Showing posts with label Cutting. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Cutting. Show all posts

Tuesday, October 25, 2011

The Insidious Nature of the 'Flat' and Fair' Income Tax



'9-9-9'? A flat 20%? On the face of it, they both sound good. Catchy, simple- and grossly unfair when you scratch below the surface! How about 0-0-0? Or a REALLY flat 0%? Ron Paul says that the income tax is the Government saying it OWNS you, AND your income- 'graciously' allowing you to keep a portion after it takes it's big cut off the top. What most of these candidates fail to mention (as well as most of the media), is that '9-9-9' or a flat 20% is so regressive- in that both tax schemes unfairly take from the poor and the middle class a larger share of their income than either does from the moderately rich or the very wealthy. If you make $20,000,000 a year, 20% is $4,000,000. That's a hefty sum, but you STILL have $16 mil! If you make $30,000 (and are trying to raise a family!), that's $6000, leaving you with only $24,000 for food, shelter, energy, education, clothing and other necessities. 

But the solution is not the job-killing and also patently unfair 'soak the rich' plan that so many Big-Government Progressives favor. Even if you make $1,000,000, if you're a business owner, you likely don't BANK all your income, but re-invest it in your company. That $4 mil the gov't takes is $4 mil that you WON'T be using to hire new employees, expand your business creating new jobs or investing in plant and equipment that also create jobs. And the VERY wealthy ALWAYS will find a way to hide, stash or (most destructively) EXPORT their income overseas. Again, money being taken out of the U.S. economy that could be put to productive job-creating investment here at home.

When you eliminate the income tax totally, with he revenues STILL there from the remaining revenue streams, you will only go back to about 2002 revenue levels. The government ran without too many problems w-a-a-a-a-y back ten years ago, so why can't it now? Too many bureaucrats trying to protect their useless jobs, too many individuals and corporations feeding off of the government trough, and too many lawyers, lobbyists and crooks siphoning taxpayer money out of the government that could be better used in the private sector to create REAL jobs! Ron Paul proposes paring down the total workers, eliminating useless and counter-productive agencies (while still rolling their USEFUL programs into more streamlined agencies), and getting America back to work by getting the Federal Government Monster off the backs of every American, out of their wallets, and out of the job of micro-(mis)managing every economic decision that every small, medium and large business makes.

A message for Big Government Demopublicans AND Republicrats: Quit hiding behind 'the children', first responders and other vital parts of LOCAL and STATE governments! The Federal government should NOT be funding those jobs in the first place! State and local governments, while not perfect, are more responsive to the needs of their constituents, and FAR more responsible in utilizing those dollars. All the Federal Bureaucrats and their enablers in D.C. do is take our state and local money, then dole a PORTION of it back to us, and tell us we 'can't get along without Federal dollars'! What a joke. How about leaving ALL of our money at the state and local level- without the strings, unfunded mandates and ridiculous and counterproductive Federal rules and regulations that go along with it?

Thaddeus S. Kaczor, Jr.
xtrabiggg.blogspot.com

Thursday, October 20, 2011

A Media Outlet actually LISTENS to what readers say about Ron Paul!



By Thaddeus S. Kaczor, Jr.


What's worse than the blackout? The type of 'damning with faint praise' type of articles that almost ALWAYS accompanies the meager amount of coverage that Dr. Paul gets. Any positive news is always followed by a qualifier. He has good plans BUT... He has dedicated and avid 'followers' (hate that word) BUT... He won the caucus BUT... In the Chrisitian Science Monitor article linked at the top, Writer Maud Dillingham, after seeing article avfter article deluged with intelligent rebuttals from adamant posters, objectively and soberly looks at the complaints that Ron Paul supporters have about the media.

My take on the media coverage? Excuse me, but since when is having a large grassroots organization; gaining and MAINTAINING popularity WITHOUT the help of (or in spite of) coverage by the media; motivating people to get out on their own (NOT 'bussed in') and actually VOTE for you; having five times as many individual campaign donors as the purported 'front runner'; having more active duty military contributors than all your opponents COMBINED (yet being criticized for 'not supporting the military'!), and finally, actually having a plan that does what all the other candidates PROMISE to do- balance the budget- in one-third the time; proposing to actually CUT the deficit by actually CUTTING spending, and by ONE TRILLION DOLLARS the first year, while the ostensible 'front runner' is proposing to cut about 2% of that, and spreading it out in time (as Buzz Lightyear would say) 'to infinity and beyond!". Ron Paul's record in this race is TEXTBOOK politics on how to build a campaign, stay on message, motivate your base and maintain fundraising- all without compromising your principles.

ANY other candidate does even HALF of what Ron Paul has proposed and accomplished, and the media and the Party Elites would declare the race OVER. Yet the more sense Ron Paul makes, the more solid support (not 'flavor of the week') he gets, the harder the media try to bury him, and the more foolish they look.

One final example. The day after Ron Paul announced the boldest proposal by ANY candidate, promising DEEPER and REAL spending cuts, I did a survey of all the major news outlets on line. Half of the news outlets put the story on their front page, or even in their 'Top News' section, while half of the major news outlets had NO STORY- even if you did a search of their entire website! How can a story be 'Top News' on HALF the major outlets, yet not even rate a MENTION on the other half? The only explanation can be a systematic and deliberate censorship of the news when it pertains to ONE CANDIDATE. It's not paranoia if they really ARE against you!

SO congratulations, CSM! Continue to cover Ron Paul fairly and in an even-handed manner with the other candidates, and you will see your readership rise as people continue to drain away from the outlets that continually and blatantly shoot themselves in the foot with obviously biased and ham-handed coverage (or non-coverage). The American people may be ignorant due to not being presented all the facts, but they are not stupid. And they recognize when they are being lied to. And they don't react to that very well.