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.

 

3 of 4 GOP Candidates would add to deficits

page: 1
11

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 24 2012 @ 08:19 AM
link   
This is not a matter of opinion... it is now a matter of FACT and it is being reported by CNN Money.


Newt Gingrich's economic plan would do a lot of things. But reducing the debt and balancing the federal budget aren't among them. Same goes for Rick Santorum's and Mitt Romney's economic plans. Indeed, a preliminary analysis by the independent Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget released Thursday estimates that the three candidates' plans could add between $250 billion and $7 trillion of debt over the next nine years.

By contrast, the proposals of Ron Paul could reduce the debt by $2.2 trillion, the group estimated.


So.... who wants to add some more debt??

It is amazing to me how Ron Paul gets proven right over and over and over and over again, yet no one wants to face the fact that he is truly the only choice we have to break the status quo and this vicious repeating cycle our Government has been in for decades. The debt we have accumulated will not be paid off by MY kids. We will be lucky if my Grandchildren can pay this off in their lifetime, and it will only be possible if we stop spending. NO OTHER CANDIDATE will stop spending, but Ron Paul.

If you have no intention of voting for Ron Paul.. all I ask is that you name your price. Name your price right now, and decide right now, when is it enough? Put a number on it, and name your price. One day we will reach that number, because no one else in Government has a plan to stop the spending. It is no longer up for debate, the plans have been checked and the numbers have been crunched. There is only one choice and if that choice is not good enough for you, the voter, then name your price.

Source

Also being reported by the Washington Post

And we can also add to the list Bloomberg News



edit on 24-2-2012 by MrWendal because: (no reason given)




posted on Feb, 24 2012 @ 08:42 AM
link   
reply to post by MrWendal
 


My favorite part is how in the CNN article, they call Ron Paul's economic plan radical. Um, no it isn't. It's just common sense!



posted on Feb, 24 2012 @ 09:00 AM
link   
reply to post by MrWendal
 


Fact - Article 2 clearly spells out the Presidents authority.
If you take a look, you will find nothing about authority for spending.


Fact - Article 1 clearly spells out Congress's authority
You will notice that Congress controls the purse strings, not the President.

Continually trying to blame one party / candidates / President's just reinforces the view that our educational system sucks.

The President makes the budget and submits it to Congress. In the end, Congress is responsible for reviewing, tweaking and approval. Congress, at any point, can exercise their authority by refusing to spend money we don't have.

If we really want to point fingers, we need to start with ourselves. We stopped participating in Government and because of that Congress took off their nerf helmets and started running around the Capital with scissors in their hands.
edit on 24-2-2012 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 24 2012 @ 09:03 AM
link   
This single factor alone makes voting for Ron Paul the best choice.

Everyone else is full of hot air and BS. But they got the Wall Street tycoons in their corner, and they'll buy the election as they always do.



posted on Feb, 24 2012 @ 09:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by Xcathdra
reply to post by MrWendal
 

The President makes the budget and submits it to Congress. In the end, Congress is responsible for reviewing, tweaking and approval. Congress, at any point, can exercise their authority by refusing to spend money we don't have.


i'm pretty sure you just shot yourself in the foot. at least Ron Paul's budget will try to reduce our debt. while the others will try to enlarge it.



posted on Feb, 24 2012 @ 10:47 AM
link   
reply to post by MrWendal
 


Star and flag for a great post! I cannot fathom why anyone would want Rick, or Mitt, or Newt to run the country. They are in the pockets of the banking elite.

On a related note, I love your avatar, but I believe you have the puppeteer wrong. I have corrected it below.



posted on Feb, 24 2012 @ 12:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by stuncrazy

Originally posted by Xcathdra
reply to post by MrWendal
 

The President makes the budget and submits it to Congress. In the end, Congress is responsible for reviewing, tweaking and approval. Congress, at any point, can exercise their authority by refusing to spend money we don't have.


i'm pretty sure you just shot yourself in the foot. at least Ron Paul's budget will try to reduce our debt. while the others will try to enlarge it.


I dont think I did. If Ron Paul were elected President, he could put together a budget that wipes out or national debt in one year. However Congress has to approve it, so unless we can clone Ron Paul and get them all elected to Congress it should be a cake walk.



posted on Feb, 24 2012 @ 12:59 PM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


You are absolutely correct. I don't know why people fail to understand the most basic principles of how the Government works. For some reason, there is an entire group of Ron Paul supporters who think that if He was elected, somehow, He would be able to make all of the changes He claims will happen. No, they won't. Not without the support of Congress. He doesn't even have the support of His fellow party members in Congress. He can try to slash programs all He wants. It takes an agreeable Congress to actually allow for it to happen.

He and His capitalized for sarcastic effect.



posted on Feb, 24 2012 @ 04:59 PM
link   
I got some news for you...

1. Ron Paul does not need Congress to close military bases around the world.

2. Ron Paul does not need Congress to bring our troops home

3. Ron Paul does not need Congress to do away with 5 Government Agencies

4. Ron Paul does not need Congress to abolish the TSA and return security back to private property owners.

Might I suggest that people actually take the time to read his plan before deciding it can't work? I know that is a far fetched idea... actually getting some facts.. but some people may want to try it. If you choose not try it, like I said in the OP, name your price.
Plan to restore America
Be sure to click the link to the full pdf and give it a look.



posted on Feb, 24 2012 @ 05:30 PM
link   
Yup. Star. Flag.

I might also add that Ron Paul's incredibly consistent voting record throughout his history in Congress would give us no reason at all to doubt that it would change any more as President, as far as intent and direction. The man can't be bought. Period. I know that's sad news to you shills out there working for the establishment, but all I have to say to you would not be said with words.


I for one am glad that his campaign staff is using the very tactics that shills have used for years against other candidates now, like character defamation techniques and negative ads. A taste of their own medicine is most definitely in order. Evil cannot stand to be mocked. And watching Ron sit there and calling Santorum fake, in his face, and watching Santorum sit there under that pressure with a big smile on his face just goes to show how really fake he is. Anyone else, if that was not true, would have had it out right there and then with Paul.

But Ron is right. He's always right it seems. And it's time we had someone that is "right" for the people in this country instead of another corrupt establishment scumbag.

It feels good to vote on the side of consistency and principle. It feels good, very good, to vote Ron Paul. He's the closest thing to a fix this country will ever see.



posted on Feb, 24 2012 @ 05:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by MrWendal
I got some news for you...

1. Ron Paul does not need Congress to close military bases around the world.

Then he should tell the congressional base closing committee that, since the operation and upkeep comes from the DoD, whose budget comes from Congress.


Originally posted by MrWendal
2. Ron Paul does not need Congress to bring our troops home

As Commander in Chief you are correct.


Originally posted by MrWendal
3. Ron Paul does not need Congress to do away with 5 Government Agencies

The responsibility of creating new departments is with Congress, as is dismantling them. This is a prime example of the checks and balances doing their job as intended. Its to prevent one branch of government from becoming to powerful. Ron Paul can decide to abolish / create as much as he wants, however trying to use executive orders to bypass congress will result in impeachment charges.

Rule by Presidential Fiat is a bad bad bad idea.

. Even though Bush "created" the Department of Homeland Security, in actuality if was Congress. Public Law 107 - 296 - Homeland Security Act of 2002.



Originally posted by MrWendal
4. Ron Paul does not need Congress to abolish the TSA and return security back to private property owners.

Actually no he cant. He has to go through Congress since it was an act of congress that brought the TSA into existence, just like the Department of Homeland Security.


Originally posted by MrWendal
Might I suggest that people actually take the time to read his plan before deciding it can't work? I know that is a far fetched idea... actually getting some facts.. but some people may want to try it. If you choose not try it, like I said in the OP, name your price.
Plan to restore America
Be sure to click the link to the full pdf and give it a look.


Ron Paul does have some good ideas, however his ability to get those ideas in place and working is easier said than done. Congress is responsible for the day to day operations of the US Government, not the President.

Congress controls the purse strings, not the President.

Ron Paul can bring all the troops home, or send them all to the moon. In either scenario unless Congress authorizes the funding for it, he can give all the orders he wants. Without funding to actually put the plan in place, its nothing more than.. well

A good idea.
edit on 24-2-2012 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 24 2012 @ 06:11 PM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


The congress does indeed have ultimate authority over the expenditure of funds. However, the president typically does have a huge amount of authority within his own political party. If the president were to choose to, he could persuade the congress, given that his party holds a majority, to pass almost any legislation he wants.

It is the duty of our representatives in the House and Senate to act as our delegates, and they are even supposed to swear an oath to the constitution, which limits the government to a few enumerated powers and specifically spells out our freedoms and rights. Yet, with such political apathy as currently exists, it's hard for me to understand how one can not comprehend how it is that they can get away with defecating on their electorate, unscathed.

The revolution that is necessary to put the government back in its place as the servant and not the master isn't quite here yet, it may not even come until the next election cycle. However, it is growing and brooding, and soon enough our weathered and beaten republic will be revitalized, or it will be dismantled and built anew.



posted on Feb, 25 2012 @ 12:21 AM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


There is a myth in place which suggest that Paul can not get his ideas past Congress. I say it is a myth, because history has shown this to be true.

We can look to the Presidency of Grover Cleveland as a prime example. He used the power of the veto, which is ultimately what Ron Paul will have to do. He could veto a Federal Budget until it was balanced. How do you balance such a budget? Look to his plan. It means there would have to be drastic cuts.

I also find it foolish to suggest that he can not gain support from Congress. After all, this is the man who got 3/4 of the house to co-sponsor his bill to audit the Fed.

I can not help but notice for all your talk of what Paul as President can not do, you have yet to actually talk about the FACT that his plan would indeed balance the budget while all other Candidates and Obama can not do it. Again, the numbers have been crunched and the evidence is there to be seen. Every MSM outlet is being forced to admit something that Paul supporters have been saying for some time, his ideas can work and will work if given the chance to do so.



posted on Feb, 25 2012 @ 12:26 AM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


Oh and there is one more pretty big thing Paul can do.....

He can make an Executive Order that dismantles and nullifies all other Executive Orders. All 13,000 + of them and he wouldnt need Congress to do it. I will leave you to think about the implications of such an act, not only in terms of how so many Governmental Agencies are laid out, and how they work, but the financial effects as well.

It would be epic




top topics



 
11

log in

join