Posts Tagged ‘constitution’

Republican Debate – My Answers

June 15, 2011

Two nights ago was the New Hampshire Republican debate on CNN. While I am a big supporter of Ron Paul, I don’t think his message was simple enough for the mainstream voters to consume. He jumped over his simple talking points about the Federal Reserve, Austrian Economics, Sound Money and Blowback among others and went right into rants that were valid, but made him sound more like a fringe candidate than a serious one.

I’m not saying that the two “winners,” Mitt Romney or Michelle Bachmann said anything of substance, but their message was well packaged. If Congressman Paul could just stick to clear, concise points while still spreading his message of liberty and Constitutionalism, he would come out as a clear frontrunner.

I only watched the first part of the debate last night, but if I had to give a response to some of the questions that were asked, here are a few:

1. What is your plan to create manufacturing  jobs in the US?

Currently in the United States, we have a service based economy. We do not have a manufacturing/production based one like we had in the past. Most of the manufacturing of products we import is in China or other Asian countries. The only way we are going to start manufacturing here is that we need the capital and labor to compete with China. In “capital,” I mean machines and resources. We need to invest in these machines so we can be competitive. Even if labor and materials are cheaper in China, we still have to ship all those products across the Pacific Ocean. It’s not really as efficient as we think. There is opportunity for us to start producing products again.

First, we need to cut the corporate tax to zero. There is no need to tax corporate profits and then tax them again when they get distributed to employees as pay. Second, we need to encourage investment in American capital. The easiest way to do this is to get the Federal Government out of economic planning. Stop subsidizing certain industries. Let the market decide what industries and products we should develop. We could be throwing money down the drain because an industry we are supporting might not be able to exist without the subsidies. That makes no economic sense and would never exist in a market based economy.

Bottom line is that we need to make things again, and in order to do that we need to let the market work and the capital invested here at home to do that.

2. What are your feelings on “Right to Work”?

Personally, I believe that the Federal Government should not be involved in the hiring process of a private company. However, we have installed labor laws that call for a closed shop if half of the workers decide to unionize. So, “Right to Work” is a counter to these regulations, but it really doesn’t work. It would be easier to defund the National Labor Relations Board and repeal labor laws that interfere with hiring process of a private firm, union or not.

Let the company, workers, and the market decide what they want to do. If Company A wants to run a closed shop with union employees, let them. If Company B wants to use non-union labor, there’s nothing wrong with that either. The point is that the Federal Government should just stay out of it altogether.

3. How would you build consensus within the Republican Party, not just Tea Partiers?

I feel the message of freedom and liberty are what the Founding Fathers of our nation wanted. This should resonate with every American, not just Republicans or Democrats. To me, it should be easy to build consensus to get the government out of our lives, out of the private sector and out of foreign wars and entanglements.

Then you would be free to live your life the way you want. Businesses will be able to hire people and deliver new and innovative products to the market. We would stop spending hundreds of billions of dollars overseas and would be able to pass that savings along to the taxpayers.

We need to remember the reasons for the Constitution that the Framers had in mind at the time. We broke away from a too powerful and distant foreign central government. This country was founded on the principle of limited central government and if we remember that, building a consensus should not be too difficult.

As I watch more of the debate tonight, I’ll post more answers. Your comments are always welcome. Thanks for reading.

The GOP Needs to Embrace Ron Paul

May 18, 2009

Lately, I’ve been reading articles about the state of dissarray the Republican Party is in, and how there is a leadership void in the party.  The Republican National Committee Chairman, Michael Steele, says he’s the leader.  Rush Limbaugh wants to be the voice of the party.  Ex-Vice President Dick Cheney is going on every talk show he can trying to further push the George Bush Neo-Conservative agenda.  The Democrats have seized on this opportunity and have poked and prodded the GOP into making rash statements and decisions, further pushing them into a hole.

The funny thing, is that the Republican Party has a leader, with millions of followers, but they don’t want to acknowledge him.  The person is Ron Paul, and whether the rest of the GOP likes it or not, he is the true leader of the conservative, constitutionalist, Republican movement.  He understands the issues facing the country, and can back up what he says with his record.

All you have to do is look at all of the talk shows Dr. Paul has been making appearances on lately.  He is the only member of the GOP that is regularly on Fox, CNBC, MSNBC, and CNN.  He also set fundraising records during his Presidential campaign during the Republican primaries.  Plus, he won an NCAA basketball style bracket of GOP contenders on NPR.com by way of the votes of visitors on the site.

With the Democrats and Republicans growing closer together, with only a few billion dollars spending here or there between them, the GOP needs to separate itself and really stand up for the small government our founding fathers envisioned, and the freedom and liberty of all citizens.  With Ron Paul as the head of the GOP, we could get this country back on the right track and back to the way it is supposed to be.  If we keep down the current path, we will see less prosperity, less freedom, and more pain for the American people.  There is an answer to our problems, and the Republicans need to wake up and embrace him.

In This Case, the States Have it Wrong

November 1, 2008

The basic premise of the Constitution of the United States and the founding fathers was a small central government.

If you think about the conditions at the time, this becomes very obvious.  They were being ruled by an all powerful monarchy that was located thousands of miles away.  The colonies were sending taxes back to Britain, but they had no voice in how they were ruled.  The founding fathers wanted a weak central government and strong states.

The opposite of their vision is true now.  Again, we have a strong central government, that in my case on the West Coast, rules from thousands of miles away.  The politicians are so out of touch anyway, that even if you live in Washington DC, you probably feel they are thousands of miles away too.  We pay up to a third of our earnings to a central government that then distributes it as they see fit.  How do they know what’s best for your state?  Or for the city or town you live in?

The problem is that the states and our representatives in Congress keep ceding more and more power to the exectutive branch.  Many of these powers were supposed to be temporary, but “temporary” and “government” are pretty much an oxymoron.

In recent years, we have given the President the power to use the military without Congressional approval, we have accepted the No Child Left Behind Act that dictates to every school in the nation what to teach, we allow the CIA to spy on us by searching our internet and phone records without a warrant, and with the bailout, we now let the government give out mortgages, insure us, and nationalize banks.

So, after all that background, we now we get to the point of my post:  Many states are talking about abolishing their state income taxes.  Massachusetts has an initiative on the ballot, Rhode Island’s governor is talking about it, and if there is any momentum, California won’t be far behind.

Many, “small government” citizens are embracing the elimination of their state’s income tax.  They argue that it will make their governments more efficient.  If these states can function without a penny of Federal tax dollars, then eliminating the state income tax would be fine.  However, I doubt the states can do this.

To me, the idea of less taxes is the right one, however, the execution of this idea is wrong.  What we should be trying to abolish is the FEDERAL income tax.  We need to stop sending the fruits of our labor to a strong central government.  How do you know that your tax money is going to fund projects in your state or neighborhood?

Sure, taxes are basically “legalized plunder” according to Bastiat, but we should accept paying local and state taxes and abhor our taxes going to the central government.

The states need to be organizing against the Federal Government and the Federal income tax.  Only after that tax has been eliminated, should states start eliminating their own income taxes.

If we eliminated the Federal income tax, we would each have between 15-25% more of our paychecks.  Who knows how much of our tax dollars are wasted anyway, going through all the bureaucracies in Washington.  Then, we could actually increase our state or local taxes by 2-5%, which are more efficient and have better oversight.  We would still have almost 20% more of our income.

This would return more power back to the states, and weaken the control of the Federal government.  If states act hastily and eliminate their major source of income, then they will rely more on funds from the Federal government.  This will create even weaker states and a stronger Washington.  We are playing right into their hands.

So, while eliminating taxes and allowing us to keep more of our earnings is a great concept of liberty and freedom, we need to direct it how the founding fathers would want.  We need to first eliminate the Federal income tax and take our powers back from Washington.  Only after the central government has been weakened, can we start to examine the policies of the states.