Ron Paul's Restore America Plan.

[Anarchist420]

http://c3244172.r72.cf0.rackcdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/RestoreAmericaPlan.pdf

He's the only man we can afford to have as our President. He cares so much about the tax payer and society, so why does anyone worry about him wrecking the country? The fact that he has ethics and the others don't should be enough. Why don't ethics matter like they used to?

http://www.therightperspective.org/2011/10/16/ron-paul-vows-1trillion-in-cuts-and-40k-salary/

You could do 200B in SS cuts from means testing (not giving it to people who don't need it), you could reduce the cost of medicare part D by 25B, 5 harmful departments could be eliminated saving 300B, the others could be trimmed by 1/3 and that would save 75B, and we could cut defense spending to 1/3 of what it is and save 300B there. We could cut half of the welfare (corporate and individual) and allow the states to take care of the rest and save 250B right there, and you'd have at least $1T saved from all of that. Selling Federal lands and weapons would reduce the interest payments, so that's less spending there. I'm not saying that's how Dr. Paul is going to cut things, as I don't speak for him, but he'll do it in a perfect way so that the poor won't be adversely affected.

 

[schneiderguy]

Texas Congressman and US presidential candidate Ron Paul has vowed to cut US$1 trillion from the federal budget without affecting military spending

Military spending should be cut by 90%, along with the rest of his plan. No one is going to invade us when we have enough nukes to turn the world into a parking lot, and we shouldn't be sending troops to meddle in overseas affairs.

 

[MotF Bane]

I'm actually disappointed that he's willing to leave military spending alone.

 

[Lyfer]

I'm actually disappointed that he's willing to leave military spending alone.

And what if the Decepticons attack? Cmon, be realistic.

 

[JSt0rm]

no military cuts. lol. This is why we will have no cuts in this country.

 

[soundforbjt]

It doesn't matter, he won't get elected, period.

 

[Anarchist420]

I'm actually disappointed that he's willing to leave military spending alone.

Where does it say that he's not going to cut military spending? He has already said that he is and that he won't cut defense spending.

He probably will cut military spending by 90%, which still may not be enough. I think it should be 1% of what it is, where just a common armoury system is guarded as the Antifederalists proposed.

 

[MomentsofSanity]

Lol yeah let's see the itemized breakdown first. 1 trillion and no military? Good luck.

 

[YoungGun21]

He's the only man we can afford to have as our President. He cares so much about the tax payer and society, so why does anyone worry about him wrecking the country? The fact that he has ethics and the others don't should be enough. Why don't ethics matter like they used to?

http://www.therightperspective.org/2011/10/16/ron-paul-vows-1trillion-in-cuts-and-40k-salary/

You could do 200B in SS cuts from means testing (not giving it to people who don't need it), you could reduce the cost of medicare part D by 25B, 5 harmful departments could be eliminated saving 300B, the others could be trimmed by 1/3 and that would save 75B, and we could cut defense spending to 1/3 of what it is and save 300B there. We could cut half of the welfare (corporate and individual) and allow the states to take care of the rest and save 250B right there, and you'd have at least $1T saved from all of that. Selling Federal lands and weapons would reduce the interest payments, so that's less spending there. I'm not saying that's how Dr. Paul is going to cut things, as I don't speak for him, but he'll do it in a perfect way so that the poor won't be adversely affected.

This line cracked me up lolololololol

 

[PeshakJang]

The poor need to be affected. Maybe then their interest in government will extend beyond who's promising to give them more shit they didn't earn.

 

[Doppel]

This line cracked me up lolololololol

op is epic

 

[senseamp]

He'll trigger a second Great Depression for only $40K/year? Sounds like a bargain.

 

[Spikesoldier]

pretty noble gesture.

anyone who can campaign for president really doesnt need the 400,000.00/yr.

 

[Nebor]

no military cuts. lol. This is why we will have no cuts in this country.

That's why we need to start looking at a 50% income tax on everyone.

 

[Fear No Evil]

Ron who?

 

[Phokus]

This line cracked me up lolololololol

Hahahaha, that was hilarious.

 

[irishScott]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c7RUeMCZL3Q

 

[her209]

Is Ron Paul going back on his promise to close overseas bases?

 

[sportage]

Ron Paul WILL NEVER be president. So enough with the skinny creepy guy already.
America has some stupid voters, but not THAT stupid.
Besides... isn't he a Mormon? Or was it a moron?
Can't remember... Probably both?

 

[Nebor]

Ron Paul WILL NEVER be president. So enough with the skinny creepy guy already.
America has some stupid voters, but not THAT stupid.
Besides... isn't he a Mormon? Or was it a moron?
Can't remember... Probably both?

I'm pretty sure he's a scientologist.

 

[juiio]

I'm actually disappointed that he's willing to leave military spending alone.

There is basically zero percent chance that Paul wouldn't cut military spending. The source for this article seems to be a Brody File blog, which doesn't say anything about military spending.

 

[frostedflakes]

Doubt he'd leave military spending alone, that's one of the things he's been pretty adamant about reducing. It's always been an easy place to cut for him, whereas most federal programs he obviously doesn't agree with, but they are more difficult to cut and you have to be more delicate about how you cut and phase them out, because the reality is that a lot of people have grown very dependent on them and you can't just yank their benefits (and it wouldn't be fair either to people who have been paying into SS for their whole lives, for example, because they were promised they'd get their money back later). But he's been talking about cutting back on military spending for a long time and putting the money saved toward the national debt and making sure that we can meet our domestic obligations (SS, Medicare/Medicaid, etc.) until ideally those programs could also be phased out.

Is probably just saying that without even touching the military, these cuts are what could be achieved. I don't see anything in the source article alluding to defense cuts being off-limits, that seems to be something that was added in the article OP linked to.

 

[Grooveriding]

no military cuts. lol. This is why we will have no cuts in this country.

This is the one I don't understand. Your economy is in the toilet and the biggest government expenditure is... defense ?

Basically just slash that right out of the budget, maintain a shoestring to keep the nukes online to allay the paranoid segment over fears of being invaded. Even that is a bit of far-fetched thought; countries at risk of being colonized are ones with an abundance of resources others want, so it doesn't fit in the case of the usa. Take the windfall of savings along with maybe forcing some of those wall street CEOS to give their bonuses over as a start of paying back the bail-outs and fix your shit.

Obviously a simplistic strategy, but really, priorities sure look ass over tea kettle looking in as an outsider. Sure there is the whole huge business of manufacturing all that garbage, but there are no shortage of other positive industries that would actually benefit society that could rise up to take the place of manufacturing that crap.

 

[DucatiMonster696]

This is the one I don't understand. Your economy is in the toilet and the biggest government expenditure is... defense ?

Defense spending is not our biggest government expenditure. The big ponzi scheme known as Social Security and the mess called Medicare/Medical system are way larger economic liabilities then defense spending. Nevertheless Ron Paul if elected president won't be gallivanting across the globe without good cause unlike current and past presidents. His main view on our foreign policy is that it needs to be drastically scaled back in terms of our military presence and interventionist actions globally. So the EU folks better start putting aside some money for their own common defense. ( relevant link). However I highly doubt that Dr. Paul is going to gut defense to the point of stupidity (i.e no defense at all) that liberals would like to see either but again he won't be the EU's or the UN's water boy (unlike Obama) when it comes to deploying US troops.

 

[airdata]

That crazy mother fucker...

So crazy I bet he'd actually do it.