Attention all Liberty loving Americans

[hobo]eclipse

I eccourage all voting americans to take a good hard look at Dr. Ron Paul, 10 term Republican Representative of Texas and the consistent message of Peace, Prosperity, and Freedom he has stood behind unwavering.

Ron Paul: A New Hope

Ron Paul : Stop Dreaming

Ron Paul: Who Owns You (Narrated By George Carlin)

for what it's worth...

YouTube Search Results for “Ron Paul on Federal Reserve”

Kazeko

Editing...

I'm going to post what I had here in another thread. - Nevermind. It's on topic, Ron Paul's ideals may be no tax, to the extreme libertarian, but most of the sources I've found have him supporting either a flat tax, or no tax at all. The no tax issue is a different argument than what I'm point at, because in all likelihood, the tax system will not be abolished that easily.

So...

I'm obligated by my moral value to explain a few things.


I understand Title 26 of the U.S. Code better than most.
Title 26 is also known as the "Internal Revenue Code." It's the Section of the US code that governs taxation.


I've spent years in foreign countries. My forum name is Japanese. They use a Flat Tax System similar to one that Mr. Paul proposes.




I'm going to explain a few things, both about our tax system, and an undelying principle of the US constitution, in addition to the real math that YOU WILL NOT HEAR.



First, is the math.

DISCLAIMER: THESE ARE NOT YOUR FIGURES. THIS IS NOT AN EXACT TAX RETURN, MERELY AN EXAMPLE OF HOW OUR TAX SYSTEM WORKS. ALL INFORMATION USED HERE IS AVAILABLE IN IRS PUBLICATION 17.

Pub. 17 is available on the IRS website @ Internal Revenue Service, along with other tax forms and other resources.

Our tax system, is a progressive tax system. Taxes are applied in "brackets." People presume that once you make more money, you fall into a different "bracket."
That would be a tiered tax system, as you move up the "Ladder" you fall into a different "Tier."
Most people believe that when you move from a 10% (the lowest) to the 15% (2nd lowest) bracket, ALL of your income is taxed @ 15%.

It's not.


It's actually more around a 9% rate in the 15% bracket, based on how our tax system works.

Here's a quick explanation.

As a what if, I'm going to say that I make $24000 per year, gross.

Without digging into the specifics about things like Adjusted Gross Income, Taxable Income and deductions, I'm going to presume a $24000 TAXABLE income. (If you were single, living on your own, with no dependents, that would put your Net Annual income at about $34,050 USD.)


However.... What you actually pay, is how much money you earn into each bracket.

So, @ 24000 USD, you'd have earned $16450 into the bracket, and are only taxed the 15% on the $16450, or $2467.50.

Then, you'd be taxed a 10% rate on the first $7550.00 you made or $755.

Total: $3222.50 paid in taxes on $24,000 USD in TAXABLE income, or $34,050 NET.

If we figure 15% of $34,050 that's $5107.5.

It's Actually closer to 9.5%

Easy Figures.

10% of 7550.00 = $755.00 (First Bracket)
15% of $24,000-7550 = $2467.50 (Second Bracket)

.1(7550) = 755
.15(24000-7550) = 2467.50



So, that's how our current tax system works.

I'm going to add a few figures from a flat tax system that Mr. Paul supports.

Our lowest income tax bracket is 10%.
Our highest income tax bracket is 35%.

So, if we apply a flat tax, we would have to apply a flat percentage on EVERYONES income. The same Percentage. Increasing the percentage above our lowest tax bracket would INCREASE their tax.

Also, any flat tax rate LOWER than our current highest tax bracket, would equate to a tax decrease for the highest income earners in the country.

So, 10% rate...
Assuming someone makes $7550 exactly, they would pay $755 in taxes.

Assuming someone makes $3,000,000, they would pay $300,000 in taxes. Cutting their taxes by over 70% - Less than 1/3rd of what they pay now.


35% rate
Assuming someone makes $7550 exactly, they would pay $2642.50 - Effectively TRIPLING THEIR TAX DOLLARS PAID.

Assuming someone makes $3,000,000, they would pay $1,050,000 in taxes.


Delta (Difference):
Lowest Bracket - $1,887.50
Highest Bracket - $750,000.00.


So, that's pretty meaningless unless we take things like the US budget into context.

Assuming the budget stays the same, the onus (or burden) of the current US budget would fall on the lower income tax brackets to come up with the 59% of said budget that the higher income earners in this country currently cover, since they're very obviously (as we demonstrated) taking a significant tax cut that someone would have to come up with.

The basic answer, is that we'd be looking at a flat tax rate somewhere around 28%. England uses a flat tax rate around 22%.

For the average US income of $35,000 per year, that would equate to effectively DOUBLING the amount of tax you pay.



But you wouldn't have to file a tax return.


So, the highest tax bracket in the country equates to 59% of the revenue collected.

So.

Is the responsibility of filing a tax return worth ~$1,500 per year to you?

Keep in mind that Mr. Paul's income is in the highest tax bracket in the country - He wouldn't mind a tax cut, neither would the top income earners in the country.




So, why am I posting this beyond saving you a few dollars each month?


Because the problem with the United States right now, is in the constitution.


The principle that the Constitution speaks of is freedom. The freedom of choice. Choose who you vote for. Choose how you think. How you live. What you believe. What you want.

Choice.


The definition of "Freedom" to each person equates to whether or not you define "Freedom" as the ability TO make a choice and deal with whatever consequences (good or bad) may come, or not having to make a choice in the first place, to shed the responsibility of said choice.


With our current tax system, you're involved in your own tax matters. You have appeal rights, you have constitutional conditions that limit the government from collecting too much.

If you institute a flat tax rate, you no longer have appeal rights. You're putting the responsibility and TRUST into the Governments hands.

You're telling them to handle your affairs.


With Great Power, Comes Great Responsibility. The problem with America RIGHT NOW, isn't a question of who's being voted into office.

It's the American public's refusal to handle their own affairs. Their desire to shed responsibility. - A flat tax rate allows you to shed the responsibility of filing and paying your taxes properly.

It also means you give up your power. You're saying Taxation without Representation is okay. - You pay your tax, with no choice of your own. If the government collects too much, you've lost your method of proving that they did. You've lost your ability to take them to court and appeal their collection activity.


So, give up the responsibility. Give up the power.

The underlying principle in the constitution is power to the people, but with that power comes the responsibility of using it, and using it properly.

Don't use the power, don't take responsibility, and you've given up your freedom to fight the government on an every day basis.




Regardless of my political stance, the abolishment of our current tax system equates to nothing but a total evasion of personal responsibility, and a consent to someone else making your choices for you because you don't think you should have to make them.

Don't be lazy. Be educated.

"People shouldn't be afraid of their governments. Governments should be afraid of their people."



Note:

Publication 1 - The Taxpayer's Bill of Rights
http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/p1.pdf

Publication 17 - Your Federal Income Tax
http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/p17.pdf

Publication 5 - Your Appeal Rights and How to Prepare a Protest if You Don't Agree
http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/p5.pdf

More info about appeal rights
Publications and Forms About Your Appeal Rights

All of this is public information, all links refer to the IRS.GOV website.


The real truth is - you have the power now. Most just don't want to take the responsibility associated with it.


Many don't want to pay taxes at all, but understand that the US government needs some kind of budget, whether it's a sales tax (that would ultimately increase the cost of everything you buy) or it comes out of your paycheck.

Six of one.

One half dozen of the other.




Lastly - "Making money worth more" is not a choice any government has beyond how much money it prints. - Removing the Federal Reserve Bank won't increase the value of the dollar.

The entire principle of paper money is meant as a MEDIUM for trade. Gold was the previous standard. Paper currency (used the world over) is the standard now.

It's only value is the value a society gives it. - The more printed money in circulation, the less value each dollar will have.

The mint prints additional dollars to pay contractors and corporate entities it purchases services and goods from.
As an example, the IRS has been fighting to keep private debt collectors from being allowed to collect on Tax Debts. - IRS employees are cheaper, and do a better job than a contracted corporation would.


Removing the federal reserve bank won't do anything more than bandage the issue.

Judas

er..

Kazeko

Edit: This forum needs a thread delete button

Senor_Mota

Why? I think you've made an excellent point. You ARE correct in assuming that over 75% of the American population is either too lazy or too stupid to take matters into their own hands - isn't that how George W. Bush became our President? Also, the current state of affairs with the Attorney Firings and the Attorney General basically lying about his lying - it's not the fact that so many people are under-educated, it's just that they don't care anymore. Thirty years ago, there were at least a few "crotchety" old men and women who could point out when we were being lied to - and would do so veraciously and vehemently. But currently, being stared in the eye and seeing the beads of nervous sweat pouring from the forehead of the current "deceptionary representative" (probably not even a real phrase), I feel like I'm the only one saying, "Hey! This guy is full of sh!t!".

Bill Hicks, legendary sardonic comedian and courageous advocate of free-will and free-thinking said it best during his Relentless tour in 1989 -

Most people are so comfortable in their "modern" existence that the realization of being screwed over often comes far after the "pull-out". Who wants to revolutionize the current state of affairs when it's so much easier to sit behind your 42" Plasma LCD HDTV and defeat the "evil" in HALO 3?

You don't have to worry about any supposed or tentative revolution when you've remove the concept of revolution from the revolutionary.

[hobo]eclipse

Are you aware the fedral reserve is a private company that prints money and loans it at immediate interest to the US government?

Ron Paul supports abolishing of income and inflation taxes, only possible by a complete reworking of the US foriegn policy.

Ron Paul will bring home the troops immediatly.

Of all the canidates, both Republican and Democrat, Ron Paul recieves more campaign donations from the troops than any other.

Reworking the foriegn policy with a marginally less aggressive stance all the way around, and quiting with this occupation shit (both aggressive and non) that is nothing but a black hole money vaccum emptying descretly into select pockets means the assumption you made of the US budget remaing the same is far from a good one.

OldBuzzard

I see Ron Paul as being the GOP's equivilent to the Dem's Dennis Kuscinich(sp?).

Both appeal to the whacked out fringe element of each side, and either one would be a disaster as POTUS.

Kazeko

Then why can't I purchase Federal Reserve Bank stock? Why is it not listed at all?

Why can I not find a Business listing for them?

Why do their presidents serve 12 year terms that are ELECTED positions, while a real CEO (Chief Executive Officer) is determined by the stockholders of a corporation, or by the largest shareholder?

Is it a partnership, sole proprietorship, S-Corp, Corporation, or Non-Profit, (i.e. Section 501(c)(3) )?

The truth of this matter, is that the Federal Reserve Bank is not a corporate entity, but rather, the presidential positions in each branch (12 total) are typically held by high-end corporate officers from varying other national banks (like Wachovia and such) or corporations.

Further, the "presidency" of each branch is typically held by multiple people rather than a single corporate entity.

The listing of officers/presidents, and their affiliation is publicly available.
FRB: Directors of Federal Reserve Banks and Branches

Why? You ask, with wonder and awe...
Because these corporations control the majority of the money in this country.

And the Value of the Dollar has ZERO to do with the FRB. - The Mint Still Prints the dollars, and the Mint is still part of the U.S. Treasury.

The FRB doesn't have anything to do with our Budget Deficit. It affects interest rates, and savings rates, sure. In fact, Interest rates are lower than they've been in over 40 years. There's a reason no one's saving money - it's not worth it.

Even Japanese Interest Rates dipped below 1% recently. Would you save if you knew it was pointless?


Get to the core of the issue - why is the US government having to take out loans from any bank in the first place? - BUDGET DEFICIT.

Next up - Would you rather the government take loans from Corporate America to cover budget deficit, or would you have them take loans from China and other countries, like we have in the past? Am I safe in assuming he supports taking out loans from other countries?

This is a plug to gain support of people who dislike taxes. It's a front-end issue that people who owe tax debts associate with.

Fact: If the budget isn't paid by income taxes, it'll be paid by a Federal Sales Tax - Increasing the cost of all products and services - This will not change our economy. At the end of the year, you will have spent as much on real services, and you will have paid as much in tax.

-- The budget will be paid, it will come out of your wallet. The only difference is how it gets paid by you.

Furthermore - what happens if you purchase a car on a loan? You pay federal sales tax on the MSRP of a vehicle? So, your new Car is $35k before, and after a federal sales tax your car is $40k. - You're getting a loan to pay for a tax debt, though you won't be mailing a check to the IRS.

Every other presidential candidate promised this too. Next.

Have you ever served in the military?
The left isn't spoken on most military bases. All you hear on Yokosuka Base in Tokyo, is Rush Limbaugh, and other right-wing broadcasts. You will NEVER hear the left. Ever. - Find me any recent day General above 2 stars who is on the Left. (Hint: it doesn't exist, and hasn't for decades.)

Alright, I'll fire a flame for this one, but only a light one...

In 2007, $548.8 billion was allocated to Defense Spending.
$586.1 billion was spent on Social Security.

$1.163 Trillion ($1,163 Billion) was collected in income tax.

$345 billion dollars is outstanding in Uncollected Income Tax from people who did not pay their taxes. This is referred to as the "Tax Gap."

22% of the US budget went uncollected by people who refused to pay their taxes, or refused to properly withhold tax from their paycheck and now owe a tax debt.

Who's creating the problem, the people pushing the war and defense spending, or the portion of the American Public who isn't paying their dues?

[hobo]eclipse

Check the 4:12 timestamp here here for the facts straight from the horses mouth.



So what you're saying is along with paying social security out on every dollar EARNED, half of the federal income tax we pay also goes to social security? Something current generations will never see.?

[hobo]eclipse

Watch Ron Paul for yourself on Meet The Press w/ Tim Russert, Sunday Dec.23 2007

Kazeko

Where exactly does this individual state that the FRB is a corporate entity though?

You're dodging the questions I asked regarding the FRB being a corporate entity.

"How is the FRB, an agency created by the US government, a Corporate Entity?"

You haven't answered that.

So...
Yes, they do have the power to regulate "coin." They can tell the mint to print more funds.

But do you know what effect that has?


The US dollar has steadily dropped in value for the last hundred years.

Why?

What effect does that have?


These are questions that most people don't even ask. They presume that "The value of the dollar is dropping" = Bad Economy


The Japanese Yen is currently worth approximately (it changes hourly) .011 dollars. 1 dollar = 114 yen.
Under the presumption that a lower dollar value = poor standard of living and rising costs, the Japanese would be living in shanties - Yet they're more affluent than most of Europe.

Ironically, the Mexican Peso is worth ten times what the Japanese Yen is worth.


Now, the value of the dollar does have a great many impacts, too much to delve into, and too much side tracking for one debate.

So the question in this regard is pretty simple - "What are you getting at?"
Sure, I mis-spoke, but merely because the FRB is NOT a corporate entity. The FRB is a branch of the US treasury - and they still print the money.

Further - If Corporate America COULD print a dollar bill, what effect would it have?

On an economic basis, Corporate America wants you to have money in your pocket, to purchase products and services that they sell - That's Capitalism. The people at Best Buy, or Newegg.com want you to go to their store(s) with fat wads of money in your pocket to buy their crap. If you don't have money, they don't do business.

If you have no money, if the Consumer has ZERO dollars to spend, because they've been "subjugated and oppressed financially," then big corporations go out of business, because they have no one to buy their products.

Economics are Cyclical in nature, not Directional. - In order for our economy to function, people need to buy things, and corporations need to employ people and pay them so they can turn around and purchase more things.

Do you have a Basis for this statement? Because I've never been able to figure the source of this statement.

I ask, because I already have when I was a kid due to unfortunate circumstances. SSA paid out a decent sum each month for eight years. - I would have been growing up in a 2 bedroom apartment in a bad area of town, if it wasn't for Social Security.

I know a great many people in my own generation (i'm in my mid-20's) who already have received social security benefits.

On a daily basis, I speak to more people who DO recieve Social Security Benefits either due to disability, or age than people who haven't or don't recieve Social Security Benefits in similar circumstances.

No, you don't have specific dollars that are invested for you into some magical fund that you can draw from at any time.

It's not an IRA, 401(k) or pension. It's SOCIAL SECURITY. It has more benefits than simply functioning as retirement. There's a great many other functions of social security, including death benefits, disability payments, and retirement, as the name implies.
"Social."
"Security."


In regards to the "additional" amounts to income tax - No, actually I'm generalizing.

The 1.1 trillion dollars that I mentioned is both Social Security / FICA (Federal Insurance Contributions Act), and Income Tax.
You can find that yourself by looking at the various reports the OMB (Office of Management and Budget) releases annually, or with IRS reports as well.

Also, there are some individuals who are able to "Opt Out" of the social security program, which means the taxes have to be separated for payroll purposes.
Hence the reason for the separation on your paycheck.

Mousey

Second

[hobo]eclipse

Please folks, let's see some facts,


Central bank

A central bank, reserve bank, or monetary authority, is an entity responsible for the monetary policy of its country or of a group of member states. Its primary responsibility is to maintain the stability of the national currency and money supply, but more active duties include controlling subsidized-loan interest rates, and acting as a "bailout" lender of last resort to the banking sector during times of financial crisis (private banks often being integral to the national financial system). It may also have supervisory powers, to ensure that banks and other financial institutions do not behave recklessly or fraudulently.

In most countries the central bank is state-owned and has a minimal degree of autonomy, which allows for the possibility of government intervening in monetary policy. An "independent central bank" is one which operates under rules designed to prevent political interference; examples include the Reserve Bank of Australia,the Reserve Bank of India, the European Central Bank, the Bank of Canada, the Banco de la República de Colombia, Central Bank of Norway and the U.S. Federal Reserve.


Federal Reserve System

The Federal Reserve System (also the Federal Reserve; informally The Fed) is the central banking system of the United States. Created in 1913, it is a quasi-public (part private, part government) banking system[1] composed of (1) the presidentially-appointed Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System in Washington, D.C.; (2) the Federal Open Market Committee; (3) 12 regional Federal Reserve Banks located in major cities throughout the nation acting as fiscal agents for the U.S. Treasury, each with its own nine-member board of directors; (4) numerous private U.S. member banks, which subscribe to required amounts of non-transferable stock in their regional Federal Reserve Banks; and (5) various advisory councils.

The Federal Reserve System was established in 1913 by the enactment of the Federal Reserve Act. Currently, Ben Bernanke serves as the Chairman of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System.

History of central banking in the United States; 1913 – Present - Recent Changes

The Structure of the Federal Reserve System

Kazeko

Again...

"What are you getting at?"


I've supplied the same information that you just posted in my 2nd post on here.

The FRB having full independence over monetary matters is inconsequential - It's still NOT a corporate entity.

Furthermore, their method of income production is very similar to that of a "daytrader." They buy and sell securities producing income on interest accrual. What of it?


What I see here, is the concept (and fear) that any one entity can exclusively control the value of the dollar, and the wealth of the populace. - As if the FRB is the sole determining factor in the affluence of the US population, or that it has more control than what it really has.


Again... The facts have been presented, yet the intent and purpose of your debate has yet to be displayed. - "What's your Point?"


I don't mean to be rude, nor am I trying to turn a debate into an argument, but it seems to me you're in need of an economics class.

Much of your stance seems to me to be a super-moral concept that makes you feel just and right, without any raw substantiation beyond appearance, and without any rationalization of the ideas presented to you.


So I say again - What is your purpose? What is your intent? What are you trying to convey or stand for? That the FRB is an immoral institution who's destroying the affluence of society by printing money, loans and securities sales? Am I to just attach myself exclusively to the morality of the situation without rationalizing it?

Is the goal to control the FRB more? Bit Ironic for a Republican, wouldn't you say? Perhaps Mr. Paul is marketing his stance to snag more than the "right" but the left as well. - Election is the goal, after all.

OldBuzzard

Kazeko, don't waste your time. These are Paulbots you are dealing with, and they don't let facts stand in the way of their 'convictions'.

Like I said earlier, Ron Paul represents the whacked out fringe element of the conservative side.

Wingnuts = Whacked out conservatives.
Moonbats = Whacked out liberals.

Wingnuts, and Moonbats have one thing in common: Their 'feelings' and 'convictions' trump facts and reality.

cozumel

He unfortunately appears to be coming up quite fast on the rails never-the-less. So is Obama come to that (against Cliton)...