Damn interesting?

[charles royer]

The Dutch Tulip Bubble of 1637
The later part of the 20th century saw its share of odd financial bubbles. There was the real-estate bubble, the stock market bubbles, and the dot com bubble, just to name a few. In each instance of price inflation people paid exorbitant amounts for things that shouldn’t have been worth anything like the going price. And each time people stood around afterwards and said “What were we thinking?”

One has to believe that the same thought occurred to the Dutch in the 17th century when they settled down after their bout with tulipomania, wherein the humble tulip bulb began to sell for prices to make New York Realtors blanch.

As much as the tulip is associated with Holland, it is not native there. Rather it was introduced in 1593 by a botanist named Carolus Clusius, who brought it from Constantinople. He planted a small garden, intending to research the plant for medicinal purposes. Had Clusius’s neighbors been morally upright, the tulip might still be a rare exotic in the gardening world. Instead they broke into his garden and stole some of his bulbs in order to make some quick money, and in the process started the Dutch bulb trade
http://www.damninteresting.com/the-dutch-tulip-bubble-of-1637/
Just sayin!

[JV]

4 out of the 5 voices in my head agree with you.

the one remaining voice is just disappointed that the constitution is not the main driving force in all of the most recent election cycles..

about 35 yrs for me

[Rhodes]

Well I can tell you for sure about the last 56 years of elections since I do remember the 1960 cycle.

Every time it is ever used as a main platform point it ridiculed as racist, isolationist, or extreme.

Only in House elections is it hardly ever a point and there it is rare, Ron Paul the latest example.

How was he treated again?

[JV]

thats no reason to abandon it...at least for me

[Rhodes]

No very much the opposite in fact, but one needs a healthy dose of tolerance for seemingly lost causes.

Emphasis on seemingly, perhaps whatever hard lesson that has yet to be learned will in time.

[charles royer]

Same as Ted Cruse.

Rand Paul seems to do better representing constitutionality. .

[kevin kiernan]

AH yes, Rand Paul , my first choice as President before I got Trumped. Rand Paul in my mind is the most constitutional member of Senate.

[Rhodes]

He is without a doubt the most "virtuous" of those currently in that bordello called Congress.

Yet let's never forget that it is still a bordello and swamp in dire need of draining. ;)

I found a lot of common ground with his father, not nearly as much with him. 

[JV]

the only common ground I have with ron paul is the federal reserve, his hypocracy is a little hard to stomach.

he loads bills that will pass with earmarks then votes against it knowing it will pass

he is the king of pork

[Rhodes]

Since he is no longer relevant having retired I wont get into it since source material matters greatly in these subjective back and forth debates. 

We may as well be debating Jefferson vs Burr.

[JV]

source material???

I used his own words...unless he was telling a lie that he did it.

but your right he is gone, but does his son hold the same view?

only time will tell

[Rhodes]

One has to understand the constitution gives a lot of latitude, one can be constitutional and yet out of favor with general ethics that seem to turn on a dime.

[JV]

could you be more specific?