ID:38689
 Jan 31 2008, 9:53 am
|
|
| |
|
Jan 31 2008, 12:23 pm
|
|
EGUY
 |
After much liberation and analysis of my blue ribbon committee's findings, I have indeed located the fiscal conservative.
|
Yeah, but Ron Paul’s ideas are a little extreme. He basically wants to abolish everything. Which may be a good idea because of the bureaucracy, but it isn’t as easy as just closing up all the various departments. I do think that most of the government needs a management change, and maybe some rebuilt from the ground up.
| |
EGUY wrote:
After much liberation and analysis of my blue ribbon committee's findings, I have indeed located the fiscal conservative. *Cough* That is increase in spending */cough* Paul is the only one proposing a budget cut. | |
Certainly not everything, he feels that the federal government should be in charge of defense, and some moral issues, the federal government has been ballooning for the past 10 years. Ron Paul doesn't want to get rid of the federal government, he wants to cut it to the size it was in the clinton years. During the period of 1995, to 2009, the US budget will literally double. From 1,500,000,000,000 to 3,000,000,000,000. And that isn't even including the Iraq war! Not to mention, the only reason why we even approach a budget balance is because we steal money from the social security fund. Every single year the government predicts a budget surplus in 5-10 years, and as that 5 years comes around, it is reprojected to another 10 years. Infact, at the beginning of the decade it was predicted that the US would pay off all of it's debt by 2010, all 5 trillion of it. If the US paid off all of it's debt right now, the US outlays would be 500 billion dollars lower. If the US cut overseas deployments, it would save nearly 400 billion dollars, and a global effort to end farm subsidies would lower expenditure by 100 billion, get rid of department of homeland security(Which is a large bureaucracy) for a grand total of nearly 1.1 Trillion dollars saved. Which puts us almost exactly where we were 10 years ago. Not to mention the fact that taxes could be lowered nearly 30% after the debt is paid. We could go with Huckabee's fair tax, and instead of a 23% sales tax, we could have a 16% sales tax(Which is lower then the lowest VAT tax in the EU.) The only way the US can remain successful in this next century is, as Cheney is quoted saying, "We need to make America the best place in the world to do business."
Asielen wrote: Yeah, but Ron Paul’s ideas are a little extreme. He basically wants to abolish everything. Which may be a good idea because of the bureaucracy, but it isn’t as easy as just closing up all the various departments. I do think that most of the government needs a management change, and maybe some rebuilt from the ground up. | |
Certainly not everything, he feels that the federal government should be in charge of defense, and some moral issues, the federal government has been ballooning for the past 10 years. Ron Paul doesn't want to get rid of the federal government, he wants to cut it to the size it was in the clinton years. During the period of 1995, to 2009, the US budget will literally double. From 1,500,000,000,000 to 3,000,000,000,000. And that isn't even including the Iraq war! Not to mention, the only reason why we even approach a budget balance is because we steal money from the social security fund. Every single year the government predicts a budget surplus in 5-10 years, and as that 5 years comes around, it is reprojected to another 10 years. Infact, at the beginning of the decade it was predicted that the US would pay off all of it's debt by 2010, all 5 trillion of it. If the US paid off all of it's debt right now, the US outlays would be 500 billion dollars lower. If the US cut overseas deployments, it would save nearly 400 billion dollars, and a global effort to end farm subsidies would lower expenditure by 100 billion, get rid of department of homeland security(Which is a large bureaucracy) for a grand total of nearly 1.1 Trillion dollars saved. Which puts us almost exactly where we were 10 years ago. Not to mention the fact that taxes could be lowered nearly 30% after the debt is paid. We could go with Huckabee's fair tax, and instead of a 23% sales tax, we could have a 16% sales tax(Which is lower then the lowest VAT tax in the EU.) The only way the US can remain successful in this next century is, as Cheney is quoted saying, "We need to make America the best place in the world to do business."
Asielen wrote: Yeah, but Ron Paul’s ideas are a little extreme. He basically wants to abolish everything. Which may be a good idea because of the bureaucracy, but it isn’t as easy as just closing up all the various departments. I do think that most of the government needs a management change, and maybe some rebuilt from the ground up. | |
I am aware and agree with everything you just stated. Especially the abolishment of the department of homeland security.
However, I don't agree with: -Abolishment of the Department of Education -Abolishment of the Department of Commerce -Abolishment of the Department of Energy -Abolishment of thethe Internal Revenue Service. (Although he most likely wouldn't totally cut it) I think all of the above departments need to be fixed, but not abolished. http://www.ntu.org/pdf/P0801Paul_Analysis.pdf | |
Asielen wrote:
I am aware and agree with everything you just stated. Especially the abolishment of the department of homeland security. Wow, I'm like, complete opposite. I don't understand the reasoning for abolishing homeland security. It doesn't make much sence to me. I do understand abolishing the Department of Education. I don't feel like paying someone elses way into school when I never went to school, and my kids will go to a private school. Why should I pay 3 times? The IRS is killing us from the inside out. Banks shouldn't have control over any countrys currency. That's just stupid. | |
I'm trying, but everytime I think I see it, it turns out to be a religious zealot!
Your graph must be broken. | |