It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

WSJ economist : Ron Paul economic plan would create the biggest job growth in history

page: 1
30
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:
+9 more 
posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 09:38 PM
link   


Ron Paul right again.... Ron Paul has found his ideas in history... and what has worked... the US government funded itself without any income tax for more than a hundred years.

Then the sellouts in congress sold the country away to the bankers with the FED act... time to go back to what the US should have been. A country without a big government controlling everything in your life. A country based on personal LIBERTY.

Don't like it? More to Europe or China.
edit on 18-1-2012 by Vitchilo because: (no reason given)




posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 09:41 PM
link   
reply to post by Vitchilo
 


nice find! yes, Ron Paul would fix years of damage in months. He has my vote!



posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 10:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by Deja`Vu
reply to post by Vitchilo
 


nice find! yes, Ron Paul would fix years of damage in months. He has my vote!

The scars on the US run deeper than a few months. But 4 maybe 8 years would set the country on the right path , in the right direction, that once started would not be able to stop.



posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 10:05 PM
link   
Generally speaking, when people talk about wanting job growth and job creation, they are talking about it in the manufacturing, energy, R&D, pharma, etc. and not unskilled labor jobs at Walmart and Mcdonalds.

Ron Paul's plan may help to create thousands of unskilled labor jobs that pay minimum wage (if he doesn't abolish it, already), but he will continue to destroy or outsource manufacturing, energy, R&D, pharma, insurance, software development industries and will promote more FTA and H1-B scabs coming to drive wages down to minimum wage.



posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 10:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by Diablos
Generally speaking, when people talk about wanting job growth and job creation, they are talking about it in the manufacturing, energy, R&D, pharma, etc. and not unskilled labor jobs at Walmart and Mcdonalds.

Ron Paul's plan may help to create thousands of unskilled labor jobs that pay minimum wage (if he doesn't abolish it, already), but he will continue to destroy or outsource manufacturing, energy, R&D, pharma, insurance, software development industries and will promote more FTA and H1-B scabs coming to drive wages down to minimum wage.


Or maybe his corporate tax policies will encourage industry to keep or return skilled labor jobs to the US...


Oh and by 'continue' are you referring to his actions, or the actions of the previous administrations that have already run off so much of the skilled labor jobs?



posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 10:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by blamethegreysOr maybe his corporate tax policies will encourage industry to keep or return skilled labor jobs to the US...

This is the same argument parroted by ignorant people who have never ran a business in America nor do they understand how businesses function. Outsourcing has been going on since the early 90's, and no job that has been outsourced has returned, while many corporations have been given very generous tax breaks. Of course, the corporations are not to blame, it is the fools who believe one solution will solve all problems.

Let's say you run a manufacturing corporation and have been outsourcing entire departments for years. To encourage you to bring back the jobs, the government has extended a very generous tax break but with no strings attached, which allow you to free up 100K in funds. Now, would you hire 2 American engineers who would demand a reasonable 50K and benefits for their services while complying with labor and health regulations over 100 Indian engineers on the same budget that do not demand any benefits nor must they comply to health and labor regulations in America, thus giving you a much greater bottom line? Only a true idiot would choose the former, and if he isn't the owner of the company, such actions won't have him at the company for too long.

Now, I'm in favor of tax breaks as much as any other conservative, but extending tax breaks to companies that continue to outsource jobs without any form of repercussions is the furthest thing from a solution. In fact, it allows them to create more jobs overseas and reap more capital.

We need to bring back tariffs and give tax breaks to companies that keep American jobs here as an incentive. Something Ron Paul is strongly opposed to. He believes the one thing the government has done right are all these free-trade agreements.



posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 10:37 PM
link   
reply to post by Diablos
 


I don't believe a tariff promotes trade. The real reason (IMO) is the currency exchange in addition to hiding funds overseas somehow - accounting loopholes... This over time (a long enough time) will work itself out as 3rd world countries become bigger players. It doesn't help that we are the world reserve currency and it is enticing to keep our dollar weak.

It is pretty funny though. I had an associate out in China and in all reality I would LOVE to have the tax policy they do. No capital gains. You can take your money anywhere you want (** British Virgin Islands ** everyone does it) and it promotes growth. Not really sure what the current rate is there but you see where I am getting at.

I think you should look at what countries like China are doing to promote 8.3% GDP.



posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 11:19 PM
link   
I love you Diablos. You must get paid for your trolling. Here's a troll for you. Business is not sound, if you have to find ways to ship your "people" resources to other countries. It's not good for America, The greatest country on earth to give our economy away to 3rd world cheap labor. We can't even guarantee the safety of the things made there unless an American company sets the terms in the first place.

It sounds like you take the wall street approach profits over people. If you can't remain competitive, go out of business. Or get a bunch of motivated voters to elect the man who will reverse the job growth problem, by taking back our competitiveness. Things will get cheap to produce in America quick if the sources of our governments massive tax and spend, goes away. Big business will stand alone, and have to re-think paying Americans a decent wage again. Or they will dry up, and a renaissance of capitalism happens and new mom and pops start back, reinvigorating local economies. Wouldn't it be nice to see a Detroit Recovery, based on Agriculture, or Electric cars? They have good infrastructures there, land and skilled labor.



posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 11:22 PM
link   
reply to post by Diablos
 




We need to bring back tariffs and give tax breaks to companies that keep American jobs here as an incentive. Something Ron Paul is strongly opposed to.

Wrong. Ron Paul doesn't supports the free trade treaties.

And he's against the free trade treaties that have been signed since they are BS.

Ron Paul on free trade


Ron Paul is a proponent of free trade and rejects protectionism, advocating “conducting open trade, travel, communication, and diplomacy with other nations.” He opposes many free trade agreements (FTAs), like the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), stating that “free-trade agreements are really managed trade” and serve special interests and big business, not citizens.

He voted against the Central American Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA), holding that it increased the size of government, eroded U.S. sovereignty, and was unconstitutional. He has also voted against the Australia–U.S. FTA, the U.S.–Singapore FTA, and the U.S.–Chile FTA, and voted to withdraw from the WTO. He believes that “fast track” powers, given by Congress to the President to devise and negotiate FTAs on the country’s behalf, are unconstitutional, and that Congress, rather than the executive branch, should construct FTAs.


And as for the tariffs, since he want the income tax out and the US government funded itself with tariffs before then, wouldn't surprise me if he supports tariffs.

Ron Paul on taxes

To provide funding for the federal government, Ron Paul supports excise taxes, non-protectionist tariffs, massive cuts in spending.

edit on 18-1-2012 by Vitchilo because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 11:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by Vitchilo


Ron Paul right again.... Ron Paul has found his ideas in history... and what has worked... the US government funded itself without any income tax for more than a hundred years.

Then the sellouts in congress sold the country away to the bankers with the FED act... time to go back to what the US should have been. A country without a big government controlling everything in your life. A country based on personal LIBERTY.

Don't like it? More to Europe or China.
edit on 18-1-2012 by Vitchilo because: (no reason given)



the economy would implode if he gets in..and then go on to do such this

but there will be lots of pain at first..the tentacles of wasteful spending and fat are deep. the corporate welfare is insane.



posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 11:37 PM
link   
reply to post by Diablos
 


Yes..yes..a free market economy would lead to more entry level jobs and zero R&D and manufacturing jobs.


A free market economy is never going to work, we all need regulations!


Like that has been working....






I swear it is like some people have never heard of COMPETITION before.






edit on 18-1-2012 by eLPresidente because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 19 2012 @ 12:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by eLPresidenteYes..yes..a free market economy would lead to more entry level jobs and zero R&D and manufacturing jobs.

The free market you people talk about and the free market us true conservatives talk about are very different. Millions of middle class conservative professional Americans have been laid off or are on the verge of being laid off because some foreign scab who most likely bought their education is willing to work for pennies a day, while employers see a massive opportunity to decrease overhead costs by 10x.

We aren't against a free market in OUR COUNTRY, we are against a free market IN THE WORLD and GLOBALIZATION.


The funny thing is, you probably do not have the slightest idea of how to run a successful corporation nor have a deep understanding of how a corporation functions.

If Ron Paul is elected, he will set the stage for millions of jobs being outsourced and the average American salary going down from 50K/year to 100 dollars/year.

No conservative is against free trade, but we staunchly oppose the bastardized version of free-trade proposed by Ron Paul where he will have us competing with the world for slave labor wages.



posted on Jan, 19 2012 @ 02:46 AM
link   
reply to post by Diablos
 


Cute rant

but you didn't understand my simple post and your extremely lengthy post didn't even respond to it.


See, the great thing about competition is, YOU MUST COMPETE.


So here is my challenge:
Name Ron Paul's economic policy or policies that would cost America MILLIONS of jobs (government jobs excluded) and slash their salary 50-100k. Since you made the claim with detailed numbers, I'm expecting you to have THE PROOF & REFERENCES to back it up. Don't conveniently ignore this challenge because I WILL bring it up.


You dumped that thread about Ron Paul not being a corporate honcho so he isn't fit to be president and never came back to respond in it. Here you are again, in another thread, preaching the same broken message that the president needs to be none other than Mitt Romney (Mr. Goldman Sachs) and talking down Ron Paul's economic policies and how he would destroy the American economy without naming ONE policy that would cause it.


Don't run around ATS saying others know nothing about running a successful corporation or
how one should function. You never know, one day you'll be talking down to somebody that has actually graduated college and worked in the real world.







I don't even know why I'm arguing with you, you think:



Iran is a dangerous enemy that must be completely obliterated by our superior military and technology.



Where do you get your information? Fox news!?






edit on 19-1-2012 by eLPresidente because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 19 2012 @ 03:11 AM
link   
reply to post by Diablos
 


" Ron Paul's plan may help to create thousands of unskilled labor jobs that pay minimum wage (if he doesn't abolish it, already), but he will continue to destroy or outsource manufacturing, energy, R&D, pharma, insurance, software development industries and will promote more FTA and H1-B scabs coming to drive wages down to minimum wage."


I just don't see what you are saying here having Any Basis in Fact . With LESS Goverment Regulations, and a Zero Based Tax as Dr. Paul suggests , American Manufacturing Jobs would be in High Demand once American based Companies were Free to Openly Compete with other Countries Products on the Open World Market .

I gotta give you a D - for that Post Sir.......





posted on Jan, 19 2012 @ 03:17 AM
link   
reply to post by Zanti Misfit
 


Throw out enough industry terminology and general numbers and you could fool some people but not a good bunch of ATS members.





I wonder if Diablos even watched the OP video, he should argue WSJ's economist first....






edit on 19-1-2012 by eLPresidente because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 19 2012 @ 03:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by Diablos
Generally speaking, when people talk about wanting job growth and job creation, they are talking about it in the manufacturing, energy, R&D, pharma, etc. and not unskilled labor jobs at Walmart and Mcdonalds.

Ron Paul's plan may help to create thousands of unskilled labor jobs that pay minimum wage (if he doesn't abolish it, already), but he will continue to destroy or outsource manufacturing, energy, R&D, pharma, insurance, software development industries and will promote more FTA and H1-B scabs coming to drive wages down to minimum wage.

Lower taxes make people more profitable,
this line of reasoning is laughable

I work for a small business, we get killed with taxes, we would be able to pay our workers more, hire more people AND be more profitable, if some of these silly taxes were cut or even gone for good.

Infact, the very idea that you have to pay the federal freakin' government to work is a JOKE!



posted on Jan, 19 2012 @ 09:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by eLPresidente
See, the great thing about competition is, YOU MUST COMPETE.

I'm sorry, but this is why your cult leader will never ever get the nomination nor will he have the slightest chance at winning the election. The vast majority of Americans DO NOT WANT TO COMPETE WITH FOREIGN SCABS WHO DRIVE WAGES DOWN TO SLAVE LEVEL.



Originally posted by eLPresidenteSo here is my challenge:
Name Ron Paul's economic policy or policies that would cost America MILLIONS of jobs (government jobs excluded) and slash their salary 50-100k. Since you made the claim with detailed numbers, I'm expecting you to have THE PROOF & REFERENCES to back it up. Don't conveniently ignore this challenge because I WILL bring it up.

Ron Paul is against protectionism, tariffs, and approves of free-trade. These are core tenets of the libertarian ideology. He also approves of H1-B program and would love to increase more of these foreigners flooding our countries and industries and driving wages down.

What more proof do you want? Ron Paul is the only Republican candidate to say he is not against job outsourcing, which is evident to any middle class conservative American that this guy supports outsourcing and global competition.

Do you understand simple logic? When you force Americans to compete with foreigners for jobs in their own country, while other developed countries protect jobs of their country, you allow for DEMAND to decrease significantly while supply jumps up, which in turn drives wages down to the point where it becomes SLAVE LABOR.



Originally posted by eLPresidenteYou dumped that thread about Ron Paul not being a corporate honcho so he isn't fit to be president and never came back to respond in it. Here you are again, in another thread, preaching the same broken message that the president needs to be none other than Mitt Romney (Mr. Goldman Sachs) and talking down Ron Paul's economic policies and how he would destroy the American economy without naming ONE policy that would cause it.

Mitt Romney actually has private sector experience and understands the intricacies of job protection. He is also against outsourcing and would like to bring American jobs back home, unlike Ron Paul who is for GLOBAL FREE TRADE.


How does it feel that Mitt Romney will most probably be the nominee and Ron Paul has about 0.000001% chance of winning both the nomination and the election? If Ron Paul is the best Republican candidate, then why do millions of die hard conservatives hate the man and believe he will be deadly to our country's future?



posted on Jan, 19 2012 @ 11:41 AM
link   
if you actually vote against 0% income tax, then you should have your head examined.

can you imagine the burden that will be lifted if you kept 100% of your paycheck. even those extra 300-400 every 2 weeks will make an enormous difference to families.

it's surreal that a politician actually want's to see his fellow citizens prosper.


edit on 19-1-2012 by randomname because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 19 2012 @ 11:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by Diablos
Generally speaking, when people talk about wanting job growth and job creation, they are talking about it in the manufacturing, energy, R&D, pharma, etc. and not unskilled labor jobs at Walmart and Mcdonalds.

Ron Paul's plan may help to create thousands of unskilled labor jobs that pay minimum wage (if he doesn't abolish it, already), but he will continue to destroy or outsource manufacturing, energy, R&D, pharma, insurance, software development industries and will promote more FTA and H1-B scabs coming to drive wages down to minimum wage.


Simply reading your post reinforces my suspicion that you have no idea what you're talking about. Your statement "but he will continue to destroy or outsource manufacturing..." lost me and absolutely every other Paul supporter because he endorses exactly the OPPOSITE of what you posted.

It is one thing to not like or support Dr. Paul. It is another thing to not undertsand Dr. Paul. It is pure unadulterated ignorance when you cross-breed the two and post the nonsense that you posted.



posted on Jan, 19 2012 @ 12:23 PM
link   
OH, an economist said so! Well, where do I sign up? First an example: "Economists" have told me for about 11 years now that gasoline was going to be $10 a gallon by (pick a holiday or season). As recently as the weeks leading up to Thanksgiving, "economists" told me that gas was going to skyrocket to $5 or $6 a gallon. For 11 years they have been wrong. There is no reason for me to believe they are right about this either.

Now a question: What if the very same "economist" had never said this of Ron Paul's plan, but had instead said it about a plan proposed by Mitt Romney? I suspect many a thread here on ATS accusing said "economist" of being a paid shill, an MSM plant, or some other sad claim regarding some conspiracy to keep good ole RP down.



new topics

top topics



 
30
<<   2 >>

log in

join