The Santa Ana Sentinel

Ron Paul: Republican business, as usual

Posted in Editorial, Election 2012 by Omar Ávalos Gallegos on January 16, 2012

“Real” change? What do you call giving the wealthiest Americans tax breaks, like those that make income on their Wall Street investments? Do you call that “real” change? Unless you’ve been living in isolation in this country and detached of any news, or if you’ve been living in some other country, do you not know that the Republican party is synonymous with giving the wealthy in this country tax breaks.

The latest example, one that Ron Paul pushes for, is the eliminating of capital gains taxes.

This type of tax applies to income made on the sale of real estate and investments, particularly investments made in the stock market, you know, places like Wall Street that have become as vilified as the word communism in modern times.

One can try to defend the elimination of capital gains taxes by saying that ordinary people can make investments and not get taxed on income made from that, or that they can sell property and not get taxed, but that does not answer the question of how much money the wealthiest make by doing these same things. How much more money do the wealthiest make on their Wall Street investments and their sales of large property?

Why would Paul be in favor of eliminating capital gains taxes? Because it is Republican business as usual with him, that’s why he was an “independent” gone Republican, because the ideals of Republicanism are what appeal to him. More of the same: no immigration reform, no DREAM act, and now no capital gains taxes?

That is the biggest pro Wall Street move you can make. Reward those that play the stock market, which let’s face it, are the wealthiest and those that have disposable income to invest, and not the majority that is struggling.

It’s one thing to spill verbiage in favor of Ron Paul, but to do it thinking that listing a pretentiously impressive x, y, and z topic that he’s in favor of just for the sake of listing and not thinking that readers won’t catch and see what’s wrong with the big picture is a nice try at best.

Ron Paul being in favor of eliminating capital gains taxes proves that he’s Republican business as usual, the type that bows to big money. The argument that he’s somehow different from other politicians because he’s against big money is now invalid.

4 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. J. González Solorio said, on January 16, 2012 at 8:34 pm

    His proposed cuts aren’t only in capital gains taxes, it’s on taxes across the board, including income tax, which benefits everyone, not only the rich. A fitting move at the time of the burst of the housing bubble would have been to cut capital gains taxes and work to at least lower, if not eliminate, income tax, for at least a year or two, rather than what Obama did—bail out Wall Street, and put the weight on the working class.

  2. Omar Ávalos Gallegos said, on January 16, 2012 at 8:53 pm

    He’s still a typical Republican bowing to big interests. Cutting taxes and spending is every Republican’s mantra. What else is new? It’s part of the package, one politician says, “Hey Joe, I’m going to lower your taxes, but the catch is, that I have this friend who wants me to cut his taxes too.”

    So think of this, if income taxes are eliminated, consumers (who are the majority) will make up for lost taxes with increased sales tax. Remember the saying, the only thing certain in life are death and taxes? We will never see a tax free United States.

    Where is the political will to implement the extreme solutions that many people want to see like raising taxes on the rich? They don’t exist. They certainly don’t exist in Ron Paul’s platform due to his wanting to do away with capital gains taxes.

    Let’s not conveniently overlook the fact that the housing crisis occurred prior to Obama, which means that it should have been Bush who implemented what you wanted to see. But, that would never have happened anyway given that he was from the Eliminate Capital Gains Tax, I mean, Republican party.

  3. J. González Solorio said, on January 16, 2012 at 9:38 pm

    I’m not for spending Republicans, or spending Democrats. Spending is the #1 problem in this country. It’s what killing the dollar. We don’t have money, and we keep taking more and more out, we need to suffer, there’s not other way, it’s simple math.

    A saying like that about taxes has no bearing on the actual situation. If you didn’t know, 0.0% of our taxes go into infrastructure, I’m not exaggerating or lying, it’s verifiable. It ALL goes towards paying PART of the interest we owe on the national debt. Cutting income tax will not affect our infrastructure one bit, at all. This action, of curtailing income tax, goes hand-in-hand with the reeling in of the Federal Reserve. The very nature of the Federal Reserve is to operate our country on debt. People don’t realize it’s a debt machine. Most of the funds that go into our country’s infrastructure come from property taxes, amongst a few other sources, but NOT income tax. Our reliance on the Federal Reserve can obviously not be eliminated overnight, but what we CAN do is not run deficit budgets, and make REAL cuts, that WILL hurt, but that will HEAL us in the long-run. Getting an antibiotic injection when one is plagued with an infection HURTS, but it HEALS us. Not instantly, but no further damage is allowed, and you go from there.

    Believing that you have punish those who make more with higher tax percentages goes completely against the concepts of the free market. I am absolutely against tax subsidies that only benefit large corporations, ones that aim to keep them here in the country, etc. But I am not against those that go across the board. Capital gains tax cuts benefit ALL businesses, not just those who employ more people. Income tax cuts benefit ALL individuals who work, not just those who make more. The act of a government punishing those who’ve legally (Wall Street would not qualify here) made a decent living, by taking a higher proportion of their earnings, and then giving those earnings to a group of the government’s own choosing, is corrupt. The very nature of a free market system, a free market in which acts like those perpetrated by Wall Street are not accepted and punished to the full extent of the law, is one which motivates people into advancing in their fields, which sparks ambition within them to innovate, create, and work hard, so they may improve their chances of becoming more prosperous and successful. I understand there are corrupt big businesses, and I agree those businesses should be held to all laws, and should be punished when guilty (like Wall Street was), but believing that those who become successful because of genuine hard work and business savvy is backward, it undermines the entire idea of freedom.

  4. J. González Solorio said, on January 16, 2012 at 9:44 pm

    There is no spending increase anywhere in Ron Paul’s platform, it’s all cuts, $1 trillion the first year, with the elimination of 5 departments, which will be a great start to curtailing the runaway bureaucracy that’s taken this nation hostage. Billions will be saved almost immediately when troops are brought back home from Afghanistan and from a great majority, if not all, 900 bases around the world. Those who criticize his proposal automatically believe this means we’ll be unsafe because of it, but the absolute opposite is true, and those in highest posts in the Defense Department and in Homeland Security agree that much of the terrorism we’ve suffered domestically has been a direct result of our meddling on Arab land that is considered sacred to them. We can’t even get our economy right, but we continue to spread ourselves all over the world, opening new bases everywhere, while we close bases here, which makes absolutely no sense at all.


Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: