I liked it! He challenged a lot of my ideas, and I do not agree with him on several issues. However, he is consistent. That’s a big deal to me. He believes things for a reason.
Here’s a “for instance.” He thinks we should abolish the income tax, and asserts that it does not need to be replaced with something else. That’s revolutionary! He says that such a move would reduce the Federal Government’s income by 40%. To return to a time when the Feds spent 40% less money than they do now, we would have to go back to … (here’s the zinger)… 1997.
2 comments:
That's what I liked about Ron Paul too. He is very consistent.
So, 1997. What does that mean? Clinton was better at being conservative than Bush?
I also listened to one of Milton's videos. Free To Choose. Very free thinking guy.. literally. The Hong Kong example was probably the thing that hit home the most for me. I know fiscal conservatism is the correct way but as you know I lean extremely left on social issues.
But even writing that, it doesn't make since. If fiscal conservatism means less rules for business why would social conservatism mean more rules for individuals... ie. drugs, gay marriage, prostitution, abortions, euthanasia, Gambling... etc.
It doesn't make since. I like less rules, but it should be across the board.
For all I know, Clinton may have been more fiscaly conservative than Bush, but these numbers don't prove it. Back in 1997, Clinton's budget was spending our income tax dollars as fast and furiously as Bush's is.
I'm glad you checked out Milton. He is amazing. Keep watching, you will continue to be impressed.
As far as social conservatism, I'm going to have to think about that. I know that Ron Paul is for the legalization of drugs. I think he leans libertarian. Also, I oppose the Federal Government's making any law regarding marriage, abortions or euthenasia. I have always believed that those issues were for the state governments to decide.
I'll have to think about why it is intellectually consistent to support free markets on the one hand and to petition the government to legislate morality on the other.
Post a Comment