R. Caron: Beware Ryan's agenda

When John McCain (who was not a Republican favorite candidate) made his bold move by taking Sarah Palin as his running mate, Palin came out blazing like the wildfire now burning on the West Coast. She ended up destroying their chances for the White House.

Mitt Romney also made a bold move by choosing Rep. Paul Ryan. Ryan, unlike Romney, has a written plan to reduce the federal budget and re-do Medicare.

Many conservatives on talk radio wish that Ryan was the top man on the ticket and Romney his running mate.

The dangers that Ryan bring to the ticket include that he is very conservative and a tea party favorite; he is an old-thinking Catholic who is against birth control and all abortions; against equality for gays and lesbians, keeping marriage sacred for a man and woman only; he wants to completely cut or reduce food stamps; cut Section 8 housing support for the poor; and cut Medicare and Medicaid insurance for the poor, elderly and disabled.

A Romney/Ryan ticket supports making poor individuals poorer while the rich will be pocketing millions, leaving this country to be fair game for China or Japan to take over.

In November, it will be time for those people who are less fortunate to get out and vote, making sure that they will be provided for in the future.

Rolande Caron, South Paris

What do you think of this story?

Login to post comments

Our policy prohibits comments that are:

  • Defamatory, abusive, obscene, racist, or otherwise hateful
  • Excessively foul and/or vulgar
  • Inappropriately sexual
  • Baseless personal attacks or otherwise threatening
  • Contain illegal material, or material that infringes on the rights of others
  • Commercial postings attempting to sell a product/item
If you violate this policy, your comment will be removed and your account may be banned from posting comments.

Advertisement

Comments

PAUL ST JEAN's picture

One again, Ms. Caron has

One again, Ms. Caron has presented her views in a fair, factual, and balanced manner.

Jim Cyr's picture

Ms. Caron,

I guess, with 46 million people on food stamps that "must" be "provided" for, we know which way they will vote. We all have choices in life and to believe that 46 million "need to be provided for in the future" surely speaks poorly of our knowledgeable electorate. With open borders, 30-40 million illegals and handing out of precious work permits to illegals, we say watch out for Obama's agenda ! Panthers sorting out voters in Philly, Ft. Hood masscare being called "work place violence", religious zealot shooting at recruiter station and no news coverage of it. We certainly need to be knowledgeable of ones' agenda and vote for America and the Constitution and take us away from the destructive path of "Progressivism" .

Betty Davies's picture

Very nicely expressed

Good comment. Thank you, Ms. Caron.

MICHAEL LEBLANC's picture

Nicely expressed hogwash.

The only threat Ryan poses is to the left's delusion that their VP has a brain.

PAUL ST JEAN's picture

I can't wait for the Vice

I can't wait for the Vice Presidential debates....Albert Einstein meets Gomer Pyle.

PAUL ST JEAN's picture

A recent poll suggests that

A recent poll suggests that oBAMa has taken a 12 point lead over Romney among dead voters.

Betty Davies's picture

Did you notice Ryan's parade of lies?

If not, perhaps it's the right-wing that lacks a brain.

Here's a NYT article: http://takingnote.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/08/30/beyond-factual-dishonesty...

Here's a Fact Check article: http://www.upworthy.com/fact-check-five-blatant-lies-from-paul-ryans-con...

I do realize that the R&R already made it clear that they don't let facts get in the way of slander...

MICHAEL LEBLANC's picture

Sorry for the delay.

I had better things to do. My comb really needed a good soak.

Evidently you do not have better things to do than troll websites for opinions to call your own, or for "facts" to confirm your one underlying opinion: Democrats are good, Republicans are evil. A blog and a YouTube wanna-bee - unimpeachable witnesses.

Since you seem to be into 24/7 media, you must have seen Obama's campaign spots. They're all the same - not one word about Obama's qualifications, record, or intentions - just continuous "slander" of Romney and Ryan - and, the ultimate hypocrisy, always accusing the other side of "going negative".

I too eagerly await the VP debate. It should be great theater, if Biden can get his foot out of his mouth.

PAUL ST JEAN's picture

Do you speak of the same type

Do you speak of the same type of slander that dingy Harry Reid has been engaging in towards Romney's tax returns of late? Are you not aware that the greatest obstacle a liberal faces each day is the truth?

MARK GRAVE's picture

Yes, and Democrat politicians

Yes, and Democrat politicians are the harbingers of truth, justice and the American way.

Let's speak candidly. The Republicans don't line your pockets with money; therefore, you seek an affinity to the parity that does.

Betty Davies's picture

Logic? Nope

Let's see. Your theory is that it's fine for Republican presidential and vice-presidential candidates to lie to the American public about major issues, because you think some Democrats have lied. How did that theory work when you were a kid? ("But Mom, other kids break rules, too!")

You're correct that Republican politicians aren't exactly lining my pockets with money. They're threatening Medicare and Social Security, which means I can't retire at 66 (about 10 months from now, not that I'm counting) but will have to work until I drop. Yes, it's a well-paying professional job, but I'm very tired or working 50+ hour weeks.

Republicans are trying to destroy SSI and MaineCare, which will potentially affect my disabled adult daughter.

Republicans are trying to slice away the pension of a good friend who worked many years for the state--and depends on that pension, because an unregulated Wall Street (gee, thanks, Republicans) devastated his retirement savings.

Republicans are trying to destroy Obamacare, so my other daughter--who has pre-existing conditions--won't be able to get affordable health insurance if and when she's laid off.

So yes, I do have an affinity to the Democratic party, which looks out for the average person.

David A. Gagnon's picture

Miss Davies your

President has lied to you everyday that he has been in office. Yet you fail to see it.

MARK GRAVE's picture

And Obama, a sitting

And Obama, a sitting president, lies to the American people. Perhaps the alternative view here is not buy into anything any politician says.

Do you buy into everything Obama spews from his lips?

A simple yes/no please.

PAUL ST JEAN's picture

None of the changes to Social

None of the changes to Social Security and Medicare being proposed by the republicans will affect anyone who is over the age of 55. Your retirement, at least the portion provided by government, is no less safe than it's ever been.

MARK GRAVE's picture

Some people just don’t want

Some people just don’t want to believe that fact. In my opinion, that is a display of their greed; they don’t care about providing a stable safety net for future generations. They are willing to rape the wealth from others to get their cut now.

MARK GRAVE's picture

So please tell us how

So please tell us how spending this country into bankruptcy benefits the poor and elderly more than sustainable entitlements?

Let’s face it, the end of large entitlements has been written; it will either be by choice or by necessity.

Betty Davies's picture

You're referring to GW Bush, right?

He started 2 major wars while slashing revenue (tax cuts for billionaires). This was done to fulfill Norquist's dream of dedstroying government-by-and-for-the-people and replacing it with government by-and-for-corporations.

It's interesting how medical care and enough Social Security income to keep seniors from starving and freezing is called an "entitlement" by the right wing, while tax breaks for billionaires are never called entitlements.

PAUL ST JEAN's picture

World War Two was a major

World War Two was a major war; Iraq and Afghanistan are not.
Who do you know that collects Social Security who does not consider themselves entitled to what they receive? The right wing hasn't coined the term; recipients have.

Betty Davies's picture

Recent veterans would disagree with you

Try telling recent veterans that Iraq and Afghanistan aren't "major" wars.

And you might keep in mind that Iraq alone has been costing more than WWII, accoding to the Christian Science Monitor: http://www.csmonitor.com/Business/new-economy/2011/1025/Iraq-war-will-co.... They note that, as of 2011, the Iraq war was costing $3000 per second.

Take a quick look at this:http://costofwar.com/

Also take a gander at Reuters (http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/06/29/us-usa-war-idUSTRE75S25320110629)--the article is called "Cost of war at least $3.7 trillion and counting"

According to http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RS22926.pdf, WWII cost about $4 billion (adjusted to current $).

And yet GW Bush got us into war in both Iraq and Afghanistan while REDUCING federal revenues by giving tax breaks to his millionaire and billionaire cronies.

As for the term "entitlements," yes indeed, people collecting Social Security are entitled to what they receive. But the right wing has worked hard to call every aspect of the social safety net an "entitlement," always making it clear in context that they consider this to be a disparaging term, and consistently arguing that anything with that name should be slashed.

PAUL ST JEAN's picture

My statement was in no way

My statement was in no way intended to trivialize the nature of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars. It was in response to the context of your statement regarding Bush and money. To any combat veteran, any war is major; that goes without saying. Too bad our government no longer fights its war with clear and clean victory being the primary objective. Your use of the cost of the wars to emphasize Bush's spending habits does nothing to minimize the fact that it's oBAMa that has raised the national debt to 16 trillion dollars; not Bush. Moreover, you like to say Bush started two wars. How many wars would Bush have "started" had 19 animals arranged to crash two passenger filled airliners into two tall buildings on September 11, 2001?

MARK GRAVE's picture

Don’t waste your time.

Don’t waste your time. They’ll still link everything back to Bush even 3.5+ years after the fact. Moreover, if Obama is unseated this November, they’ll blame that on Bush too.

MARK GRAVE's picture

First, SS is meant to be

First, SS is meant to be supplemental to what an individual saves for retirement. It is designed to only provide cash to meet basic needs for food, clothing, and shelter. Nothing more.

The fact you believe you are entitled to more or entitled to someone else's earnings makes the term "entitlement" self-defining.

Perhaps tax cuts should be called entitlements because the creator of that wealth is "entitled" to spend the money as they see fit and not be forced to hand it over to Washington DC where it is wasted and misappropriated.

Moreover, your anger should be focused on politicians who decide how to prioritize what revenue the country takes in verses reflecting your envy on the more well to do.

So please tell all the readers why you believe you are entitled to someone else's money, please.

FRANK EARLEY's picture

Mr. Gravel, you are so wrong

You are so wrong on so many points I don't know where to begin. First of all, I am on Social Security, not due to any choice I made. I didn't plan to get sick, but it happens. I don't consider myself entitled to anything. I'm only 54, and I've been disabled for seven years now. I retired at age 44 from one career after twenty four years, I paid a lot into SS and Medicare all my working life. So I don't consider it other peoples money I receive. One thing no one ever talks about is the cost of being on SSDI. It cost me almost three hundred dollars per month for my Medicare, prescriptions, and supplemental insurance. It ain't free. That comes right out of my check every month. Also as far as savings go, that's a dream. When you first get sick, even with good health insurance, your savings disappear in no time. I'll let you in on a little secret. I could care less for Obama or Romney, I have to spend to much time protecting myself. It may be supplemental to you, but for me its all I got..............

MARK GRAVE's picture

Frank, I’m not say there

Frank,

I’m not say there should not be a safety net, but what do you do to make SS solvent for future generations?

SS needs to cut costs, so what do they do?

Just project yourself in the future to the day SS goes bankrupt, what would you personally do when your support stops altogether?

Would you personally want to experience that day? Why would you want anyone to experience that?

What do you do?

I yield the stage to you. We are patiently waiting your response.

FRANK EARLEY's picture

What can I do?

I'm past the point of being able to do much of anything. Sure I could vote for Obama or Romney, like there's any difference. About the only thing I've seen out of either of them is who can trash the other the most. All I can do know is take care of myself. You have to make whatever you have grow. I do that. When I was working it was a lot easier, now it takes more planning. There are lots of ways to do most anything, its how smart you are that makes the difference. This so called "gravy train" I'm riding might end tomorrow, If that happens, all the worrying in the world won't change that. You seem to have a lot of time to waste worrying about whats going to happen down the road. I used to. Now I have to worry day to day, I wasn't given any choice.....

PAUL ST JEAN's picture

"Sure I could vote for obama

"Sure I could vote for obama or romney, like there's any difference."...
With all due respect, Frank, if you can 't see any difference between oBAMa and Romney, you might want to consider getting an eye exam.

FRANK EARLEY's picture

Its all perspective....

I know what your saying, what I'm saying is, I've seen presidents come and go. Quite frankly, they're both just as capable of screwing everything up. One wants to do away with medicare, as we know it, the other wants to improve healthcare. You would think that with all my problems, Obama would be my hands down choice. Not necessarily. It took seven very long, very painful years for me to get to where I am now. I lost a 100k per year income plus I don't know how much savings, I was forced into Medicare. I have spent much time making sure that Medicare and Social Security is not all I have to fall back on. Its been very difficult, very time consuming, and most of all I did it despite all the medications I have to take daily. One thing I have lost in this seven year long fight, is my ability to trust ANYONE. You let your guard down for one second, and what you've gained to this point is gone. I've seen it happen.
Its just that one of those two are going to win, I have a pretty good idea who, but thats not something I discuss often. Who knows, whoever wins will actually follow through with his campaign promises. It's not likely but possible. One thing I do know for sure. When it comes to how I live my life, and how my medical problems are addressed. I am only going to have one person to count on for my livelihood. Thats me. Who ever wins I wish them all the luck in the world, they'll need it. I'm not going to be concerned about how their decisions might affect me, although I'll be watching like a hawk. I've taken the steps, legally to protect my personal interests. So you see I don't need an eye exam, some might argue I need my head examined, but we'll leave that for another day.....

PAUL ST JEAN's picture

Well stated. Just once, I

Well stated.
Just once, I would like a presidential election not to be the equivalent of going to a cat house hoping to find a virgin bride.

MARK GRAVE's picture

“One wants to do away with

“One wants to do away with medicare” – The question you need to ask yourself is whether medicare will exist in the future if nothing to done to the program?

FRANK EARLEY's picture

There's nothing really wrong with Medicare, or Sociel Security..

The problem lies in how these programs are financed. The system was designed to finance itself, back then the general idea made sense. They counted on a steady flow of users coming into the program, and based on the life expectancy at the time, room for the new would be sort of made by the old dying off. This probably would have worked just fine, accept for the lack of one essential tool, history.
What was true then, is true now. No one can see into the future. They had no more luck at predicting the future, as politicians have today. If they did, perhaps they would have seen that a huge influx of new users of the system would no longer be paying into it. Thus creating a totally lopsided ratio of people paying into the system, to those collecting out of the system. They may have then realized that the system could not remain solvent.
Now we have a whole new generation of people, trying to repair the mistakes made many years ago, with what very well may be the future, mistakes of the past. It's a never ending cycle.
Do I think Medicare, and Social Security will be there in the future? They just might be, if someone comes along and is willing to look to the future, as well as learn from the past. We don't need a lot of bells and whistles, we need a well thought out plan that will sustain itself, its not impossible. So far all I've seen is two groups who grade their progress on how hard they hit the other guy over the head. That's the kind of politics that got us into this mess in the first place. Is it any wonder that I've spent the last five years building my own safety net? I can't see into the future either, but I'm not taking any chances........

Betty Davies's picture

Romney has plans for you (and me)

His plan to repeal the Affordable Care Act would wipe out new Medicare benefits included in the law. It would re-open the Medicare prescription drug donut hole and eliminate coverage for preventive services and annual checkups that the ACA created. His plan for further means-testing of Medicare would amount to a benefit cut to current as well as future seniors.

His determination not to raise the cap on contributions toward Social Security (raising it would mean that very wealthy people would pay their fair share) will ensure ongoing problems for Social Security's solvency.

MARK GRAVE's picture

I would think you would want

I would think you would want to support means testing. That is if you can afford to chip in more, you should. If you are rich, then you don’t get SS. Why should a millionaire get SS?

Removing the SS contribution cap will do little to SS solvency since the so-called rich that you loath don’t get all their income through salary, which can be taxed.

Anyhow, we all have roughly the same life expectancy and therefore roughly the same SS liability based on actuaries. How is it fair to make someone pay exponentially more for services that they will not benefit from – SS supposed to be pay as you go – right?
I’m not rich nor do I ever expect to be rich, but I realize using the rich as the wallet of government excesses it not fair. The rich already pay enough in taxes.

I really wish all those individuals who champion the “tax the rich” movement could see how their behavior emits greed and envy.

Betty Davies's picture

The millionaires you worship...

You wrote two things that look interesting side-by-side:

1) "The rich already pay enough in taxes."

2) The rich "don’t get all their income through salary, which can be taxed."

On some level, you recognize that millionaires dodge taxes by getting a large part of their income from non-salary sources. This admission is also interesting because it means you are aware that these folks, who supposedly are "working" hard to "earn" their money are actually accruing a lot of it from playing the stock market and enjoying capital gains.

Taxing the “earned” and not the “unearned” seems rather un-American, doesn’t it?

Raising the payroll tax cap would simply apply to very wealthy folks the same payroll tax already paid by more than nine out of 10 Americans to those with incomes over $250,000 a year (currently, those with incomes over $106,800 a year get a free pass on the excess). Lifting the payroll tax cap would virtually eliminate funding shortfalls the program would experience over the next 75 years.

MARK GRAVE's picture

Point 2 comment is related to

Point 2 comment is related to SS contributions, not taxes in general. I should have been clearer.

We all dodge taxes. If your employer offers a 401K, we dodge taxes when we take make that pre-tax contribution. All normal Americans take advantage of tax laws to minimize their tax liability.
“Taxing the “earned” and not the “unearned” seems rather un-American,
doesn’t it?”

Absolutely not! First, money used to generate unearned income was first earned income and appropriately taxed. Our government concluded that they want to incent investment, so they taxed unearned income less. Don’t citizen people who simply follow current law.

We can also eliminate your so-called free pass by means testing benefits without raising taxes. Again, we can get around the payroll tax by taking income in different ways. I want to see fiscal responsibility from our governments before we discuss raising taxes. Not forcing fiscal discipline is simply throwing good many after bad.

How much spending is enough? How much should we take from the rich – 90% -100% tell me?

PAUL ST JEAN's picture

You realize you're trying to

You realize you're trying to reason with Marxist beliefs, right?

MARK GRAVE's picture

We do have an obligation to

We do have an obligation to educate the less fortunate amongst us, don’t we?
Think of it as teaching someone how to fish vs. just giving them a fish.

PAUL ST JEAN's picture

No and no. We cannot educate

No and no. We cannot educate them any more than they are capable of educating us to their way of belief. I don't come here to learn from these people nor to teach them, but to observe and laugh at them. They have the right to be here and they get to vote, but they sure are fun to watch.

MARK GRAVE's picture

I personally get tired of the

I personally get tired of the relentless attack on my wallet, and their claim right to my earnings. In the end however, those who pay the taxes will control their destiny. Nothing for you...

PAUL ST JEAN's picture

"No soup forrrr you", said

"No soup forrrr you", said the Soup Nazi.
That's the whole problem with the left. If they can learn to keep their heads out of other peoples' wallets, perhaps many of them would be doing better for themselves. But, day in and day out it's, "The rich are this, the rich are that. They have all this wealth. It's not fair. They don't pay their fair share of taxes." What about the lower income class who pay NO taxes and get money back on the earned income credit? Some of them get something like $3500 back from the Feds for not having earned enough money to pay taxes on. Nice.
I don't know about you, but I just get sick and tired of their constant whining over what they don't have. Life is a bitch and no one ever said it was fair. Why do so many people not get that?

Betty Davies's picture

Why do you hate poor people?

You are actually disgusted that elderly people, disabled people, people who've lost their jobs, people working for minimum wage, and so on -- desperately poor people-- don't pay taxes.

You adore millionaires and would throw just about anybody under the bus to keep their special tax breaks for them.

It appears that you like to identify with millionaires, which prevents you from facing the fact that YOU or someone you love could become impoverished one day.

PAUL ST JEAN's picture

As is often the case, you're

As is often the case, you're wrong on every count and on every level. I just get tired of listening to you and people like you constantly demonizing the wealthy and all that they represent, often with no basis of fact whatsoever. It was private sector wealth and ingenuity that built this country. You people need to get your heads out of other peoples' wallets and find another way of adding new meaning to your lives.

As far as me or someone I love becoming impoverished one day, I'm quite aware of that possibility, and we'll deal with if and when it happens. And, it's no one's business but ours; not yours, not the poor, not the rich, and certainly not the government's.

MARK GRAVE's picture

Some people like to always

Some people like to always blame others for what they see as failures in their own personal success. Some people just keep trying when things don’t go their way. From life observation, the latter group is much more successful that the former group in my opinion. Just look around your workplace. Those who are successful are more likely to be from the second group – those who just keep working toward a goal without blaming others for obstacles. They are the problem solvers.

PAUL ST JEAN's picture

As most often is the case,

As most often is the case, your grasp of the situation is precise.

MARK GRAVE's picture

Seems like the neo-Marxists

Seems like the neo-Marxists jumped ship when the topic of personal responsibility surfaces.

PAUL ST JEAN's picture

Funny how that works.

Funny how that works.

PAUL ST JEAN's picture

Probably out searching for

Probably out searching for some fresh links.

MARK GRAVE's picture

Some people like to always

Some people like to always blame others for what they see as failures in their own personal success. Some people just keep trying when things don’t go their way. From life observation, the latter group is much more successful that the former group in my opinion. Just look around your workplace. Those who are successful are more likely to be from the second group – those who just keep working toward a goal without blaming others for obstacles. They are the problem solvers.

MARK GRAVE's picture

You are presenting a false

You are presenting a false dichotomy – tax the rich or poor will be rolling in the streets. This is not true. There is plenty of government revenue to provide a basic safety net for people who fall on hard times. The government simply needs to prioritize its spending. Why should the first solution always be more taxes? Although you demonize the rich, the reality is that anytime the tax structure is changed it typically also hits the middle class if not everyone.

It is time for the government to cut waste and prioritize current revenue to provide these services.
Most of the people I know that are struggling financially, the problem is due to their behavior and not because they lost a job, got ill, etc. My experience is that these people would rather spend money on a vacation, snowmobile, RV, camper, ... ,etc rather than save that money for a rainy day.

Frankly, I don’t what to help people with that behavior. Let’s use our limited resources on those who really need it because they did fall on misfortune that was not preventable.

If a loved one became impoverish due to bad behavior, I’m okay with tough love. The only way we as humans will learn from our mistakes is to suffer the consequences of those choices.

In closing, the fewer and fewer number of people paying into the system will at some point revolt and refuse to pay. It is simply human nature to protect one’s own interest, especially when it is under constant assault.

Betty Davies's picture

Tax facts

From 1950 to 1963, the top tax rate hovered around 91%. [http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxfacts/displayafact.cfm?Docid=213], so that would not be unprecedented. You posit that the "money used to generate unearned income was first earned income and appropriately taxed." That's not necessarily so. How about trust fund babies and others who simply keep tucking their capital gains back into Wall Street?

In May 2010, the Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) noted that federal, state and local taxes—including income, property, sales and other taxes—consumed 9.2% of all personal income in 2009, the lowest rate since 1950, and a rate far below the historic average of 12% for the last half-century. The overall tax burden hit bottom in December of 2009. Yet Bush committed us to two major wars--one of them justifed by lies--while slashing revenues by giving tax breaks to billionaires. That's a stunning example of fiscal irresponsibility that needs to be corrected before we slash the social safety net.

Who gains the most from tax breaks? Check out this chart--
http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2012/04/13/opinion/sunday/0415web-leon...

It's true that everyone does their best to maximize whatever legal tax "breaks" exist (I can hardly wait to see Romney's tax returns). But some folks get a far better "break" than others, and this has nothing to do with what the contribute to America, unless you're willing to assert that a firefighter and the guy who's repairing your electric wires during an ice storm have far easier jobs than someone who plays the stock market.

MARK GRAVE's picture

The following link shows

The following link shows historic revenue (adjusted for inflation) as a percent of GDP. The year 1944, which marked the highest marginal tax-rate in the U.S. history, did not generate significantly more review. In fact, revenue has been historically flat over a wide variety of tax rates.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:U.S._Federal_Tax_Receipts_as_a_Percent...

In closing, the tax rate tells you absolutely nothing. Only outcomes matter. In this case, only revenue matters.

MARK GRAVE's picture

1. Owning slave is also no

1. Owning slave is also no unprecedented, but we would all agree that it is not a good thing. Likewise, peak top marginal tax rate in 1944 was 94%; that too is not necessary a good thing. Much more data is needed, like how many individuals did that rate apply to? How much revenue did that generate? What did people do to avoid paying that marginal tax rate? That is how did people shelter their money. Just because you have a high tax rate does not mean it was effective at generating revenues. Moreover, the world today is more global, so there are alternatives to sheltering income – legally and more so illegally.
2. “unless you're willing to assert that a
firefighter and the guy who's repairing your electric wires during an ice storm have far easier jobs than someone who plays the stock market.”

Let’s forget for the moment those firefighters living well off the taxpayer. Someone who invests in Wall Street can make lots of money or they can lose lots of money. It is simple risk reward. The firefighter who is risk adverse with their money can expect a mediocre return.
The bigger the risk, the bigger the upside potential – nothing wrong with that. We should not penalize success nor should we subsidize loses. Most Americans are illiterate when it comes to making money work for them, but they are quick to citizens those how learn and do make their money work for them. I, like many Americans, make money grow with simple investments.

Are you a typical American that spend everything they earn, or do you make money work for you?

Betty Davies's picture

Your syntax is perplexing

I must admit I've begun to wonder if you are a local individual, or if perhaps the Republicans have been outsourcing their commentary, perhaps to offshore trolls.

Please forgive me if there is some more innocent explanation. But what on earth do you mean by phrases such as "they are quick to citizens those how learn"?

And a phrase such as "a typical American that spend everything they earn" has a foreign ring to it...

MARK GRAVE's picture

1. Meant to say “criticize

1. Meant to say “criticize those who learn”.
2. Let me repeat this again – I’m not a Republican.
3. In the sense that a typical American saves less than 1% of their earnings, then yes I’m foreign to that behavior.

PAUL ST JEAN's picture

What? She no unnastanna

What? She no unnastanna ranguage?

MARK GRAVE's picture

Frank, Even under the

Frank,

Even under the Republican plan, I don’t hear or see anything that will affect you. While no one can perfectly see into the future, insurance actuaries come pretty darn close.

The private sector can manage insurance risks, social security is claimed to be an insurance, so why can’t the government manage something the private sector can? Perhaps SS is simply a political football.

MARK GRAVE's picture

Frank, My heart goes out to

Frank,

My heart goes out to you. That said, let’s discuss this one issue. If you can type, you can think.

That fact is that SS is on a trajectory to insolvency. Should we or should we not takes steps today to preserve some semblance of SS for the future Franks of this nation?

Please, start the response with a simple yes or no.

Betty Davies's picture

The Republicans are counting on you not voting...

This is how they plan to win one election after another--get so many Americans so poor and desperate that they don't have time or energy to vote against them. That would leave them free to kill Obamacare, slash your Social Security benefits, and turn Medicare into a voucher system--leaving you to spend money you don't have on healthcare you certainly do need... and deserve.

PAUL ST JEAN's picture

Where does the Constitution

Where does the Constitution provide for guaranteed 'deserved' health care?

PAUL ST JEAN's picture

"This is how they plan t win

"This is how they plan t win one election after another--get so many Americans so poor and desperate that they don't have time or energy to vot against them." Lyndon Baines Johnson started the war against poverty during his presidency. How many people were poor then? How many people are poor now? We now have 46,000,000 people on food stamps alone, never mind all the other programs that are out there for the so-called "poor". Being poor under democrat controlled administrations has become pretty darn profitable. There is no war on poverty. The war is for the democrats to get as many people on the welfare plantation as possible so that the welfare "slaves" can vote for democrats and keep them in power.

FRANK EARLEY's picture

Betty

I'm not poor, and certainly not desperate. If these idiots managed to screw everything up by tomorrow, I would survive. Everyone needs to learn that even with next to nothing, you can make that grow. I learned seven years ago, I'm never going to be able to work again. I was totally not expecting that. I just finished earning two degree's that allowed me to make more money than I knew what to do with. Does that sound like the actions of someone expecting to live the rest of his life on SS?
What I'm saying is that no one knows whats going to happen tomorrow. You have to teach kids at an early age, to plan for the worst and hope for the best. Unfortunately the worst happens far more often than the best. It all boils down to how you prepare yourself for whatever happens.....

MARK GRAVE's picture

I was hoping or a simple yes

I was hoping or a simple yes or no, but I enjoyed your monolog regardless.

FRANK EARLEY's picture

I'm sorry

Yes, I mean No, Oh wait i me.... oh hell I forgot what the question was.....

MARK GRAVE's picture

Enjoy the weekend and get

Enjoy the weekend and get some rest.

MARK GRAVE's picture

Please tell me what makes you

Please tell me what makes you think you deserve?

Is it because you paid into the system?

Is it because you think just being born as an American?

MARK GRAVE's picture

The readers are waiting for

The readers are waiting for your answer.

Why you believe you are entitled to someone else's money?

Betty Davies's picture

Busy at work...

Hey Mark, I've been pretty busy at work. How about you?

Social Security is a social safety net that we all pay into, in order to avoid being destitute in retirement. It's a type of insurance.

Tell me why you think you are "entitled" to have your medical insurance (to which I very likely contribute with my own premiums) pay for your possible misadventures--traumatic brain inury, heart attack, cancer, etc.--when your bills could mount into the millions and all I've ever needed in 65+ years is preventive care.

PAUL ST JEAN's picture

Does your employer know

Does your employer know you're using the office computer for social networking on his time?

MARK GRAVE's picture

NO, just sitting home running

NO, just sitting home running my toes through my billions of dollars.

PAUL ST JEAN's picture

That post wasn't intended for

That post wasn't intended for you,Mark.

MARK GRAVE's picture

Oh, I should mention I earned

Oh, I should mention I earned it grinding bones of the poor and elderly.

Betty Davies's picture

Busy at work...

Hey Mark, I've been pretty busy at work. How about you?

Social Security is a social safety net that we all pay into, in order to avoid being destitute in retirement. It's a type of insurance.

Tell me why you think you are "entitled" to have your medical insurance (to which I very likely contribute with my own premiums) pay for your possible misadventures--traumatic brain inury, heart attack, cancer, etc.--when your bills could mount into the millions and all I've ever needed in 65+ years is preventive care.

AL PELLETIER's picture

Hey Betty,

Your in a verbal pissing contest with a man who's head is stuck in the urinal, I've found doing it to be a total waste of my time.

Betty Davies's picture

And yet...

If nobody ever stands up to these folks, they and everyone who reads the comments section will assume that people agree with them.

MARK GRAVE's picture

Likewise, if no one stands up

Likewise, if no one stands up against entitlement spending the financial future of this country will be that of Greece, Spain, or Italy.

Betty Davies's picture

What happened in Greece etc...

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/18/opinion/krugman-greece-as-victim.html-- "...many things you hear about Greece just aren’t true. The Greeks aren’t lazy — on the contrary, they work longer hours than almost anyone else in Europe, and much longer hours than the Germans in particular. Nor does Greece have a runaway welfare state, as conservatives like to claim; social expenditure as a percentage of G.D.P., the standard measure of the size of the welfare state, is substantially lower in Greece than in, say, Sweden or Germany, countries that have so far weathered the European crisis pretty well..."

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/16/opinion/krugman-europes-economic-suici... "...the Spanish story bears no resemblance to the morality tales so popular among European officials, especially in Germany. Spain wasn’t fiscally profligate — on the eve of the crisis it had low debt and a budget surplus. Unfortunately, it also had an enormous housing bubble, a bubble made possible in large part by huge loans from German banks to their Spanish counterparts. When the bubble burst, the Spanish economy was left high and dry; Spain’s fiscal problems are a consequence of its depression, not its cause. Nonetheless, the prescription coming from Berlin and Frankfurt is, you guessed it, even more fiscal austerity. This is, not to mince words, just insane. Europe has had several years of experience with harsh austerity programs, and the results are exactly what students of history told you would happen: such programs push depressed economies even deeper into depression."

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/02/25/european-crisis-realities/-- "The Republican story is that it’s all about excessive welfare states. How does that hold up? ...What we’re basically looking at, then, is a balance of payments problem, in which capital flooded south after the creation of the euro, leading to overvaluation in southern Europe.... You can slash the welfare state all you want (and the right wants to slash it down to bathtub-drowning size), but this has very little to do with export competitiveness. You can pursue crippling fiscal austerity, but this improves the external balance only by driving down the economy and hence import demand, with maybe, maybe, a gradual “internal devaluation” caused by high unemployment."

As you can see, following failed austerity policies worsens existing crises. Social spending did not cause Europe's problems, and slashing it won't solve them.... or ours.

MARK GRAVE's picture

Krugman’s solution to any

Krugman’s solution to any economic problem is more spending. However, there is one question Krugman never answers. How much debt is too much? Perhaps Krugman thinks there is no limit.

MARK GRAVE's picture

First off, Krugman is a

First off, Krugman is a political operative for the Democrats. I recommend reading alternative views to compare with Krugman’s opinion.

Secondly, no one wants to lone Greece any more money so austerity is the only choice if they want to remain in the EU.
This is what the November election is all about. Are we going to follow the fallacy of debts don’t matter and keep spending, or are we going to rain in on spending.

Lastly, if overspending did not cause the Greece's financial crises, what did?

MARK GRAVE's picture

Lone --> Loan

Lone --> Loan

PAUL ST JEAN's picture

"Reasoning with a liberal is

"Reasoning with a liberal is like trying to pick up a turd by the clean end."...Ted Nugent, great American and Rock Star.

Betty Davies's picture

A brilliant example of Republican's best arguments

I've noticed that quite often, when a conservative commenter has been bested by reason and logic, he or she resorts to mud-slinging ad hominum attacks.

MARK GRAVE's picture

Well Betty, I notice not just

Well Betty, I notice not just quite often but always limit your view of the economy to what Paul Krugman says. Is that because he shares your political view point? Do you even read the viewpoint of opposing economist?

BTW I do notice that you can sling-mug with the best of them, so what makes you above your own criticism?

David A. Gagnon's picture

There is

no reasoning nor logic with a liberal democrat. Reason and logic left that party back in the 60's.

PAUL ST JEAN's picture

"Verbal pissing contest with

"Verbal pissing contest with a man who's head is stuck in the urinal" is an acceptable left wing statement, though, eh?

MARK GRAVE's picture

Just like your personal

Just like your personal attack against me yesterday for example?

Betty Davies's picture

I did not use foul language

Your metaphor is foul and disgusting.

MARK GRAVE's picture

What metaphor?

What metaphor?

PAUL ST JEAN's picture

The truth of it is, Mark,

The truth of it is, Mark, they can dish it out all day long, but they can't take ANY of it. Whiners and cry-babies.

MARK GRAVE's picture

You can’t handle the truth (I

You can’t handle the truth (I always wanted to say that). The fact is that all politicians are made of snake oil when they remove the R or D skin.

It is humorous to observe how people think their team is pure, truthful, and just while the other team is evil.

To that I would say you drank the Kool-Aid.

MARK GRAVE's picture

This was intended to be a

This was intended to be a response for Betty, not the parrot and his friend.

PAUL ST JEAN's picture

No offense taken, my friend.

No offense taken, my friend.

Advertisement

Stay informed — Get the news delivered for free in your inbox.

I'm interested in ...