A Ron Paul presidency would have economically hurt people who make money by relying on the government to enforce anti-market policies. For example, the military

A Ron Paul presidency would have economically hurt people who make money by relying on the government to enforce anti-market policies. For example, the military spends a lot of money maintaining troops throughout the world. If troop levels were reduced and bases closed, a lot of the people involved, especially military contractors, would suffer, at least until they could find a way to serve private interests. Also, banks that rely on the ability to create fiat money that the government forces people to use would suffer as people begin to use hard currency. Also, a lot of government employees would have to transition to private employment. Since a lot of people are employed by the government, banks, and the military, RP-style changes in these sectors would create a lot of tumult. But this would be temporary until people readjust. The end result would be a richer society because more people would be employed privately and resources would be better distributed. Society would also be more free, which is a quality worth having even if there were no economic benefits.