Ross Perot launches new website

Yeah, Republicans run up massive deficits, then Democrats have to come in and clean up their mess. When will people learn that Republicans cannot be trusted wtih the economy?

Perot is right about the trend of the economy. We are also sending nearly $500,000,000,000 - yes Five Hundred Billion Dollars - this year and next year, etc to foreign powers to purchase oil that we have untouched in the ground and under our waters. We have a 49 year supply of natural gas in this country, untouched. All we need to do is drill. If we intend to solve the problems Perot points out and build an economy to solve them, then we must have a positive trade balance. The environmentalists are a one issue group - an important issue just the same, but not the only issue. If we do not fix our economy and our trade balance, it will not matter about the environment, because China will be the dominant super power and it does bot care about the environment.
Read Why We Must Drill Now and Drill Hear!" at:
http://brokengovernment.wordpress.com/2008/06/16/why-we-must-drill-now-and-drill-here/

Not again, Ross. You sucked us in once, then dumped us because you're a chicken. Never again with you, buddy, no matter what the cause.

Paul, you are suggesting that USA had a balanced budget for the 40 years Democrats controlled Congress prior to 1994--when Republicans took over Congress ? Please try to calm down and objectively recheck your facts. Then ask, why were Democrats thrown out of Congress in 1994 anyway ?

Tax and Spend
Tax and Spend
That's what the Democrats do, my friend.

As opposed to Republicans, who spend without taxing and run up our debt, which devalues our currency and makes everything we buy more expensive. Sort of like a tax, isn't it ETH?

OUR ENERGY POLICY IS BLIND, NOW WE HAVE THE POLITICIANS WANTING TOO DRILL OFF BOTH COASTS. IM FOR ENERGY INDEPENDENTS, BUT NOT AT THE COST OF OUR ENVIROMENTS. THIS OFF THE CUFF POLICY IS DANGEROUS. WE NEED A GOVERMENT THAT THINKS THINGS OUT, LOOKING AT LONG TERM CONSEQUENCES AND STOP APPEASING THE AMERICAN PEOPLE.

Todd Parker, isn't this a government of, by, and for the people? Who else should the government serve?
http://brokengovernment.wordpress.com

Ken Moyes: isn't this a government of, by, and for the oil people? Who else should the government serve?

Cut Tax and Borrow and Spend
Cut Tax and Borrow and Spend
That's what the Bushes do: leave a huge mess for our future generations. ETH, my friend NOT.

I can't believe why people thinking drilling off-shore will solve our problems. Oil and gas are non-renewable resources. They will run out!! Why not start working on an envionrmentally friendly alternative now so that future generations won't be saddled with the problem. Let me see: 1) we solve our dependency on foreign oil; 2) we save the environment. As for me, I am scared for my children due to the mess this adminstration has created.

Kim, people want what they want NOW. It's all about ME! I don't care if my children or grandchildren have any...I'll use it up NOW and other generations can worry about what to do later... in 50 years it really won't be my problem and affect ME!

***SPECIAL NEWS ALERT***
Right now China is drilling for oil 60 miles off of the coast of Key West, Florida. But 1.200 miles north of Key West democrats are blocking the United States from conducting it's own environmentally-safe oil and gas exploration. Is it possible that the democrats think that China cares for our environment? US offshore drilling is also being done by INDIA, VENEZUELA, CANADA AND VIETNAM. Yet US oil companies are not allowed to. If we wait until alternative fuels are advanced enough to heat our homes and run our cars it will be too late. I'm worried about the economy that democrats want to leave my children with by forcing the US to remain dependent on foreign oil until the alternative fuels arrive. The country may be in depression by the time the democrats figure this out, and on top of that countries that could care less about our coastal waters will continue drilling.

Ross, you know well that neither candidate for the Presidency is going to be good for this country.

You also know that this country is in trouble.

Now is the time for all good men to come to the aid of their country.

Please run.

Oh, and the Republicans care about our environment?
The present administration has underminded many environmental matters.. Yeah, it cares.
Why don't we step up to the plate and be the first major country to produce those environmentally friendly alternative fuel sources? Maybe other countries would follow our lead. Costly at the beginning, maybe. But at the rate wer're going what will it cost us in the long run if we damage the environment & its inhabitants beyond repair?

Well, there is one good thing about the oil/fuel/energy issues we're facing... its forced gas prices upwards causing Americans to be a little more prudent in their driving habits, buying more efficient cars AND spurring growth in a sector of business that has been neglected for so long. Only now do we care about efficiency. Not so bad in the long run, even if short term is stings. We're Americans, we can manage...

So how about this. We get rid of the Republicans and Democrats and any other political party and just sent people off to the government like they do for jury duty. This will alow the general public make the decisions. These terms should be only 2 to 4 years. therefore, what good will a lobbyist be because they will no longer have control of the congress.

This message is an attempt to raise your awareness level as to the potential benefits enactment of a consumption tax method of taxation merged in with our current method of taxation would have upon the abysmal condition of our economy. Mr Greenspan, in 2005, indicated that a consumption tax is desirable albeit also indicating that the logistics of transitioning were of a concern. I translate that Greenspeak as meaning that he recommended transitioning to a consumption tax in a slow & deliberate manner. With that in mind, I will offer some calculations which should illustrate to you the potential positive influences enactment of a consumption tax method of taxation would have upon our economy. These calculations approximate the incoming revenues from fiscal 2006 using $2.5 Tril in revenues and $25 Tril in gross sales as reported/verified by the BEA, IRS, & census bureau information available on-line & verified by me via several phone calls to those agencies. First is the total revenues collected by the IRS in 2006 as they pertain to the recommended changes to our current method of taxation.
1-Revenues from income tax = 39% of budget requirement.
A-27% from top 10% income earners./$675 Bil
B-12% from lower 90% income earners/------------------------------$300 Bil
2-Revenues from SS/Med/Un tax = 32% of budget requirement
A-Allow 18% from Business------------------------------------------ = $450 Bil
B-Allow 14% from SS/Med collected from wages--------------- = $350 Bil
3-Revenues from Corporate tax-13% ----------------------------------$325 Bil
4-Revenues borrowed to pay interest on debt-9%-------------------$225 Bil.
5-Total-----------------------------------------------------------------------$1,650 Bil

Elimination of revenues generated ($300 Bil) via 1B would require a consumption tax rate of 1.2% to replenish and would result in a very significant take home pay raise for most taxpayers with a much smaller rise in prices paid due to a small increase in cost to business caused by the 1.2% tax being paid at all levels of business & the retail level sale transaction.
Elimination of 2A + 3 would reduce the cost of goods & services at all levels of business by at least 10%. This cost decrease would carry thru to the retail level-- at least mathematically. The revenues lost (31%/$775 bil) could be replenished via a 3.1% tax applied against the $25 Tril.
So far we would have enabled a 4.3% consumption tax upon $25 Tril in known sales while greatly increasing take home pay to most taxpayers and lowering the overall cost of goods via lowering business cost of operations even after having paid the new tax because business would experience a net decrease in cost that exceeds the cost of the new tax.
Elimination of item 2B would further increase ALL wage & income earners take home pay (including the top 10% income earners). This loss of revenue (14%/$350Bil) could be replenished with a 1.4% tax on the $25 Tril.
Elimination of borrowing (Item 4) could be done via a 0.9% tax upon the $25 Tril.
The sum total percentage of the new tax would be about 6.6% and the cost of goods & services alone would have decreased by more than the amount of the new tax according to these calculations. This is why I am so adamant about pushing for this type of tax reform & I am sure Mr Greenspan would agree. He likely would not agree with my simplistic view of things but I believe he would tell you that at least my math is close enough for Government work.

ray154751@gmail.com

Here is a question for those of you who refuse to drill now. Which do you prefer an environmentally clean world - remember China does not care and it will continue to use fossil fuels - or a world where the economy of the US has been broken and we are a second rate nation with a second rate standard of living, still living in a fossil fuel environment generated by those countries who did not care about the environment and used fossil fuels to create a thriving economy and standard of living?
http://brokengovernment.wordpress.com

Ross is talking about budget deficits and the debt and NO mention of the war? Greatest entitlement program ever is Social Security. Most take far more from thatn they ever put into it. A few commenters faulted tax and spend Democrats...they seem tame next to Tax Cut and Spend More Republicans

Wake up people. This Government is as CORRUPTED as any other Government out there. Both Democrats and Republicans are corrupted. Washington is corrupted beyond repair. I love my country. I totally dislike the people running it.