ENTITLEMENTS:


Honors our promise to our seniors and veterans, while allowing young workers to opt out. Block grants Medicaid and other welfare programs to allow States the flexibility and ingenuity they need to solve their own unique problems without harming those currently relying on the programs.


an insane idea....medical costs are so out of hand...you cant attack this from 1 side...when the elderly need medical attention there is no other humane way to take care of it...you certainly cannot let people just die...could you? The pricing on the medical side needs to be brought down to something more managable for most people...

CUTTING GOVERNMENT WASTE:

Makes a 10% reduction in the federal workforce, slashes Congressional pay and perks, and curbs excessive federal travel. To stand with the American People, President Paul will take a salary of $39,336, approximately equal to the median personal income of the American worker.

very good ideas...but congress would not approve this...it would have to be voted on by the people...

TAXES:


Lowers the corporate tax rate to 15%, making America competitive in the global market. Allows American companies to repatriate capital without additional taxation, spurring trillions in new investment. Extends all Bush tax cuts. Abolishes the Death Tax. Ends taxes on personal savings, allowing families to build a nest egg.

I believe this will cause us to be in a larger deficit than we are in now...

so...he has some good yet radical ideas...some may very well work...but it will be hard for him to implement most of them...

Actually, those are just the sort of things that this country needs, and unless someone has the testicular fortitude to actually try to implement them, the problems are only going to get bigger, bigger and MUCH BIGGER till the entire country goes bankrupt. Which, by definition, I believe it already is. How much is this country in debt again? See the below attached image from -> http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/...ebt_chart.html. And what sort of steps are being taken to correct that course? Yeah, I thought so......

Getting someone into the office of president that will just give us more of the same will GIVE us just more of the same, which is EXACTLY what we don't need. Obama was voted into office on a platform based on CHANGE. What we really need is someone who will actually GIVE us that change that is needed. Of all the candidates offered, which one is the most likely to carry through with that sort of promise with at least a SERIOUS attempt at it? And don't think for an instant that only a President of the USA can make this sort of change. Obviously all of Congress needs a major overhaul as well.

Honestly, ANYONE who thinks this country is going to get out of these serious problems without some SERIOUS financial pain involved to a lot of people is just not thinking this through at length. Unless someone grabs the helm of the Good Ship America and tries very hard to set us into a different course, I really don't have much hope for the future of this country, nor those people living within in it when it crashes. The world is just not filled with altruistic people, so if the USA needs a bailout (if that will even be possible to do), then I expect we all better start learning how to speak Chinese in a hurry.

I've been reading this thread and had preferred to stay out of it until now. Being an independent I've realized that most political subjects tend to just become arguments about beliefs and not about facts, so it's better to just watch it play out. However I wanted to comment on a couple things.

They're the federal agency that makes sure riding in a plane, train, or automobile is safe.

As for Ron Paul, I am a fan of his, but only because he is one of the few politicians who is honest. I'm not sure where people get the idea that he's not being mentioned or "hyped" by the media comes from. I see him on tv everyday and I live in California where most people couldn't care less about republican politics. As for why he won't get elected, it's pretty simple and has nothing to do with the media. First he doesn't seem willing to lie to get elected and let's face it, that's basically a prerequisite nowadays. Second and more importantly is that he has views that are not limited to one party and in this 2 party system, that will not get you elected. He also has some radical views that are not looked upon favorably by either party. And last of all is he can't hold a candle to Romney in fundraising and seeing as money = speech now(lol), then Romney gets to talk a lot more.

Now his economic ideas are not only not radical but unfortunately just bland republican ideas. He wants to cut spending, ok great but then he wants cut taxes. We added around 1.3 trillion in debt last year, you know what happens with that kinda plan, another 1.3 trillion. Any plan at this point that doesn't cut spending and raise taxes, will do nothing but continue to sink us into debt.

All of these make sense, but this one the most. If a 100%-rated disabled veteran can live off of ~$36k per year, tax free of course, why can't every other public 'servant'? I guarantee you if we put this cap on every position in the government, we'd actually see people in office that are there to serve rather than take.

These tables should be the guidelines for salaries of those who wish to 'serve' in congress or any other position of our governement:

http://www.vba.va.gov/bln/21/Rates/comp01.htm

Also, why is the president allowed to retire after 4 years with something like $475k annually for the rest of his/her life? Where is another position like this available?

'Nuff said?

But wait, there's more: