ONE WANTED to bring up the economic stimulus option of the candidates. One would like to start with the economic stimulus option of Barack Obama. Barack Obama announced on the campaign trail a two hundred and ten billion dollar reform package with the intention of jump starting the economy and creating jobs. Sixty billion dollars will go to a “bank that will rebuild the infrastructure of highways, hospitals, and highways.” One hundred and fifty billion dollars will go to the creation of a “green economically sound professional class.” The question is where will the money come from?
Hillary Rodham Clinton accused Barack Obama of taking her economic reform package as his own. So I would ask Hillary Rodham Clinton where we would get the money.
John McCain, before his recent problems with a lobbyist, outlined an economic plan that would do the following: reduce the corporate tax rate from 25 to 15 per cent, allow a deduction for the first year of investment in equipment and technology, and the establishment of a permanent tax credit. John McCain also missed an important Senate meeting, which was discussing the provisions of an economic package, which would benefit his voter base of seniors and disabled veterans. Because of his absence, seniors and disabled vets have to contend with a ‘lighter’ version of an economic stimulus package. In addition, 100 years in Iraq is not an economic stimulus but a road to a long nightmare for our future generations. All of this in light of the fact that John McCain was absent in 56.7 per cent of the four hundred and fifty votes and the one hundred and tenth Congress. I was unable to gauge the economic reform package of Huckabee but Ron Paul had one economic package that almost made sense.
Ron Paul is in favour of reducing the tax burden with the elimination of taxes that punish investment and savings, and this includes job-killing corporate taxes. Ron Paul wants a Spending Reform that eliminates wasteful spending, reduces commitments overseas, and freeze all non-defenses, non-entitlement spending at their current levels. Ron Paul is also in favour of an open and transparent Federal Reserve with its meetings televised and a return to the silver and gold standard. Ron Paul is also in favour of repealing the Sarbanes/Oxley regulations that force businesses to leave the USA for better investment opportunities elsewhere.
George Phillies has an economic policy, which starts with the reduction and abolition of unnecessary spending on government agencies that are not giving back in service what they receive with the money from taxpayers. George Phillies also believes that the War on Iraq has been an economic drain and is in favour of withdrawing from Iraq and other countries where the United States is not needed in order to concentrate on the infrastructure. He proposes making the motto of the United States of America: “We cannot afford that.” I am in agreement with that statement and would go further by reducing wasteful spending from politicians to special interest groups. Another concept would be to allow the communities to generate their own revenue and spend it as they see fit.
We are owners of our own destiny and we have no need for excess government spending that will convert us into a poor country. It is for this reason that George Phillies and the Libertarian Party make sense for America.
