Reason Magazine
- reason.com
- reason.tv
- reason.org
- Donate
- Site Search:
Reason on Facebook
Reason on Twitter
Reason on YouTube
Reason RSSGet Reason E-mail Updates!
Manage your Reason e-mail list subscriptionsadvertisements
Ron Paul Interviewed by Time: Video
Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) sits down with Time for a six-minute Q&A video that covers topics ranging from auditing the Fed ("You could call the Federal Reserve a conspiracy") to decriminalizing pot ("Why criminalize marijuana?" he responds) to media bias to his part in the Bruno movie ("No one likes to be tricked") to the wrongness of the income tax ("If you concede the principle of the income tax, you concede the government owns all your income") to Obama's Iraq and Afghanistan ("every bit as bad as the last administration") and much more.
Watch the full interview:
Hat tip: Walter Riley.
Richard Hoste|9.18.09 @ 10:07AM|#
I thought Ron Paul was a RACIST (the
word deserves the Caps, italics and bold) who all respectable
people should hate for not worshiping at the alter of Martin Luther
King.
And he actually got mad when Bruno hit on him. Paul even called him
a queer, when a true libertarian would've said
"I'm straight but not narrow" and used the story to illustrate
how progressive he is.
Spoonman|9.18.09 @ 10:11AM|#
Honestly on the Bruno thing, he's an old man who has some old man flaws. It does not affect the validity of his economic thought.
Richard Hoste|9.18.09 @ 10:16AM|#
Honestly on the Bruno thing, he's an old man who has some
old man flaws. It does not affect the validity of his economic
thought.
Yes, everybody knows that when young men get hit on in a hotel room
by another guy they like it.
Warty,
How's hating yourself going for you?
Xeones|9.18.09 @ 10:32AM|#
"If you concede the principle of the income tax, you concede
the government owns all your income"
FTW!
|9.18.09 @ 10:33AM|#
I wish that he talked more about those New Hampshire ads that show white people going into buildings and talking about how glad they were to google Ron Paul.
Elemenope|9.18.09 @ 10:37AM|#
"If you concede the principle of the income tax, you concede
the government owns all n% of your
your income after taxes"
Fixed for...um, accuracy.
Elemenope|9.18.09 @ 10:38AM|#
Wanting to audit the Fed is a good idea, and one that has some cross aisle support if I'm not mistaken.
|9.18.09 @ 10:42AM|#
Jaybird | September 18, 2009, 10:33am | #
I wish that he talked more about those New Hampshire ads that show
white people going into buildings and talking about how glad they
were to google Ron Paul.
Did he mention them at all? I may have to watch when I get home.
Those ads are near the top of my list of how he misspent my money
and fucked his campaign. I've not heard him speak to how anyone
ever thought they were a good idea.
Mike in PA|9.18.09 @ 10:46AM|#
How about Peter Schiff entering the Conn. Senate race?
Could you imagine a Senator? From Conneticut?!! This guy's got to
be elected!
robc|9.18.09 @ 10:46AM|#
one that has some cross aisle support if I'm not
mistaken.
Considering cross-aisle controls both houses, apparently not.
Or, at least, not enough.
Or, at least, not in the leadership. For example, on the other
side, if you switch leadership positions of Bunning and McConnell,
TARP doesnt pass.
If Pelosi supported auditing the Fed as strongly as Paul does, it
would have already passed (the House).
robc|9.18.09 @ 10:47AM|#
Mike,
Dont forget Linda McMahon is in the Conn senate race. I assume on
the GOP side.
Not sure of her politics, other than pro-steroid.
|9.18.09 @ 10:53AM|#
Stop hating yourself, Xeones.
I will hate you, for a relatively meagre honorarium.
LibertyMark|9.18.09 @ 10:54AM|#
I thought that was one of RP's best interviews. I have a
suspicion that he knew the questions ahead of time and so was able
to get his thought in order a little more than usual.
I was actually touched by his explanation of the Bruno thing. Which
is, it's better to have a surplus of trust, such that you may get
tricked from time to time, than to have not enough trust where
everyone around you becomes a demon in disguise.
robc|9.18.09 @ 10:54AM|#
lmnop,
No, RP was right. The principle of the income tax gives full
ownership to DC, they then just allow you to keep a portion of it.
But, the pinciple has no bounds (As the 94% bracket that once
existed makes clear).
|9.18.09 @ 10:56AM|#
"How about Peter Schiff entering the Conn. Senate race?"
Just started his new book this morning.
|9.18.09 @ 10:59AM|#
Sorry, Ele, but robc has the right of it.
A mugger is no less a mugger if he deigns to leave you cab fare
home.
Xeones|9.18.09 @ 11:03AM|#
RACIST
You got me. Fortunately, Wartism is truly the last socially
acceptable prejudice.
kinnath|9.18.09 @ 11:04AM|#
Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde . . .
Every time I see Ron Paul sit down in a chair and have conservation
with someone I want him to be in charge of everything.
But the guy that kept running one hideous campaign ad and after
another in 2008 was an embarassement.
So which is the real Ron Paul?
robc|9.18.09 @ 11:05AM|#
Was just looking thru historical tax rates. The 1913 tax
brackets, even without adjusting for inflation, would be awesome
today:
1% tax on 0-$20k
2% on 20k-50k
3% on 50k-75k
4% on 75k-100k
5% on 100k-250k
6% on 250k-500k
7% on 500k+
robc|9.18.09 @ 11:06AM|#
Maybe we can have a throwback tax rate year like sports teams do throwback uniforms.
robc|9.18.09 @ 11:06AM|#
kinnath,
Why should a guy who knows how to run things also know how to
campaign? Two separate skill sets, IMO.
kinnath|9.18.09 @ 11:08AM|#
The 1913 tax brackets, even without adjusting for inflation,
would be awesome today:
My father tells me the original ammendment that authorized the
income tax was going to have an upper limit; but it was removed
because people felt it would encourage the government to raise the
tax rate up to the limit.
Oops
|9.18.09 @ 11:08AM|#
Every time I see Ron Paul sit down in a chair and have
conservation with someone I want him to be in charge of
everything.
But the guy that kept running one hideous campaign ad and after
another in 2008 was an embarassement.
So he's the complete opposite of Dear Leader.
|9.18.09 @ 11:09AM|#
kinnath, The Greatest Campaigner Evar!!! is our president. Poor campaigning does not mean Ron Paul would suck as president just as great campaigning does not make Obama good at being president, or ever right about anything, for that matter.
|9.18.09 @ 11:09AM|#
Excuse me but what the fuck would auditing the Fed accomplish? So what if we found accounting irregularities or outright fraud? It isn't like anyone would fucking do anything. If a Representative gets admonished for telling the fucking truth about BO, you really think anything would get done about the fed?
Joe M|9.18.09 @ 11:12AM|#
What's interesting is that the top marginal rate bracket jumped from 7% to 77% in three years.
kinnath|9.18.09 @ 11:12AM|#
Why should a guy who knows how to run things also know how
to campaign? Two separate skill sets, IMO.
It comes down to who Ron Paul hired to run his campaign.
It wasn't the production values of the campaign ads that were a
failure; it was the content. I could never reconcile Ron Paul's
conversations with Ron Paul's campaing message.
mark|9.18.09 @ 11:12AM|#
Excuse me but what the fuck would auditing the Fed
accomplish?
You're kidding right? Even one questionable secret deal with the
Swiss and their goose is cooked.
It isn't like anyone would fucking do anything.
Why the fuck does anyone do anything at all in DC? Usually things
happen when the media din is too loud because of something too big
to ignore. Like secret overseas deals and what have you.
|9.18.09 @ 11:14AM|#
The 1913 tax brackets, even without adjusting for inflation,
would be awesome today:
But we'd have a home mortgage interest deduction, right?
|9.18.09 @ 11:15AM|#
If the Fed is audited and it turns out they are screwing us, then maybe the general public will start to listen to the guy who wrote the bill. How is that bad for us?
kinnath|9.18.09 @ 11:18AM|#
kinnath, The Greatest Campaigner Evar!!! is our president.
Poor campaigning does not mean Ron Paul would suck as president
just as great campaigning does not make Obama good at being
president, or ever right about anything, for that
matter.
Obama is an empty suit. Looks great, no content.
Ron Paul's problem was the Jekyll/Hyde thing he had going -- he had
two dramatically different types of content that were presented to
the public.
I was precinct captain for Ron Paul during the Iowas Caucauses, and
I have no regrets about that. But remembering the campaign ads
still makes me cringe.
|9.18.09 @ 11:25AM|#
Why should a guy who knows how to run things also know how
to campaign? Two separate skill sets, IMO.
HEY!
creech|9.18.09 @ 11:40AM|#
Mr. hoste, just this morning I heard RP praise Martin Luther
King for his non-violent tactics.
He urged us, to use Rand's words, to withdraw the sanction of the
victim.
His campaign was run by mostly amateurs. The campaign exceeded well
beyond anyone's expectations, and took off so fast, that it was
difficult to recruit the pros, so RP had to recruit from the minor
leaguers who weren't worried about their future reputation for
having worked with a certain loser.
kinnath|9.18.09 @ 11:42AM|#
. . . so RP had to recruit from the minor leaguers who
weren't worried about their future reputation for having worked
with a certain loser.
Doesn't matter. RP should have controlled his message. I would
expect amateurs to make shitting ads that were sort of on message,
not an entirely differnt message.
Your Favorite Queer|9.18.09 @ 11:44AM|#
"And he actually got mad when Bruno hit on him. Paul even called
him a queer, when a true libertarian would've said "I'm straight
but not narrow" and used the story to illustrate how progressive he
is."
Hey dipshit, queer is the preferred self-identifier of young gays
now. It makes the older gays a bit uncomfortable, but the kids have
reclaimed it.
Kiss kiss!
YFQ
T|9.18.09 @ 11:44AM|#
Sweet'n'Low, it's surprisingly easy.
All it takes is dedication and focus.
Or, in my case, an overabundance of hatred such that anything in
range can be an appropriate target.
Barack Obama|9.18.09 @ 11:53AM|#
There are those who say, "Why should a guy who knows how to run
things also know how to campaign? Two separate skill sets,
IMO."
I couldn't agree more.
PS "Dick" "Host" Tee hee!
robc|9.18.09 @ 12:03PM|#
P Brooks,
I would have to look up 1913 specifically, but in many of the early
years ALL interest was deductible.
robc|9.18.09 @ 12:04PM|#
The home mortgage interest deduction wasnt a special interest add-on, it was what was a special interest fight to keep when the rest of the interest was taken away as a deductiion. If the CC industry had been bigger, Im sure more of it would have survived.
T|9.18.09 @ 12:05PM|#
I would have to look up 1913 specifically, but in many of
the early years ALL interest was deductible.
Wasn't credit card interest deductible until Reagan?
|9.18.09 @ 12:35PM|#
I thought the original income tax was essentially a flat tax, and that the exclusions and deductions were a result of the increase in the tax rate; but I was probably wrong.
robc|9.18.09 @ 12:39PM|#
1913 tax
form
#2 on the deductions was "All interest paid within year on personal
indebtedness of taxpayer".
robc|9.18.09 @ 12:47PM|#
The deductions (other than the personal deduction) did not apply
to the "normal" tax, which was the first 1%.
Dividends were taxed at the normal tax rate, but then were part of
the deductions towards the "super" tax (their term, not mine).
Capital gains, it appears, were regular income while dividends
werent.
Assuming Im reading tax instructions correctly. Form 1040 was only
4 pages in 1913, but that doesnt mean it is completely easy to
understand.
|9.18.09 @ 12:49PM|#
The hostile tone of "discussion" on this page is discouraging...
and not fitting the name of the site and its slogan.
BTW, Nick: I very much enjoyed your interview with Judge Napolitano
on Freedom Watch this week.
robc|9.18.09 @ 12:51PM|#
Drink!
I just finished teaching for the week, setting up for a class next
week, so I can join in the drinking festivities in about 20
minutes.
Warty|9.18.09 @ 1:11PM|#
The hostile tone of "discussion" on this page is
discouraging... and not fitting the name of the site and its
slogan.
That's how we roll around here. It's like a mosh pit, and
Lonewacko, Dick Hoste, and Underzog are like the high school
football player meatheads who aim elbows at people's faces. Fuck
them.
|9.18.09 @ 1:58PM|#
losses due to shipwreck.
Do German torpedoes fall into the category of "shipwreck"?
T|9.18.09 @ 2:24PM|#
Sigh. I miss the prog threads.
Post up a link, then. Emulate Warty.
Wait, did I really just offer that as advice?
|9.18.09 @ 2:34PM|#
It's worth noting that in 1913 a basic exemption of $3000 meant
that most people that worked for wages paid no income tax.
According to here, anyway.
$3000 in 1913 = $65,404.24 in 2009.
Rate of inflation change since 1913 = 2080.1%
But that's old news to Hit and Runners, isn't it.
|9.18.09 @ 2:45PM|#
Thanks for the data on income taxes ROBC and Joe M. I'd liek to
add another link though.
I get a little peeved that when many people discuss tax history,
they focus almost exclusively on income tax.
However, payroll taxes have grown from less than 9% of the
government revenues to almost 40% in the last 40 years. Payroll
taxes steal almost as much from the people as income taxes and the
growth rates are far greater.
Federal Revenue History
Does anyone else get annoyed at Republicans who claim that "rich
people pay all the taxes" while pretending that payroll taxes don't
even exist?
When a MSM liberal is arguing agaisnt he republicans you can be
sure they will never mention payroll taxes in his rebuttal, because
hey....the MSM liberals love payroll taxes!
IMO the 10% of Democrats who have legitimately high IQ's are far
more ready to turn libertarian when we rail against the Democrat
and Republican hypocrisy related to payroll taxes, than when we
focus exclusively on income taxes.
Middle class republicans (40-70k/yr)pay as much or more of their
salaries to payroll taxes as they do to income taxes. This is a lot
of votes! why ignore that?
We always here about the great dangers of a rising wealth
disparity? isn't this classic MSM complaint an easy way of entering
into a discussion about eliminating payroll taxes?
When we rail against income taxes then we are easily written
off/smeared as republicans(which everyone knows are hippocrites).
We sidestep that mindless rebuttal by focussing on Democrats
actively trying to f*** the working poor and minorities with their
payroll taxes(especially the way it penalizes the coal miners and
inner city black men dying in their 40's, 50's and 60's...while
benefitting the healthy rich white people who live to be 70, 80 or
90.)
|9.18.09 @ 2:51PM|#
Payroll tax
history
See the upper cap rose $7,800 to $106,800 over the last 40 years a
factor of 13.6. While at teh same timet he tax raate rose from 9.6%
to 15.3%...this is massive growth! This is what made a big
impression on me from the first non-blackmarket jobs I had as a 18
year old.
Paul|9.18.09 @ 3:51PM|#
Wanting to audit the Fed is a good idea, and one that has
some cross aisle support if I'm not mistaken.
Not wanting to audit the fed seems pathalogically insane to me. To
actually believe that we have a government agency with that much
power over the economy that shouldn't be scrutinized-- even on
occasion-- shows how far from our original vision we've
strayed.
Homer Simpson|9.18.09 @ 4:34PM|#
Hey dipshit, queer is the preferred self-identifier of young gays now. It makes the older gays a bit uncomfortable, but the kids have reclaimed it.
You can't use that word! That's our word for you!
robc|9.18.09 @ 4:34PM|#
An unjustly criticized song from a justly panned album:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8NO8h_uTkdU&feature=related
|9.21.09 @ 2:41PM|#
Wasn't credit card interest deductible until
Reagan?
From the time of the Founding, I think. ;-)
Site comments/questions:
Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:
(310) 367-6109
Editorial & Production Offices:
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245