Ron Paul!

[kyrider]

Originally Posted by shiroganeshinobi

I raise you Bernie Sanders, the superior senator.

I applaud the Pauls for recognizing the inefficiency of our government but their ideas are flawed. There needs to be balance on both cuts and revenue, primarily revenue.

All raised revenue leads to is more spending.

[alex.s]

colonel sanders seems to speak the truth. i would hate to see social security decline when the top 1% pay so little relative taxes. it's unfortunate how much influence money has on our government. though in terms of spending elsewhere... there are a lot of programs that seem pretty useless to me. in terms of how good something is for our country, there are a lot larger targets than things like social security.

i saw that movie "inside job" recently about the 2008 subprime fiasco... it made me want to throw up.

[kyrider]

Originally Posted by alex.s

colonel sanders seems to speak the truth. i would hate to see social security decline when the top 1% pay so little relative taxes. it's unfortunate how much influence money has on our government. though in terms of spending elsewhere... there are a lot of programs that seem pretty useless to me. in terms of how good something is for our country, there are a lot larger targets than things like social security.

i saw that movie "inside job" recently about the 2008 subprime fiasco... it made me want to throw up.

I am not for Corporatism and one of the strongest opponents to it is Ron Paul.

I have no problems with safety nets but I do have a problem with entitlement thinking. We have become a society or Corporate and entitlement thieves.

http://www.ronpaul.com/2010-04-25/ob...a-corporatist/

Prime example -

http://hotair.com/archives/2011/03/2...-any-us-taxes/

[almost40]

Just an FYI
the top 1% pays 38% of the taxes in this country
The top 5% of income earners pays almost 60%

[kyrider]

Originally Posted by almost40

Just an FYI
the top 1% pays 38% of the taxes in this country
The top 5% of income earners pays almost 60%

You are right!

I have family members that make descent money and pay no taxes due to EITC and Child Tax credits. They actually get back more than they have had deducted.

47% of Americans actually pay no taxes at all.

[almost40]

Originally Posted by kyrider

You are right!

I have family members that make descent money and pay no taxes due to EITC and Child Tax credits. They actually get back more than they have had deducted.

47% of Americans actually pay no taxes at all.

Im all about a 10-15% flat tax.
Better yet. NO Income tax and a national 1 or 2 % sales tax.
That way EVERYONE pays. EVERYONE then has some "skin in the game"

[Xoulrath]

FairTax.org

[shiroganeshinobi]

You guys must really hate roads, the police, medicare, public education, and pretty much all government services and entities huh?

[CynicalC]

Originally Posted by shiroganeshinobi

You guys must really hate roads, the police, medicare, public education, and pretty much all government services and entities huh?

[alex.s]

Originally Posted by shiroganeshinobi

You guys must really hate roads, the police, medicare, public education, and pretty much all government services and entities huh?

i can't speak for others, but i know i sure do!

[almost40]

Ill give Ron Paul Kudo's for voting NO yesterday.
One of 22 who "get it" in my opinion.

[CZroe]

Originally Posted by alex.s

colonel sanders seems to speak the truth. i would hate to see social security decline when the top 1% pay so little relative taxes. it's unfortunate how much influence money has on our government. though in terms of spending elsewhere... there are a lot of programs that seem pretty useless to me. in terms of how good something is for our country, there are a lot larger targets than things like social security.

i saw that movie "inside job" recently about the 2008 subprime fiasco... it made me want to throw up.

Are you kidding? Look up the definition of "relative." They pay far more literally and relatively.

[alex.s]

Originally Posted by CZroe

Are you kidding? Look up the definition of "relative." they pay far more literally and relatively.

percentage of their income?

[CZroe]

Originally Posted by alex.s

percentage of their income?

Percentage is the definition of relative. If the percentage changes as the amount it applies to goes up, it's a sliding scale and the very opposite of relative. It's a common misconception that they pay a lower percentage perpetuated by those with a "spread the wealth" mentality. One only has to fill out their yearly 1040EZ to see that the percentage increases as the income does.* Yes, there are numerous ways they and we can evade certain taxes, but that doesn't negate the basic fact that potential wealth is incentive to succeed. Take that and spread it around and you have a culture of "why bother" do-nothings with no economy worth taxing.

*I've never made more than 2X,000 a year in my life and yet I've bordered on certain tax brackets that make the difference between owing more or getting a refund almost every year ("Aww man! I made $32 too much No I gotta pay more than they already withheld."). Not that those paying taxes on corporate gains taxes are using the same form, but it isn't a comparable form of income either (it's mostly all still invested and imminently more likely to disappear on the market's whim). Once again, they undeniably pay far more taxes than we do as a percentage or our entire economy.

[almost40]

Originally Posted by CZroe

Percentage is the definition of relative. If the percentage changes as the amount it applies to goes up, it's a sliding scale and the very opposite of relative. It's a common misconception that they pay a lower percentage perpetuated by those with a "spread the wealth" mentality. One only has to fill out their yearly 1040EZ to see that the percentage increases as the income does.* Yes, there are numerous ways they and we can evade certain taxes, but that doesn't negate the basic fact that potential wealth is incentive to succeed. Take that and spread it around and you have a culture of "why bother" do-nothings with no economy worth taxing.

*I've never made more than 2X,000 a year in my life and yet I've bordered on certain tax brackets that make the difference between owing more or getting a refund almost every year ("Aww man! I made $32 too much No I gotta pay more than they already withheld."). Not that those paying taxes on corporate gains taxes are using the same form, but it isn't a comparable form of income either (it's mostly all still invested and imminently more likely to disappear on the market's whim). Once again, they undeniably pay far more taxes than we do as a percentage or our entire economy.

Did you mean capital gains taxes??

[almost40]

Originally Posted by alex.s

percentage of their income?

uhhhh yes.
If you make 100K and are single you will pay roughly 25K to the fed. After deductions
If you make 40K, more than likely you will pay 8-10% if you have no children and take the standard deductions.
You will get more back than you paid in federal taxes if you have kids. (EIC credit)

Thats not counting FICA, medicare, or your state taxes.

Believe the "rich dont pay enough or there fair share" if you please. Its not the truth.
That line is out there for those who have no understanding of the tax code or how it works. Thats millions and millions of people, who every year, pay someone to loan them money against the tax return just filed for them. (For a percentage of course) Thats so nutty IMO....... But every year at tax time those "loan shark" tax prep operations pop up like sprinklers in the summer. Wonder why??? lol

[wtfh4xx]

Originally Posted by shiroganeshinobi

You guys must really hate roads, the police, medicare, public education, and pretty much all government services and entities huh?

Is this where I step in?

[almost40]

Originally Posted by wtfh4xx

Is this where I step in?

NO, LOL

[wtfh4xx]

I coudlnt resist lol

[almost40]

Originally Posted by wtfh4xx

I coudlnt resist lol

I Know. lol
Ive been trying to hold MYSELF back.

[shiroganeshinobi]

No need to jump in, this is us basically.

[Seattle_Chris]

I'll be voting for Ron Paul again this year, regardless of his being on the ballot or not.

[coondog]

Originally Posted by shiroganeshinobi

You guys must really hate roads, the police, medicare, public education, and pretty much all government services and entities huh?

No, it's that you're still naive enough and don't possibly have the life experience some of the others do to leave your blinders on. Plus, HATE, is extreme verbage. Peace Out!

[alex.s]

O_O he got second place in the straw poll!

Ron! Paul! Ron! Paul! Ron! Paul!

[almost40]

Originally Posted by alex.s

O_O he got second place in the straw poll!

Ron! Paul! Ron! Paul! Ron! Paul!

Not a bad deal for Ron Paul.
He still cant win. He cant raise the money required.
If only he wasnt such an isolationist on national defense.
If only he could understand that we do need a strong military.
I would consider him the front runner.
If only........

[alex.s]

why do we need a strong military again?

[almost40]

Originally Posted by alex.s

why do we need a strong military again?

This is a joke right??
Can you speak chinese??

[alex.s]

does canada speak chinese? how about mexico? i'm so confused by the view that we have to be invading other people in order for us to not be invaded

[almost40]

Im so confused by your logic.
The only "invasion" I recall in recent memory was Iraq and that served a very strategic purpose.
If you think we as a country can just sit here in our own little space and survive, you are mistaken.
Strategic interest need to be protected and defended.
Allies need to be protected and defended.
We as a people need to be protected and defended.
That requires overseas militatary action in some cases. That requires a strong national defense. A strong military so to speak.
Weak countries get invaded. Happens all the time. They get invaded, overrun, and then conqured.
Ya think China would disarm if we disarm?? How about Russia, Iran or any other number of countries that would love to see the western world disappear.
Did we forget 9/11 already?

[CynicalC]

Originally Posted by almost40

This is a joke right??
Can you speak chinese??

Originally Posted by almost40

Did we forget 9/11 already?

[alex.s]

haha wow...

[CynicalC]

That's the face I made when I read that. Now it's stuck that way.

[Xoulrath]

So, let me get this straight: Some of you actually believe that if we put down our arms and stop policing the world, then overnight all will be forgotten and America will be loved?

I'm all for reducing our policing of the world. But I agree with Kevin. We need a strong defense. The key word being defense.

[CynicalC]

Originally Posted by Xoulrath

So, let me get this straight: Some of you actually believe that if we put down our arms and stop policing the world, then overnight America will be invaded by the rest of the world?

[alex.s]

Originally Posted by almost40

Im so confused by your logic.
The only "invasion" I recall in recent memory was Iraq and that served a very strategic purpose.

"the only invasion in recent history" is the one we're currently in the process of fighting... oh yeah there's also that OTHER one we're fighting... oh yeah and that THIRD one we're fighting! but those don't count, right?

also what was the strategic purpose iraq fulfilled? WMDs? oh right about that...

If you think we as a country can just sit here in our own little space and survive, you are mistaken.

right... cause it's not like plenty of other countries do that... oh wait...

Strategic interest need to be protected and defended.

do you mean, other people have something we want, so we need to bully them into submission? what strategic interests are we protecting exactly again?

Allies need to be protected and defended.

heard of the UN or Nato?

We as a people need to be protected and defended.

i don't disagree. this is why noone has suggested we disband our military. there's a difference however between disbanding a military, and spending billions fighting 3 wars at the same time and requiring the newest fighting technology in existence.

That requires overseas militatary action in some cases.

what? why? that's the most ridiculous statement i've heard in a while. if you think us fighting wars overseas like iraq and libya is protecting us citizens you're sorely mistaken. protecting the US government's interests, yes. citizens? no.

Weak countries get invaded. Happens all the time. They get invaded, overrun, and then conqured.

when was the last time canada or mexico was invaded? and not by us.

Ya think China would disarm if we disarm?? How about Russia, Iran or any other number of countries that would love to see the western world disappear.

again, noone is talking about disbanding the military. people are talking about reducing the massive amount we spend on our military to something sensible. look at our military budgets then look at every other country. there's a substantial difference.

Did we forget 9/11 already?

WHAT? are you kidding me? do you even know why we were attacked? why everyone else in this world hates us? why the rest of the world thinks the US is a bunch of nosy aholes always meddling in every other country's business?

[kyrider]

Ron Paul does not want to weaken the Military. He just does not want blood shed unless it is to defend the Constitution of the United States.

This to my understanding is what Ron Paul supports -

I, (NAME), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God.

[ninja_sleeper]

Hey want to see something funny about RP?

http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/mo...--the-top-tier

[kyrider]

Originally Posted by ninja_sleeper

Hey want to see something funny about RP?

http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/mo...--the-top-tier

I saw that!

Thanks for posting and showing the disrespect he is getting.

He is not some crazy uncle but he is right!

Link to original page on YouTube.

[Alex]

Originally Posted by kyrider

He is not some crazy uncle but he is right!

Those aren't necessarily mutually exclusive.

[kyrider]

Originally Posted by Alex

Those aren't necessarily mutually exclusive.

Touche!