Crazy Uncle Ron Paul

The main stream media and many in the blososphre give Paul a pass because “he can’t win.”, however, a fervent and sophisticated organization along with an angry electorate has moved Ron Paul into serious contender status in all the early primaries. It’s time to look seriously at Ron Paul and what he believes.

Ron Paul is a RINO, or Republican in Name Only. But instead of leaning left like many RINO’s Paul is on the extreme of the other end, a libertarian. You know how your crazy old uncle, and maybe even you, might say something like, “I say we bring all our troops home, cut off all foreign aid and let those other countries do whatever they want to do.” Well that sounds great, in theory, but in practice, the world is more complicated than that kind of black and white thinking. Ron Paul and libertarians are just that, black and white. Good and Bad, Wrong and Right.

In the most recent debate, Paul was taken to task by Michelle Bachman for his statements about Iran. In essence, Ron Paul would stop all of our efforts to prevent Iran from developing a nuclear program and nuclear weapons and let them do whatever they want. Bachman, rightly so, said that was dangerous. Yes, Ron Paul wants to get the government “back down to size”, but his downsizing can also weaken us around the world and at home. Iran has vowed to wipe Israel off the map. They call America the great Satan. Do you think they would hesitate to use a nuclear weapon to defeat Israel and their avowed enemy the United States. Ron Paul doesn’t think it’s worth worrying about.

I will admit, I have some libertarian leaning views. I think the Fed should be restructured, not abolished. I think the income tax should be restructured, not abolished. I think marijuana should be legal. Cocain, meth, heroin…NO, NO, NO. There is a difference. I think the Federal government should be smaller and less powerful.

But on the reality side, we can’t withdraw from the world and go back to the federal government of pre-cival war days. Times change. Society changes. Technology and lifestyles change and our system of governing has to change with it, but in the context of our constitution.

Ron Paul has some great ideas, but he is the most radical and extreme of any candidate in the Republican primary. If you want a guaranteed loss for Republicans and conservatism in 2012, then vote for Ron Paul. Crazy Uncle Ron will not only run off any moderates, he’ll lose a lot of Republican’s too.

The essential argument of all the Occupy protests is that the wealthy are getting to rich becuase the government is not regulating them enough. Extrapolate that on out to its logical conclusion and you’ll find that most Occupiers feel like the government is nothing more than a tool of the rich and powerful to opress and control the masses.

What’s mind boggling is their solution is….wait for it…MORE GOVERNMENT!

What they really need is a good dose of conservative instruction. If they had ever gotten it, instead of taking “Gay Cinema and the American Culture 101″ They would know that that conservatives have a healthy does of skepticism about the government too. We think it is to easily manipulated by the rich and powerful to their own ends, but our soultion is not more government, it’s less. Choke it. Starve it. Beat it back. Make it smaller and give it less power and authority. If you do that, then 1% have to deal directly with the 99%. They don’t have a middle man covering their ass. That is called free market capitalism.

Governments have always been and will always be tools for the wealthy to manipulate and control the masses. (So is the media, by the way.) That will never change. That is precisely why our Democratic Republic of United States was and is such a great idea. It was designed to have a nominal federal government that would basically be in charge of the stuff that only a unified national effort could handle. Protecting borders, national defense, raising armies, etc. The founding fathers left the rest up to the states and the people.

No I know we are way past “the good old days”, but the conservative argument for less government is more valid than ever and the Occupy protesters are singing our song…they just don’t know the lyrics.

If they really want to knock the wealthy down a notch or two, they should all vote for candidates who want to reform the tax code and make it simple so rich people and corporations can use it to not pay tazes.

If they really think bankers are the bad guys then they are not paying attention. Banks charge retail stores fees for accepting debit and credit cards. Government (Dodd-Frank Bill) limited how much money banks could charge retailers so the banks responded by raising fees on the cost of using credit and debit cards on the consumer. Now I bet you didn’t see retail prices go down because the retail stores now had lower transaction fees, did you? What happend next is a conservative victory. Many of the banks lowered the fees back down after thousands of customers closed accounts, proving the effectiveness of the free market over government intervention.

The point of the above is the government had no business getting involved in the fee structure between banks and retailers. The only reason they did was because Sen. Chris Dodd was being a tool for a rich constuent who owned a bunch of retail stores when he inserted the fee cap language into the bill.

The Occupiers are right that the people should have the power, they’re just to stupid, or to indoctrinated to realize that giving more power to the government is taking away power from them and putting it in the hands of the rich.

The devil is in the details and Cain’s was lacking in detail and specifics needed to score it for validity. It is, however, a great starting point.

Over the years flat taxers like Steve Forbes and others have talked about a 15 to 20% rate, eliminating all deductions. Fair taxers, like Mike Huckabee and others (Fair tax, consumption tax, VAT are pretty much the same national sales tax) have pretty much all talked about exceptions.

Cain’s plan also addressed payroll tax deductions for medicare, social security and the funding of the entitlement state. Many conservatives have been saying for years that opting out of Social Security for private retirement should be considered. Of course, we now have ObamaCare, which will most definately lead to higher payroll taxes to pay for health insurance. That’s not partisan bickering, that is straight from the CBO and ObamaCare supporters.

The great challenges of our time, jobs, government debt, runaway healthcare costs are all addressed by these three rails. Cain had the right idea, maybe not the right plan.

Now I’m not a politician, tax code genius or health-care expert, but I think the basic idea of reforming the tax code with fairness and simplification will lead to increases in revenue while stimulating job growth. Here is my plan.

SIMPLE TAX RATES
We should have three tax rates. If you make less than $30,000 per year you pay no income tax. Nothing held out of your check, no refunds back from the government of any kind. By todays living standards, $30,000 per year, or $2500 per month is just about what you need to get by with the basics. Food, shelter, transportation with some extra left over. It is about twice the minimum wage. This means a large majority of working Americans would pay no income tax and have nothing withheld from their check. (We’ll address payroll tax and health care later.)

If you make between $30,000 and $120,000 your flat tax on income is 10%. No deductions. No credits. One page tax return. This is the majority of the middle class, from lower to upper and would cover about half of our tax revenue.

If you make above $120 your flat tax rate is 15%. This is basically the upper 10% of income earners, but it’s got some broad leaps in income. A family making $120,000 a year is nothing like a family making $1.6 million per year. Generally speaking thought, this group would generate the other half of our income tax revenue.

Income from capitol gains, stock dividends, interest earned on retirement accounts, etc would be taxed at the 15% rate. 15% would also be the corporate or business tax rate. (More on that later)

VAT OR SALES TAX
Now with income taxes down to one page for indivuduals and businesses,(no deductions easy to understand) there will probably be a deficit. Remember, we still have to pay our way out of the mess we are in. That’s where the VAT or National Sales Tax comes in. It would be set at a percentage based on two criteria, a.) what is the projeted deficit from income tax revenues and b. what do we need to make payments to bring down our national debt. The VAT would also have a cap and be tied to a balanced budget amendment to the constitution. In other words, Congress would have to establish a budget, based on the projected income tax revenue and then vote every year to make up the difference by raising or lowering the VAT tax within pre-determined limits. If they couldn’t balance the budget within the VAT limit then they would have to cut the budget. The VAT would not apply to housing, utilities, food, fuel and health care. It would apply to any retail goods and services.

Simplifying the tax code in this way would be progressive, but fair. While lower rates would reduce tax revenue, simplification would increase it. We could eliminate the IRS as we know it. There would be no refund checks or paying taxes on April 15th. What you owed would be withheld.

The VAT/Balanced Budget Amendment would also force congress to act on budgetary matters. They would have no choice. For example, the law would state that the VAT could not increase more than 1% a year. Leading up to a fiscal year the congress would be given projected income tax revenues. (Which would require a super majority to change) They would also be given a projected VAT tax revenue. The budget would be set accordingly with wiggle room of 1% increasing the vat tax. If they couldn’t balance the budget by increasing the VAT 1%, they would have to cut spending. Any exces revenue would have to be used to pay down the national debt. The VAT is also very progressive in nature because it is tied to how much money you spend as opposed to what you take in.

There are obviously more details to be considered, but that’s my basic proposal. What to do about health care and entitlements are the next parts of the puzzle.

That should be the slogan for the Occupy Wall Street gang and their cohorts who have staged similar protests in other cities.

These morons have no idea why they are there. Their protesting “corporate greed” and politics as usual. Of course, they’re tweeting on their Iphones and Droids, supporting two of the greediest most monopolistic companies in the communications industry. Then they call for more government programs and spending. Imbeciles Untie!!!!

These same people and the media that supports them call Tea Partiers, racists and dangerous, then they take a break to attack policemen and take a dump in a squad car. Nice. Imbeciles…UNTIE!!!!

This is the astroturf movement of all time. Bought and paid for by progressive action committees and unions. Yes Mr. union truck driver, your dues are funding all this.

When you watch interviews with these people, they have no idea why they are there. The ones who can articulate a list of greivances are calling for nothing short than the overthrow of the government and abolishing the free market as we know it. Forgive all debt from credit cards to student loans to mortgages! Tax the rich!

Those people are there because of two possibilities. Either they don’t work and suck of the government teat which is being funded by the rich they protest against, or, they come from wealthy, tax paying parents who support their deadbeat offspring!

You idiots want a job? Pick up the friggin trash you’re leaving everywhere and trade in the aluminum beer cans at the recycling center!

The Democrat Party has become the enemy of tradition American values. Occupy Wall Street is the new face of the Democrat Party.

Hows that Hope and change thing working out for you?

I watched his press conference where he was touting his “jobs program”, which is simply another tax and spend program. He said, paraphrasing, that he was not promoting class warfare and in the next sentence, promoted class warfare.

He said raising taxes during these economic times was absolutely the wrong thing to do….now he is proposing a tax increase.
He said his administration would be the most transparent in history, but it’s turned out to be one of the most secretive.
He rails against “crony capitalism” and says the rich should pay their fair share, but when his big donors promote a failed “green business” (Solyndra) his administration cooks the books, manipulates federal law, and quite possibly commits fraud to save his big donars millions and stick the American taxpayer with a bill for billions of dollars.

Does this guy ever do anything he says?

My overall view of the debate was positive. It was my first real opportunity to see all the Republican candidates side-by-side, in full campaign mode and I was pleased with what I saw. There is quite a diversity of thought among these candidates and throughout the Republican family in general. From libertarian to interventionist conservatism, the GOP is THE party of ideas that can save our country from this economic mess we are in.

Rick Santorum – Grade B-
In the debate, Santorum didn’t get a lot of face time. On paper, he looks good and he does well in these types of forums. He is a sound conservative but there is a certain aspect of his personality that is just unappealing. He lacks “likeability” and will need to make up for that if he wants to be a serious contender for President.

Herman Cain Grade: C-
Very likeable, but very shallow as a potential leader of the free world. Herman Cain has done much to focus peoples attention on business and the economy and he is a great assett to the Republican party. BUT, his lack of government and political experience, in spite of his feelings, is a liability, not an assett. In business you can fire people who don’t follow your plan. In government you can’t. He cannot and should not be the GOP’s candidate for president.

John Huntsman Grade: D
Huntsman didn’t seem at all presidential and didin’t offer a lot of substance with any of his answers. He appeared nervous and halting during most of his answers. He had no defense whatsoever of his record as govenor other than to say that was his record. I get the feeling we’d be trading one non-leader for another with Huntsman.

Ron Paul Grade: C +
Ron Paul gets a very small number of people extremely excited. He can never, ever be president but he performs a valuable service to the the Republican pary and conservatism in general. The purest form of conservatism is libertarianism. Paul reminds us all the the real problem is government, on any level and if we always hold true to taking power away from government on any policy decision, we’ll be better off.

Newt Gingrich Grade A-
Best actual performance of the debate and Newt once again proved that he is a candidate of real ideas. I think he would make a good president, but I don’t think he has the capacity to beat Barak Obama. Newt’s character has been assasinated by media attacks and his own self-inflicted wounds. He his one of the great policy thinkers of our time and makes the Republican party better. But winning will be very difficult for him.

Tim Pawlenty Grade: B
I liked Pawlenty’s performance. His exchanges with Bachman were neccesary and, I thought, effective. Pawlenty’s biggest hurdle is personality. He doesn’t exudue presidentiality and authoritative leadership. I told a friend of mine he needs to gain about 30 pounds, get a new personality and a chin. I feel better about him as a candidate after watching him in the debate, but I don’t think he can beat Obama in a general election.

Michelel Bachman Grade D-
After seeing her performance last night I have decided that Michelle Bachman does not possess the gravitas to be president. I thought she performed terribly and I was troubled by some of her answers. I understand standing on principle and fighting for what you believe in but there is a time and a season for everyting. In America, you sometimes have to compromise and maybe even retreat from a battle in order to win the war. She is not ready to lead our country and Pawlenty was right to point it out.

Mit Romney Grade-B
Mitt didn’t have to do much and didn’t in the debate. He looked and sounded presidential and as every pundit has already said, nobody really laid a glove on him. Romney doesn’t really inspire me but of all the candidates I think he is the most presidential, the most prepared to fight and beat Barak Obama.

Rick Perry Grade-Incomplete
Even though he wasn’t in the debate, Rick Perry still had a presence. If he gets in, Romney will finally get some much needed competition.

I though Newt Gingrich was the best performance of the night, punctuated by his closing statement that excluded the final shot at self-promotion and patriotically called on Obama and Congress to get back to work for America.

To get your head around this debt ceiling debate you need to understand what all those talking heads and politicians are saying when they use certain words.

DEFICIT: The nation’s deficit is the difference between what we pay into the the federal government in taxes every year, roughtly $2.2 trillion, and what the beaurocrats in Washington spend, which is roughly $3.7 trillion and will go up every year.(see why below) That means we have to borrow $1.5 trillion just to make ends meet and next year, we’ll have to borrow more unless tax revenues go up.

THE DEBT: Our debt is how much we’ve already borrowed over the years which is well over $14 trillion and growing rapidly.

BUDGET CUT: This is “trickyer”. In Washington budget-speak a cut is increasing spending less than what you originally planned. Consider this. We are on track to go from $3.7 trillion in total spending to $4.2 trillion. If, through the current debt negotiations we only go up to $4 trillion, Washington considers that a $200 billion dollar cut in spending.

Most of us think going from $3.7 down to $3.5 trillion would be a $200 billion dollar cut. ARE YOU STARTING TO SEE WHY THE TEA PARTY congressmen aren’t so crazy after all? Only in Washington D.C. can you spend more money next year than this year and call it a cut in spending.

About $500 billion of what we spend this year will be paying the interest on the $14 trillion dollar debt. That means .18 cents of every dollar spent is to pay just the interst on the money we’ve borrowed already and Washington’s solution is to borrow even more. If Obama gets his way, next year we’ll be paying .25 cents out of every dollar the federal government spends to pay off the interest only on the debt. The $14 trillion is going to go up to nearly $18 trillion.

I feel like I’m eating crazy pills!!!

So as you watch all of the talking heads and politicians, Republican and Democrat, talk about spending cuts…remember it’s al just smoke and mirrors. As an old friend used to say, they’re all just putting powdered sugar on a dog turd and trying to pass it off as a donut.

This is a watershed moment for our nation. Are we going to continue down the path towards an even more powerful, centralized federal control of all aspects of life, or are we going to return to the fundamental principles on which our country was founded? We are Democratic Republic of United States that has lost its way and allowed to much power to be concentrated in our federal government. It is that concentration of power that has created a political ruling class that sustains itself by growing its power at every turn.

Republican or Democrat, conservative or liberal, it matters not. The elite, political, D.C., ruling class need to be reigned in. We can only do that by cutting off the source of their power….the public wealth.

The rich use government and the law to grow their wealth. That is what rich people do and it will never change. But the rich are out-numbered by, we the people, by a huge margin and we the people still have an advantage. We can control the government and change the laws if we so choose. Most importantly, our elequent constitution was designed to allow that change peacefully and with full protection from mob rule and majorities forcing minorities to “take it or leave it.”

History is being made in this debt crisis. Two clear opposing viewpoints about the future of our nation are fighting for the future. One side sees more and stronger governance as the solution and the other sees the solution as less government.

I hope for the latter. Less government. Weaker government. More faith in “we the people”. History is being made. Where do you stand?

Obama said he was not sure if Social Security checks would go out if we didn’t raise the debt limit, right? First, isn’t Social Security supposed to be a trust fund? The way it’s supposed to work is the money gets taken out of your check, put in a trust fund and then when you retire you collect. Oh that’s right, our federal government has raided the trust fund to pay for everything else. So much for the “lock-box”. Secondly, we’ve heard the Democrats say over and over again that Social Security is sound. If that’s true, why would there be any problem with Social Security checks if we don’t raise the debt ceiling? That’s the problem with telling so many lies. Eventually you can’t keep them all straight.

I’ve also seen the attack ads on Paul Ryan’s budget plan saying that granny would be pushed over a cliff in her wheel chair. First, see the above. Secondly, Ryan’s plan would only affect people who are still 10 years away from retirement. Nobody currently drawing would see any changes, at all.

Moody’s is the big ratings agency that has put the U.S. on watch for a possible downgrade, which would dramatically increase the interest we would have to pay on our debt, causing even more deficit. Is this the same Moody’s that gave Behr-Stearns, Lehman Brothers, Fannie-Mae, Freddie-Mac and virtually every mortgage derivative scam out there a triple aaa rating right up until the financial melt-down of 2008? Just asking.

The monied, political, elite ruling class is doing nothing but covering there ass. We the people need to cut them off and force them to control spending. Not that I’m a huge fan, but Ron Paul made a great point on the House floor the other day. About $1.5 trillion of our debt is held by the Federal Reserve because of the QE1 and QE2, the programs wherein the Fed bought up treasury notes by basically just printing enough money to do it. Keep in mind the Fed is just a bunch of private bankers. Paul’s solution was to write that debt off. Call it even with the Fed and start from scratch. Maybe to simplistic, but not a bad idea, huh?

Democrats know beyond all doubt that Social Security and Medicare must be reformed to remain solvent for future generations. But they’ve ignored that fact since Obama got elected and instead focused on creating yet another unfunded soon to be insolvent entitlement, Obamacare. We just don’t have enough “evil” rich people to tax. Even with a massive tax increase on all of us we still won’t come close to living up to the financial commitments in Social Security, Medicare, Obamacare and our debt obligations.

The fraud being perpetrated by the Democrats on America is, they don’t want a leaner more efficient government. If they did why not support a balance budget amendment. 74% of the nation wants it. The other 23% are Democrats.

Remember “Bush Lied, People Died”, “No Blood For Oil”, Blah, blah, blah… All of which was hindsight, second guessing for political point scoring. Where is Code Pink now?

Remember Gitmo was an embarrasment and MUST BE CLOSED! Where are the protesters in the street and the signs saying Obama’s Gulag?

The Patriot Act is an invasion of privacy. We’re sacrificing our freedoms! They’re going know what books we all check out at the library! Obama and Holder haven’t changed a thing. Still using every legal device provided by the Patriot Act. Still using rendition and other interrigation techniques that got Bush labled as Hitler.

In times of crisis people need real leaders. We are in a time of crisis, fiscally and internationally, and our president shows he doesn’t have either the desire or capacity to lead.