|
|
#101
10-06-2007, 06:55 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Yes, finally another Ron Paul-thread
I wouldn't bring this up if it weren't a good one. But what the heck, one last post on this subject:
[ QUOTE ] No it doesn't. I was never given a contract to sign. [/ QUOTE ] You never said the pledge of allegiance? Har! Fun times. And also, 100th! Woo! 
|
|
#102
10-06-2007, 07:05 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Yes, finally another Ron Paul-thread
[ QUOTE ]
1. What are the advantages of abolishin the income tax/IRS? More money for most people, and less money going to bureaucracy? If the income tax was abolished and businesses/owners made more money, will that be taxated or can that be designated as income and thus not be taxable? Who would benefit the most from abolishing income tax? Poor people, working class, middle class or rich people, or would it be pretty even? (Sorry if Im being difficult, Im from a tax-heavy country myself so the thought of no income-tax is pretty new to me). [/ QUOTE ] That would somewhat depend on what RP's plan for corporate taxes are, which I'm not sure of. But here's the basics of what would happen: Every dollar people don't need to give to the govt, they can give to a business. More money to businesses results in those businesses expanding. If they want to expand, they'll need to hire more employees. This lowers unemployment. When unemployment is very low, businesses will have a diffucult time finding enough employees. Now they need to compete for labor. They have to raise wages (or health benefits, stock options, etc.) to attract employees. The jobs that previously unemployed people are getting are going to be mostly low-level. So I think the biggest difference you would see is in the minimum wage jobs (more of them, and higher wages). I think you'd also see big profits for Wall street investors, who are making lots of money from these rapidly expanding businesses. This is just speculation, I don't really understand economics as well as some people here.
|
|
#103
10-06-2007, 08:05 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Yes, finally another Ron Paul-thread
[ QUOTE ]
Of course private individuals own their own land. And they chose to buy that land in America. America didn't choose them to live here. [/ QUOTE ] If a private individual owns the land, "America" doesn't have any say in the matter, just that individual does. [ QUOTE ] I get the feeling Alex won't, since most of his arguments are fundamentally flawed [/ QUOTE ] ROFL. Can't actually sucessfully find a flaw, so you just shout "flawed" as loudly as possible and hope it sticks. You should get a job with Fox News. [ QUOTE ] You guys want anarchy in America, I don't. [/ QUOTE ] I just want people to not initiate violence on each other and let each other live in peace without forcing their morals on each other. If you can find a way to do that that isn't anarchy, I'm all ears.
|
|
#104
10-06-2007, 08:07 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Yes, finally another Ron Paul-thread
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] No it doesn't. I was never given a contract to sign. [/ QUOTE ] You never said the pledge of allegiance? [/ QUOTE ] I know you're joking, but 10 year olds can't validly agree to a contract. :P
|
|
#105
10-06-2007, 09:22 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Yes, finally another Ron Paul-thread
I think there is a big difference between moving to a new town five miles away that shares the same culture, language and economic lifestyle I am used to, and moving to a new country thousands of miles away which is likely to be different on all three of these counts. Don't you agree?
The market doesn't provide a perfect solution to any problem and usually doesn't come close. It does, however, provide consumers the ability to find an alternative provider of a good or service at a very low cost any time they think they are being poorly served by their current supplier of that good or service. This ability to switch suppliers keeps prices low and quality high, relative to price of course, for consumers unless the government gets involved. Government regulation usually gets exploited by producers, assuming they didn't lobby for it in the first place, to limit competition, thereby raising prices and stifling innovation. Why do you think that government regulation of the internet won't be exploited by producers? Here are a couple of outstanding essays, http://bastiat.org/en/twisatwins.html and http://bastiat.org/en/petition.html, that do a better job of arguing against regulation than I could ever hope to.
|
|
#106
10-06-2007, 10:20 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Yes, finally another Ron Paul-thread
[ QUOTE ]
I just want people to not initiate violence on each other and let each other live in peace without forcing their morals on each other. If you can find a way to do that that isn't anarchy, I'm all ears. [/ QUOTE ] I don't think anarchy would accomplish that goal either.
|
|
#107
10-06-2007, 04:38 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Yes, finally another Ron Paul-thread
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] 7. Ron Paul talked about wanting to reduce the number of military bases overseas, and sending the personell home to America. If the US is at war with a foreign nation, will its ability to defend itself and to attack the enemies interests be as strong as before even without bases in Asia and Europe? [/ QUOTE ] First of all, installing US military bases around the world is a significant factor that causes terrorism. Second, if a war/terrorist organization does start, we have plenty of allies in every area of the world that would be more than happy to assist our military if a retaliation, or preemptive strike is justifiable. [/ QUOTE ] i think you live in the same fantasy world Ron Burgundy lived in.
|
|
#108
10-06-2007, 06:00 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Yes, finally another Ron Paul-thread
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] 7. Ron Paul talked about wanting to reduce the number of military bases overseas, and sending the personell home to America. If the US is at war with a foreign nation, will its ability to defend itself and to attack the enemies interests be as strong as before even without bases in Asia and Europe? [/ QUOTE ] First of all, installing US military bases around the world is a significant factor that causes terrorism. Second, if a war/terrorist organization does start, we have plenty of allies in every area of the world that would be more than happy to assist our military if a retaliation, or preemptive strike is justifiable. [/ QUOTE ] i think you live in the same fantasy world Ron Burgundy lived in. [/ QUOTE ] To clarify, do you mean this directed at his second point, or his first, or both?
|
|
#109
10-06-2007, 06:24 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Yes, finally another Ron Paul-thread
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] 7. Ron Paul talked about wanting to reduce the number of military bases overseas, and sending the personell home to America. If the US is at war with a foreign nation, will its ability to defend itself and to attack the enemies interests be as strong as before even without bases in Asia and Europe? [/ QUOTE ] First of all, installing US military bases around the world is a significant factor that causes terrorism. Second, if a war/terrorist organization does start, we have plenty of allies in every area of the world that would be more than happy to assist our military if a retaliation, or preemptive strike is justifiable. [/ QUOTE ] i think you live in the same fantasy world Ron Burgundy lived in. [/ QUOTE ] To clarify, do you mean this directed at his second point, or his first, or both? [/ QUOTE ] both
|
|
#110
10-06-2007, 07:59 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Yes, finally another Ron Paul-thread
[ QUOTE ]
I wouldn't bring this up if it weren't a good one. But what the heck, one last post on this subject: [ QUOTE ] No it doesn't. I was never given a contract to sign. [/ QUOTE ] You never said the pledge of allegiance? [/ QUOTE ] When I was in elementary school. Although, it never actually meant anything to me. If I refused to stand for the pledge I'm pretty sure that I would have been punished by the teacher, a government worker.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
