You should not. He is 72 with only one issue to push. I am sure all of his followers want not taxes and no government. They are out of touch with reality.
2007-12-04 13:39:01
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
11⤋
Nick - you really need to understand what you are talking about before you spout off like that.
You state that the dollar is falling against the Euro because it is not backed up by gold. No currency is on the gold standard.
You (and Paul) speak of gold as if it has some sort of intrinsic value itself. It does not - it is traded and only has the value it is last traded at. A new surge in supply of gold will result in any currency "backed up by gold" plummeting in comparative value. A decrease in supply or increase in demand would result in our currency becoming more valuable comparatively and so reduce US competetiveness. At present the US dollar is openly traded but the Fed plays the essential role of moderating the impact of that change. Much as Paul tries to pretend otherwise the Fed is a government agency responsible to congress. Why would you want to take the job of moderating our currency gains and losses away from a government agency and put it in the hands of Australian and South African mining companies and commodity traders. Paul's fascination with shiny metal is something most of mankind has grown out of. Any move towards a gold standard would result in the US currency fluctuating MORE against other currencies, not less.
Please remember we have left the gold standard in the past because of its inability to cope with shocks to the economy (Great Depression, WW2, commodities boom). And that was when everyone was on it. Imagine the impact when we are faced with this next but other countries use responsible monetary policy to react.
LordKelv - first of all you are the one who is wrong. Bush's tax cuts did not increase revenues.
Federal government revenues in 2001 were $1991.4 billion. In 2002 the total was 1853.4, 2003 was 1782.5, 2004 was 1880.3, 2005 was 2153.9 - so for three years revenues were lower after the tax cuts took effect. Considering that revenues generally grow on account of both inflation and the natural growth of the economy there is no way a rational person could claim the result of the tax cuts was increased revenues. In fact if we take into account inflation it was not until 2006 that revenues actually returned to the level they were before Bush's tax cuts.
Had Bush been able to merely maintain revenues at 2001 levels we would currently be a trillion dollars better off. Had revenues continued to grow at the rate they did under Clinton we would be nearly 6 trillion better off by the end of next year and Bush would have balanced the budget every year. Those are the facts
http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fy2008/pdf/hist.pdf
Bacco- if that is the definition of insanity then why do you want to return to a system that failed us every time the economy was hit but a substantial shock?
2007-12-04 14:21:00
·
answer #2
·
answered by Sageandscholar 7
·
0⤊
2⤋
Unlike all the other candidates Ron Paul is an economist, who has written several books on money & economy.
The Constitution states that the money to run the government is raised thru tariffs and excise taxes, not personal income taxes.
The Constitution also states that only Gold/Silver {or Gold backed paper money} can be used as money.
WHY???
Because unbacked money causes wide spread inflation, which is what is hurting everybody right now.
Most Americans don't know it, but the founders specified that anyone who worked at the Gvt. mint that was guilty of coin clipping.....{not putting the correct amount of metal in a coin.}.....was punishable by death!
Ron Paul has many other ideas that would eventually make America FREE and prosperious again.
For the sake of yourself & your future kids,,,please check him out throughly:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/RonPaul2008/message/3023
Thank you.
**********************************************************
[edit] Mr Sage, What country do you live in?
Gasoline & diesel fuel has risen from a little over $1.00 per gallon to over $3.50 per gallon where I live, in the last 10 years. {the West Coast} Which makes every product cost more as the price of fuel is added into the costs of products.
But a better example is housing across the country, prices have sky-rocketed in the last 10 years. Have the older houses improved in value?
NO!
The dollar is depreciating in value at a rapid pace.....Canadian & Euro money is more valuable than dollars, also because of the dpreciating dollar.
If you have never read any of Ron Paul's books on economics, I would say you sir, are not qualified to pass judgement on Dr. Pauls economic thinking.
Here is a link to the Ron Paul library, please educate yourself:
http://www.ronpaullibrary.org/
Also, the Constitution specifically states that the TREASURY department is supposed to handle money matters and is accountable to the Congress. There is no Amendment that states that the Federal Reserve Banking system is supposed to control the issue or "VALUE" of American money, {Congress is delegated to set the Value} therefore a good Constitutional Lawyer may argue that the Fed is Un-Constitutional, until an Amendment is added to the Constitution!!!
As for your contention that the Fed is a government agency, I looked up a link that someone supplied previously on this same discussion. The link was from 1938, and has never been updated. To prove this please name one Fed board member that has been appointed "other" than Chairman Barneke, by anybody.
Please Have A Nice Day!
******************************************************
2007-12-04 14:13:40
·
answer #3
·
answered by beesting 6
·
5⤊
1⤋
I don't support Ron... however you are incorrect on every point that you stated
Fact: The Bush tax cuts have *INCREASED* revenue to the IRS
Opinion: Only an idiot believes that the *much* higher taxes in Europe are a plus, or that the quality of life is "better"... If you quote the UN you prove my point.
There are other reason why I don't support Ron which have nothing to do with his monetary policies (which are good) or his staunch support of the Constitution which is outstanding.
2007-12-04 13:58:33
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
5⤊
0⤋
we lived prosperously without income tax for 300 years.
Ron Paul will eliminate the need of the Federal reserve and start a gold standard. This will stop the limitless debt and open credit line the government has with the FED.
Imagine they would have to say we only have a million in gold ad that's all we can spend. Have you ever heard of such a crazy idea I mean credit lines are really helping the economy all the way around (aren't they) LOL...
Most f the taxes we pay never even go towards the balance we owe so interest keeps building and your taxes keep going up.
Have you even looked at Ron Paul objectively or are you just repeating what you heard from the mainstream media because if you look at what his plans are and why he has these plans you are the one who sounds incompetent.
2007-12-04 13:43:24
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
10⤊
1⤋
Answer me this Paul supporters. We eliminate all those government programs and turn them over to the state level, thereby lowering taxes. So, who is going to pay for the states to make up the difference? The states you say! Okay, I live in a poor state where the property owners tote the bill for the majority of city, county and state revenues. Now we will be expected to take up the slack of lost federal revenues. Sorry, I live in a POOR state. it can't and will not happen. My tax burden just surpassed my federal tax burden by a huge margin. So, we will consolidate schools, share fire and police departments, and as far as roads and bridges? I have an idea. Let's raise the sales tax at the state and local level. I like that concept, it is the only fair tax around. But again, I remind you. POOR state. Look at it this way. In major league sports they have revenue sharing. Why, to keep enough teams in the leagues so the New York's and La's of the sports world to play. that's why. Isolation from the rest of the world might be a great idea. Isolation of the states is not. We are in this together or we aren't.
2007-12-04 14:13:05
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
2⤋
I'm guessing you've never been to Europe, because they certainly don't have a better quality of life than we. Taxes are so high (sales tax in Germany is 16.5% - that's just sales tax. Income tax is higher.) that the standard of living is on survive. Very few people can afford to own any kind of property.
I was the recipient of the "excellent" health care England has to offer. I had to get stitches in my head. They didn't shave the site, which anyone will tell you is the first step. Then, they put three stitches in, when they should have given me four. The end result is that it was still bleeding the next day.
I've also spoke with US servicemen who have received health care on the English system. They went with Tricare whenever they could. This is significant because military guys hate Tricare.
Oh, and I'm not a Ron Paul supporter.
2007-12-04 13:40:01
·
answer #7
·
answered by DOOM 7
·
8⤊
1⤋
First of all you seem not to understand the monetary system so watch this for a quick lesson (well.. 3 + hours but better than several books!!) It is great and will answer some question about the economy and money system
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-515319560256183936
Then go to www.RonPaul2008.com and read & listen to Ron. Think and feel for yourself why. We can tell you bits and peices but i think Ron is very intellegent. He has served in the armed forces 6 years and served in congress over 20 years. he has a great background.
That web site was put up by one of his supporters, at no cost to Ron and it includes all the information out there on Ron and the latest developments.
But I respect your views and it is up to you to make the final descision.
2007-12-04 15:48:13
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
0⤋
First off you have to ask yourself, why are we trillions of dollars in debt? because of the war in Iraq, and the way our great president loves to give billions and billions of dollars to other governments. End the war, and change our foreign policy, and our spending ( like Ron Paul will do the second he gets into office ) amd we will save TONS of money.
And not only that bring troops home from around the globe and instead of spending their paychecks overseas they spend it here, not only buying small products but cars and even houses, this will definetly help our economy.
Theres tons of ways he will save money, and if hed get a chance to explain all his ideas on the news and debates, this wouldnt be as big of a question as it is.
2007-12-04 16:12:39
·
answer #9
·
answered by JOSH 2
·
2⤊
0⤋
It seems you misunderstand his whole position. Lowering taxes is only one part. He also wants to eliminate entire parts of the government(Homeland Security, Energy, FDA, Education, farm subsidies, so on and so forth). Either because they are limiting our liberties(Homeland Security), unnecessary(Energy), better handled at state and local level(Education), or a combination of all these. By doing this, you can reduce taxes, while still paying off debt(which you can't anyway, more later)
But the most important thing he wants to do is phase out the Federal Reserve and it's debt based, fiat, and ultimately worthless Federal Reserve Notes(FRNs) as our main currency. He would do this by allowing private banknotes to be legal tender(which are backed by gold and silver, the only legal money according to the Constitution). By doing this, the demand for FRNs, which are backed by nothing except debt, legal tender laws, and taxes, would decrease. People would rather have money backed by gold and silver(which have held their value for 6000 years) than pieces of paper backed by escalating debt.
Admittedly, it would be a tough go for a few years, and we would need longer than Ron's 8 years to completely set the nation straight again, but electing him would be a good start. For more info, check out ronpaul2008.com, and look at what he has to say, he explains it better than I can.
Oh, and the Euro is stronger than the dollar because it is newer on the fiat money cycle, nothing else.
And for the record, I am a hardcore Ron Paul supporter, and encourage you to check him out. It might not be all what you want to hear, but hearing what you wanted from politicians got this country into the mess it is in nowadays. Vote for something different(even if it isn't Ron, though I would like to see you vote for Ron), both parties have screwed the country up for the last 50 years. Remember, the definition of insanity is doing the same thing and expecting different results.
2007-12-04 13:53:35
·
answer #10
·
answered by bacco l 3
·
7⤊
1⤋
His whole point is to make our money sound again and get us on track to take away this debt. He wants to lower taxes dramatically to make our economy stronger and let American citizens keep the money that they worked for. To make up for this he will bring our troops home from Iraq, Korea, and all the other random places they are still stationed. There is no reason why we should be paying billions of dollars every year to pay for Korea's and Japan's military. They need to pay for their own, not rely on hard-working American taxpayers.
And yes, the Euro is beating the dollar, which is why Ron Paul wants to again back our money up with gold. This will make our money actually worth something. Currently, our dollars are not backed up with anything, thus it is failing. Backing it up with gold may seem old-fashioned, but it does work.
Ron Paul does want to lower taxes, but he also wants to eliminate all wasteful government spending. He is the only guy who has actually done the math on this, and he has proven that it will work.
Hope this answers your question! Many people have this same question about Ron Paul, but if you really look into what he writes, you will see that his plan will actually give the government more money to spend on Americans, not on foreigners. Europe has a high quality of life because they keep all their money in Europe and their taxes come back to them in the form of healthcare, gov. services, etc. This is what Ron Paul wants to do, though not use this money for the same purposes (he is against universal healthcare, etc.) He wants to give this money back to the taxpayer so that they may enjoy a better quality of life for themselves, not Iraqis or Japanese or Koreans, etc etc.
2007-12-04 13:40:36
·
answer #11
·
answered by Star 3
·
9⤊
2⤋