1) Eliminating the IRS - this would be awesome, no doubt, but the consequences would be - interest rates soar - after all, if there is no money to pay the interest on the bonds, why would foreign holders continue to hold our debt?.....the stock market declines nicely, perhaps 30-40% (maybe more) because the ability for our government to issue debt is vital for our economy....the dollar plummets further, perhaps to $4/euro, why? well when those foreign debt holders dump our bonds they will sell dollars and buy back their currency. 2) the elimination of the federal reserve......with no lender of last resort who would prevent runs on our banks when there is a mad rush to convert meaningless paper assets to gold 3) putting us back on the gold standard would cause mass inflation while the economy plunges into recession because no money to back our bonds and no fed to rescue the banks, everything of real value rises - gold, wheat , oil.... no way he could do it even 2 terms
2007-12-31
09:10:07
·
20 answers
·
asked by
james_r_keene
2
in
Politics & Government
➔ Politics
shhh. don't tell the ron paul supporters that congress would have to write these changes into law FIRST, then he would pass them.
as for the recession remark - recessions come and go, and when we finally came out from these reforms it would be a decade later (even considering the american people wouldn't throw him out, and stick to the plan) when we emerged from a depression that would make the great depression feel like the internet bubble.
on the plus side............. once the above happens - it will make american rediculously cheap. the U.S. will replace china as the manufacturing hub of the world, and the economy will be based on "sound" money...............considering americans have the stomach to loose almost everything - we will become the top shelf 3rd world economy in the world, after about 10 years of mass poverty.
2007-12-31
09:24:04 ·
update #1
thomas S - i know he only goes after the cause - i'm asking you to consider the effects, because he doesn't talk about them, nor does anybody else.
in theory - i agree with him - but he talks about abolishing the IRS within the first week of his administration.
oh yeah, how many of you ron paul supporters are willing to vote for a tom delay type of representative? cause thats what it would take for these reforms to be passed in the first place...........these reforms would take a generation to complete without serious damage to our economy - you talking about a herion, alcohol, and crack addict going gold turkey one day and waking up ready to win the boston marathon the next day.
2007-12-31
09:30:10 ·
update #2
yes the tax code needs major overhaul
sales tax is regressive. sales taxes always effect the poor more then the rich. it requires the same basic items to support a family of 4 if you are rich or poor the only difference is in the extras that people can afford, this is why some but not all states have taken sales tax off of food. sales tax is just unfair it does not encourage savings or prevent unneeded spending it just takes a bigger percentage of a poor persons funds relative to their assets.
a fair tax has not been offered but it should be based on income without deductions of any kind for anyone personal or business.
Mr Paul wants to do away with IRS and at the same time wants to give huge tax refunds(deductions) to all kinds of groups. he wants to restore social security reserve while putting less funds into it. he has some wonderful ideas, if we could enact them things would be great. the problem is he has no plan of how to pay for or administer his plans. he just throws out seemingly good ideas with no clue as to how to actually enact or fund.
2007-12-31 09:40:16
·
answer #1
·
answered by michr 7
·
2⤊
3⤋
I support Ron Paul, but like any other politician, he can't be trusted for being just that. A politician. Compared to every other talking head, Paul's 'talking points', 'catchphrases', and 'buzzwords' are clearly dissenting from the rest of the pack who's "TALKING POINTS" include WAR, MORE WAR, AND YET MORE WAR, with a little "EXPAND THE PATRIOT ACT" here and there. I vote for the guy who says my liberty is most important, not some desert to send our sons and daughters to an unjust death.
2016-05-28 07:03:18
·
answer #2
·
answered by ? 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Since there is an annoying possibility the whole world economy may collapse before the election is over, it may be a unique opportunity for Ron Paul to actually get some reforms through. Timing is going to be everything, and I have no Lil to help me with the calculations. (Any sci fi buffs remember who and what Lil was?) But you're right. Since the whole world economy seems to be headed into collapse because of speculative activity, who do we want to take the blame for it? Sweet dreams.
2007-12-31 16:05:50
·
answer #3
·
answered by balloon buster 6
·
2⤊
1⤋
Do they? Probably not, but that is mainly because not everything you just said was correct. What you just mentioned was a worst case scenario, what actually will happen is likely much less severe.
Beyond that, our current currency is horribly inflated and a depression will eventually happen if it is left in its current direction. Thus Dr. Paul is trying to mitigate the negative repercussions of what will happen.
2007-12-31 12:15:47
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
6⤊
2⤋
We need to elect a congress full of Ron Pauls!
The country will do fantastic without the IRS to terrorize us and an anonymous sales tax would boost the economy beyond belief!
We are at the edge of self destructing. If we don't do something about it now it will be too late!
Don't listen too all the Liberal Nut Jobs that call Ron Paul a kook. There were those who called some of our founding fathers kooks too!
2007-12-31 09:55:34
·
answer #5
·
answered by mr.richie 3
·
12⤊
1⤋
1) Why did we elect such incompatent idiots in the first place who sold our country out to foreign nations.
2) The greatest debt this nation ever had when adjusted was right after the Revolutionary War. Yet we managed with out an IRS to get out of it. Of course we had men who were leaders like Washington, Franklin, Adams, etc to lead this nation not, George W, Pelosi, Reid, Cheney, etc.
3) One the nation functioned great for over 100 years before the Federal Reserve was ever created.
4) The gold standard is tried and true, almost every civilization that has ever been has used gold.
5) We would still pay taxes just in the form of a national sales tax.
That said the Federal Reserve has been around for almost 100 years. Ron Paul is correct things have to change, the fact is that I hope he realizes that in order for it to work it will have to be a gradual change, not something done overnight kind of like bringing our troops home from all over the world. Ever since WW1 (Again that idiot Wilson) we have been foreward deployed to some extant. To fix things that have been in place for 100 years will take time.
2007-12-31 09:23:13
·
answer #6
·
answered by satcomgrunt 7
·
10⤊
2⤋
The reveue would come in very nicely from a National Sales Tax. No prob. And we'd get to spend ALL our money, however we chose to. It's Ron Paul's BEST plank. Ending the war quickly is his other good one.
Too bad he's a loon on most other things! Thus, he has ZIP chance of being nominated.
2007-12-31 09:22:38
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
12⤋
Most of 'em will never notice.
2007-12-31 09:14:18
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
6⤊
14⤋
Nah...Ron Paul supporters having to think critically, in real world terms? Naaaah...Never happen.
This guy voted against relief funding for victims of Hurricane Rita in his own district...then took credit for its passage.
2007-12-31 09:14:11
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
7⤊
15⤋
In case you haven't noticed we are entering a global recession already, the question is do we want to come out on the other side with a strong Gold Based currency, or just wait until the dollar falls below the peso ?
2007-12-31 09:14:00
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
17⤊
3⤋