Posted on 11/26/2012 7:41:24 PM PST by mtrott
My goodness, I got a tingle up my leg just now, listening to Rand Paul vigorously advocate for cutting taxes to grow the economy at 4% or greater. And he also pushed back on the dem premise that only by raising taxes can we cut the deficit.
On the contrary, he strongly insisted that the Bush tax rates resulted in INCREASED revenues to the federal government for years. He also confirmed that he would not vote to raise ANY taxes, and did not buy into Greta's query about the whole idea of cutting deductions to raise revenue either.
This was so refreshing to hear, and actually renewed my hope that there was at least one right thinking person still in congress.
Glad to hear it but hardly a new argument.
Do we NEED a new argument? What would that argument be?
what increased revenues is he talking about? tax revenue under Bush was far less than it was under Clinton. At it’s peak the tax revenues were around 18% uner Bush and around 20% under Clinton.
there was no increased revnue for years under the Bush taxes
His father ran on the same platform and was attacked endlessly on this site remember?
Ron and Rand Paul are as close to the founders as we will get.
Now that the election is over and there is ZERO chance of getting it done, it is safe to pander to conservatives.
As long as there is no chance it’ll happen of course.
Lucky Kentucky. He was very good.
Well IF we have elections in 4 years and rand paul is the R candidate, I will certainly vote for him!
I certainly didn’t mean to imply he was a perfect candidate or anything like that. It was just so refreshing to hear an unabashed articulation of conservatism.
Then they were bad.
If higher rates cause FedGov revenues to fall, then I'm for higher rates.
Bill Whittle at David Horowitz's Restoration Weekend 2012
Post up a link to Rand if there isn't one on the thread, and you can find one. And ping me, please.
His father ran on the same platform and was attacked endlessly on this site remember?
Ron and Rand Paul are as close to the founders as we will get.
I understand, but that would mean reducing revenues and shrinking the government by actions(high tax rates) that cripple the economy and put millions of Americans out of work. Not the way I’d like to go about it.
Rand Paul also advocates assimilating the 12 million illegals while turning away those trying to enter the US legally.
This proves Rand Paul is a loon by seeing revenue that didn’t exist. Revenues after the Bush tax cuts fell and didn’t start recovering until around 2006.
These increased revenues:
Year_ GDP-US _ Total Revenue-fed
———$ billion-——$ billion-———
2002... 10642.3..... 1853.40
2003... 11142.1..... 1782.53
2004... 11867.8..... 1880.28
2005... 12638.4..... 2153.86
2006... 13398.9..... 2407.25
2007... 14077.6..... 2568.00
2008... 14441.4..... 2524.00 (recession begins)
As would be expected, after 911 we did poorly and it took a while for the Bush cuts to have an impact in terms of stronger economic growth. But, that’s exactly the idea: Grow the economy, not the % the gov’t takes from the people!
(I hope this posts ok - am having a hard time getting a table to look decent in the Preview, and I’m no HTML expert...)
The problem with Bush was the spending side...
I agree with you. Every time someone actually talks conservative with conviction people on here pounce. I think the people doing the pouncing are mostly the country club sect of the GOP, you know, the ones that are the problem and keep control of a declining party.
Don’t back down. There was nothing wrong with your original post
Nothing wrong with that plan. He is correct on both points. It is the only rational policy a long as border security is included. Are you in favor of the green card lottery?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.