Quote:
Originally Posted by rlbond86
This is ridiculous. Are you listening to yourself? Do you even read what you type? This is no worse than the Bush idealists, who rationalize everything. The federal reserve causes despotism? Without it, it would be nearly impossible to buy a house.
With all the elderly, around 80% of whom vote, your candidate won't win when he talks about getting rid of social security.
Also, you're equating an EXECUTIVE issue with a monetary one. FEMA is doing terrible because the President hired someone incompetent to run it. The EPA is too influenced by industry. This is a problem with our leadership. You think letting the states handle these issues would fix the problem? If anything, it would be worse.
Then there's the multitude of things we need to fund with the Federal Government which have been listed in this thread many times.
The only people behind Ron Paul are idiot techies on the internet who don't really know how to run a government, and people who are unequivocally against the war to the point where it is their central issue. And just because they're spendthrifts when Ron Paul asks for money doesn't mean he's a remotely good candidate.
I have respect for him because he sticks to his guns, but I won't be supporting him. Though as far as the Republican candidates go, he's the best on their roster.
|
He is not advocating that we eliminate social security for the people currently dependant on it, just that we find alternate means of funding it other than by taxing the people currently entering or newly in the workforce who can be fairly confident at this point that they will recieve no benefits from it.
Also, it's not as if the Government will be recieving zero funds at all, he's not abolishing ALL taxes. We get enough revenue through other sources (such as import/export traffic) to raise a significant amount of funds.