Thursday, April 24th, 2008
As a basic principle of his recent Information Clearing House article, ‘The Double Trouble of Taxation’ (22/04/08) Ron Paul states:
“Tax policy in this country hurts taxpayers twice — once when they pay taxes, and then when the government spends the money.”
I do commend Dr. Paul for his courage in standing for the direction of what is right. But I make no apology for pronouncing this further unqualified assertion damaging to the country, because he has taken the good attention of the people who are waking to issues which I for one was standing for when Mr. Paul professes to first take an interest in economics, yet *wrong* ideas and preposterous solutions only waste time and lead the country astray when we can least afford either.
The consequence of this irresponsible misleading is going to be another 4 years under a president — any one of the 4 — who *cannot* save us from any of the improprieties we face, much less the most damaging one — namely irreversible multiplication of debt by interest: When the imposed, purported economic system soon fails, it will be because it is impossible to maintain a circulation without suffering irreversible multiplication of debt in proportion to the circulation, because to maintain a circulation we must perpetually re-borrow whatever we pay against principal and interest as subsequent sums of debt, increased so much as periodic interest.
There is no damage when the government spends tax dollars back into circulation; the damage would be if the government just saved the tax dollars, because this would deprive us of the circulation necessary to sustaining our commerce.
While Mr. Paul’s assertion therefore couldn’t be further from the truth, Mr. Paul furthermore takes the hideous notion that the spending is inflationary, when by no definition or measure can spending money for things of the given value be inflationary.
Two wrongs, instead of a right; and in the wake of that, “the revolution” others started long ago is swerved to nowhere.
The crime here is that instead of understanding an issue so we *can* solve it, people hungry for answers are given the wrong, false thing to hang onto. The perceivable impropriety even destroys the credibility of that purported search for truth, if the search can only die at the false thing(s).
There is one and one only solution for 1) inflation and deflation, 2) systemic manipulation of the cost or value of property or money, and 3) inherent, irreversible multiplication of debt in proportion to the circulation. These are *all* the problems which confront us; and I hereby challenge Ron Paul yet again to debate that with me.
In fact you see, he dares not even write an article attempting to disprove so, because that would certify forever how inept such ideas are that *spending* tax dollars for instance is “inflationary.” No one here can say that the costlessness of money (”creating money out of thin air”) either is a thing which damages us; in the case Mr. Paul usually applies this further assertion to, it is instead the fact the currency is subject to interest which damages us; and yet “somehow” Mr. Paul dares not reply to my research which establishes this against his perpetual hollow assertions.
Likewise, returning to the gold standard will not only lose all our gold and engender a different kind of inflation and deflation because the value of commerce vacillates in relation to a relatively fixed quantity of monetary reserves, but the fixed monetary reserves will fail to sustain the much greater quantity of commerce we are capable of.
This therefore is irresponsible politics, much as I otherwise like and admire the man. I say he could have served the American People far better if he would have united with me, if he would even discuss the mathematic perfection of economy.
Why he will not, I now know at least by three things: his evasion of these critical issues, his lack of an answer, and his perpetual controversial assertions.
A republican form of government only survives as such if the people enforce their purported representatives’ accountability. So, the question is, who of you understand this statement which asserts truly first that Americans are hurt when they pay taxes, and secondly, that they are injured when the government spends the money?
Why does no one, and particularly, why do Ron Paul supporters not question the second assertion?
After all, even if we were to misconstrue “inflation,” is there even an increase in circulation but equal to the decrease of the first injury? Or would you rectify the latter injury by *not* spending the tax dollars back into circulation?
If the opposition weren’t even more inept, they would be herniating from laughter.
But no Ron Paul, you are not advocating solution.