I hear Members of Congress Saying 'If We Could Only Nuke Iran': Ron Paul

reply to post by mybigunit

Originally posted by mybigunit
reply to post by jsobecky

 

Umm socialist? Can you tell me how you arrive at Im a socialist when I say to get the federal government out of everything?

Well, you say "get the federal government out of everything". The you speak of nationalization of energy. Nationalization is a 4 letter word to me. Then you speak of excise and corporate taxes - what's that all about?

It really sounds like Hugo Chavez-style socialism to me.

reply to post by mybigunit


Let me give you an example of why I don't like the idea of corporations being taxed heavily. You remember last year Exxon/Mobil made $36 billion in profits, yes? Some called that obscene. Yet that same corp. paid over $27 billion in federal income taxes that same year - more than the bottom 100 million individual taxpayers combined!

And that is just one corporation. It is so easy and sounds so good to say tax corporations, but look at what is happening in Venezuela - they are in the midst of a huge brain drain of intellect and capital to - guess where? - the US. They got tired of Chavez shaking them down. It can happen here too, if we pursue socialism.

Here is the thing
You all like living in a rich affluent society (I know I do) if steps like this were not taken you wouldnt be living in a rich afluent society.
The old saying "you cant handle the truth" its absolutley true, we all reap the benifits from the dirty backhanded things our goverment does, and yet nobody wants to dirty their hands with the moral dilema in doing so.

Fact is there is a certain amount of oil in certain geographical areas around the world, dont kid your self we have a lot of it and dont really need theirs, we do however need to control the flow of that oil, other nations depend on a steady flow of that oil in order to make economies run
$146 a barrel is nothing, if we control that oil you dont have an economy unless we say you do... whats that worth to a nation?
I remember when I was 14 or so and a very wise woman told us that expect us to be in the middle east by the turn of the 21 century (russia was still in afghanistan then) she said we would now what to expect when we go in to afghanistan the most strategic point in the world ocupied by every superpower in recorded history Russia, Britan,France,America, all the way back to Alexandar the great (check it out if you dont beleive me) ifyou want to do anything in the middle east thats the first country you have to control, its everything
So here it is people if we werent there it would be Russia or China thats a "Truth"
Human nature is a horrible thing, but it is predictable just as predictable as the steps we must take when it comes to our shared future as the western world.
Barak obama, Hilary clinton, George bush they all know whats going on... what has to be.
Thank God we have a long term plan and an ability to carry it out regardless of what the masses say, its our own nature of being dishonest with our selfs that make it impossible to tell the people what is going on
3000 people died on 9-11 how many do you suppose would have died trying to take Afghanistan from a well embeded Russian or Chinese army? the whole country is a Fort! with 1 door in and 1 door out 3000 would have been a drop in the bucket.
Please dont misunderstand me, its a horrible thing what we did on 9-11 but when you look at the big picture, its the lesser evil

Love forgive and respect oneanother
lack of knowledge is tue inocence.

Originally posted by jsobecky
reply to post by mybigunit

 

Let me give you an example of why I don't like the idea of corporations being taxed heavily. You remember last year Exxon/Mobil made $36 billion in profits, yes? Some called that obscene. Yet that same corp. paid over $27 billion in federal income taxes that same year - more than the bottom 100 million individual taxpayers combined!

And that is just one corporation. It is so easy and sounds so good to say tax corporations, but look at what is happening in Venezuela - they are in the midst of a huge brain drain of intellect and capital to - guess where? - the US. They got tired of Chavez shaking them down. It can happen here too, if we pursue socialism.

There is something called a Windfall Tax that the oil companies don't need to pay anymore thanks to mr. bush.

Windfall Tax-A tax levied by governments against certain industries when economic conditions allow those industries to experience above-average profits. Windfall taxes are primarily levied on the companies in the targeted industry that have benefited the most from the economic windfall, most often commodity-based businesses.

Windfall taxes will always be a contentious issue debated between the shareholders of profitable companies and the rest of society. This issue came to a head in 2005, when oil and gas companies, such as Exxon Mobil who reported profits of US$36 billion for the year, experienced unusually large profits due to rising energy prices.
www.investopedia.com...

Originally posted by jsobecky

Well, you say "get the federal government out of everything". The you speak of nationalization of energy. Nationalization is a 4 letter word to me. Then you speak of excise and corporate taxes - what's that all about?

It really sounds like Hugo Chavez-style socialism to me.

The fact is for this strong national defense that you want oh so bad that money has to come from somewhere plain and simple as that. I dont think the individual should have to pay for it I think they should get to choose where that money is going that is why there would be NO income taxes. Boom they are gone. So the question of the day is where do we get money then. Excise & other taxes bring in around $160 billion a year or so. Corporate taxes bring in around $400 to $600 billion a year with income taxes bringing in the brunt of the money at around 1.1 trillion dollars. Social Security and Medicare around 800 billion.

So when you cut out income taxes that leaves around $560 to $660 billion dollars. Now with the people keeping all that money they will spend that money so in actuality the corporate tax receipts would be higher so lets say total income of $800 billion. The other 200 Billion would come from income of nationalizing energy which like water should be nationalized. That would bring the total income to around 1 trillion dollars.(This of course is leaving out medicare and social security in which I would push to the states to let them decide if they want those programs or not) Now without that money going to wars we shouldnt be in and in countries that we shouldnt be in all that money would go to the best weapons and best training. The F-22 would be crap with the money I would be putting into weaponry. We would have the best roads, dams, bridges, and mass transit. People would get to choose where that money is spent because they keep it all. That is going to make business BOOM.

The fact is government HAS to play some role in our lives thats how it is even me the small government guy knows this. So we have to get income from somewhere and I dont like that flat tax because that does not encourage people to spend to keep the economy booming it encourages saving which is not a bad thing but I want a steady economic growth and if people are going to get taxed for buying things they wont buy things like fancy TVs and what not.

So to sum it up individuals no taxes you get paid $600 a week you bring home $600 a week and you choose where to spend it. Government income comes from corporations for the priveledge of doing business in a tax free well funded society and excises & tariffs & the nationalization of energy. So what if a few oil execs arent going to get their hundreds of millions in pay Ill sacrifice them for the majority 300 million people to not have to pay taxes at all. If you call this socialism them whew I guess I am a socialist then.



[edit on 6-7-2008 by mybigunit]

reply to post by jsobecky


You wouldnt need to raise corporate taxes like in Venezuela. You are going to get more income which will accommodates the difference because people will have more money in their pockets. I know how much oil pays in taxes but I also know how much they spend to keep the profits as low as possible so they dont have to pay that much in taxes. We as tax payers have to pay the oil companies also around 18 billion a year. We should just nationalize it and get it over with there is no reason for it not to be its a national security issue and people shouldnt be making mass profits on things our country cannot go without.

BTW just so you know the energy situation is not cause of the oil companies at all its because of our government spending all sorts of money it does not have which has killed the dollar so if you are under the impression I am saying nationalize because of that you are wrong. They should be part of the government thats all. We should be asking ourselves why all these other countries that are oil countries like Russia and all these arab countries are building up mass amounts of wealth during this time and we are not why is this?

It looks like they will force Iran's hand through the proposed Blockade that Congress will vote on next week. This is probably the 'seemingly unimportant event' mentioned by the Admiral.

In an article entitled "Maritime Strategy in an Age of Blood and Belief" in the U.S. Naval Institute's monthly Proceedings, Admiral Winnefeld describes the possibility of an offensive barrage of ballistic missiles fired from Iran against Israel as being "by far the most likely employment of ballistic missiles in the world today, and it demands our immediate attention in the event of a need for a U.S. or NATO response." He says Iran is an "unpredictable adversary," which could be provoked into action "by an isolated, and perhaps seemingly unimportant, event."

www.haaretz.com...

reply to post by mybigunit

Originally posted by mybigunit
BTW just so you know the energy situation is not cause of the oil companies at all its because of our government spending all sorts of money it does not have which has killed the dollar so if you are under the impression I am saying nationalize because of that you are wrong. They should be part of the government thats all. We should be asking ourselves why all these other countries that are oil countries like Russia and all these arab countries are building up mass amounts of wealth during this time and we are not why is this?

So, you want to reward the gov't for being so inefficient by giving them the prize economy of the world?

That's called socialism.

And with your system the corporations will pay for our education? And health care? What's next, food and shelter?

You're actually on the fine line between socialism and communism.

man, its good to know that there are true freedom lovers and dissent like Ron Paul , who tries to expose the true face of the fascist imperialist genocidal american govt whose warmongers drool day and night fantasizing that they can and should nuke Iran....

Cheers to true american heroes like Ron Paul , who valiantly stand in the face of the extremely sinister war criminal fascist american govt ...


three cheers to Ron Paul

Any country that uses nuclear weapons as a first strike option automatically becomes the lowest form of scum on the face of the earth.

Lower than Saddam, Hitler, Stalin, or any other lowlife you could ever imagine.

And as such, any country that dares to do something as disgusting as using nuclear weapons as a first strike option must be destroyed.
There's no question about it, no options, that nation, whoever they are cannot be trusted to remain part of this earth.

I really hope the US, once a leader in freedom and democracy, wouldn't dare even imagine using nukes as a first strike option.

I'm not a praying man, but if I were, I'd pray no nation would ever consider such an option. It would become every mans duty on earth to ensure of that nations removal from this planet.

reply to post by jsobecky


Ummm socialism and communism huh.... Ok so if letting individuals choose how they want to spend their money that they earned is socialistic or communist then chalk me up as a commie baby. Then I guess we lived in a communistic or socialistic society for 130 years here in America because there was no income taxes in sustained times until 1913 when the IRS was created. Education and Healthcare are not federal matters they are state matters and should be handled by the states. Where in my post about governments roll did I say it was the federal governments job to handle education and healthcare. Food and shelter dude either you are not understanding me or your trying to be smart. With people have ALL of their money there is no reason for the government to pay for all of that. Oh I didnt say that federal government should cover all of that and thats why it didnt show up. Just like FEMA gone I would get rid of it. It should be up to the states. People in Montana shouldnt have to pay for people to live in Florida and cover their hurricane damages. The war on drugs gone the federal government would end it and it would be up to the states. Now the states if they want to have an income tax to cover all of this then so be it but its not the job of the federal government.

Socialist there is no where in my program that redistributes wealth among individuals not one. In fact it evens the playing field as now we ARE in a socialist environment just the wealth is going straight to the top.

Communist is common ownership and that is most common in the fact the government owns it all. How is my platform communist when I say the people can choose where they want to spend their money and the government has no right to tell them when and where to spend it. Im not saying you cant be rich in fact rich people will probably benefit the most because they PAY most of the income taxes they save the most.

Dude you should really rethink the role of government in things for the government to take money from me that I work for and tell me where and how I have to spend it that is not freedom or very capitalistic if you ask me THAT is borderline communist and socialist.

[edit on 6-7-2008 by mybigunit]

Originally posted by johnsky
Any country that uses nuclear weapons as a first strike option automatically becomes the lowest form of scum on the face of the earth.

Lower than Saddam, Hitler, Stalin, or any other lowlife you could ever imagine.

And as such, any country that dares to do something as disgusting as using nuclear weapons as a first strike option must be destroyed.
There's no question about it, no options, that nation, whoever they are cannot be trusted to remain part of this earth.

I really hope the US, once a leader in freedom and democracy, wouldn't dare even imagine using nukes as a first strike option.

I'm not a praying man, but if I were, I'd pray no nation would ever consider such an option. It would become every mans duty on earth to ensure of that nations removal from this planet.

There is a difference between The Nation and The administration. I don't know of ANYONE who thinks bombing Iran in ANY capacity to be a good idea. The VAST MAJORITY of Americans are peaceful people who are not interested in conflicts. So my point is that our NATION would not launch a first strike against Iran but our ADMINISTRATION might. Would you convict all Germans because of what some nazi's did?

reply to post by mybigunit


So you want to shift the burden from income taxes onto the corporations. Do you think they will be just too happy to accept that?

Who will end up paying for those added corp taxes? You and I, in the form of higher prices. And what will that do to wages? Inflationary spiral, anyone?

You also fail to mention currently funded programs that people rely on, such as Social Security. Are you jut going to throw them under the bus?

reply to post by jsobecky


Did you not read above WE PAY COPORATE TAXES NOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! The tax % would not change and corporations would see a BOOM in business because the people will have more money in their pocket to spend. The corporations would pay no more in taxes as far as % as they do now. Its not like Im jacking the % to 50% or anything like that. I promise you Joe CEO wont mind because once again he pays NO personal taxes. So if paying corporate taxes is communistic or socialistic then we live in a communistic country.

As far as social security that will have to be phased out probably in a flat tax form which would be a very minimal % to start and then phase it out all together. Yes we have entitlements that we cant just drop but when they are phased out each state can choose whether they want to offer such programs outside of the federal government.



[edit on 6-7-2008 by mybigunit]

JFJ I like your approach to the subject but their is a big problem with it, you're making the assumption all people think like you... Using Germany as a metaphor with Nazi's was a bad example because a lot of time when I hear about what happened in WW2 all I hear about is Germany as a whole. People like to generalize to associate a place with an event, so either way you look at it people are going to think that America and their citizens are behind it. It's kinda like saying you and your friends went to the store to get something to eat and your friend pulled out a gun to rob the store, I know most of the time the police aren't going to think you had anything to do with it and you will most likely be in trouble just by association...... Either way you look at it, it's a lose lose situation..

reply to post by mybigunit

Originally posted by mybigunit
reply to post by jsobecky

 

Just like FEMA gone I would get rid of it. It should be up to the states. People in Montana shouldnt have to pay for people to live in Florida and cover their hurricane damages. The war on drugs gone the federal government would end it and it would be up to the states. Now the states if they want to have an income tax to cover all of this then so be it but its not the job of the federal government.

Bingo! The fatal flaw in your system. I knew that all I had to do was wait for you to bring it up.

You and Ron Paul are not fixing anything. You're just shifting the problem from one giant one to 50 smaller ones.

Your plan will result in the Balkanization of the USA.

Originally posted by mybigunit
Socialist there is no where in my program that redistributes wealth among individuals not one. In fact it evens the playing field as now we ARE in a socialist environment just the wealth is going straight to the top.

You certainly are redistributing wealth. From our hands to the corporations. As I said, you will pay for their additional taxes in the form of higher prices. And whatever the feds used to take, the states will now take.

You will also drive the lifeblood of our society, the small business owner, straight out of business.

reply to post by mybigunit


Answer me this : What IS the "corporate tax rate" right now?

Originally posted by johnsky
Any country that uses nuclear weapons as a first strike option automatically becomes the lowest form of scum on the face of the earth.

Lower than Saddam, Hitler, Stalin, or any other lowlife you could ever imagine.

Entirely correct. Because the current USA government and military elements (as well as the military-industrial complex) act with impunity and without accountability, they are headed toward a conflagration with other elements in the world deciding to end the USA's capacity to wage war. And by other elements I mean not only nation states by such groups as the Yakuza.

The current tragedy of the USA is that the great and good citizenry are being betrayed from within by the chattering classes and military-industrial elites.

Originally posted by jsobecky


Bingo! The fatal flaw in your system. I knew that all I had to do was wait for you to bring it up.

You and Ron Paul are not fixing anything. You're just shifting the problem from one giant one to 50 smaller ones.

Your plan will result in the Balkanization of the USA.

Umm no it will get rid of a big bureaucracy and lower the costs because think about it if in Florida you had to pay a little extra in taxes to cover hurricane damages you may think twice about living there. Right now people in Montana who really have NO disasters has to pay higher taxes because people choose to live in hurricane zones...sounds like wealth redistribution doesnt it? Im sure the disaster tax would be far less in MT than FL and states do not have to charge that BTW that is their choice they can say hey that is what insurance if for buy some.

Yeah these should be problems that 50 states should handle because I promise you state governments will be a little more careful about how they spend the money because they know that the people are right there and can march on them at any time.

I think our fundamental difference is you believe the Central Government should have all sorts of power Big government is what you like I think the states should have that power they way there things go astray people dont have to go far to march on their government.

You certainly are redistributing wealth. From our hands to the corporations. As I said, you will pay for their additional taxes in the form of higher prices. And whatever the feds used to take, the states will now take.

You will also drive the lifeblood of our society, the small business owner, straight out of business.

Dude can you tell me what higher taxes? They are paying the SAME tax % no difference they will be paying MORE because they will be doing MORE business from all the money that people will be spending at their stores instead of the government. The small businesses will be BOOMING because the people will have more money that isnt going to the government that is going into their stores. They will pay no different as far as a tax % I dont know how much more I can emphasize that.

Originally posted by jsobecky
reply to post by mybigunit

 

Answer me this : What IS the "corporate tax rate" right now?

Ill do one better ...here ...