Have Americans read Dr. Ron Paul's written plan for the country? Are Americans ready to upset the apple cart in a controlled and methodical way for the betterment of the greater good? The main source I am referencing here is Dr. Ron Paul's website, so that we can debate his priorities and proposed approaches. I have paraphrased items from his site; however, I encourage the reader to thoroughly review all the links.
Here is Dr. Ron Paul's 11-point plan:
11. Energy Independence: Eliminate the federal gas tax of $0.18 per gallon and eliminate the EPA, allowing prosecution of polluters to answer to citizens, not Washington, and allowing coal, oil, nuclear and other forms of energy to be safely explored.
10. Education: Dr. Paul would like to see the U.S. Department of Education return its powers to the states and parents. He proposes and intends to give parents a $5,000 tax credit per child for kids K-12 to help with all the costs of education. He is supportive of home-schooling and will veto legislation that interferes with parents choosing to home-school their children.
9. Workers' Rights: Dr. Ron Paul is against forcing workers to join unions and pay dues if they do not want to, citing the $8 billion that union leaders bring in annually that is often given to political candidates. He does not want workers forced to belong to unions or to be under union control against their will.
8. Protect Gun Rights: Protecting the right of Americans to keep and bear arms. Here is an example of a town that required each head of household to own a gun. This policy resulted in decreased crime.
7. Heath Care: Dr. Ron Paul will repeal Obamacare, allow for tax credits and deductions for all medical expenses and not allow money that belongs in Medicare or Medicaid to be misused for other purposes. He will protect the privacy of American citizens' medical records from the federal government, remove barriers for all citizens to have HSAs and keep the FDA out of vitamins and alternative treatments. Also, he wants to provide payroll deductions for terminal illnesses and caregivers.
6. Pro-Life Issue: Here is the one fact all Americans need to know. Dr. Paul is the only Republican candidate who has said, "So while Roe v. Wade is invalid, a federal law banning abortion across all 50 states would be equally invalid." Abortion is one of the most divisive issues and may always be a divisive issue as long as Americans have freedom of religion and the right to be, think and feel differently. Dr. Ron Paul may be personally pro-life; however, his voting record indicates that, even if a bill attempting to make abortion illegal federally in the U.S. were passed by the House and Senate, Dr. Paul would veto the bill as unconstitutional. Which other Republican candidate has a track record to indicate that? Would Dr. Paul look to put pro-life judges on the Supreme Court bench? Probably as much as past Republican presidents. The current Democratic President has recently placed two women on the Supreme Court, and new Justices are appointed only when a Justice dies or retires. Six Republican Presidential candidates have already signed the Susan B. Anthony List 2012. Dr. Ron Paul is the safest Republican candidate because he would veto anti-abortion bills at the federal level and support states that chose to protect women's reproductive rights. His other strong Constitution-based reforms outweigh the small risk that Roe v. Wade would be overturned during his term, returning the power to the states, who can then protect women's reproductive rights, as Vermont has. Would he truly respect the states' rights on this, considering his strong personal stand? Many progressive states have anti-abortion laws on their books that are not enforceable due to Roe v. Wade. So far, Dr. Paul has written bills to make it possible for states to make abortion illegal in the Sanctity of Life bill. He wrote the We the People Act, which, if passed, would render Roe v. Wade invalid and return powers to the states. He signed the Susan B. Anthony list, which describes federally defunding all abortions and Planned Parenthood. If Dr. Paul can fix the economic mess, is the slight chance that Roe v. Wade would be rendered invalid something Americans are willing risk for the betterment of the country in many other important areas? We will not ever go back to a time before birth control, morning-after pills, RU 486, the Internet and other advancements. Certain states, even with Roe v. Wade, are extremely restrictive.
5. Immigration: In Dr. Paul's own words:
Immigration reform should start with improving our border protection, yet it was reported last week that the federal government has approved the recruitment of 120 of our best trained Border Patrol agents to go to Iraq to train Iraqis how to better defend their borders! This comes at a time when the National Guard troops participating in Operation Jump Start are being removed from border protection duties in Arizona, New Mexico, and Texas and preparing to deploy to Iraq and Afghanistan! It is an outrage and it will result in our borders being more vulnerable to illegal entry, including by terrorists.
Also, we need to take serious steps to prevent terrorists from gaining easy access to targets on our soil. Quite alarmingly, even with the knowledge that the 19 terrorist hijackers entered our country legally, and that 15 of them were from Saudi Arabia , student visas from terrorist sponsoring countries are still far too easily obtained. In a baffling move President Bush struck a deal with Saudi King Abdullah in 2005 to allow 21,000 more Saudi young men into the US on student Visas. Of course, not all students from terror sponsoring countries are terrorists, but I place a higher premium on the security of the American people than the convenience of citizens of hostile countries. We should not be making the goals of would-be terrorists easier to accomplish, but rather should be vigilant about defending against enemies at every turn. They should not be slipping through our doors so easily, using our immigration laws against us, and that is why I proposed the Terror Immigration Elimination Act (HR 3217) to toughen standards for VISAS from countries on the State Department's list of terrorist sponsoring countries in addition to Saudi Arabia . Just as you decide who to invite to a dinner party in your home, we should be in charge of who we allow in this country, without apology.
Also:
Both the Bush administration and congressional leadership have promised to spend the next two months addressing national security issues. But real national security cannot be achieved unless and until our borders are physically secured. It's as simple as that. All the talk about fighting terror and making America safer is meaningless without border security. It makes no sense to seek terrorists abroad if our own front door is left unlocked.
In short, Dr. Paul's plan is to secure the border, end amnesty, abolish welfare to illegal immigrants, end birthright citizenship and protect lawful immigrants.
4. National Defense: Dr. Paul's approach is simple. He believes in a strong national defense and is against militarism -- in other words, protect the U.S. but do not police the world and require congressional approval before declaring war. The last time the U.S. formally declared war was World War II in 1941. Dr. Paul would bring the troops home to protect America. Dr. Paul said he would get the troops home as soon as the ships would get here. He is the largest recipient of donations from soldiers in the U.S. military, getting 71 percent of all military donations.
3. Taxes: Dr. Paul would support an amendment to the U.S. Constitution that abolishes income and death taxes. Ideally, he'd like to close the IRS. He would seek to repeal capital gains taxes and reduce then abolish taxes on Social Security. Before a flat or fair tax would be implemented, Dr. Paul would ensure that the 16th Amendment, which made income taxation legal, would be repealed so we don't end up with both.
2. End the Fed: The Fed was created in a time of turmoil and seems similar to the Patriot Act in that it was done from a position of hysteria, not logical and rational decision-making. The U.S. Constitution is considered such a well thought-through document as it was drafted in a time of peace rather than as a reaction to a panic. Documents and policies that are reviewed and seen in the light of day by calm, rational people tend to be better for the long-term wellness of the people than policies passed quickly in an emotional, reactive and hurried manner. Dr. Paul equates the Fed with deeply-in-debt parents sending their teenagers out with credit cards and blank checks. Dr. Paul's ultimate goal would be to see the Fed end, yet he would not act rashly. What his focus would be is a full and complete audit of the Fed, as Congress is currently unable to audit the Fed. Dr. Paul would commit to passing legislation that requires transparency and accountability from the Fed. At this time, the Fed can keep secret to whom they are lending trillions of taxpayers' dollars. If the Fed is handling American money responsibly, for what reason would they refuse to open their books? We American citizens are all subject to audits from the IRS, but the U.S. central bank is not? Please take three minutes to watch this amazing video of Bernie Sanders asking Ben Bernanke, where $2.2 trillion of taxpayer money is. Bernanke will not answer the question and will not disclose where $2.2 trillion went, and he doesn't have to.
1. Economy: Dr. Paul's plan is to audit the Fed, veto any unbalanced budget and refuse to raise the debt ceiling. He is also committed to getting rid of self-dealing and corruption in D.C. Additionally, he will eliminate income taxes, capital gains taxes and death taxes. It would be a breath of fresh air to have the Fed audited and wasteful government spending eliminated, and to actually be able to keep more of the money we make. America's debt did not come out of nowhere. In 2008, the U.S. had spent $3 trillion on the war in Iraq. The current costs are at $3.2 to $4 trillion. How much did we vote to increase the debt ceiling? We raised the $14.3-trillion debt ceiling by $2.4 trillion, to $16.7 trillion on Aug. 2, 2011. Here is a great 10-minute video with Dr. Paul clearly stating how, if elected president in 2012, he would balance the budget in one year.
In this discussion, I request that emotional reactions and sarcasm be set aside. The goal is an accurate, clear and truthful dialogue. We are blessed with a group of knowledgeable Americans making comments here. What I want to suggest is that we discuss what is best for the greater good for our country, not just for ourselves.
Any presidential choice we make involves a risk. Is he lying and manipulating to win the election, or is he honest? Will she serve American citizens ethically and honorably as president? The U.S. Constitution was created to unite the states in our country in certain crucial areas, like national defense, while allowing states their autonomy and uniqueness. In the spirit of Mr. Smith Goes to Washington, good character is the most essential quality to bring to our government. Dr. Paul combines solid character and backbone with seasoned wisdom and experience. He has not compromised the values and principles that America holds dear.
If you are not going to register as a Republican and vote for Dr. Ron Paul in the primary, who do you think is better, and for what reasons? Don't state what you dislike about Dr. Paul's plan. It is easy to shoot someone's ideas down.
"[At times of hysteria] that is all the more reason the President has to speak out for what is right. Otherwise, he's got no reason being in the White House. The President has to do the leading in a case like that. I've said before, the President is the only person in the government who represents the whole people. There are some who can afford to hire lobbyists and others to represent their special interests, but the President isn't elected to pull strings for anybody. He's elected to be the lobbyist for everybody in the United States. And, he is, too, if he's any good."
--Harry Truman (from Plain Speaking: An Oral Biography of Harry S. Truman, by Merle Miller, Tess Press 1974)
Follow Laura Trice on Twitter: www.twitter.com/LaurasWJF
Laura Trice: 5 Reasons Every Single American Needs to Register as a Republican Today
binea: "YOU didn't watch the debates."
1) Prove it.
bin: Ron Paul said “you can not outlaw that morning after pill,that would extend to Birth control.”
2) How would that stop a dictator-wanna be like Ron Paul from simply signing a far-right bill into law outlawing the birth control pill? It kills zygotes which would have personhood under dictator Ron Paul's so-called Sanctity of Life Act. Right?
bin: "he is for ADULTS being able to ingest anything"
3) LOL! I have already PROVED that Ron Paul is a lying hypocrite who says he will not vote for coercive laws at the Federal level and then violates that by voting for federal abortion restrictions. Which do you chose to believe, Ron Pauls’ hypocritical actions or his contradictory words?
bin: "it is their body,it does NOT belong to the state"
4) WRONG AGAIN! Women's bodies to belong to Ron Paul's coercive Federal police state. Paul voted that it is illegal for women to seek some abortion services.
bin: "Under Obama care,they …TELL YOU THE FRICK how fat your kid can get,or ELSE."
5) Prove it.
6) Or else what? The government will help your abused obese kid learn about diet and exercise? The horror!
7) Why is it that supporters of the GOP (Greedy One Percent) are uninformed on the issues they are so self-righteous about?
Once you see his 30 year CONSISTENT record "Ideologically consistent" with who and what he claims to be,you will feel embarrassed you ever thought otherwise :) He was consistent even to his OWN detriment.he could have taken lobbiest money,gone with the flow,did as the romans do in rome.But he never did.
as to # 3 send it in an email..make your case,check it out thoroughly and I will have judges from all sides look at your evidence ( that would be proving him ideologically inconsistent) and you would win my $500.00 challenge. I am sure he has an explanation,so why don't you look to see,first :) hint ..read "Where to from here ?" by Ron Paul in written in 04 he talks about it there.
as well as many other places..just google Ron Paul and abortion ..but stick to only what HE say's,not what someone else say's he say's or thinks he means..
but MY OWN view is,
Once a woman is pregnant it is no longer just her body.When she has an abortion,is she destroying her body ,or someone else's body ?
prt 1
You keep repeating that, but you fail to PROVE IT.
1) Prove it in light of the fact that Ron Paul not only tried to assume dictatorial power but divine power by claiming that he alone is capable of divining when human life begins AND FORCING HIS DEFINITION ON WOMEN AT THE FEDERAL LEVEL, when even science cannot make that determination.
So if we don't know for a fact, why impose an arbitrary point as the start? That's what dictators do. He didn't just vote for it, he WROTE the dictatorial bill that would take away freedoms from Americans. What an anti-freedom tyrant Ron Paul proved to be!
bin: Ron Paul said “you can not outlaw that morning after pill,that would extend to Birth control.”
2) How would that stop a dictator-wanna be like Ron Paul from simply signing a far-right bill into law outlawing the birth control pill? It kills zygotes which would have personhood under dictator Ron Paul's so-called Sanctity of Life Act. Right?
3) LOL! I have already PROVED that Ron Paul is a lying hypocrite who says he will not vote for coercive laws at the Federal level and then violates that by voting for federal abortion restrictions. Which do you chose to believe, Ron Pauls’ hypocritical actions or his contradictory words?
binea replied: "I am sure he has an explanation,so why don't you look to see,first"
LOL! Binea FAIL!
Don't lie and give me a bunch of "mass of cells" nonsense cause that is all we ALL are,just a "mass of cells" ( if you don't bring the question of a soul into it)
so this isn't about a woman's right any longer.There are TWO people to take into account.he makes that point when he speaks of how a person can be charged with a double murder if they kill a pregnant woman.hmmm
You Dispise his bill because it would only make the reality of that Human life "legally defined as such" Much like black folks were once considered less than human,and had to fight to be "legally defined" as human,and deserving of ALL human rights.
ask yourself WHY you are so fixed on this right anyway ? IF there is ONE exception allowed ( if the lief of the mother is in real danger of ending,should she carry the baby to term)
because if you force her to carry to term..you KILL her,if you force her to abort to save her own life,you kill her Child. There is No way anyone else but the mother can make that decision.( or her spouse should she be unable)
your other questions I already answered.
bin: "Under Obama care,they …TELL YOU THE FRICK how fat your kid can get,or ELSE."
5) Prove it.
6) Or else what? The government will help your abused obese kid learn about diet and exercise? The horror!
7) Why is it that supporters of the GOP (Greedy One Percent) are uninformed on the issues they are so self-righteous about?
binea: "Don't lie and give me a bunch of "mass of cells" nonsense"
8) LOL! If I didn't say that, why are you inventing straw man arguments?
9) "so this isn't about a woman's right any longer"
LOL! Prove it! Do women cease to have rights when they contain an un-implanted zygote?
binea: "There are TWO people to take into account"
10) Prove it. Does your OPINION count as proof? Does Ron Paul's OPINION count as proof? Does Pat Robertson's OPINION count as proof?
binea: "your other questions I already answered."
11) LOL! Where?
binea: "he bio philosopher on the show did admit,biologically that baby is human at conception,that is simply a fact"
12) LOL! Because a "philosopher" said it on TV, that constitutes proof and a "fact"?
In this time of crisis, the big issues really do matter. The other candidates are likely to simply make things much worse - more unemployment, more inflation, more war. That's unacceptable.
Why is it that the people who display the LEAST understanding of the Constitution are the followers of Ron "Constitution" Paul?
MarketAnarchist101: “Welfare means to look after the happiness of people.”
1) LOL! Prove it!
2) Definitions:
Welfare: The health, happiness, and fortunes of a person or group. Well-being.
Availability of resources and presence of conditions required for reasonably comfortable, healthy, and secure living.
Do you see that by definition welfare is a lot more than mere “happiness”?
MA: “People are obviously not happy even when they get subsidized by the government.”
3) PROVE people are “not happy even when they get subsidized by the government”
4) Prove that is “obvious”
MA: “the way to deal with contradictions is through the constitutional process of making amendments.. IE.. a Constitutional Convention..
5) LOL! Wrong! The way to deal with constitutional issues is by the entire constitutional process as defined by the Constitution itself, including legislation (like Civil Rights Act, which outlawed unconstitutional segregation). Do you see that you are wrong to claim that the dealing with constitutional issues is limited to the extreme step of amending the Constitution?
Continued:
MarketAnarchist101: “the way to deal with contradictions is through the constitutional process of making amendments.. IE.. a Constitutional Convention.. Not the black robed deities of the court.”
6) LOL! Prove it! Who says the Supreme Court has not power to deal with constitutional contradictions?
7) Are you really unaware that the Constitution says this:
“… the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make.”
7) So the Supreme Court IS a constitutional way of dealing with constitutional contradictions. Right?
MA: “ What is so hard to understand that no where in the constitution does it say justices can determine the constitutionality of an amendment and what it means.”
8) That smells like a Straw Man argument to me. When did I say that the justices “determine the constitutionality of an amendment?”
MA: “…checks and balances (which are non-existent now.)”
9) LOL! Prove that our constitutional checks and balances are “non-existent now.”
MA: “I don't think you know what the world Welfare means in that context now do you?”
10) LOL! Prove it!
LOL! Pallen42 admits "Didn't see the section 8, 1, my bad"
LOL! I POSTED THE NAME OF SECTION 8.1!
1) Now that pallen42 knows that the Constitution says PROVIDE FOR our General Welfare and not just PROMOTE it, will you change your opinion? LOL!
2) Pallen42 has yet to prove a word of the bogus claim that $5k vouchers would cause “incredible advances in education” instead of just making a nice partial discount for the fat cat 1% who already send their kids to ritzy private schools.
3) Pallen42 claims “please argue against the ideas.” I did. Please get around to answering where I have debunked your ideas.
Pallen42 falsely claims “We agree that the gov't has an effective monopoly on education.”
4) LOL! When did I say I agree on any such silly thing?
5) Prove it, given the huge role of the states in education.
Pallen42: “…the system is broken.”
6) LOL! Prove that is the fault of the federal government.
7) Do you support states teaching non-scientific piffle like “creationism” as if it were actual science? That is one of the many problems caused by NOT ENOUGH of federal role in education. The poorly educated states commit poor education.
Pallen42: “Having more choice can only help the children.”
8) LOL! Prove it!
9) Prove it in light of the fact that “more choice” can be harmful in many cases.
http://www.abc.net.au/catalyst/stories/s1615006.htm#transcript
nope..you can't.which means.....
Thanks much for posting this.
Abortion would be illegal, even for incest victims, since Ron Paul's religious fantasy that "life begins at conception" would be the FEDERAL law of the land.
LOL PROVE!
So, I support Ron Paul and I think if he can end the wars and give more state rights where at least locals can have a voice, thats a good start. 2008, I supported Obama, I thought he would uphold the constitution and end the wars. He has violated just like Bush and has increase government power. He has silence the anti-war left by fake ending the war of Iraq and justifying an illegal war with Libya. What is considered a win at these wars?
The economy, the Fed is reactive and prolongs the hurt. The way capitalism works is that you start a business, you succeed, great. You fail, you have to find another means of survival while the competitor make a move. Government should not be saving you.
When you know that you have no safety net(gov bailouts aka job bills),you have to operate an honest business. Everybody wins. I have become a blue repub for a year to help Dr Paul out..RP2012
LOL. Then you FAILED voter education 101. What Obama REPEATEDLY said he would get us out of Iraq and into Afghanistan, where he would finish the job against Al Qaeda that attacked us.
That is exactly what Obama did, and Obama did it spectacularly well.
If Ron Paul would not have done that, then how would Ron Paul have gotten bin Laden?
If Ron Paul or people like him were president since the 50's there would be no Al Qaeda. It was because of intervention (support for Israel, Iran 1953 Coup, Military presence in Saudi Arabia, sanctions on Iraq, etc) that led to the motivation for 9/11 in the first place.
"LOL. Then you FAILED voter education 101. What Obama REPEATEDLY said he would get us out of Iraq and into Afghanistan, where he would finish the job against Al Qaeda that attacked us."
We are still in Iraq.
"If Ron Paul would not have done that, then how would Ron Paul have gotten bin Laden?"
Bin Laden was in Pakistan, not Afghanistan.
Paul also voted for the invasion of Afghanistan for the precise reason of capturing Bin Laden.
but yes, i like gary. but, he's no ron paul. put gary in charge of the commerce department!
Pdubya FAILS to deal with greenb's comment that "there is a true pro-choice Republican Presidential candidate--Gov. Gary Johnson"
All the Stossel in the world (what an icky thought) won't change that fact.
How many people know that the federal gov's involvement in Ed. was started under the guise of gathering statics, during reconstruction, and that by 1979, what began as the mere collection of statistics by the federal government, had assumed the proportions of a modern Napoleonic Educational Code.? How many even know that compulsory education went hand in hand with child labor laws, AFTER the great depression when it was difficult for adults (especially single adults) to find work and that the federal law against child labor didn't pass until 1938? It was the same law that gave us a minimum wage and defined what constitutes full-time, part-time, and over-time work... very handy way to raise wages and lower the unemployment rate... simply define whole sectors of the potential workforce as unemployable. It wasn't strictly "for the children" as many are "taught" in school.
I became a Ron Paul supporter after I set out to "prove" that he was wrong, but I realized that he was right. Most people today already have their minds made up and won't even read anything that doesn't already fit their own views... the "my mind's made up, don't confuse me with the facts" mentality, aka the semmelweis reflex :)
Prove it.
The principle of the Constitution is that the federal government is forbidden to do anything it isn’t positively authorized to do, not that the federal government is entitled to do anything it isn’t positively forbidden to do.
If you want to change it see Article V.
Ron Paul 2012
Wow, how ironic that I have the same view about Ron Paul followers.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/arianna-huffington/laissez-faire-capitalism_b_152900.html
If you want to make reforms, great. Ron Paul makes some good observations, but fundamentally I liken what he's advocating to throwing the baby out with the water.
"Laissez-Faire Capitalism Should Be as Dead as Soviet Communism"
I like the article it links to on how Bush's deregulation hurt the nation's mortgages:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/21/business/21admin.html?pagewanted=all
White House Philosophy Stoked Mortgage Bonfirehttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/dreamcatcherss/ron-paul-11-point-plan_b_947832_110938696.html#
Of course you KNOW he will try and reason with them ( I find his reasoning pretty darn sound) but it is THEY who argue out the details and then send to him to pass or not pass.
THAT is the way it is supposed to work..I think it work even Better with Ron Paul as president..maybe Kucinich as VP ..a real coalition kind of cabinette, with Honest men not owned by Big Corps or bankers running the country for OUR best interest..not Banksters/fruadsters
I voted Obama to end the wars, and we got more. At least with Paul, he has stated the same thing for 30 years, get out of other countries affairs.
Then you fail Voter Education 101. Obama clearly and repeatedly said he would rotate out of Iraq and into Afghanistan and FINISH THE JOB.
Locust: "He is the only candidate willing to do one thing, end all wars and bring all troops home. WE can argue the merits and rationality of all other points on his platform."
No, we will ALSO argue the merits and rationality of ending all wars NOW. Iraq was a bogus war. Ron Paul is right about that, and so is Obama.
But Afghanistan is the RIGHT war, and Ron Paul is WRONG about that and Obama is RIGHT!
We should WIN against Al Qaeda and the Taliban and everyone related to 911 BEFORE we leave.
This is where Ron Paul fails and Obama succeeds.
George Bush wanted to divert to Iraq before Al Qaeda was finished, which let Al Qaeda grow and become a threat again.
Ron Paul wants to cut and run, which will let Al Qaeda grow and become a threat again.
Never.
Not while I have a vote.
"Health Care Debates will be on CSPAN" we got closed door meetings between O and the big insurance and Pharma.
"Close Gitmo" Don't make me laugh...
"I'll create Jobs" Yea, for GE, Google, Boeing, Verizon, Exxon-Mobil, Shell,etc.
"Everyone needs to pay taxes" Except all the companies who support him who pay ZERO taxes....
I should have a 3 foot lollipop for voiting for this bull jive shuckin sham artist. Because I feel like an ALL DAY SUCKER....
"George Bush wanted to divert to Iraq before Al Qaeda was finished, which let Al Qaeda grow and become a threat again."
The killing of innocent people and the occupation of the middle east helped radicalize people and many of them joined AQ or simply made a statement themselves and killed themselves to get back at Americans.
"Ron Paul wants to cut and run, which will let Al Qaeda grow and become a threat again."
He wants to stop getting Americans killed.. He wants to prevent AQ from growing because their message is for radicals.. their message says that they attack Americans because the USG has killed innocent men, women and children.. that the USG occupies their land.. and the American people have supported the actions of the USG by popular vote. Their evidence of what the USG has done to their people helps them get more recruits. By taking away their reasons to hate us AQ will simply be a small terrorist organization that attempts to overthrow the Saudi government.
You are not catching on.
American does not want to be saved.
It is a cesspool of corruption, just catching up to the other countries.
No libertarian ever gets elected to anything, but an occasional school board.
Without corruption, there is nothing to grease the politics.
Corporate welfare or babies bound for prison welfare, take your pick.
That is not a false dilemma, there are no other choices that can get elected.
If the US was only populated with first born nerd engineers, Ron Paul could reduce the fed gov to 5% of GDP.
What happens to all the useless people?
They vote.
They want their share of what the useful people produce.
LOL!
Since Ron Paul supports outlawing abortion at the FEDERAL LEVEL with laws that would mandate the unscientific notion that personhood begins at conception, the RON PAUL is the one guaranteeing "babies bound for prison and welfare" since safe legal abortion cuts down on both!
LOL! More Ron Paul hypocrisy!
That's why liberals are not embracing Ron Paul despite this propaganda campaign to make his extremism palatable to liberals.
Money is power, Dr. Paul knows this... so I am curious to know how he thinks a largely powerless group of citizens could really and truly hold corporations accountable... If anyone has an answer to that I would like to hear. If you say by our dollar, we can already do that. Furthermore, in many cases that has become largely impossible because many corporations we are totally dependent on - like energy....
But still... I do not believe in this all or nothing situation. The idea that Government cannot do anything, or is "the problem" is a talking point, its not a fact. Civilizations, tribes, and people throughout history have used many different forms of government to address the collective concerns of the people.
I think it should be a collective concern of the people whether their food is ok to eat, and water ok to drink. Unless you can provide me with something more, I do not think it is far-fetch to say that the function of Government is to see to the protection of the people - whether that be from other nations or from businesses, individuals, or corporations who neglect the environmental surroundings of our communities, and our food supply...
Think about it... when at war Armies destroy food-supplies, and nations do a whole bunch to protect those food-supplies. Why is it so far-fetched to think that the government should also be sure that food supply is safe during a time of peace??
What we need is policy that attempts to equal the playing field... I am not saying HUGE income transfers... but policy that can guarantee that minimum wages pay enough for basic needs as well as the opportunity to save or invest. Poor folks will never get out of poverty is they cannot save, invest, etc. Furthermore, since many of these folks have inadequate schools it is even harder to get out of poverty.
I have heard of the push for a consumption tax. Again, terrible for poor folks... that would make it even HARDER for them to get what they need...
What I feel someone like Ron Paul neglects to acknowledge is that for Centuries Government and ruling class policies have been in place to keep their power and wealth, and to actually enrich it. Therefore, if you just jump into a a real free market, those folks who have a head start will continue to have that, and those who have been historically disenfranchised from accumulating wealth will have still the same difficulties obtaining it...
not only that, so many people have been falsely led to believe that even a small amount of inflation is somehow "healthy". this is a farce of Keynesian economics. inflation only steals wealth from the poor and even middle class. how, you ask? because people with less typically save the majority of their money in bank accounts with small (or no) interest earned. this interest rate is never more than the inflation rate. therefore, these people are actually LOSING money by keeping it in the bank. Inflation is wealth theft and transfer to the already wealthy.
The safety of a light bulb is different than the safety of a food or water supply. See this is the problem I think many of us have, myself included. We see an example of something - either the government or a private corporation doing something well, and think that means that entity can do EVERYTHING well. When that is not the case.
I am open to the fact that there are many things the FedGov cannot do well... but simply stating that it has been doing something badly is not a good point because it is obvious that Congress does not draft legislation and policy with only the general welfare and protection of the people at heart. Our Congress is extremely corrupt, and this needs to change before we try to reform government in a way to truly provide avenues for the protection of our safety, health, etc.
I am still not sold on a flat tax. It is still not fair
Lastly, I totally agree with your last statement about inflation, and think that is something we need to enact some reform and change on.... we need to start making steps to Eliminating the Private Federal Reserve, start issuing sovereign currency backed by silver or gold from our Treasury, and TRULY start living in our means.
There are two HUGE issues that I totally agree with Dr. Paul and that is about the Fed, and the War. Because these are two of the biggest issues that face our nation it may be enough to make me vote for him, especially in terms of the Fed. It is outrageous to have a PRIVATE bank owning our currency and basically our country. We are not a sovereign nation because of this, because our debt is owned by private institutions therefore our taxes and labor are owned by PRIVATE people... this is not freedom.
I have serious issues with almost every other policy.... Though I slightly agree with his stance on education, in terms that the National Government should not be setting standards, I still think the Federal Government needs to be involved to try to boost equity into education across the nation - not sure how you do this though. The national standards right now do not boost equity... education is a huge problem for our nation.