|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Washington Post Fact Checker Questions Paul\'s plans.
I dont endorse this guy's analysis but do feel Paul should be more detailed about where he'd specifically like to start making cuts outside military spending.
if i have time tomorrow id like to do some fact checking of my own and see what's feasible and suits Dr. Paul's ideas. Anyways, share your thoughts... http://blog.washingtonpost.com/fact-....html#comments |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Washington Post Fact Checker Questions Paul\'s plans.
Paul has mentioned he would support a VAT like the Fair Tax to help transition. He just doesn't want either, and especially doesn't want both. But a VAT would be an improvement to a federal income tax.
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Washington Post Fact Checker Questions Paul\'s plans.
I'm lazy, so I'd be interested in someone doing some fact checking on the claims about the portion of taxes that come from income tax and the spending cuts.
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Washington Post Fact Checker Questions Paul\'s plans.
Considering the only military spending cuts the "fact checker" included were Iraq/Afghan ops, I think somebody needs to fact check the fact checker. Not to mention he just assumed that Paul would advocate no spending decreases in other areas (including the billions in Congressional pork every year). His whole analysis was a weak attempt to smear Paul with that same tired tactic of "if [x] doesn't have every possible answer, then [x] has no answers". As if the status quo is somehow the only option despite its glaring failures unless another option emerges which fixes every failure *immediately*. Yeah, things will really change with that attitude.
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Washington Post Fact Checker Questions Paul\'s plans.
Kaj,
I noticed that myself. I'm pretty sure the cost of the Iraq war is $100 billions more than the fact checker stated. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Washington Post Fact Checker Questions Paul\'s plans.
[ QUOTE ]
Kaj, I noticed that myself. I'm pretty sure the cost of the Iraq war is $100 billions more than the fact checker stated. [/ QUOTE ] The numbers are right basically, spending on the Iraq war is "off budget" spending. I'm too lazy to explain anything else about government spending to you though. This guy's analysis is badly flawed though IMO and I find it amazing that people can't see how it is flawed but I guess I shouldn't be given the apathy about how the government collects taxes and spends money. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Washington Post Fact Checker Questions Paul\'s plans.
How exactly did the individual income tax collected jump $162 BILLION in one year?
I think every member of congress should have the graphs from this wiki page branded on them. budget wiki |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Washington Post Fact Checker Questions Paul\'s plans.
How can Ron Paul claim that the US did "just fine" without a federal income tax the 126 first years of the nations history when there was an federal individual income tax in place from 1862-1872?
|
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Washington Post Fact Checker Questions Paul\'s plans.
[ QUOTE ]
How can Ron Paul claim that the US did "just fine" without a federal income tax the 126 first years of the nations history when there was an federal individual income tax in place from 1862-1872? [/ QUOTE ] ??? Nit much? Did this tax somehow matter to the government in 1787-1862 or 1872-1913? Is 116 years less evidence than 126 years? That income tax was also 3% for incomes under 10,000 (the vast majority) and 5% for larger incomes. Hardly the situation we're in today. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Washington Post Fact Checker Questions Paul\'s plans.
I'm not attempting to get off topic, however VAT (usually) means Value Added Tax and is in effect a sales tax which is applied when buying items. I just cannot imagine the Federal income tax being replace with a national sales tax, however if it did I would embrace it wholeheartedly.
|
|
|