 |
| Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan |
Here they come, Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan. Two grinning robots that want to take your money. And some of you are even going to vote for them.
Romney’s plan is to give record tax breaks to the rich, lowering their tax rate down to 28 percent. Ryan is a little different. His plan is to give the rich even bigger tax breaks, lowering their tax rate down to 25 percent. No wonder billionaires are bank rolling them.
Both of these men understand exactly how to advocate for their own class. If elected it'll be just like the George W. Bush years again, except this time, along with launching exciting new wars overseas, they’ll finally be able get rid of the remaining tax breaks that benefit low-income Americans.
Comforting the comfortable while punishing the American mainstream is now open Republican practice, so the far right have finally stepped out from behind the curtain to watch their candidate Ryan take on the mantel of power in full public view.
The timing is fortuitous because it's become apparent to most observers that the truth about Romney would probably end his presidential campaign.
He cannot sell himself on Romneycare, his signature achievement, because it would be too damaging. He cannot disclose his own income tax returns -- apparently they would be too damaging too.
Enter Ryan and his big toothy grin. But who is Paul Ryan, that’s the question?
Well, tremble now American seniors, because Ryan is the man who genuinely believes in turning Medicare into a voucher program.
Under his budget plan senior citizens would no longer be entitled to comprehensive medical benefits designed to protect them from financial ruin. No more guarantee of benefits, just take a voucher instead, and you know what a voucher's good for, don’t you?
Ryan also believes in ending Medicaid, turning it into a “block grant” instead. It’s estimated between 14 and 27 million low-income Americans would lose their health insurance over it.
Ryan also wants to privatize Social Security. In fact his plan to take a wrecking ball to the New Deal is so radical that even the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops and Bush rejected it out of hand.
So why do very rich people like Romney and Ryan hate government programs like Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid?
Well, the nation’s top earners don’t want the financial burden of the welfare state, since they don’t benefit from it, so their plan is to hand the entire cost of it over to the middle class, who do.
America’s rich no longer feel the need or the responsibility to contribute one thin dime to the upkeep of this nation. Instead they open Swiss bank accounts to hide their earnings from the IRS; they ship jobs overseas while closing companies here; they play Wall Street like a private casino and hand you the bill for their excesses.
I don't know how they can make this fact any plainer. They don’t actually care what happens to America.
Under Romney/Ryan it’ll be tax breaks for the rich and social Darwinism for the poor. These would be the deepest, most biting cuts ever attempted by a sitting government.
Have you noticed all of that crumbling infrastructure from sea to shining sea? Under Ryan’s budget the government would be so starved of resources that by 2050 it wouldn’t have enough money for basic functioning, never mind overdue road works or highway repairs.
Ryan’s massive and historic cuts to government funding would mean debilitating cuts to law enforcement, education, highway repair and even basic even food inspection.
Ryan does want to increase defense spending, however, so while you're watching all the bombs drop on new wars overseas you can try to console yourself that your money's being well spent.
But predictably, Ryan’s most characteristic ambition of all is Robin Hood in reverse. He wants to preside over the largest transfer of wealth from the poor and the middle class over to the rich in American history.
According to Robert Greenstein, president of the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, the new Ryan budget “would likely produce the largest redistribution of income from the bottom to the top in modern U.S. history, and likely increase poverty and inequality more than any other budget in recent times (and possibly in the nation’s history).”
So that's who Paul Ryan is. Another partisan plutocrat with faraway eyes comes to squeeze the last few drops out of the American century.
A man who has never once in his life had to ask himself, which bill can I afford to pay this week? A man who once used Social Security checks to pay for his education, but who now wants to see Social Security scrapped.
And some of you will even vote for him. Just don’t ever get sick or lose your job, all right?
41 Comments
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Switch to the desktop site to post a comment.jflanagan | Sep 20, 2012, 10:59 AM EDT
We have a "Community Organizer" President who has helped bring the national debt to over 16 Trillion Dollars, more than the Gross National Product, and tells David Letterman "debt doesn't matter in the short term" and you call Paul Ryan extreme. This President is spending our descendants money and is not brought to bear any responsibility by the likes of media supporters like Mr. O'Doherty here. The President doesn't need a campaign committee, he has the media running his reelection campaign for him.
eiriamach | Aug 30, 2012, 08:23 AM EDT
hannah gruen, here's the first set of facts; you'll find it in the article's second paragraph: "Romney’s plan is to give record tax breaks to the rich, lowering their tax rate down to 28 percent. Ryan is a little different. His plan is to give the rich even bigger tax breaks, lowering their tax rate down to 25 percent." Specifically what is your complaint? Do you think these two claims are false? Have you done your "research" and found evidence that these claims are not true? What is that evidence, specifically? Did you find it by "checking out Mr Ryan's website" as you advise the writer to do? And you say that you do not like the article's "tone," well la-dee-da! If your comment is an example of the sneering, slip-shod critiques you give your student writers, they should be embarrassed to have you as a teacher.
hannah gruen | Aug 29, 2012, 05:06 PM EDT
This is one of the poorest written articles I've seen. There's not a whit of thesis support. I'd fail a student who turned in an essay like this. Tone is shrill, sneering, cliched, unoriginal. Why not try checking out Mr Ryan's website and using facts, actual quotes, reputable citations without using outdated CBO estimates. Also, compare Ryan's plan to save Medicare with Obama's plan to do nothing and let it go insolvent in 12 years. This is a carelessly written, lazily "researched" article. This column makes me embarrassed to be Irish.
hannah gruen | Aug 20, 2012, 02:37 PM EDT
How depressing to read how worthless you two consider people.
eiriamach | Aug 20, 2012, 12:01 PM EDT
Ephraim, today's NY Times has an interesting article in the philosophy section on interdependence and connectedness. An excerpt: "We can hardly fathom the depth of our dependence on government, and pretend we are bold individualists instead.... Ryan’s signature work, his proposal for the federal budget, calls for drastic cuts to Medicaid, Medicare, Pell grants and job training programs, among others. To no surprise, as The New Yorker revealed in a recent profile of Ryan, the home district that supports him is boosted by considerable government largesse.... But the fate of the middle class counties and urban ghettos is entwined. When the poor are left to rot in their misery, the misery does not stay contained. It harms us all. The crime radiates, the misery offends, it debases the whole. Individuals, much less communities, cannot be insulated from it" ("Deluded Individualism"). Ideology is powerful, and it can delude us into thinking that we are and ought to remain fully self-sufficient, all of us "frontiersmen," as in the great John Wayne American myth. I hope enough people shake off this delusion before election day.
EphraimKibbey | Aug 18, 2012, 10:36 PM EDT
@eiriamach - Why can't the 1% see that they need the 99% far more than the 99% need them. It is the demand of the 99% that created the wealth of the 1% suppliers. After the Black Death ravaged Europe the 1% of the time was left with a vastly reduced 99%, their few remaining serfs escaped, their manor houses fell to ruin, their estates became overgrown and they starved meanwhile what was left of the 99% carried on. Interestingly the current disparity between wealth of the 1% and that of the 99% is even greater than in the Middle Ages. It is time that the 99% saved the 1% from themselves and their greed. Four more years and both houses!
eiriamach | Aug 18, 2012, 05:34 PM EDT
In 1961, John F. Kennedy warned, "If a free society cannot help the many who are poor, it cannot save the few who are rich." With the exception of a handful of smart rich guys like Warren Buffet and Bill Gates, the wealthy do not seem to realize that they need to be saved too, that they are marching in lockstep with Ryan toward a very steep cliff. As the American middle-class shrinks, possibilities for profitable investments and business start-ups, as well as continued corporate revenue, dwindle. Without middle-class buying power, the economy will continue to contract. Along with the US, economies around the globe will stagnate. Then US outsourced employment and investment will become liabilities. As Obama says, we are all connected. Those who think the rich can stay rich while everyone else loses purchasing power will realize their delusions only when they're at the edge of the cliff with no way to go except down ... fast. But I do not believe it will happen unless voter suppression succeeds.
rebel999 | Aug 18, 2012, 03:51 PM EDT
Excellent article. Thanks for telling it like it is. Folks, this election is more than just about jobs. It's about fairness, righteousness, equality, equal pay, rights, no more wars, no more voodoonomics, gun control and much much more. Romney and Ryan will only make the rich richer and make the rest of us miserable.
michaelidaho | Aug 17, 2012, 01:02 PM EDT
Hollabackgurl, Please explain President Obama's plan to save Social Security and Medicare. So far he has only managed to drain funds from these programs.
michaelidaho | Aug 17, 2012, 10:48 AM EDT
Hoollah, you insult a commenter for being ignorant, senile, fat, dumb, and sexual deviant, I guess that's ok because you are progressive
hollabackgurl | Aug 17, 2012, 09:30 AM EDT
Tom Mo, any man who uses the term 'pipsqeek,' even if he has ignorantly misspelled it, as you just did, betrays something about himself: he's very old, probably has a commodious posterior, and he mistakes hurling insults for intelligent discussion. No one but a Tea Bagger thinks that's classy.
hollabackgurl | Aug 17, 2012, 09:26 AM EDT
No michaelidaho, you don't understand your own candidate. Paul Ryan believes that Social Security, Medicaid and Medicare, and government generally, should be taken to a bath and drowned because they interfere with the purity of capitalism. His hero Ayn Rand called altruism evil. He believes helping others diminishes you.
michaelidaho | Aug 17, 2012, 09:06 AM EDT
What I find most interesting about the left-wing’s critique on Paul Ryan are his plans for Social Security and Medicare. They argue that he is seeking to dismantle the programs. Actually, he is trying to develop a strategy for their long-term fiscal stability. Ironically, Obama has actually worsened the situation for Social Security (remember the 2% reduction in payroll tax) and his health care legislation will take money from Medicare. In short, Obama has no long-term plan for Social Security or Medicare. Ryan's plans are not perfect, especially the part about privatizing Social Security, but at least he recognizes these programs are unsustainable in their current form.
Tom Mo | Aug 16, 2012, 11:19 PM EDT
I read Cahir O'Dorthy's rant again. The man is a commumist thru and thru. Impossible to argue with an ass. "Under Romney/Ryan it'll be tax breaks for the rich and social Darwinism for the poor. These would be the deepest,most biting cuts ever attempted by a sitting government." A sitting government? Ever? How many governments have you lived under in you miserable life? You pipsqeek. Try Stalin, Mousillini, Hitler, Pol pot.
Tom Mo | Aug 16, 2012, 10:07 PM EDT
Garythomas/Lane2445 Attaboys. two thumbs up. Semper Fi.
Tom Mo | Aug 16, 2012, 09:57 PM EDT
Cahir O'Doherty. Waterboy for obama, socialist. Hollabacgurl: There are no guarantees in life. Except Communism. It guarantees misery. Merefalow: Get back on your meds. Jamthecat: Got it assbackwards.
jflanagan | Aug 16, 2012, 09:52 PM EDT
When reading this I see the same omissions and spin that the Democrats are using. Does Cahir have any thoughts not given to him by others? I don't agree with everything that the Romney/Ryan ticket is speaking of but at least they tackle the problem. The Obama/Biden ticket is made up of Ostriches who kick the can down the road for later politicians to address, if they have more guts than the President.
hollabackgurl | Aug 16, 2012, 07:35 PM EDT
The stock market is far to risky to count on for retirement funding. Every investment adviser will tell you not to invest money that you cannot afford to lose. Ryan would hand us over to HMOs and private issuance companies. No one but the top one percent would be able to afford healthcare in this country if Ryan gets his way.
lane2445 | Aug 16, 2012, 04:10 PM EDT
Cahir O'D and Joe Biden should get together; both speak without thinking. Has Cahir compared the Romney-Ryan budget to the Obamna budget, which was rejected by the Senate 97 to 0. So, who is the extreme candidate?
torbreezy | Aug 16, 2012, 03:58 PM EDT
This rant reminds me of an old quote: "Never attribute to malice what can best be explained by stupidity."
merefalow | Aug 16, 2012, 03:47 PM EDT
Obama is a decent man trying to introduce a decent humane bill to help people who rely need it,to the rich powerful and uncaring right wing this is anathema,they hate anything that they think has a slight pink blush.well i hate them and their right wing military worshiping elitist 1% fat cat mentality war mongering bunch of masonic twats..there will never be a fair society with people of this ilk.they have no conception of poverty,only a deep rooted sense of their own arrogant sense of entitlement to rule,show your tax return creepy, openness and transparency in government,fairness and decency and fair shares for all,NO 1% elitist rule.
PiperMac52 | Aug 16, 2012, 03:37 PM EDT
Your leftist ideology is showing, Paul Ryan is the most Extreme candidate to run??? Sorry but that designation would belong to One Barak Hussein Obama. A man who came from virtual obscurity, and enigma who was never vetted who spent his life surrounded by Marxists/ Socialists/ Anarchists. A student of Saul Alinsky's "Rules for radicals" a questionable past made more suspicious by his sealing of his College records....I could go on.
jamthecat | Aug 16, 2012, 02:23 PM EDT
Ryan wants to kill Medicare, kill Social Security, remove all governmental regulations on business but let government interfere with your personal life, and give more tax breaks to the rich. What further proof do you need that he's a dangerous ideologue?
Nicomax | Aug 16, 2012, 02:08 PM EDT
I see nothing in the Ryan plan to increase revenues which currently are about 15% of GDP- the lowest they have been in 50 years. Traditionally revenues and spending represent about 19-21% each- usually more spending than revenue, but sometimes a surplus emerges like in the Clinton years. Is Ryan proposing we stay at this 15% level, while not cutting Medicare, Social Security, but increasing defense spending? If so, nothing else will get done, so forget the Food and Drug Administration and wash your lettuce throughly.
garythomas | Aug 16, 2012, 01:11 PM EDT
O'Doherty couldn't be further from the truth. The most radical politician to ever run is Obama!
markday | Aug 16, 2012, 12:56 PM EDT
Vouchers? I think i have a roll of that in my bathroom.
njirish | Aug 16, 2012, 12:36 PM EDT
This article is a perfect example of why we have the electoral college - so the hordes of liberals (like the author) packed into America's urban centers cannot dominate or otherwise unduly influence the electoral process. Their muddled thinking is legendary. Paul Ryan a plutocrat? The guy grew up flipping burgers. Give it a rest Cahir, noone believes this pablum
susan724 | Aug 16, 2012, 12:36 PM EDT
wjb1tex - what planet are you on? Congress gets their health care from private insurance companies and they get great deals because it is through a Federal Employee plan, not vouchers. Since the average do nothing Congressperson makes about $175,000 a year, they can well afford it. Not bad for a group of people who did absolutely nothing since the Republicans took over in 2008. They openly admitted on national TV that their #1 goal was to defeat Obama in 2012 so they did nothing to make him look bad and THEY are the one responsible for appropriating our tax money.
susan724 | Aug 16, 2012, 12:26 PM EDT
The Republican Congress has its lowest approval rating ever recorded - 10% (G allup Poll)!! LOL - and this numb nuts are going to take away Medicare?
hollabackgurl | Aug 16, 2012, 11:49 AM EDT
A voucher system isn't worth squat. It's just a stepping stone to phasing it out completely, which is Ryan's ultimate aim. He wants rid of the welfare state completely. Let the market's look after grandma or let her starve (which do you think is more likely?) It'll be the Great Gatsby for the rich and Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome for the poor.
wjb1tex | Aug 16, 2012, 11:42 AM EDT
More scare tactics. Senior citizens would not be denied medical coverage. They could choose to keep Medicare as is or choose the voucher system. By the way, the voucher system is exactly the same as members of congress get and I thought we all wanted the same great coverage they receive.
jamieLM | Aug 16, 2012, 11:27 AM EDT
Oh, please, C. O'D. Let's get real here. There isn't one person in the world that Romney could have chosen that would've met with your approval. You'd find faults with him/her, no matter who Romney chose. You're hardly an objective voice who's able to judge any GOP candidate fairly, since you write as if you're on the Saint Obama/Biden campaign team. This is America and you're certainly entitled to your opinion, as everyone is, but the fact is, you're completely biased. Btw: I'm not endorsing any of the candidates. Everyone can decide for themselves who to vote for.
wilhoef | Aug 16, 2012, 11:27 AM EDT
Ribbett, ribbett, the frogs are croaking. O'Dumberty has no clue.
BrianO | Aug 16, 2012, 11:05 AM EDT
Checkout Cahirs source The Center for Budget and Policy Priorities, as I did, The blog entries tell the agenda of this website that exists on government grant money.
BrianO | Aug 16, 2012, 10:51 AM EDT
Cahirs ignorance is only outweighed by his arrogance. The super rich do not pay into social security for their full income by law, they do not receive the full social security benefit by law. the social security system is weighed toward the lower earners as it is perceived they will need it the most. What bothers me the most is he talks about other peoples money like it is his. Sometimes being brilliant and industrious pays off. Meaning you go out into the marketplace and offer a service and people give you money for it. When you wish to take this money from one person to give to another person it is theft. This is the starting point, from here most reasonable people can agree to certain costs that must be born by ALL citizens. These costs should be a constant percentage to be fair to ALL.
Fran Connor | Aug 16, 2012, 10:48 AM EDT
Here's a real surprise - Cahir doesn't like a conservative candidate. By the way, Cahir, it's Obamacare that wants to steal $700,000,000,000 from medicare, some of which will go to cover illegal aliens. Nice try on the scare tactics though.
hollabackgurl | Aug 16, 2012, 10:48 AM EDT
Paul Ryan's budget plan is (1) give even more unnecessary tax breaks to the rich. (2) Poor people can look for food in the woods.
hollabackgurl | Aug 16, 2012, 10:37 AM EDT
income is produced by people, it is not produced by government. Once you have part of your income taken by a third party, government, then we argue about where the third party, government, redistributes it. Government produces no income or wealth, the best thing for someone on the bottom to do is rise to a higher level and control their own destiny. I am insulted by the many who think that being born poor or black, or hispanic, or Irish means you are to stupid or lazy to get ahead, you are not. The class argument from the marxist is used to enslave the a working man to government handouts and pointless existence. If you want to help out your fellow man/woman cut the percentage government spends or redistributes to 20% or less and prosperity and optimism will result, currently it is approaching 25%
CelticQueenUSA | Aug 16, 2012, 09:54 AM EDT
two words; VOTE OBAMA!
OldMariner | Aug 16, 2012, 09:53 AM EDT
All these economic claims and counterclaims confuse the hell out of me, and I dare say for most people. But the one thing that impresses me about the Ryan plan objectives is that it plans for the debt to be erased in 14 years. This is a modest, sober and probably realistic projection. It is attacked by both sides as too long term (another example of American impatience). The fact remains is that Ryan plan is the only (serious) one out there and is based on the Simpson-Bowles commission that Obama commissioned but disregarded their findings. Re Medicare: Despite left-wing predictable attacks, Ryan's plan DOES NOT cut benefits for seniors or future seniors unless the latter so designates to enter a contributory plan that Ryan proposes. Three years have gone bye without a budget from Obama and his Democrat senate. Oh by the way, Cahir, I would think that the Moscow-backed Henry Wallace was the most radical to run as VP and President during the late 30's and 40's.
eiriamach | Aug 16, 2012, 09:13 AM EDT
Ryan's budget would redistribute income from the bottom to the top and would "increase poverty and inequality more than any other budget in recent times.” And for what purpose? It would not reduce the deficit by a penny! It would cut Medicaid in half and limit Medicare-by-voucher to a fraction of current rates. The only visible outcomes of these cuts in govt commitments are reduced taxes on corporations, untaxed capital gains, and a token tax on millionaire incomes. As Krugman points out (and more economists see it every day), "These concrete proposals would, taken together, actually increase the deficit for the first decade and beyond." If there's any deficit reduction in Ryan's plan, it's the great invisible, unexplained mystery!