Ron Paul 08

Page 3 of 13 [ 208 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 ... 13 Next

Previous topic | Next topic

ed
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 19 Dec 2004
Age: 80
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,788
Location: Whitinsville, MA

30 Nov 2007, 4:15 pm

Anubis wrote:

The government is a neccesary keeper of law and order in its most basic form. Law good. Anarchy horrific.

Law not necessarily good. The government has no business interfering with your right to do what you want, as long as you don't hurt others.

snake321
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 25 Mar 2006
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,135

30 Nov 2007, 5:24 pm

Thing to bear in mind is that as long as we need their money, they already own us. Every dollar we print costs us that dollar plus interests. Currency in itself is a form of enslavement.

Cyanide
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 24 Sep 2006
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,003
Location: The Pacific Northwest

30 Nov 2007, 5:45 pm

Ok, I guess I'm lost here, but when did Ron Paul say he wanted a nationwide sales tax? I thought he wanted to eliminate the income tax and replace it with nothing. Mike Gravel is the one who wants to replace the income tax with a sales tax.

ed
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 19 Dec 2004
Age: 80
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,788
Location: Whitinsville, MA

30 Nov 2007, 5:55 pm

His website doesn't say anything about a consumption tax... now. I know it did before, I remember it well; he also used to have a forum, where I expressed the same views I have expressed here today (maybe that's why he doesn't have a forum anymore) :lol:

I smell a rat...

snake321
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 25 Mar 2006
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,135

30 Nov 2007, 6:45 pm

Cyanide wrote:

Honestly I'm not entirely sure, I hear many interpretations of what he listed on his web-site as to where he stands on issues (RP I mean). I know he wants to abolish the IRS, that is definately a good thing..... Of coarse I have considered the possibility that he might be a curve ball thrown out by the NWO to put some more support into the conservative divide, seeing as NWO wants Hillary to get into office next to offset the flame wars in the divide. When we have a republican president, democrats get flustered, when we have a democrat president, republicans get flustered. I think that's what theyr going for.
So RP might just be a curve ball, but he might not be, he might be legit.

snake321
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 25 Mar 2006
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,135

30 Nov 2007, 6:48 pm

Right now I think he's the only legimate hope we've got, so I hope his campaign isn't a curve ball.

Averick
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 5 Mar 2007
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,709
Location: My tower upon the crag. Yes, mwahahaha!

30 Nov 2007, 8:07 pm

I like Ron Paul, but he doesn't have a chance in hell.

Kitsy
Supporting Member

Joined: 23 Sep 2007
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,015

30 Nov 2007, 8:44 pm

ed wrote:

Kitsy wrote:

Income taxes should be eliminated.

Fortunately, we could still wage the glorious war in Iraq, because we don't use income taxes to pay for it, we just borrow the money from China and Japan. :lol:

Yeah, all of this borrowed money. I can't even count how much money China has loaned! I hope Ron Paul does win. People that say he doesn't have a chance in hell, well according to CNN sure but he raised 4 million dollars in one day. That speaks loudly.

I despise mainstream's approach to candidacy. BBC, I hear did a more fair coverage of all the candidates but everytime CNN does anything with Ron Paul, they give him the worst questions, select the worst you tube questions to take swipes at him and Huckabee is actually taking some Ron Paul quotes and passing them off as his own. Things Ron Paul has said for a long time and he has the voting record to back it up.

Even without mainstream support, Ron Paul is doing great. I'm happy for him and I think this revolution will not be televised.

He may have to run as independant though. I know he says that he won't but what he's doing right now is a very smart move to get his name on the voting platter.

_________________
I am the DAN Monster. I have your child. You owe me twenty five thousand dollars.

xx Dan Monster

marshall
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 14 Apr 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,752
Location: Turkey

30 Nov 2007, 9:43 pm

Awesomelyglorious wrote:

Both promote the economy. No, false, a bad interpretation of Keynesian economic theory. The velocity of the dollar does nothing but cause inflation if there isn't growth. Let's just say that the amount of money is M, the number of times a dollar is spent is V, the price level is P, and the output of the economy is Y. If M does not change and our output(Y) does not grow, then increases in V just lead to increases in prices(P). Now, in the short run, it is correct that you can have higher output just from more spending, but you cannot continually have growth from that because the entire reason you have that effect in the first place is because prices aren't adjusting fast enough to the change.

In order to have growth you must have increases in the amount of capital. Increasing capital requires that some people save in order to do that, so they can lend that money to others via banks or the stock market. This increase in capital, based upon saving, is where we get our long-term growth, which is important to the growth of the economy.

You are right, Keynesian stimulus is a part of the deal, and that consumption is necessary, however, that is a very incomplete picture as we do not argue all consumption versus no consumption, only that in the long run, that more capital will help us more than current consumption.

I don't see how saving increases capitol any more than consumption does. I thought increasing production and demand are what grow the economy. People need to produce new products/services and at the same time increase the demand for said products/services. That’s the only thing that causes actual growth.

Maybe I'm missing part of your argument. It's true that without loans savings would be necessary to increase production. However our current economy is based on mutual debt which completely bypasses the need for savings. Banks loan money borrowed from other banks all the time. The only thing that controls how much money is available to grow the economy is how much banks are willing to loan. Eventually all that debt is shouldered upon the government which then passes it all back to the people through taxes. It seems kind of backwards to me philosophically, but you can’t really deny that this is how things currently work.

Last edited by marshall on 30 Nov 2007, 9:47 pm, edited 3 times in total.

Cyanide
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 24 Sep 2006
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,003
Location: The Pacific Northwest

30 Nov 2007, 9:43 pm

Averick wrote:

I like Ron Paul, but he doesn't have a chance in hell.

He's the most popular candidate with the 18-24 age demographic, by far.
That demographic is why Kerry lost the election in '04; he didn't get enough votes from them.
I think he might actually have a surprising victory for the Republican Party nomination...

marshall
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 14 Apr 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,752
Location: Turkey

30 Nov 2007, 10:11 pm

Cyanide wrote:

There's no way he will be able to eliminate the income tax without replacing it with something else. As much as people rail against big government and government-corporation entanglements, if government funding was suddenly cut off it would take the entire economy down. It would cause a global recession the likes of which we have never seen before. It would be complete madness.

Kitsy
Supporting Member

Joined: 23 Sep 2007
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,015

30 Nov 2007, 10:15 pm

marshall wrote:

Cyanide wrote:

What exactly is the income tax used for?

_________________
I am the DAN Monster. I have your child. You owe me twenty five thousand dollars.

xx Dan Monster

marshall
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 14 Apr 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,752
Location: Turkey

30 Nov 2007, 10:29 pm

Kitsy wrote:

marshall wrote:

Cyanide wrote:

What exactly is the income tax used for?

It’s used to pay down government debt. Without tax revenue the debt will grow even faster unless there is an equivalent cut in spending. A cut in spending large enough to offset the deficit created by the loss of tax revenue will cause a recession. The federal government currently supports a big chunk of the economy whether people like it or not.

Kitsy
Supporting Member

Joined: 23 Sep 2007
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,015

30 Nov 2007, 11:27 pm

Ron Paul on income tax.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qI5lC4Z_T80[/youtube]

_________________
I am the DAN Monster. I have your child. You owe me twenty five thousand dollars.

xx Dan Monster

Awesomelyglorious
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 17 Dec 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,157
Location: Omnipresent

01 Dec 2007, 1:05 am

marshall wrote:

Demand will always naturally grow. Increasing production is the actual source of growth because demand always adjusts.

Quote:

Maybe I'm missing part of your argument. It's true that without loans savings would be necessary to increase production. However our current economy is based on mutual debt which completely bypasses the need for savings. Banks loan money borrowed from other banks all the time. The only thing that controls how much money is available to grow the economy is how much banks are willing to loan. Eventually all that debt is shouldered upon the government which then passes it all back to the people through taxes. It seems kind of backwards to me philosophically, but you can’t really deny that this is how things currently work.

But, that isn't the entire truth. The fact is that there are still bank loans and there are still some checks on the amount of lending done. I think you would have to explain all of your logical leaps. Banks get money from people who lend the money, and these banks lend the money to others to invest. The banks still have to provide a service though. I think you are adding in additional assertions but there is still a strong element of private savings in there. This isn't exactly the Soviet Union.

Quote:

t’s used to pay down government debt. Without tax revenue the debt will grow even faster unless there is an equivalent cut in spending. A cut in spending large enough to offset the deficit created by the loss of tax revenue will cause a recession. The federal government currently supports a big chunk of the economy whether people like it or not

Yes, the only way to be effective is to do this slowly due to the balanced budget multiplier.

ed
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 19 Dec 2004
Age: 80
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,788
Location: Whitinsville, MA

01 Dec 2007, 10:01 am

Of course it would be nice to not have to pay income taxes any more, and I know that Ron Paul supporters don't like a welfare state. That would mean no more money for people with AS, no more special school programs for Aspie kids, no more support for adult Aspies who can't make it in the world. Just want to make sure - is that what you really want?

Page 3 of 13 [ 208 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 ... 13 Next

Jump to:

Ron Paul 08 Post Reply New Topic

Ron Paul 08