- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
http://blogs.usatoday.com/ondeadline/2007/11/ron-paul-raises.html
This is not huge but the news in the story is.. This IS the man with the best intrest of the people in mind, not his wallet.
Unfortunately there is close to zero chance of him being elected as the Republican nominee although his poll results have increased over the last month. It looks like it will be either Rudy Giuliani, Fred Thompson or John McCain: http://www.pollingreport.com/wh08rep.htm
Read something in the NYTimes yesterday about him raising over $2 million in one day via the web.
Ron Paul is gaining momentum. He is getting a large following of young people. He is very pro civil liberties, and following the constitution. His senete voting record shows he practices what he preaches. I think he actually stands a chance.
P.S.
Ron Paul belives in an open market place.
Ron Paul belives in leaving the internet alone.
Ron Paul belives online gambling should be legal.and he is for abolishing taxes :wink-wink
I listen to CNN a lot on Sirius satellite radio and I must’ve heard 10 ads for him over a 2 hour period.
@Goldfinger 144295 wrote:
and he is for abolishing taxes :wink-wink
not quite, but he is in favor of national sales tax to eliminate the IRS.. and of course save us thousands per year, and lower production costs.. but hey they still need revenue!
Ron Paul raised over 4 million in one day.. and that is all form PRIVATE SECTOR donations, he refuses corporate contributions.
This is the man or patriot we have been waiting for, unfortunately the public is too complacent to see we need him.
@Goldfinger 144289 wrote:
Read something in the NYTimes yesterday about him raising over $2 million in one day via the web.
He actually raised $4.2 million yesterday, pretty interesting story if you have the time to read it.
I’m busting my gut listening to Ron Paul. It’s good that he is not against online gambling, but the president doesn’t make the laws, the Congress does – which is why he would be more valuable to the industry if he stays in the House.
He is riding on vague statements which make no sense and would ultimately hurt the average Joe in the long run. Take for example
he is in favor of national sales tax to eliminate the IRS
this is a very, very bad idea, especially for low to middle class. Right now many people get a refund on their taxes or pay low percentage due to deductions, child credit and various other credits your H&R guy knows about. Most of the people basically lend interest-free money to the IRS. If the model changes to national sales tax – all of us will pay taxes all the time, no refunds, nothing. And the national sales tax should be at least 10% to wipe off the IRS, add this to the 6% most of us pay already in our counties and you got yourself a number…The higher price you have to pay will also slow down the economy drastically, because the 10% extra will not go to profit but to the government.
I guess he is talking about the European VAT, but even people in countries with VAT pay taxes. And that model has a lot of loopholes for companies to drain money from the government, as well…As far as I know the UK Vat is 17.5% I think that if you take time and explain to people, that if Ron Paul is president you may end up paying 23.5% total tax on every single item you buy, no one would vote for him.
there is quite a bit on national sales tax, most likely at a rate of 30-33%. Now you say WOW thats high, but there is a lot involved here, I pay over 40% on total income now.. id rather pay 33% on what I buy and that only includes new items, and lots of non taxable things are included. There are pieces to insure the poor to a certain rate do not pay sales tax by recieving tax vouchers ahead of time.
Also the production costs of good would drop emensly as corporations while still paying taxes, would no longer be paying the 50% hit on each employee.
Its a giant issue with a LOT of reading and research, not somthing that can be explained here on the forum.
while all for him,
I also if I understand correctly …. would want to legalize drug use …… (to some extent)
all for it …… not gonna happen.
too bad. correct me if I’m wrong.
@Stupid 144322 wrote:
I’m busting my gut listening to Ron Paul. It’s good that he is not against online gambling, but the president doesn’t make the laws, the Congress does – which is why he would be more valuable to the industry if he stays in the House.
Not really. He’s the only candidate that isn’t a big government / corporate shill. He’s spent 10 terms in the house talking sense, and nobody listens. The republican party would rather see a deomcrat win than have Paul messing with their gravy train. It’s the same gravy train the dems ride.
The real reason Paul is more valuable as a president is because he can force conversations to take place. He can immediately pardon non-violent drug offenders. He can immediately change an imperialist foreign policy that breeds resentment. He can immediately refuse to enforce federal law that is unconstitutional. (gambling, etc.)
The guy spent 10 terms in congress holding to the same principles he talks about now. The others, well, they’re the fakest of the fakes, saying whatever they think will get a vote. People are seeing that, despite what amounts a real lack of media coverage, or slanted media coverage when he gets it.
I’m not a fan of everything Paul says or thinks. He’s honest, and that’s more that can be said for almost any of them, save Gravel and Kucinich who have both been pretty much marginalized by media. Paul might have enough grassroots support to overcome the establisment’s distaste for him.
The bad thing about Ron Paul and the constitution is that he bases his politics on the constitution that was passed in 1787. For example, the 16th amendment in 1913 “authorizes unapportioned federal taxes on income”. If he wants to follow the constitution – he should be FOR federal income taxes, not against.
If his understanding of the constitution stops with the 10th amendment – that’s just insane – you cannot be one of the most modern countries in the world, yet blindly obey a document passed 200+ years ago. The constitution serves only as the building block and must be amended as the world turns, let’s not forget that the freedom of speech is given not by the constitution but by amendment to it. Ron Paul’s idea of “the constitution” is unclear and his position, although consistent, clashes with his politics of following the constitution (tax example above).
As far as adding VAT instead of income tax – imagine today that instead of paying $3.50 for a gallon of gasoline, you pay $4.55 (30% VAT) – yeah, you may get some kind of voucher at the end of the year, but will you sirvive until then? The same will happen with every other product – you want to by a $200 text book? It’s $260 now with the VAT. You want to by $30,000 car? It’s $39,000 now. I have been in Europe, and people there don’t get VAT refunds, the companies do (plus, people still pay income taxes).
I don’t really think he has a problem with changes in the consitution. There’s an ammendment process built in. It just seems quite often that it changes in other ways. I’d say some have had some pretty positive outcomes and clearly been right, but he’d (me, actually) prefer that changes are made through the ammendment process instead of just ignoring what it says.
As far as VAT goes, I personally don’t like it because it causes a crazy amount of record keeping, and I count that as a cost to business that is often left out of the discussion. It also makes the level of taxation harder to see for those who are actually being taxed.
A VAT system doesn’t require or presuppose a high level of taxation. You can have a VAT with a net 1% tax, or a VAT system with a net 50% tax.
As far as Paul goes, I don’t think he has, or would advocate for a VAT. He wants to remove the federal income tax. No doubts states will increase their income taxes when they see people with extra money and some services that need to be filled. At least at a state level, people have a much greater possibility of being included in conversations about tax levels and how those taxes are spent.
