Congressman Paul Introduces Bill for Fuel Efficient Cars

[nobody's_hero]

Haven't read the posts, but as long as someone has actually PAID $2,000 in Federal Income Tax, I don't mind backdoor ways of getting taxes returned, but how do you ensure that someone who didn't pay $2,000 in FIT is not getting the tax credit?

I knew I left one of my issues out earlier. Yes, that is another thing that rubs me the wrong way. Few people, if any, are actually researching what flows in or out. That was one reason I didn't support Ron's earmarks, as well. It is easy to argue that the money is just coming back into the rightful hands, but don't get upset when someone other than Ron Paul starts using that technique to justify a $1 million community park for every neighborhood in their district.

I'll wait for my tax credit for buying a used vehicle instead of taking out a loan that I couldn't repay and end up needing a bailout at other peoples' expense. I'd like to think it was a wise decision for me not to go into frivolous debt, but my good habits need to be reinforced by government incentive.

 

[Feenix566]

Stealing from people is never "good" for the "economy", no matter how much you want it to be.

Suppose someone proposed a bill that would give a full tax refund to anyone who voted for Obama. I suppose you would be in favor of this bill, given your hard-line stance that stealing is never "good" for the "economy". I mean, all they're doing is stealing less from some people, right?

 

[acptulsa]

I'd like to think it was a wise decision for me not to go into frivolous debt, but my good habits need to be reinforced by government incentive.

Well mine don't. And no incentive in the world will convince the neocons of my state that we don't need to go around kickin' the wurld's dawg ass, either. So, if Dr. Paul wants to convince a few disaffected liberals that all of D.C. is crooked and they should help get it cut down to size, well, we sure need them to fatten up our numbers at the next state G.O.P. convention.

So don't badmouth da man for trying to get me some of those. He's trying to do his part, just like I'm trying to do mine.

 

[werdd]

asdf

 

[rockandrollsouls]

I'm going to reserve judgement until I hear his explanation. I'm sure this is simply strategic since it sounds contrary to free market phiolosophy that Paul promotes. I'm not against this type of thing necessarely depending on the context and details. Sure enough, it sounds like massive climate change bullshit will be rammed down our throats with higher taxes and regulation. Perhaps this is a strategic maneuver to make the socialists look bad with their middle class destroying plan. This will also beat the RHINOs to the punch, when they offer a socialist lite proposal to the democrats. At the very least, I can see this as being a pretty shrewd political move on his part to expose the congress as radical socialist/fascists in bed with Monsanto.

Same. Though, from what I've read, I'm not sure I like it. We'll see, though.

 

[dannno]

Listen, guys, I've explained to you how this is bad for the economy. Others in this thread have, as well. If you don't get it, you don't get it. No amount of repeating myself is going to change that. You apparently don't care. So now you're supporting a bill that's bad for the economy. Obviously, the best interests of the economy are not your highest priority. Something else must be more important to you.

You can't tell me that a tax break is bad for the economy. I'm sorry, you can't. It is completely irrational. Have you ever taken an economics course?

 

[dannno]

I mean, all they're doing is stealing less from some people, right?

Exactly, so what's the problem??

They should steal less from others too, but that's no reason not to stop the looting in a specific area if possible. Not one.

Let's say your neighbor gets a $2,000 tax break on his new car. Maybe he'll spend it shopping at your electronics store. If the government had the money instead, what good would that do you??

In other words, we are putting more money in the hands of the people, who then use that money to drive the market. That is free economics. That is why this bill is pro-free market.

If you have taken economics, have you taken accounting? Do you know what a contra account is? This is like a like a contra account in the liabilities section of a balance sheet. More is good, even though it's on the liabilities side of the balance sheet. Once you twist your mind to understand the logic of what his happening here, you will see where Ron Paul is coming from. That is the biggest problem we had with the campaign, is that people are not educated enough on the issues to understand why he votes the way he does. Same with earmarks, only the people who were uneducated on the topic disagreed with him.

 

[Brian4Liberty]

I would generally classify this as corporate welfare. You are buying a car (buying a car is the only way to get this money). You get a tax rebate. The rebate comes from the government instead of the auto manufacturer or dealer. The auto industry saves the $2000 that they would have lost in order to provide that rebate discount. Essentially a government subsidy for a specific industry. Similar to how mortgage deductions have been nothing but government welfare for the housing/mortgage/banking industry (and extra incentive for the housing bubble, btw).

This would have been preferable to the bailouts already given to the automakers, but as President Obama's advisers would say, the horse is out of the barn already on that.

It should also be noted that this differs from the bailout money given to US automakers in that this rebate/tax deduction will apply to all manufacturers.

I look forward to hearing more about this proposal.

 

[devil21]

Stealing from people is never "good" for the "economy", no matter how much you want it to be.

I would generally classify this as corporate welfare. You are buying a car (buying a car is the only way to get this money). You get a tax rebate. The rebate comes from the government instead of the auto manufacturer or dealer. The auto industry saves the $2000 that they would have lost in order to provide that rebate discount. Essentially a government subsidy for a specific industry. Similar to how mortgage deductions have been nothing but government welfare for the housing/mortgage/banking industry (and extra incentive for the housing bubble, btw).

You're making a large assumption that the auto industry would cease rebates simply because of this tax break. I seriously doubt that would be the case. Keep in mind that 20% more fuel efficiency (probably based on EPA numbers on the sticker) is actually a pretty large hurdle for most people to achieve given current gas mileage averages in the mid to high 20mpg range. My 2002 SUV gets 25mpg highway so Id have to find a new car that gets at least 30mpg. That means I'd probably have to give up my SUV. Are SUV and truck owners going to willing give up their favorite style of car? If they're like me, then no, Ill keep my SUV. Basically I don't see the tax break being that wide scale that makers would cease other incentives like rebates, low financing, etc. They need to sell cars if they want to stay in business. What business they have left, at least.

But I digress. Yes, the auto companies do stand to gain some business because of a gov't stimulus proposal and I do see where some think this isn't free market economics. However, it still stands that no one is forced to take the rebate and trade in their current car. There's no mandate here.

 

[SimpleName]

I've seen similar moves by Paul. He often tries to maneuver ways to reduce the tax burden on citizens in whatever way possible. There is no penalty on people who do not take part in it, so nothing to worry about. He's just trying manipulate the tax lords and pull away as much power as possible. Still the same good ol' Dr. Paul

 

[MRoCkEd]

[Kludge] Dr. Paul should introduce a bill to cover the full costs of equipping a house with solar panels in tax deductions.
[Kludge] Sounds like a great idea!
[Kludge] Wait, wait -- let's give people no-sales-tax cards if they build a windmill!
[Kludge] Wait -- wait! I have another good idea... We should help society by covering healthcare with tax deductions!
[Kludge] We increase health AND lower taxes!

 

[idiom]

As long as you don't have to buy GM or Ford or something.

If you can unload your GM vehicle for a Toyota then then the bill is moving America forward.

 

[andrewh817]

It seems that this is an infringement on the free market. It will help companies that produce vehicles with high MPG and hurt those that don't. Perhaps with a $2000 credit the effect will be minimal, but this still rubs me the wrong way. I don't like the idea of the government influencing which corporations are successful.

Just wondering if those who are for this would have a problem with the credit being $5000? $10,000? $50,000? If so, why is $2000 okay but these higher amounts not? If not, surely you can see that some companies would have much higher profits while others would likely be put out of business.

If the credit was $10,000 couldn't you get a $30,000 car and then flip it for $25,000 to someone else using their $10,000 credit in turn selling it for $15,000 etc etc.....??

I don't know much about the tax system as I've never paid taxes so is this just a stretch of the imagination?

 

[anaconda]

RP has no problem legislating for tax credits. Any means of getting the money back to the people is at least a little push back against government theft.

 

[LibertyRevolution]

The auto industry and the banks are the only ones who will benefit from this bill.
People will buy into this bullshit and trade in their paid for old car for a nice new one with a 5 year car loan.
To make up for all the junk cars they are taking in on trade in, your decent trade in car will be worth $1000 less than it should be.
Dealerships will tack on an extra $1000 to the price of any fuel efficient car, because they know you got that rebate coming and can afford it.
In the end, the bank and the stealership will eat your rebate money.

 

[muh_roads]

We should have tax credits for as many things as possible. For all things made in the USA would be a good start.

 

[Brassmouth]

If you can't get rid of the income tax, at least find ways to give people there money back.

This justifies every form of redistribution of wealth known to man. Congrats, you're a socialist now.

People, Ron Paul is a politician. He will say or do anything to make sure he gets his votes, and (because he has a fawning internet following) his donation money.

Like the shrimp subsidies, and the other pork he inserts, this is how the State corrupts even the most well-intentioned of bureaucrats. This is why avoiding the State like the plague is the best method. This is why Peter Schiff will do far more harm than good if he gets elected.

Tax credits are not tax cuts. This is redistribution of wealth, for green cars, no less. Not even I thought Ron Paul would do something like this...

(Although given the hero-worship among you people, he can do just about anything and the lot of you will jump through hoops to justify it. Apparently, he's realized this.)

 

[idirtify]

This justifies every form of redistribution of wealth known to man. Congrats, you're a socialist now.

People, Ron Paul is a politician. He will say or do anything to make sure he gets his votes, and (because he has a fawning internet following) his donation money.

Like the shrimp subsidies, and the other pork he inserts, this is how the State corrupts even the most well-intentioned of bureaucrats. This is why avoiding the State like the plague is the best method. This is why Peter Schiff will do far more harm than good if he gets elected.

Tax credits are not tax cuts. This is redistribution of wealth, for green cars, no less. Not even I thought Ron Paul would do something like this...

(Although given the hero-worship among you people, he can do just about anything and the lot of you will jump through hoops to justify it. Apparently, he's realized this.)

(Just jumping in here people, so sorry if this has already been covered.)

While I generally agree with your anti-government overview, let me offer this defense of RP.

Regarding “the redistribution of wealth”, the term is a little misleading. The crime is not really in the redistribution; it is in the taxation (stealing) part that precedes it. IOW, would you rather stolen money NOT be redistributed?

Unless you can show where RP is directly responsible for stealing the money (creating taxes) in the first place, I don’t think finding an excuse to return it is necessarily anti-libertarian / anti-liberty. I’m sure if he thought he could get away with introducing a bill that gives tax incentives for having paid taxes (simply gives the money back to those who had it stolen), he would.

So yes, in terms of the whole government, it is technically part of the crime of “the redistribution of wealth”; but in terms of one politician, it is only returning money that other politicians have stolen.

 

[RCA]

tax cuts are bad how?

 

[Danke]

tax cuts are bad how?

Read the entire thread.