Talk:Ron Paul
Script error: No such module "Message box".
<templatestyles src="Module:Message box/tmbox.css"/><templatestyles src="Talk header/styles.css" />
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Ron Paul Template:Pagetype. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Template:Find general sources |
| Archives: Template:Comma separated entries<templatestyles src="Template:Tooltip/styles.css" />Auto-archiving periodScript error: No such module "Check for unknown parameters".: Template:Human readable duration File:Information icon4.svg |
| Template:Search box |
Script error: No such module "Check for unknown parameters".Script error: No such module "Check for deprecated parameters".
Script error: No such module "Message box". Script error: No such module "Message box".Template:Template other Script error: No such module "Article history". Template:Afd-merged-from Template:Afd-merged-from Script error: No such module "Banner shell". Template:Annual readership Template:Contentious topics/talk notice User:MiszaBot/config User:HBC Archive Indexerbot/OptIn Script error: No such module "Message box".
Use of the words fiscal policy to describe opinions on the federal reserve instead of monetary policy
Hi all,
First timer here. Maybe nitpicking but in macro-economic courses that I took (Econ and math major) I was taught that the federal reserve's interest rate manipulation, open-market operations etc. were examples of monetary policy, not fiscal policy. I understand fiscal policy to be more the tool of congress i.e. changing taxes or spending money to stimulate the economy. I believe articles on fiscal vs monetary policy should support this.
This is in one of the first paragraphs in the introduction section, which I guess I can't edit. Language would be much more precise if it were to be changed imho. 2601:586:5280:EEB0:303D:85BB:6EF8:B46E (talk) 05:32, 25 May 2023 (UTC)
- You are correct. I edited this sentence accordingly. –CWenger (^ • @) 14:34, 25 May 2023 (UTC)
- No, I didn't put my comments about unsourced materials here! They appeared separately in original. Leslynjd (talk) 01:44, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
== Unsourced claims about number of delegates at the 2008 Republican National Conventions and the results of the subsequent elections. Without sources, "popularity" is an opinion, not a fact. == I apologize for putting this in the text rather than as a footnote. I haven't edited since Edward Snowden. That article received so much partisan argument as well as deletion of sourced facts that I gave up. I've forgotten how to exactly insert footnotes in text about "Needs source."
Unsourced claims about number of delegates at the 2008 Republican National Conventions and the results of the subsequent elections. Without sources, national "popularity" is an opinion, not a fact. Leslynjd (talk) 01:33, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
Unsourced claims about delegates at the RNC 2008, 2012, and results of national elections.
Unsourced claims about number of delegates at the 2008 Republican National Conventions and the results of the subsequent elections. Without sources, "popularity" is an opinion, not a fact. == I apologize for noting this in the text of the article, rather than as a footnote.this in the text rather than as a footnote. I haven't edited since Edward Snowden. That article received so much partisan argument as well as deletion of sourced facts that I gave up. I've forgotten how to exactly insert footnotes in text about "Needs source." Leslynjd (talk) 01:48, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
Lead portrait
_(cropped).jpg){kind=link}
Sthubertliege asserts that the "excited and happy" portrait to the right is "ridiculous", and that we have to respect the consensus for the "grim and determined" portrait. Where is this consensus? I don't have a really strong preference for either but I don't really agree that the "happy" one is ridiculous. Trovatore (talk) 22:49, 13 May 2025 (UTC)