I posted a link to his budget plan. Cutting government expenditures is a necessity. Our debt is unmanageable. I'm still waiting for you to reference the VAT's in his flat tax plan that I can't find.
I googled Rand Paul VAT. Did you try that? http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/a...-rand-paul-ben-cardin-push-to-change-tax-code http://dailycaller.com/2015/06/23/rand-paul-tax-proposal-compared-to-european-style-tax/ http://www.taxjusticeblog.org/archive/2015/06/rand_pauls_tax_plan_would_blow.php Even those supporting him acknowledge it includes a VAT-type element: http://www.forbes.com/sites/taxanal...ls-tax-ideas-are-worth-serious-consideration/ I don't like doing this kind of work for other posters here who I should be able to assume know how to use an internet search. Aa for the federal debt, you do not make a case for cutting government expenditures. Debt as a percentage of GDP has greatly declined and is within acceptable historical parameters. And in the short run any significant cutting will impair demand and likely lead to a decline in the economy. The better way to reduced debt in any event is to raise taxes on the wealthy.
Thanks for this. I was reading the plan directly rather than looking elsewhere. Since he calls it something else and it's applied to businesses I didn't think that was what you were referring to. I was thinking it would be something applied to individual sales. So the tax is on businesses but the assumption is that the cost gets passed on to the consumer. Seems logical. Pretty disappointing to me that Paul would pull a typical scumbag politician move like this. I really thought he was different.
Don't be so thickheaded, ignoring an argument doesn't make it go away. We've all seen way too many "plans" from politicians over the years that have no substance and are simply constructed of buzzwords and platitudes to make the simple minded think they'll be getting something for nothing. Let Paul plug his plan into specifics from 2014 and show us how much that plan will save each and every one of us. He won't because he can't, there is no way he can make the math work. I notice that you have not addressed the question of what eliminating import duties and tariffs will do to American made products and commodities - why is that?
I want answers! Show me how this magical plan could possibly work, show me what happens to producers of American products, then ask me all the questions you want. Rand Paul is just another political fraud and far, far too many voters fall for this crap every year. Tell me why you're not among them.
The Right rarely fights with facts and numbers because those quantifiable factors rarely support their positions. Herbert Hoover wanted to put a chicken in every pot. He just didn't follow the logical path of creating a chicken-dispensing bureaucracy to make sure this actually happened. Ronald Reagan thought wealth would magically trickle out of the grasp of the wealthy and into the hands of everybody else. Instead we've gotten an ever fuller reservoir of wealth at the top that rarely opens to dispense it's floodwaters to the masses. George W. Bush thought we actually had a surplus with a national debt of many trillions of dollars. He not only solved the surplus problem he made the debt much larger at the same time. Rand Paul is no better nor worse than any of the above and if we listen to him we're no better or worse either but we're definitely screwed.
See Hong Kong for an example of this type of plan working extremely well. Producers of american products would get a huge tax break. I try to be a reasonable person and part of being reasonable means you have to acknowledge when you're wrong and be open to changing your mind as you learn. I have been a fan of Paul's ideas for a while now and considered him to be different than your run of the mill scum bag politician. It was pointed out to me in this thread that he's trying to pull a run of the mill politician scum bag move, and I am a bit of a butt hurt fanboy atm. Very disappointing.
I'm not so sure that he's a scumbag. While I'm not a fan of his, he shows originality and at times is willing to think outside the box. And he's called out other Repubs on a number of occasions. He even said the gov. shutdown was stupid because it cost 24 bil. My take on him is that he's trying to not be like his father who was high on scruples and idealism but never had a gnats chance to win the Presidency although he had a lot of followers. He thinks he has a good shot at the nomination and can win and is willing to compromise a little and play the game. As for this plan of his, I haven't delved into in like some of you guys have. To me it's just a preliminary economic policy that his economics team whipped up. It's political because he's using all of the key conservative catch phrases like "flat income tax." As for topics like another key conservative favorite issue (but an important one) -cutting the deficit. It's debatable on whether in the long term that the deficit is going to be as catastrophic as some politicians and economists are saying. And when you're looking at solutions it's hard to predict that far into the future. There are a lot of variables like interest rates, etc. One way to prevent further economic chaos: no more Iraq Wars. The people screaming the most about the deficit are the ones who created it.
Love this post, not only do I agree with it completely (trickle-down economics is the worst political/economic idea ever dreamed up btw) but I think this is the first time I've ever seen the words "chicken-dispensing bureaucracy" in a sentence hahaha. While I agree on your take regarding Paul, the one thing I'll say is that at least he's offering some sort of plan/solution as opposed to the rest of the yahoo republicans who's plan doesn't go beyond just being pissed off about the status quo and thats it. No real plans. (Rubio, Jeb Bush, Ted Cruz, etc. - I'm looking at you) Paul offers some answers albeit ones I have fundamental problems with. The other guys are sadly running a John Kerry 2004 campaign - - we have no answers we are just not the other guy.
One thing I'll say about you dude that I respect is that you are willing to acknowledge other ideas and you aren't always blinded by your own thoughts as doctrine on this board (football ideas, political, etc....) Which is a hell of a lot more than I can say about practically everyone here, myself included sometimes haha. Blocker presented you with new information about Paul and you accepted it for what its worth. He unnecessarily, and some might say arrogantly, spiked the football with the information. Most of us would've reacted differently and spiked the football right back at him.
I just need to go on record right here and right now and say that any idiot that plans to vote for that fat slob Christy deserves shitty government. Somebody that looks like that isn't qualified to lead anything more than a halloween parade, although he'd probably be bigger than most of the goddamned floats. What a disgrace.
When you score a TD you earn the right to spike the football. I just hope to avoid the group celebration.
I don't do group celebrations. Imo they are totally overrated. I will say Paul is an interesting character, at least in relative terms. He is willing to look at things like sentencing reduction for non-violent crimes, scaling back the drug wars, skepticism about foreign military involvement (not that I am a pacifist, to be clear). I also always believe there should be a presumption in favor of personal liberty, and tend not to like social engineering for the sake of it. But at the core of it all Paul is about more rigging of the game for the very wealthy. hey no one likes taxes, but we've seen enough of that sort of thing the last 35 years.
I'll take my $10.10 and hour. Even though I'll have to work 60 hours a week to eat. And get my $2000 tax credit. Compliments of the billionaires. How's that?
The only way we're going to get an answers campaign is if both sides are willing to do it. The answers are going to lose you 62% of the vote if the other guy isn't in it with you for the good of the country. I totally agree that Paul (and the very Liberal issue candidates on the left of the Democratic process) are the only people pointing at specific problems and offering specific answers however none of them are going to get elected if everybody else is going Partisan Warfare 101 as the order of battle.
