Thread: Ron Paul on taxes

Originally Posted by MW

americangirl wrote:

Social Security and Medicare are HARDLY entitlements you dumb bafoon!

That wasn't necessary! Furthermore, it's an ALIPAC rules violation.

MW: I believe americangirl was addressing the article author - not another poster here. It's kinda gray area to this mod/admin guy. I could pursue that, but on the other hand, sometimes there is some utility in allowing our members/posters to provide a public reality-check to some of the horrible and inaccurate 'news' items that get published out in the public view too.

If you insist, I will edit. However, I'd just assume leave this alone - no blood, no foul - sorta thing...

PhredE wrote:

MW: I believe americangirl was addressing the article author - not another poster here. It's kinda gray area to this mod/admin guy.

After reading it again, you're probably right. Americangirl has my apology. Guess I shouldn't have acted on first instict.

Originally Posted by PhredE

Originally Posted by usanevada

Originally Posted by PhredE

There is $500+ billion sitting in the Soc Security 'Suspense File/Fund' - the accrued total of contribution by persons having 'no matching valid SSN'...now, I wonder what type of people might be paying into SSN with no valid SSN???

Put that money to work NOW for US citizens (only!)

Actually this "money" is only on "paper"

It was spent long ago

Isn't ALL our money 'on paper' at this point?
Yes, I see your point. It all comes down to clever accounting and tracking of various pots of Federal funds... (been there, done that - former GS-11 with Fed. Gov't).

Not to mention, we're technically bankrupt already anyway....

Bankruptcy is a legally declared inability or impairment of ability of an individual or organizations to pay their creditors.

I don’t think we are even close to bankrupt why and where people get this Armageddon agenda or public scare tactics is beyond me.
Now Phred
I’m not saying thats what your doing I’m just interested in knowing where the info comes from and How or what makes you feel that way.
The national dept doesn’t make America broke by any means and I think people believe the war spending is also the reason to say we are broke… (Another public scare tactic by anti war types) Does your credit card max out make you bankrupt?
Some people feel that when times get hard they are broke but in all common since and reality its just a little creative money works thats needed

Originally Posted by MW

PhredE wrote:

MW: I believe americangirl was addressing the article author - not another poster here. It's kinda gray area to this mod/admin guy.

After reading it again, you're probably right. Americangirl has my apology. Guess I shouldn't have acted on first instict.

Ya but its still a good practice to stay away from
it just cheapens an opinon when names are called

I heard enough about the "Fair Tax" when Huckabee was interviewed on Roger Hedgecock. I know that he shocked Hedgecock as well when he started talking about this.

I would rather have the income tax----as if they put into effect the Fair Tax, you will be paying MORE in taxes, not less.

You will be paying a tax of 23% on EVERYTHING!!!!

When I first heard about this, I supported it. I was thinking-----okay, they will raise sales taxes 2% or so----and this would mean that EVERYONE----even illegals----end up paying their fair share.

However, this is 23%!!!

I would NO WAY support this!!!

Originally Posted by sturmruger

Originally Posted by Bren4824

No plans by Paul to go after employers. I guess that employers get to do what they want----including hiring illegals.

In case you haven't figured out Ron Paul he is a Jeffersonian (States Rights over Federal G.) so he will not have a federal tax plan for such. This does not mean he will not he may use tariffs from foriegn goods or other methods to fund going after employers.
http://www.betterimmigration.com/can...aulPres08.html

2005: Voted for H.R. 4437 to increase interior enforcement
Rep. Paul voted in favor of final passage of H.R. 4437 which would increase interior enforcement by requiring employers to use the Basic Pilot program to verify that new hires have the legal right to work in the United States. As well, it would bring state and local law enforcement agencies more into the enforcement fold and provide funding through both grants and reimbursement for their assistance in federal enforcement efforts. H.R. 4437 was passed by the House by a vote of 239 to 182.

[quote:1p8o93e3]2006: Voted in favor of H.R. 6095 to increase interior enforcement
Rep. Paul voted in favor of H.R. 6095 to clarify state and local law enforcement’s inherent authority to enforce Federal immigration laws and overturn a decades-old court injunction that impedes the Federal government’s ability to remove aliens from El Salvador on an expedited basis. H.R. 6095 passed by a vote of 277-140.

If he voted to allow State and local authorities to enforce Federal immigration laws then their is no doubt he will be for the same at the federal level. IMO the issue with Paul is who is going to pay for it. Increasing Federal taxes(?) Paul will not however if he is able to use tariffs on foriegn goods or some of the other methods he has mentioned in recent interviews he will.

OFFICIAL STANCE on protecting Americans' jobs and wages from foreign workers:
No welfare for illegal aliens. Americans have welcomed immigrants who seek opportunity, work hard, and play by the rules. But taxpayers should not pay for illegal immigrants who use hospitals, clinics, schools, roads, and social services. RonPaul2008.com

"He has also called for an end to welfare benefits, 'mandatory medical care' and public education for illegal immigrants." July 16, 2007; Des Moines Register (Iowa)

2005: Voted in favor of amendment to prohibit foreign-worker importation provisions in Free Trade Agreements
Rep. Paul voted in favor of the Tancredo Amendment to H.R. 2862 to prevent the U.S. Trade Representative from including immigration provisions in Free Trade Agreements. The Tancredo Amendment failed by a vote of 106 to 322.

He has stated in a recent interview he is against the Fair Tax.[/quote:1p8o93e3]

So, he has said NOTHING about going after employers who are hiring illegals since 2005, when he voted for the E-Verify???? As hot as this issue is NOW----as much as citizens have brought up their concerns regarding this issue---and he has NO plans "NOW" to go after employers who hire illegals???

Originally Posted by specsaregood

93% Libertarian Bologna?

"If you analyze it I believe the very heart and soul of conservatism is libertarianism. I think conservatism is really a misnomer just as liberalism is a misnomer for the liberals–if we were back in the days of the Revolution, so-called conservatives today would be the Liberals and the liberals would be the Tories. The basis of conservatism is a desire for less government interference or less centralized authority or more individual freedom and this is a pretty general description also of what libertarianism is." --Ronald Reagan

Yes, libertarian balogna.

The founders were not Libertarians, they were nationalists.

And Ronald Reagan doesn't really have a special place in my heart. Sorry.....as far as the quote goes, it has to do with corporatism. In the early days, the corporatists called for a strong central gov't to protect domestic industry. Today, they prefer the gov't to get the hell out of the way. The Republican Party was spawn from the Whigs who were spawn from the Federalists. The Democratic Party has always been the Democratic Party -- Democratic-Republicans in the early days (same Party, different name.....). The Federalists were corporatists. The modern day Republicans are corporatists. Not much has changed, except the means to further corporate interests (less gov't vs. more gov't).

Reagan would have done better to say that BOTH parties today are the tories (or Federalists). They are both corporate parties.

Originally Posted by Bren4824

So, he has said NOTHING about going after employers who are hiring illegals since 2005, when he voted for the E-Verify???? As hot as this issue is NOW----as much as citizens have brought up their concerns regarding this issue---and he has NO plans "NOW" to go after employers who hire illegals???

Going after employers does NOT fit his straight-line libertarian agenda which is open borders with true free trade - free flow of people (no one is illegal). Listen close and look how he has voted in the past before running for office and you can see his agenda. Once the welfare state is gone the border will open. His votes are only for stopping the welfare. Never votes "YES" but does for 245(i) amensty and for increasing H1b's visas

Originally Posted by Once_A_Democrat

Originally Posted by Bren4824

So, he has said NOTHING about going after employers who are hiring illegals since 2005, when he voted for the E-Verify???? As hot as this issue is NOW----as much as citizens have brought up their concerns regarding this issue---and he has NO plans "NOW" to go after employers who hire illegals???

Going after employers does NOT fit his straight-line libertarian agenda which is open borders with true free trade - free flow of people (no one is illegal). Listen close and look how he has voted in the past before running for office and you can see his agenda. Once the welfare state is gone the border will open. His votes are only for stopping the welfare. Never votes "YES" but does for 245(i) amensty and for increasing H1b's visas

Yes its true a vote for Dr. No,
Is a Vote of Open Boarders and amnesty

Originally Posted by GREGAGREATAMERICAN

Yes its true a vote for Dr. No,
Is a Vote of Open Boarders and amnesty

You know what they say about 'opinions'...