Posts
How I would put the Constitution back in the Oval Office
by Ron Paul
Of course, just as the welfare-warfare state was not constructed in 100 days, it could not be dismantled in the first 100 days of any presidency. While our goal is to reduce the size of the state as quickly as possible, we should always make sure our immediate proposals minimize social disruption and human suffering. Thus, we should not seek to abolish the social safety net overnight because that would harm those who have grown dependent on government-provided welfare. Instead, we would want to give individuals who have come to rely on the state time to prepare for the day when responsibility for providing aide is returned to those organizations best able to administer compassionate and effective help – churches and private charities.
Now, this need for a transition period does not apply to all types of welfare. For example, I would have no problem defunding corporate welfare programs, such as the Export-Import Bank or the TARP bank bailouts, right away. I find it difficult to muster much sympathy for the CEO’s of Lockheed Martin and Goldman Sachs.
No matter what the president wants to do, most major changes in government programs would require legislation to be passed by Congress. Obviously, the election of a constitutionalist president would signal that our ideas had been accepted by a majority of the American public and would probably lead to the election of several pro-freedom congressmen and senators. Furthermore, some senators and representatives would become “born again” constitutionalists out of a sense of self-preservation. Yet there would still be a fair number of politicians who would try to obstruct our freedom agenda. Thus, even if a president wanted to eliminate every unconstitutional program in one fell swoop, he would be very unlikely to obtain the necessary support in Congress. FULL STORY
2 comments:
Rose, and rabid followers who simply advocate "scrapping the income tax and replacing it with nothing" should take note of Ron Paul's own words,
...just as the welfare-warfare state was not constructed in 100 days, it could not be dismantled in the first 100 days of any presidency...Thus, we should not seek to abolish the social safety net overnight because that would harm those who have grown dependent on government-provided welfare.
The MI FairTax will bring a robust economy with many job openings for many without jobs to solve their family's immediate problem - obtaining an income! And, they'll be able to grow investments tax free.
The ability of gov't to lay claim on our hard-earned dollars, through confiscation, is GONE with enactment of the MI FairTax.
And Ron Paul's plan also talks about how to fund these programs by cutting spending in other areas until they can be eliminated.
Your plan doesn't cut any spending, it's just an alternative way of collecting the same amount with a little bait of kicking back a little.
What you don't talk about is the fact that raising the sales tax on everything is still going to hurt the elderly who are already on a fixed income because there is no kick back for the other necessities like toilet paper, laundry soap or any other sundry items that they still have to buy. Or their medication which is huge. Your pre-bait won't even begin to compensate for what it will cost them out of pocket when inflation goes up or if the Federal Government changes the level of poverty.
The only thing you plan allows us to control is the percentage of tax collected. As I told you before, and I will say it again, it's a progressive tax proposal and unacceptable.
Post a Comment