Ron Paul blasts ‘fiscal cliff’ deal scam

Ron_Paul,_official_Congressional_photo_portrait,_2007Jan. 5, 2013

By John Seiler

He’s no longer in office, but the greatest congressman in American history still is telling like it is. Here’s Ron Paul on the fraud “fiscal cliff” deal imposed on us by the scamsters of both parties in Congress:

“While there was much hand-wringing over the “draconian” cuts that would be imposed by sequestration, in fact sequestration does not cut spending at all. Under the sequestration plan, government spending will increase by 1.6 trillion over the next eight years. Congress calls this a cut because without sequestration spending will increase by 1.7 trillion over the same time frame. Either way it is an increase in spending.

“Yet even these minuscule cuts in the ‘projected rate of spending’ were too much for Washington politicians to bear. The last minute ‘deal’ was the worst of both worlds: higher taxes on nearly all Americans now and a promise to revisit these modest reductions in spending growth two months down the road. We were here before, when in 2011 Republicans demanded these automatic modest decreases in government growth down the road in exchange for a massive increase in the debt ceiling. As the time drew closer, both parties clamored to avoid even these modest moves.

“Make no mistake: the spending addiction is a bipartisan problem. It is generally believed that one party refuses to accept any reductions in military spending while the other party refuses to accept any serious reductions in domestic welfare programs. In fact, both parties support increases in both military and domestic welfare spending. The two parties may disagree on some details of what kind of military or domestic welfare spending they favor, but they do agree that they both need to increase. This is what is called “bipartisanship” in Washington….

“While the media played up the drama of the down-to-the-wire negotiations, there was never any real chance that a deal would not be worked out. It was just drama. That is how Washington operates. As it happened, a small handful of Congressional and Administration leaders gathered in the dark of the night behind closed doors to hammer out a deal that would be shoved down the throats of Members whose constituents had been told repeatedly that the world would end if this miniscule decrease in the rate of government spending was allowed to go through.

“While many on both sides express satisfaction that this deal only increases taxes on the ‘rich,’ most Americans will see more of their paycheck going to Washington because of the deal. The Tax Policy Center has estimated that 77 percent of Americans would see higher taxes because of the elimination of the payroll tax cut.”

That explains why Establishment Republicans so opposed Ron Paul in the GOP primaries a year ago: the Establishment wanted to keep the spending scams going, at the expense of taxpayers. Ron Paul would have stopped the scams. So he was stopped in favor of the Republican Establishment functionary Romney, who “lost” to Democratic Establishment functionary Obama.

Read the rest of Ron Paul’s analysis here.

14 comments

Write a comment
  1. Rex the Wonder Dog!
    Rex the Wonder Dog! 5 January, 2013, 11:01

    RP is correct- we need to at least freeze spending at CURRENT levels (statewide also) until we can grow the economy, have a positive cash flow AND pay down ta least half the $16 trillion in debt we have, just MHO.

    Reply this comment
  2. SeeSaw
    SeeSaw 5 January, 2013, 12:23

    Ron Paul was the debater who recommended letting sick people, without money or medical insurance, just die if they couldn’t afford the care–god forbid that the government should help. That’s why this country will never be Libertarian. There are not enough citizens who are that selfish!

    Reply this comment
  3. Curt
    Curt 5 January, 2013, 13:25

    Seesaw: he never said anything like that!!

    Reply this comment
  4. Curt
    Curt 5 January, 2013, 13:38

    Seesaw, middle class Americans pay 75% of our income to various direct and indirect taxes. Check this article out. Charities can help woolen for about 1/10th the cost that the government can. Unfortunately, none of us have enough money left to donate due to the near total theft of our money by our government. Please educate yourself before making comments.

    http://www.oftwominds.com/blogjuly12/real-world-tax-rate7-12.html

    Reply this comment
  5. Bubba
    Bubba 5 January, 2013, 15:03

    This is prime example of why we need term limits for congress!

    Reply this comment
  6. CalWatchdog
    CalWatchdog Author 5 January, 2013, 17:20

    SeeSaw: Ron Paul never said that. What he has done is remind us what medical care for the poor was like when he first started out as a doctor, before LBJ’s 1965 Medicare system began the ride to socialized medicine. Back then, all doctors were required, not by government, but by tradition and ethics to provide a certain part of their practice for the poor; for such services, the doctors were paid at a lower rate. The same was true for hospitals and other medical services.

    There were two big advantages of the old system: The bureaucracy was a fraction of that imposed today by the government. And the system was not headed for bankruptcy, as is the current system because Medicare costs are exploding.

    The system soon will become much worse, and will advance euthanizing people (something that already exists).

    The rich will get treatment from special hospitals, or in countries with capitalist medicine, such as Switzerland and Singapore.

    If you are poor or in the middle class, you will be sent home in a body bag. Which also will cut costs for the likewise bankrupt Socialist Security system.

    — John Seiler

    Reply this comment
  7. SeeSaw
    SeeSaw 5 January, 2013, 17:38

    Guess I will need to see if I can find a replay of the debate. I can agree about the costs; but disagree that SS will ever be bankrupt before something is done to sustain it. Without SS, the country would be covered with “poor houses”.

    I am a middle class American Curt. Nobody has to educate me about the costs of medical care. I retired with the benefit of medical insurance with a cap. My current out-of-pocket has matched it and will continue to increase. It is more than any other taxes I pay. There is no way of escaping them, except for the alternative.

    Reply this comment
  8. Rex the Wonder Dog!
    Rex the Wonder Dog! 5 January, 2013, 22:11

    SeeSaw says:
    Ron Paul was the debater who recommended letting sick people, without money or medical insurance, just die if they couldn’t afford the care
    ====
    Seesaw: he never said anything like that!!
    ==
    LOL! Seesaw makes things up as she spins her fantasyland fables….. 🙂

    Reply this comment
  9. Douglas
    Douglas 6 January, 2013, 00:40

    Middle class Americans do not pay anywhere near 75% of income in taxes. You cannot believe everything you read on the internet.

    Bonjour.

    Reply this comment
  10. Douglas
    Douglas 6 January, 2013, 03:08

    SeeSaw, from what I saw, you are more right than not. He didn’t say they should die if they dont have insurance (or cash). But he did say, as you stated, that the GOVERNMENT should not be involved.

    Churches, charities, and doctors and hospitals working pro bono seems to be his answer. He seems to believe that is more efficient than the government bureaucracy.

    Seems to me that doctors and hospitals pro bono is the same thing we have now. Cash and insurance patients are subsidizing the unensured. The money comes from somewhere.

    Reply this comment
  11. SeeSaw
    SeeSaw 6 January, 2013, 10:04

    I was using the inference of what would happen if the government did not get involved. I do consider Ron Paul a good person; he was a family doctor after all. He probably would have been better suited to the job of Surgeon General.

    Reply this comment
  12. CalWatchdog
    CalWatchdog Author 6 January, 2013, 10:17

    Assemblywoman Linda Halderman, a Republican from the Central Valley who did not run for reelection, is also a doctor. She treats the poor and has for many years. However, she advocates that everyone make some form of payment, even from the poorest. She requires everyone to reach in their pocket for payment medical care, even $1.

    John is right – If everyone adhered to this responsible approach to payment for service rendered, America’s health and medical system would not be such a mess. Instead, health care has become another entitlement for too many.

    Katy

    Reply this comment
  13. Rex the Wonder Dog!
    Rex the Wonder Dog! 6 January, 2013, 11:22

    Middle class Americans do not pay anywhere near 75% of income in taxes.
    =
    They can easily pay 50%;

    “The Tax Racket: Government Extortion From A to Z”

    http://www.amazon.com/The-Tax-Racket-Government-Extortion/dp/0345387783

    Reply this comment
  14. Rex the Wonder Dog!
    Rex the Wonder Dog! 6 January, 2013, 11:23

    Assemblywoman Linda Halderman, a Republican from the Central Valley who did not run for reelection, is also a doctor. She treats the poor and has for many years. However, she advocates that everyone make some form of payment, even from the poorest. She requires everyone to reach in their pocket for payment medical care, even $1.
    ==
    LOL… Reminds me of Michael J Fox in “Doc Hollywood” where the poor people paid him with a pig! I loved that pig.

    Reply this comment

Write a Comment

Leave a Reply



Related Articles

Secretary of State's Website Crashes

Anthony Pignataro: 8:32 p.m. — The California Secretary of State’s office is a quiet place right now, mostly because the

Middle class is Shocked! Shocked! at tax increase

Jan. 13, 2013 By John Seiler Wait! Weren’t the tax increase supposed to hit only the rich? President Obama, Gov.

Campus Political Rally

Katy Grimes: A California State University college faculty association has organized a rally for today, encouraging urging students to vote YES