of this bullshit. When they were talking about his book against socialism, he was twisting the word socialism with communist regimes that Trevor did not call him out on. Hitler?? Really? Just because the word "Socialist" was in The National 'Socialist' Workers Party doesn't make it Socialism. Do we call North Korea a Democracy or Republic because they call their country the DPRK (Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea)?

    This interview was straight bullshit. While i respect Trevor, he was obviously being really careful and too nice, trying to not be too intrusive in hopes of gaining more Republican/GOP guests. I get it, but it makes me upset since I know too many people can't see through the bullshit like I can, and I truly hope I am wrong about that since I don't want to come off arrogant or too condescending/patronizing towards my fellow Americans, no matter what side of the spectrum you may fall under. God help us all. Impeach/Imprison Trump 2019/2020!

  • Rand Paul, who is talking about the government taking over production of products? If you can't see the crimes of this ass clown president then you are just stupid, in which case, STFU!

  • I remember when I was 22 and an idiot. And I thought the daily show was a good source for political insight. Nobody forces you to purchase anything. Except health insurance under the last administration. And it destroyed health insurance for anyone not sucking off the Labor of other people. Nobody stole money out of your bank account to get wealthy. You give it to them. But you feel to compensate for you lack of risk taking and tenacity, it ok to forcibly steal money from other people. Socialism is evil.

  • Go get a job or a lucrative idea and stop looking for free stuff. You want to have the same result as ppl who have trained themselves and worked super hard to produce real value and become rich. Trevor is talking socialism with his super high earnings. Nobody seems to be able to give a modern day example of successful socialism since Scandinavia rejected the tag.

  • Rann Paul said insurance companies is a government run thing or is not capitalism which is the exact opposite but if we abolish the medical insurance company we wouldn't be having these high prices.

  • Mr Trevor- dude you rock so hard! I love that you don't have to agree but you aren't disrespectful and you treat all guests with dignity and respect. This was a very interesting segment. Well played sir well played

  • Socialism! For people who want what everyone else got. Democratic socialism is a joke. Even the countries that Bernie called socialism go on tv to tell the world that they’re not socialist.

  • He won't support impeachment? Because he believes Biden may have done something illegal? So Trump gets to also break a law because he was trying to investigate Biden? What the backwards-ass-self-protective-dishonest BS answer?

  • Some socialist based policy is not an issue. 100% socialism I don't support, not do I support 100% capitalism. There are some issues of public services that MUST BE socialist in nature, while other businesses that are not about public safety and basic needs, these can be capitalist.

  • Hypocrites. "I support we baiting the Kurds with a state of their own as a carrot" – "Oh, it is messy to carve a piece of land for them vs.our allies". No shit.
    Also, what he says is a lie: Bernie is center-right for Europe. Bernie just accepted the ad nauseam repeated trope that whomever is not for anarcho-capitalism is a socialist/communist. Bernie is a mild social democrat. That's all.
    Also the largest % of people that came out of poverty was through the Revolutions in Russia, India, China and the rest of the colonies that were sucked dry by European colonists. They did not become rich, but it was poverty that drove them to revolt, to begin with.

    Rand Paul's knowledge – or at least his propaganda – is a caricature of reality.

  • So anything that capitalism does bad, his argument is, "well that's not REAL capitalism," but anything anybody could possibly cite as downside to socialism, "well that's REAL socialism."

  • After watching this video I completely understand why his neighbor almost killed him. He advocated for arming the Kurds because "they were the most effective and significant fighters America had". Now our government in the form of Donald Trump is stepping aside to allow them to be slaughtered and he approves of it.

  • #1 The unemployment rate sharply DROPPED in 2010 and continued to drop until recently. In some states, it is starting to rise.
    #2 The cost of living is higher but wages HAVE NOT RISEN at the same rate as inflation.

  • I gained a little bit of respect for both of you. Both had good points. We need to hash out solutions that are not tribal and seek data that points to those solutions–not just what supports our pre-decided bias.

  • LOVE how he point out dictator after dictator but mentions SWEDEN , Denmark , CANADA , England , GERMANY , JAPAN ETC ETC they all socialist parties !!!!!!!!!!!!!! Also COMMUNIST CHINA is the HERO of so called free market capitalist REPUBLICANS !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Wasn't Rand Paul one of the Republicans that went on the news ,exclaiming how buying cheap made Communist Chinese made products at WALMART was good for the poor in the the USA??????????????????????????????

  • Rand Paul isn’t the smartest person in the world but he is at least honest in his belief which is much more than can be said by most Republicans.

  • We did not need to be there. We are not the guardians of the entire world! We are not the only country in the entire world. I am sick of all these people blaming us. Yes. We needed to walk away! And am sick of the entire world blaming us.

  • “The case FOR socialism” is how Trevor ended the interview rather than saying “against” and Rand Paul did NOT look happy about it lol

  • complete idiots in the audience laughing their airheads off, especially the ones that don't believe in statistics that categorically state we have lowest unemployment ever for blacks, hispanics and asians and median income has gone up. I don't agree with Rand on everything but he is in a completely different league than these manboons.

  • I was listensing this in the background so I realised this is Rand Paul. No wonder all the opinions said here were so laughable.

  • Ron you contradict yourself , playing stupid doesn’t work anymore ( maybe with the brainless Trumpers) . The most outrageous you said you support getting our troops out of Siria , but you haven’t say anything about sending them to Saudi Arabia ,what is the meaning of doing that ?

  • Rand's case for capitalism is spot on. It works until government gets involved. Everything bad about capitalism is not real capitalism. Its crony capitalism. Look at everything the government has ruined. Housing, health care, education, banking, etc…. Advocates for socialism cant name one thing the government has run successfully?

  • Rand Paul wants to go back to either the Old West or feudalism. In case you don't know, being able to have peace and prosperity that depended entirely upon your personal ability to defend it from thugs and robbers fucking sucked. It's why those same people voted for a better system so that breaking a leg or getting sick didn't mean you lost everything down to the food in your belly.
    Rand Paul thinks that this kind of system would somehow magically be honorable when A) it wasn't before and B) he himself would not be happy to find himself in such a system. "Might makes right" doesn't work just because everyone agrees to immediately breakable rules.
    Read about Anarchapulco, and how well it's gone for all the rich white libertarians suddenly upset that drug cartels with automatic weapons are the ones who make the rules instead of them.

  • Riiiight! that's why we have so many homeless, that's why we have so much student debt and hunger, housing? impossible, minimum wage Stifling, gas prices out of control, medication beyond our reach, insurance of any kind? Not affordable and last but certainly not least Climate Change. I can go on all day. Oh yeah we r so much better. Needless to say we haven't even got to the next recession that's coming soon. America has become so freaking Greedy it dosen't want to help even a little. Greed will be America downfall.

  • I think the socialism argument conservatives use misses the point. The US is a mixed economy with public and private enterprise. Yes we have capitalism and private ownership, but we also have government run pension systems(Social Security) and government run insurance(Medicare and Medicaid), and government run schools. You can argue about the merits about whether the US should lean towards private enterprise more or not, but I don't think anyone is in favor of the economy being totally private or totally public. Its this lack of nuance that really bugs me.

  • I always wonder why billionaires and millionaires aren't being killed by people that make less than $29,000 a year. Does anyone else?

  • That poverty and median wage argument is irrelevant.
    The value of a $ has changed significantly since then. A diner meal could be bought for cents. Now its more than 10 bucks.
    Maybe the average means of living improved. But you cant tell just by looking at the figures he used. You have to account for dollar value adjustments.

  • He is afraid of Trump. How does he say "wait until the election and let the people decide" to determine whether or not the President broke the law?

  • Listen to that sonofabitch equate socialism with fascism. God, what a tool. Communism too. All one and the same is what he would have us believe.

    I cannot believe that he is ignorant of the distinctions, so he must be prevaricating. Or, as simple folks call it, lying.

  • Paul had some good points but he never let Trevor finish his questions before cutting him off. I wish Trevor got on him on what his party has become. Spineless and do and say anything to protect Donald Trump. The most corrupt person to ever hold office.

  • Love how Trevor had to hush the crowds over-reactions because he genuinely seemed intrigued by Rands arguments, he really doesn't like to be on the wrong side. Good for him looking into the logic of his political opponents.

  • Paul's being dishonest again. Regardless of what GOP talking points say, Trump and Biden did not do the same thing. Biden withheld aid to get Shokin fired in the interest of the United States. Trump withheld aid to get Biden investigated for personal gain. Shokin was widely known to be covering for corruption at a time when the Ukraine was trying to clean itself up. The US, the EU, the IMF, and anti-corruption watchdogs in the Ukraine ALL wanted Shokin to be fired. Joe Biden didn't get him fired because of Hunter Biden. Hunter wasn't even under investigation. The CEO of Burisma was under investigation…and investigation that had gone no where. If anything, Biden getting Shokin fired put his son at more risk. It's also dishonest to repeat the talking point of Hunter's salary, with the implication being that's unqualified and being paid for his name alone. Whatever else he is, Hunter Biden was still an ivy league educated lawyer with 15 years experience in international finance.

  • Rand does have a point about Trump though. He polarises things too much. It's not healthy and people will just disagree with everything instead of considering the positives that have happened (not enough obviously). He's not the man for the job and he is just busking it most of the time while also being a shady character. The man is the supreme chancer but people don't want what the democrats are offering. There needs to be a sane thoughtful capitalist who removes the corruption that exists within it, not someone who adds to it. America needs an actual removal of corruption from the top down

  • Semantics asshole. There are socialist elements like public healthcare education in all the other developed countries where it has been proven time after time again, and you very well know it you fucken asshole. What we have in the US is where capitalism leads. The rich and the powerful have revolving doors and the average citizen is pillaged, just like in any other form of government. You just want the money from your rich benefactors and having government funded programs will go against their wishes and weaken them so you won't benefit. You and your kind are the illness that plagues this country.

  • "we have always resisted the centralization of power"
    Exactly right, and your Republican party and Trump are trying to fuck that over by breaking all the rules surrounding checks and balances. Put conservative supreme court judges in place, lie about impeachment laws and how the constitution operates, and protect a person who clearly wants to be a dictator when he breaks the law, and enable him to try to obstruct justice by trying to fuck with an independent special counsel who is looking into crimes by the president.

  • Really intellectually dishonest to call a bunch of brutal dictators examples of socialism. Hitler was a nationalist

  • Funny how the argument in America is always based on Capitalism VS Socialism as the same contradiction of Day VS Night. This is a false presumption. Capitalism 'won' from Communism as a system which provides more and better wellfare, economic growth, freedom, innovation etc. But there's a huge difference between the capitalist model a country chooses: unbrettled libertarian neocapitalism (where 28 people own the same as 50% of world population) VS marketbased societies where the government applies policy which is social, aimed at redistributing wellfare and promoting equality. The latter is the case in e.g. Scandinavian countries, Germany and the Netherlands (where I live). These kind of countries are always in the top10 where it comes to low gini coefficient, very high income per capita, education, health and happiness of population, quality of life etc. So, please note that there are many forms of capitalism (a system which has great advantages) where some of them just work better for most of the people – like the social capitalism we have adopted here in Europe.

  • Most people fighting socialism are fighting the word itself and not even trying to address the policies. They also defend capitalism as if it isn't the actual cause of the worlds problems. Then they point to socialist policies like the ACA and say "See how well that worked?" as if republicans didn't gut the options that would have made it successful (such as the bargaining power of Medicare. As it stands, Medicare cannot negotiate prices). If you properly fund socialist programs, they work. History shows it every time. Analyses of programs always show that it generates more than it costs, often by quite a bit. When he points to education and healthcare costing more because of government, it's flat out false. They cost more because the government actually puts the power into the hands of private companies. Remember folks, we, as people, can choose the price at which we sell a good. So if the cost is high, we can literally just decide to lower it. Capitalists are shitty people who prioritize profit over everything.

  • What is this guy talking about? What Bernie is talking about is mostly stuff we already HAVE in Europe. Hell, it is partly stuff our CONSERVATIVES support. The issue Denmark isn't with Bernies politics, it is that Bernie wrongly labels his politics as socialist.

  • This debate is so asinine. The problem with both Socialism is the same with Capitalism – it's the corruption, stupid! Both systems are borne from a need for an efficient economy, but both are corruptable.This is obvious.

  • Government involvement has always damaged economic growth. https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/610236811230445568/632698170849361941/Screenshot_20190731-134457__01.png

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *