By RonPaul.com on June 26, 2006
by Ron Paul
The United Nations is holding a conference beginning this week in New York that ironically coincides with our national 4th of July holiday. It’s ironic because those attending the conference want to do away with one of our most fundamental constitutional freedoms—the right to bear arms. The stated goal of the conference is to eliminate trading in small arms, but the real goal is to advance a worldwide gun control movement that ultimately supercedes national laws, including our own 2nd Amendment. Many UN observers believe the conference will set the stage in coming years for an international gun control treaty. Fortunately, U.S. gun owners have responded with an avalanche of letters to the American delegation to the conference, asking that none of our tax dollars be used to further UN anti-gun proposals.
But we cannot discount the growing power of international law, whether through the UN, the World Trade Organization, or the NAFTA and CAFTA treaties. Gun rights advocates must understand that the forces behind globalism are hostile toward our Constitution and national sovereignty in general. Our 2nd Amendment means nothing to UN officials. Domestically, the gun control movement has lost momentum in recent years. The Democratic Party has been conspicuously silent on the issue in recent elections because they know it’s a political loser.
In the midst of declining public support for new gun laws, more and more states have adopted concealed-carry programs. The September 11th terrorist attacks and last summer’s hurricanes only made matters worse for gun control proponents, as millions of Americans were starkly reminded that we cannot rely on government to protect us from criminals. So it makes sense that perhaps the biggest threat to gun rights in America today comes not from domestic lawmakers, but from abroad. For more than a decade the United Nations has waged a campaign to undermine Second Amendment rights in America. UN Secretary General Kofi Annan has called on members of the Security Council to address the “easy availability” of small arms and light weapons, by which he means all privately owned firearms. In response, the Security Council released a report calling for a comprehensive program of worldwide gun control, a report that admonishes the U.S. and praises the restrictive gun laws of Red China and France! It’s no surprise that UN officials dislike what they view as our gun culture. After all, these are the people who placed a huge anti-gun statue on American soil at UN headquarters in New York.
The statue depicts a pistol with the barrel tied into a knot, a not-too-subtle message aimed squarely at the U.S. They believe in global government, and armed people could stand in the way of their goals. They certainly don’t care about our Constitution or the Second Amendment. But the conflict between the UN position on private ownership of firearms and our Second Amendment cannot be reconciled. How can we as a nation justify our membership in an organization that is actively hostile to one of our most fundamental constitutional rights? What if the UN decided that free speech was too inflammatory and should be restricted? Would we discard the First Amendment to comply with the UN agenda? The UN claims to serve human freedom and dignity, but gun control often serves as a gateway to tyranny. Tyrants from Hitler to Mao to Stalin have sought to disarm their own citizens, for the simple reason that unarmed people are easier to control. Our Founders, having just expelled the British army, knew that the right to bear arms serves as the guardian of every other right. This is the principle so often ignored by both sides in the gun control debate. Only armed citizens can resist tyrannical government.
»crosslinked«
Processing your request, Please wait....
Posted in Ron Paul's Writings, Texas Straight Talk | Tagged Gun Control, Second Amendment |
By RonPaul.com on June 19, 2006
by Ron Paul
Let me ask you a question: Do you think you pay enough taxes? Throughout the year you paid federal taxes through withholding, including Social Security payroll taxes. You also paid state income taxes, unless you’re fortunate enough to live in Texas or another state without an income tax. You paid local property taxes. You paid local sales taxes every time you bought something, and you paid numerous miscellaneous taxes such as vehicle license fees and federal gas taxes. Like most people, you probably feel taxed to death by all these city, county, state, and federal taxes. Well, hold on to your wallets, because the United Nations now wants to impose a whole new level of global taxes on us. UN bureaucrats think rich nations like America ought to give more money to poor nations- a lot more- simply because we’re rich. Never mind the billions of foreign aid tax dollars we send overseas every year; never mind the billions donated to overseas charities by Americans, the most charitable people on earth.
The UN mindset blames the western world for poverty everywhere, assuming that our relative wealth must have come at the expense of the third world. The poor countries themselves are never deemed responsible for their own predicaments, despite their often corrupt governments, lack of property rights, and hostility toward wealth-producing capitalism. Somehow, it’s always our fault. So the UN holds conferences to talk about how we should pay to make things right, and the idea of a UN tax naturally arises. Understand that the UN views itself as the emerging global government, and like all governments, it needs money to operate. The goal, which the UN readily admits, is to impose a comprehensive set of global laws on all of us- laws that supersede sovereign national governments. To do this, the UN needs a global military, a global police force, international courts, offices around the globe, and plenty of highly-paid international bureaucrats. All of this costs money. Rest assured that the UN is absolutely serious about imposing a global tax.
In fact, it has been discussing a global currency tax for years. The “Tobin tax,” named after the Yale professor who proposed it, would be imposed on all worldwide currency transactions. Such a tax could prove quite lucrative for the UN. The Tobin tax is not the only idea being considered. Some have suggested taxing all airline travel or carbon emissions. The ultimate goal is an income tax, which will be imposed after we’ve all swallowed the concept of UN taxing authority. Fortunately, the House of Representatives last week passed my language in the 2007 Foreign Operations bill that prohibits the Treasury from paying UN dues if the organization attempts to implement or impose any kind of tax on US citizens. But that only protects us for another year. Given the stated goals of the UN, it would be foolish to believe the idea of a global tax will go away.
Processing your request, Please wait....
Posted in Ron Paul's Writings, Tax Freedom, Texas Straight Talk | Tagged Tobin Tax, United Nations |
By RonPaul.com on June 12, 2006
by Ron Paul
The U.S. Senate had a golden opportunity to repeal the federal estate tax last week, but fell a few votes short. I fear that vote might represent the high-water mark in the movement to get rid of this destructive tax once and for all. Fortunately, estate taxes no longer devour 60% of some individuals’ wealth when they die. Congress passed legislation in 2001 that reduced estate tax rates and increased the amount of assets exempt from the tax. Yet Congress has been unable to abolish the estate tax altogether, and due to a political compromise the old rates will be back in effect come 2011 unless Congress acts first. The estate tax raises very little money.
In fact, even at its height the estate tax accounted for only a little more than 1% of federal revenues. A congressional Joint Economic committee report estimates that Americans spend as much avoiding estate taxes—paying attorneys and accountants—as they do paying estate taxes. A study by a Stanford professor concluded that “True revenues associated with estate taxation may well have been near zero, or even negative.” It’s no longer a matter of tax policy or economics—the arguments in favor of the estate tax have all been demolished. Instead, the estate tax survives purely because of politics. The real motivation behind the estate tax is a deep-seated hostility to property rights, and a misguided fear of family dynasties. But people don’t keep money in mattresses anymore. Money inherited from an estate is either spent, saved, or invested—all of which are better for the economy than sending it to Washington, where bureaucratic overhead consumes at least 50 cents of every dollar.
If you truly own your property, you have the right to dispose of it any way you wish. You can sell it, give it away, or direct who will receive it when you die. This control is the essence of property rights. If you can’t control what happens to your property, you don’t really own it. That’s why the estate tax is so destructive. Since people don’t want the government controlling their property when they die, they twist themselves into pretzels finding ways to avoid turning assets over to the IRS. Some create elaborate trusts to minimize their taxes, supporting the economically wasteful estate-planning industry. Others simply lose their entrepreneurial spark, stop working, and spend their money– succumbing to a “die broke” attitude. Again, the issue is control. People who have worked hard to build wealth simply cannot stand to see government take a big chunk of their assets when they die, so they do anything they can–even economically harmful things—to prevent it. This is what supporters of the estate tax cannot seem to understand. For smaller, family-owned farms and ranches, the estate tax is especially threatening. Such operations may be worth several million dollars when the value of land, livestock, buildings, and equipment are considered. Yet when the owner dies, his heirs often do not have liquid cash to pay a hefty tax bill.
As a result, all or part of the family business may be sold to pay the IRS. This has accelerated the trend toward corporate ownership of American farms and ranches. As William Beach at the Heritage Foundation summarizes, the estate tax does four things– all of which are bad for the economy and frankly un-American: First, it discourages savings and investment. Second, it undermines job creation and wage growth. Third, it stifles investment. Forth, it contradicts a central premise of American life, namely, building wealth and “getting ahead.” For all of these reasons, it’s time to get rid of the estate tax once and for all.
Processing your request, Please wait....
Posted in Ron Paul's Writings, Tax Freedom, Texas Straight Talk | Tagged Death Tax, Estate Tax |
By RonPaul.com on June 5, 2006
by Ron Paul
This week, Congress will vote to send more than 20 billion of your hard-earned dollars overseas, when it passes the Foreign Operations Appropriations bill for 2007. Our annual foreign aid bill is one of the most egregious abuses of the taxpayer I can imagine. Not only is it an unconstitutional burden on America’s working families, but this yearly attempt to buy friends and influence foreign governments is counterproductive and actually results in less goodwill toward the United States overseas.
Why is foreign aid so bad? Isn’t it our obligation to help those less fortunate? What is not mentioned by proponents of foreign aid is that it very seldom gets to those who need it most. Foreign aid is the transfer of US dollars from the treasury of the United States to the governments of foreign countries. It is money that goes to help foreign elites, who in turn spend much of it on contracts with US corporations. This means US tax dollars ultimately go to well-connected US corporations operating overseas. Foreign aid distorts foreign economies and props up bad governments. It breeds resentment among citizens of foreign countries, who see the United States as keeping oppressive governments in power. Also, it is important to remember that forced charity is not charity at all. While I believe strongly in the moral value of helping the less fortunate, charity must come voluntarily from the heart, not under threat from the IRS. This year’s bill is even worse than last year’s bill.
Aside from the almost 600 million dollar increase, the bill will spend half a billion dollars on something called the “Trade Capacity Enhancement Fund.” This is nothing but an enormous fund to bribe foreign governments to “liberalize” their trade policies. As one of the strongest proponents of free trade in Congress, I know well that open and free trade is its own reward. Countries that trade freely with each other are wealthier and far less likely to go to war. We shouldn’t kid ourselves: this new program is not about free trade. Its purpose is to encourage countries to enter into new so-called trade agreements with the US government. Government to government trade agreements produce government-managed trade relationships, which are not free trade at all. This fund is a colossal waste of money that will result in less free trade worldwide.
Also, this year Congress will nearly double funding for the monstrous Millennium Challenge program. This is billed as a different kind of foreign aid, in that it only goes to governments that pursue “free market” economic and social reforms. Of course this is a waste of money: governments that pursue wise economic policies will attract much more in foreign private investment than the US government can send them. The true reward for sound economic policies is increased prosperity. Foreign aid does not purchase that prosperity but in fact distorts internal markets and props up inefficient companies. Americans concerned about high taxes, out of control gas prices, and economic downturn should think hard about what the US government is doing with the money it takes from them. The greatest “foreign assistance” we can give to other countries is to demonstrate to the rest of the world that limited government and the rule of law ensure freedom and prosperity.
Processing your request, Please wait....
Posted in Foreign Policy, Ron Paul's Writings, Texas Straight Talk | Tagged Foreign Aid |
By RonPaul.com on May 29, 2006
by Ron Paul
The House of Representatives recently passed funding for a new federal mandate that threatens to put thousands of small farmers and ranchers out of business. The National Animal Identification System, known as NAIS, is an expensive and unnecessary federal program that requires owners of livestock– cattle, dairy, poultry, and even horses– to tag animals with electronic tracking devices. The intrusive monitoring system amounts to nothing more than a tax on livestock owners, allowing the federal government access to detailed information about their private property. In typical Washington-speak, NAIS is “voluntary”—provided USDA bureaucrats are satisfied with the level of cooperation.
Trust me, NAIS will be mandatory within a few years. When was the last time a new federal program did not expand once implemented? As usual, Congress is spending millions of dollars creating a complex non-solution to a very simple problem. NAIS will cost taxpayers at least $33 million for starters. Agribusiness giants support NAIS, because they want the federal government to create a livestock database and provide free industry data. But small and independent livestock owners face a costly mandate if NAIS becomes law.
Larger livestock operations will be able to tag whole groups of animals with one ID device. Smaller ranchers and farmers, however, will be forced to tag each individual animal, at a cost of anywhere from $3 to $20 per head. And NAIS applies to anyone with a single horse, pig, chicken, or goat in the backyard—no exceptions. NAIS applies to children in 4-H or FFA. Once NAIS becomes mandatory, any failure to report and tag an animal subjects the owner to $1,000 per day fines. NAIS also forces livestock owners to comply with new paperwork and monitoring regulations. These farmers and ranchers literally will be paying for an assault on their property and privacy rights, as NAIS empowers federal agents to enter and seize property without a warrant– a blatant violation of the 4th amendment. NAIS is not about preventing mad cow or other diseases.
States already have animal identification systems in place, and virtually all stockyards issue health certificates. Since most contamination happens after animals have been sold, tracing them back to the farm or ranch that sold them won’t help find the sources of disease. More than anything, NAIS places our family farmers and ranchers at an economic disadvantage against agribusiness and overseas competition. As dairy farmer and rancher Bob Parker stated, NAIS is “too intrusive, too costly, and will be devastating to small farmers and ranchers.” NAIS means more government, more regulations, more fees, more federal spending, less privacy, and diminished property rights. It’s exactly the kind of federal program every conservative, civil libertarian, animal lover, businessman, farmer, and rancher should oppose. The House has already acted, but there’s still time to tell the Senate to dump NAIS. Please call your Senators and tell them you oppose spending even one dime on the NAIS program in the 2007 agriculture appropriations bill.
Processing your request, Please wait....
Posted in Civil Liberties, Ron Paul's Writings, Texas Straight Talk | Tagged National Animal Identification System |
By RonPaul.com on May 22, 2006
by Ron Paul
In recent weeks the Bush administration has stated its willingness to use diplomacy in dealing with Iran, which is a welcome change from previous policy. Let’s hope it’s more than just a change in tone. With ongoing wars in Iraq and Afghanistan costing more than $5 billion per week, record levels of federal spending and debt, and oil hovering around $70 per barrel, American taxpayers certainly cannot afford another war. Iran, like Iraq, is a major source of global oil. For all our posturing, the truth is that worldwide crude prices would spike rapidly if we attacked Iran. With summer coming, demand will increase and gas prices at the pump will be over $3 for most of the nation.
Airlines are raising ticket prices to compensate for jet fuel prices that have nearly doubled in a year. A strike on Iran in coming months would create serious trouble for an American economy that is already struggling with high energy prices. It’s time for a foreign policy based on reality, a foreign policy that serves the interests of ordinary Americans. The reality is that we will continue to use oil as a major source of energy in this country for the foreseeable future, and therefore the health of our economy will be affected by the price of oil. Like it or not, some of that oil will continue to come from the Middle East even if we get serious about tapping domestic sources.
The US has not used diplomacy with Iran for nearly 26 years, since the hostage crisis of the Carter era. But this “no negotiation” stance hasn’t worked: Iran’s defiant behavior continues, and its uranium enrichment program has not been dismantled. Is Iran a nuclear threat? Not according to our own CIA, which says Iran is years away from developing nuclear weapons. This is not to say we should sit back as nuclear weapons proliferate in the Middle East. But we shouldn’t allow war hawks to wildly overstate the threat posed by Iran, as they did with Iraq. Since 2001 we have spent over $300 billion occupying Afghanistan and Iraq. We’re poorer but certainly not safer for it. We removed the Taliban from power in Afghanistan– much to the delight of the Iranians, who consider the Taliban an arch enemy. Warlords now control the country, operating a larger drug trade than ever before. Similarly in Iraq, our ouster of Saddam Hussein will allow the majority Shia to claim leadership title if Iraq’s election actually leads to an organized government.
This delights the Iranians, who are close allies of the Iraqi Shia. Talk about unintended consequences! This war has produced chaos, civil war, death and destruction, and huge financial costs. It has eliminated two of Iran’s worst enemies, and placed power in Iraq with Iran’s best friends. Even this apparent failure of policy does nothing to restrain the current march toward a similar confrontation with Iran. What will it take for us to learn from our failures? Government power in Iran is divided, and President Ahmadinejad—the man responsible for hateful comments about Israel- does not control their nuclear policy. We should ignore him as a pariah, and deal instead with Ali Larijani, head of Iran’s National Security Council, who has made several reasonable statements about the US and shows a desire to have direct diplomatic talks. Discussions with Iran are not appeasement. On the contrary, dialogue is needed to explain clearly that America’s objectives of non-proliferation and peace in the Middle East will not be compromised. 25 years of isolating Iran has moved us farther from, not closer to, achieving those objectives.
Processing your request, Please wait....
Posted in Foreign Policy, Ron Paul's Writings, Texas Straight Talk | Tagged Iran |
Recent Comments
4:54 pm: "they all fear Ron Paul because he tells the truth and he has a lot of support from the American..." - terry hill
4:51 pm: "H cliton didn’t inherit anything ,she helped create the situation in the first place. She is..." - terry hill
4:41 pm: "yeh you’ve been white washed, i have a problem wiv that ;ol" - Proctor Chatanooga
4:15 pm: "Maybe I read that wrong but don’t dot-heads already rule all 7/11′s?" - l3etterlife
3:53 pm: "i would like to bang hillary clinton" - MrLeagueGamerFTW
4:40 pm: "-Deny deny deny -Whistleblower exposes them -Deny deny deny…. its only for statistical..." - doug lothier
4:26 pm: "Its OK if you are White?! Hispanic Caucus refuses to assist Puerto Rican family against the IRS! There..." - Pab Marq
3:26 pm: "Idiot." - Emily Yacobian
4:24 pm: "I just read in the Arizona Republic that we are having peace talks with the Taliban. Interesting..." - Anon ymous
4:14 pm: "Don’t make fun of him…he is obviously mentally ill!" - Veggamattic
4:11 pm: "Shame on America for not voting this man into office!" - nin6246
4:10 pm: "He’s not wearing a suit dumbass." - Emily Yacobian
3:50 pm: "Liberals feel the same way about Neo-Libs that you feel about Neo-Cons, there is a lot of common ground..." - Dorn94
4:09 pm: "4th Amendment protest schedule for US cities at: Reddit r/restorethefourth" - Wall Street
3:50 pm: "So, what is the answer if we can’t propose a mathematically balanced equation? The underlying..." - T.E. Sumner
3:43 pm: "RON PAUL – THE BEST PRESIDENT WE SHOULD HAVE HAD!" - Paraiba blue
3:22 pm: "All you conspiracy people should be focuses on a whole different line of reasoning. You should be..." - xxxselectum
3:13 pm: "That is why I kind of laugh at alot of these posts that are on here, talking about how the Fed is..." - xxxselectum
3:11 pm: "Also, it is easy to say “let the dud companies go broke”, but if that were allow to..." - xxxselectum
3:10 pm: "Me" - Jesse T