Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: Paul Ryan: An opportunity to cut poverty


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Paul Ryan: An opportunity to cut poverty Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Paul Ryan: An opportunity to cut poverty - 7/25/2014 7:44:10 AM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic
quote:

ORIGINAL: hot4bondage
quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic
oh derp...this is paul ryan we are talking about, its not much different to what he talked about before and he has a reputation for budget slashing that even his own party disagree with.

If taking 30 years to balance the budget is extreme, what's reasonable? 60 years? 90?


30 years isn't reasonable, h4b. Neither are 60 or 90 year plans. How about 10 years? Maybe even 5?

quote:

amazing that its only been in the past five years that this has been important to republicans/tea parties and that its the poor that have to pay the price.
oh no, its not amazing....it is hypocrisy and unadulterated hatred disguised as fiscal AND social conservative mores.


How about we not ignore the facts, Lucy? Under W's tax cuts, the upper percentiles shouldered a larger % of the overall income tax burden, and more wage earners didn't have a tax burden at all (wasn't because they were earning less, either). Under W, we still saw a massive increase in revenues that are still enjoyed to this day.


_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to Lucylastic)
Profile   Post #: 21
RE: Paul Ryan: An opportunity to cut poverty - 7/25/2014 7:50:03 AM   
Lucylastic


Posts: 40310
Status: offline
SMFH FACTS???
yeah ..ok..im glad you are enjoying your massive increase in revenues

_____________________________

(•_•)
<) )╯SUCH
/ \

\(•_•)
( (> A NASTY
/ \

(•_•)
<) )> WOMAN
/ \

Duchess Of Dissent
Dont Hate Love

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 22
RE: Paul Ryan: An opportunity to cut poverty - 7/25/2014 8:07:36 AM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
How about we not ignore the facts, Lucy? Under W's tax cuts, the upper percentiles shouldered a larger % of the overall income tax burden, and more wage earners didn't have a tax burden at all (wasn't because they were earning less, either). Under W, we still saw a massive increase in revenues that are still enjoyed to this day.



Lets be real punctilious about facts. The percentage of tax burden doesnt really mean shit. The revenues were not increasing and in fact declining rapidly, only the spending was rapidly increasing, there was a huge increase in revenues when the W cuts expired, not before, not never.

http://www.usgovernmentrevenue.com/revenue_chart_2007_2017USb_11s1li111mcn_F0f

https://www.google.com/search?q=actual+federal+revenue+chart+since+1990&rlz=1C1KMZB_enUS510US510&es_sm=93&tbm=isch&imgil=7vr9m4sMtXssFM%253A%253Bhttps%253A%252F%252Fencrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com%252Fimages%253Fq%253Dtbn%253AANd9GcSwRa2mSsntoSEzT-ZwkVB4b8y7hFOrzzOLvJSi1X9-UVIMrTJA%253B960%253B720%253B5DfWZMG4L5vdcM%253Bhttp%25253A%25252F%25252Fen.wikipedia.org%25252Fwiki%25252FUnited_States_federal_budget&source=iu&usg=__G-RlNULVJ6g3sASKDOwzQg9PDeg%3D&sa=X&ei=h3fSU_yOJcKvyASCuIHYAw&ved=0CB8Q9QEwAA&biw=960&bih=511#facrc=_&imgdii=7vr9m4sMtXssFM%3A%3B0-nB7d6BvC1xqM%3B7vr9m4sMtXssFM%3A&imgrc=7vr9m4sMtXssFM%253A%3B5DfWZMG4L5vdcM%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fupload.wikimedia.org%252Fwikipedia%252Fcommons%252F3%252F33%252FSectoral_Financial_Balances_in_U.S._Economy.png%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fen.wikipedia.org%252Fwiki%252FUnited_States_federal_budget%3B960%3B720


Take that shit to the creative writing section.

< Message edited by mnottertail -- 7/25/2014 8:29:43 AM >


_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 23
RE: Paul Ryan: An opportunity to cut poverty - 7/25/2014 11:28:25 AM   
joether


Posts: 5195
Joined: 7/24/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DaNewAgeViking
The problem with this idea is that this is Ryan talking - so we can safely presume this is another of his endless schemes to dismantle the safety net once and for all. It's a non-starter on that basis alone.



I got the same feeling when I heard of this one. If it was a Democrat, I could get on board with it (provided I got to read the bill before voting on). If it was a moderate Republican, I could agree to the idea. But a conservative, Tea Partier, or Republican like Mr. Ryan just raises a number of red flags. The guy has 'zero' credibility to be taken seriously and trusted. He has a history of under cutting those programs he doesn't used, and for attacking programs that help actual Americans in real need.

Would be like the President advocating more lenient gun laws towards conservatives. They just wouldn't trust him.


(in reply to DaNewAgeViking)
Profile   Post #: 24
RE: Paul Ryan: An opportunity to cut poverty - 7/25/2014 12:51:19 PM   
joether


Posts: 5195
Joined: 7/24/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic
amazing that its only been in the past five years that this has been important to republicans/tea parties and that its the poor that have to pay the price.
oh no, its not amazing....it is hypocrisy and unadulterated hatred disguised as fiscal AND social conservative mores.

How about we not ignore the facts, Lucy? Under W's tax cuts, the upper percentiles shouldered a larger % of the overall income tax burden, and more wage earners didn't have a tax burden at all (wasn't because they were earning less, either). Under W, we still saw a massive increase in revenues that are still enjoyed to this day.


Under former President George W. Bush, this nation saw the federal budget go from a surplus during the Clinton Administration to a HUGE deficit. All thanks to those five tax cuts that were handed out. And how did we pay for those deficits, DS? That's right, we BORROWED MONEY. So that in effect increased our federal debt. What was the debt in 1999? About $4 trillion. At the end of the Bush administration? About $10.5 Trillion. You can blame Democrats for not going along with reductions in the budget, since the items being effected were HEAVILY stacked against the Democrat's 'sacred cow' (gee, cant imagine why they would resist that....). Since the budget has been out of sync and uneven, that deficit has grown and the debt has grown.

Every attempt to reach a consensus and agreement on the budget has failed due to Republican/Tea Party problems. They are the ones that wanted to shut down the whole government last I checked, unless, America bow into their extortion tactics. Then there is that Iraq War. Why did we go there, DS? Oh, that's right to find and removed those 'Massive Stockpiles' of 'Weapons of Mass Destruction'. We didn't find very much. But boy did we get tens of billions to Dick Cheney's former employer, lost 4,000+ good US Soldiers and found 32,500+ soldiers with long term injuries/wounds. The world witness 100,000-600,000 civilians being put to the sword (depending on which report one believes). And that whole disaster cost the nation $1 Trillion of BORROWED MONEY. Longer term, it will cost the nation another $5-7 trillion.

On top of all that, Republican/Tea Party in Congress removed a number of regulations that kept American companies from doing bad/stupid things in the quest for more profit (read: Greed trumps Wisdom). And what happened, DS? This nation was sinking down into a second great depression in 2007. And who was against the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009? The bill that would shore up the 27 key industries in America, resulting in a recoverable recession rather than a lengthy economic depression? The Republican/TEA Party! You never read the ARRA, but were FULLY against it. So the DOW is twice what it was when President Obama took office in 2009, the nation is doing better, unemployment is going down. And we have reinstituted some of the previously removed regulations to keep what happen in 2002-2006 from happening any time soon.

W's tax cuts? Those did NOTHING to help this nation's budget. The Republican/Tea Party removed tax revenue to 'appease' the ignorant masses of conservatives/libertarians (i.e. 'The Low Information Voters'). But they couldn't adjust the Federal Budget since they tried to gut a high amount of things that Democrats thought were important. So that nice Federal Surplus this nation was enjoying was removed in 2000. And each year after that, it got worst.

And where were all those 'Fiscal Conservatives'? That's right...completely silent and obedient to the Republican/Tea Party's wishes. They were only 'let off their leash and muzzle' when some black guy won the White House. Which is to show to any decent observer how full of shit 'Fiscal Conservatives' really are!

If those tax cuts were removed, and about $150-350 Billion was to be removed from the budget, it would be evened out, if not a tiny surplus. But Republican/Tea Party doesn't want to do that, because they are slaves of the 1% of tax payers in the nation (i.e. the absurdly rich). If the 1%'ers were to demand Republican/Tea Party to suck there cocks, it would be done within an instant! If the other 99% of Americans ask Republican/Tea Party to do something useful for them, it would be ignored. Cause in point....The Republican House right now is the 2nd least productive in the 238 years of America; and the least productive was the year before. Republican/Tea Party can not make any compromises on ANYTHING ranging from simply 'up/down votes' on the hiring of interns to work for Congress to handling immigration reform. Because their.....deluded....belief system has become "Our Way or Hell!".

And where are all those conservative/libertarians to hold the people they elect and support? Completely silent! How silent? I could drop a pin in the room, and you'd be blown off your feet from 100 miles away by the shockwave. That's how silent and full of shit they are! They want to impeach the President for doing his job, but not lifting a finger in annoyance to how Republican/Tea Party behaves. Which is to greatly diminish any and all credibility with being taken seriously as citizens and adults.

Finally, conservative/libetarians live in a total fantasy world. Removed of facts, information, or evidence from reality that would contradict their viewpoints when making any of their arguments would be laughable if the subject matter was not some important.

How programmed and condition are conservatives/libertarians to the Republican/Tea Party and the 1%er's? You couldn't even give a decent, well thought, straight answer to the question "How do you define Limited Government in exacting terms?" Why? Because conservative media didn't tell you to think for yourself, but believe everything they say without question. That's not rational, intelligent, OR wise!



< Message edited by joether -- 7/25/2014 12:52:24 PM >

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 25
RE: Paul Ryan: An opportunity to cut poverty - 7/25/2014 1:40:57 PM   
MrRodgers


Posts: 10542
Joined: 7/30/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic
quote:

ORIGINAL: hot4bondage
quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic
oh derp...this is paul ryan we are talking about, its not much different to what he talked about before and he has a reputation for budget slashing that even his own party disagree with.

If taking 30 years to balance the budget is extreme, what's reasonable? 60 years? 90?


30 years isn't reasonable, h4b. Neither are 60 or 90 year plans. How about 10 years? Maybe even 5?

quote:

amazing that its only been in the past five years that this has been important to republicans/tea parties and that its the poor that have to pay the price.
oh no, its not amazing....it is hypocrisy and unadulterated hatred disguised as fiscal AND social conservative mores.


How about we not ignore the facts, Lucy? Under W's tax cuts, the upper percentiles shouldered a larger % of the overall income tax burden, and more wage earners didn't have a tax burden at all (wasn't because they were earning less, either). Under W, we still saw a massive increase in revenues that are still enjoyed to this day.


Under Clinton revenues were 19/1% of GDP...under W 17.9% of GDP so we saw a decrease in federal tax revenues while federal spending under W was 19.9% of GDP, the same as Clinton...hence the deficits.

Under Obama federal tax revenues hit a low of 14.9% of GDP and an almost zero increase in federal discretionary spending which represents the lowest of both as a % of GDP since the Eisenhower admin.

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 26
RE: Paul Ryan: An opportunity to cut poverty - 7/25/2014 2:05:42 PM   
DomKen


Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: thishereboi


quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic

Well, Ken, things you have chosen to share previously lead me to believe you are more familiar with long-term programs, rather than TANF which would be the central program tinkered with here, so you might not be aware that time limits and work requirements have been part of the system since the '96 reforms. Now, if I get a chance to get in on this (and it's not outside the realm of possibility if things break right in November) there are certainly some loopholes in those rules that could be tightened up.

Getting TANF and Section 8 under the same roof is something I would heartily endorse. We also absolutely need to get some time limits into Section 8 for able-bodied participants, and eradicate the provision that allows those vouchers to be inherited.

We get it. You really dislike poor people.



So tell us the truth, do you really have such poor reading comprehension that you think that's what he said or are you just so fond of lying that you can't help yourself? Inquiring minds and all...

I got the venom quite clearly. You have a strange inability to read clearly.

(in reply to thishereboi)
Profile   Post #: 27
RE: Paul Ryan: An opportunity to cut poverty - 7/25/2014 2:24:44 PM   
DomKen


Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic
quote:

ORIGINAL: hot4bondage
quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic
oh derp...this is paul ryan we are talking about, its not much different to what he talked about before and he has a reputation for budget slashing that even his own party disagree with.

If taking 30 years to balance the budget is extreme, what's reasonable? 60 years? 90?


30 years isn't reasonable, h4b. Neither are 60 or 90 year plans. How about 10 years? Maybe even 5?

quote:

amazing that its only been in the past five years that this has been important to republicans/tea parties and that its the poor that have to pay the price.
oh no, its not amazing....it is hypocrisy and unadulterated hatred disguised as fiscal AND social conservative mores.


How about we not ignore the facts, Lucy? Under W's tax cuts, the upper percentiles shouldered a larger % of the overall income tax burden, and more wage earners didn't have a tax burden at all (wasn't because they were earning less, either). Under W, we still saw a massive increase in revenues that are still enjoyed to this day.


WTF?
federal tax receipts by year (constant FY 2009 dollars)
in 2001 (last year before W got hold of things) $2,435.6 billion
2002 $2,229.2
2003 $2,086
2004 $2,142.8
2005 $2,371.8
2006 $2,562.1
2007 $2,663.1
2008 $2,529
2009 $2,105
http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxfacts/displayafact.cfm?Docid=200

So in real terms federal tax receipts barely ever returned to pre W levels and did not stay there. The W tax cut, most importantly the cut of the top marginal rate was devastating to the tax base and built a structural deficit into the budget that cannot be over come by simple cutting of spending. There is too much mandatory spending.

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 28
RE: Paul Ryan: An opportunity to cut poverty - 7/25/2014 3:18:56 PM   
cloudboy


Posts: 7306
Joined: 12/14/2005
Status: offline

Let me know if that permeates anyone's right wing bubble consciousness.

(in reply to joether)
Profile   Post #: 29
RE: Paul Ryan: An opportunity to cut poverty - 7/25/2014 7:32:22 PM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic
SMFH FACTS???
yeah ..ok..im glad you are enjoying your massive increase in revenues


Yeah, Lucy, facts.

http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxfacts/displayafact.cfm?Docid=203

Look at the individual income taxes (look at the total tax revenue column, too).
2000 $1.004T (Clinton's highest income tax revenue year)
2001 $0.994T
2002 $0.858T
2003 $0.793T
2004 $0.809T
2005 $0.927T
2006 $1.044T
2007 $1.163T
2008 $1.146T
2009 $0.915T
2010 $0.898T
2011 $1.091T
2012 $1.132T
2013 $1.316T

Share of Federal Income Taxes



So, yeah, massive increases in tax revenues.



_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to Lucylastic)
Profile   Post #: 30
RE: Paul Ryan: An opportunity to cut poverty - 7/25/2014 7:40:24 PM   
Lucylastic


Posts: 40310
Status: offline
WASHINGTON (AP) — More families with higher incomes could claim the popular child tax credit under a bill that won approval Friday in the House. But in a dispute that divides Republicans and Democrats, millions of the poorest low-income families would still lose the credit in 2018, when enhancements championed by President Barack Obama are set to expire.

The bill would gradually boost the amount of the $1,000-per-child tax credit by tying it to inflation, so it would go up as consumer prices rise. It also aims to make a dent in illegal immigration by prohibiting people without Social Security numbers from claiming a portion of the credit reserved for low-income families.

With nearly all Republicans voting in favor and most Democrats opposed, the bill cleared the House by a vote of 237-173. The White House threatened to veto the bill, though the Democratic-controlled Senate is unlikely to pass it.

About 37 million taxpayers claimed the credit in 2012, reducing their tax bills by nearly $57 billion.

House Republicans say the bill would strengthen the tax credit by increasing it as inflation rises, and by making it available to even more middle-income families. "It is time we make some simple improvements to the child tax credit, so it keeps up with the cost of raising children," said Rep. Dave Camp R-Mich., chairman of the tax-writing House Ways and Means Committee.

The White House said the bill favors high-income taxpayers over the poor, while adding $90 billion to the budget deficit over the next decade.

Five million of the poorest low-income families would lose the credit in 2018, the White House said. An additional 6 million low-income families would see the amount of their tax credits reduced.

"The new Republican rhetoric on poverty is no match for the deeply troubling actions they have repeatedly taken, and continue to take, with this legislation today," said Rep. Sander Levin of Michigan, the senior Democrat on the Ways and Means Committee. "This bill leads to harm for millions of low- and middle-income families and their children."

House Republicans dispute the Democrats' argument, saying the bill is silent on low-income families. Current law calls for Obama's enhancement for low-income income families to expire. The bill simply lets it happen. "The opponents make a false claim, that somehow this bill eliminates benefits for millions of low-income families," Camp said. "That's just wrong."
http://www.sfgate.com/news/politics/article/House-votes-to-limit-tax-credit-for-immigrants-5646911.php

_____________________________

(•_•)
<) )╯SUCH
/ \

\(•_•)
( (> A NASTY
/ \

(•_•)
<) )> WOMAN
/ \

Duchess Of Dissent
Dont Hate Love

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 31
RE: Paul Ryan: An opportunity to cut poverty - 7/25/2014 7:49:08 PM   
DomKen


Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic
SMFH FACTS???
yeah ..ok..im glad you are enjoying your massive increase in revenues


Yeah, Lucy, facts.

So, yeah, massive increases in tax revenues.



Hold on. If we're talking facts then we shouldn't be comparing dollars across time without adjusting for inflation which is what the constant dollar column does. It is inherently dishonest to simply use the raw numbers. I posted the inflation adjusted numbers and they make quite clear that you are wrong.

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 32
RE: Paul Ryan: An opportunity to cut poverty - 7/25/2014 8:00:55 PM   
TheHeretic


Posts: 19100
Joined: 3/25/2007
From: California, USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: joether
If it was a Democrat, I could get on board with it.



Thank you for your honesty.

_____________________________

If you lose one sense, your other senses are enhanced.
That's why people with no sense of humor have such an inflated sense of self-importance.


(in reply to joether)
Profile   Post #: 33
RE: Paul Ryan: An opportunity to cut poverty - 7/26/2014 8:03:13 AM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic
SMFH FACTS???
yeah ..ok..im glad you are enjoying your massive increase in revenues

Yeah, Lucy, facts.
So, yeah, massive increases in tax revenues.

Hold on. If we're talking facts then we shouldn't be comparing dollars across time without adjusting for inflation which is what the constant dollar column does. It is inherently dishonest to simply use the raw numbers. I posted the inflation adjusted numbers and they make quite clear that you are wrong.


The problem is, though, things aren't priced in constant year dollars, are they? Therein lies the problem.

Plus, budgets aren't set up according to FY dollars, but according to raw dollars.


_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to DomKen)
Profile   Post #: 34
RE: Paul Ryan: An opportunity to cut poverty - 7/26/2014 8:05:30 AM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline
Forget budgets, we havent had one since 1997

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 35
RE: Paul Ryan: An opportunity to cut poverty - 7/26/2014 9:20:46 AM   
DomKen


Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic
SMFH FACTS???
yeah ..ok..im glad you are enjoying your massive increase in revenues

Yeah, Lucy, facts.
So, yeah, massive increases in tax revenues.

Hold on. If we're talking facts then we shouldn't be comparing dollars across time without adjusting for inflation which is what the constant dollar column does. It is inherently dishonest to simply use the raw numbers. I posted the inflation adjusted numbers and they make quite clear that you are wrong.


The problem is, though, things aren't priced in constant year dollars, are they? Therein lies the problem.

Plus, budgets aren't set up according to FY dollars, but according to raw dollars.


Yes, they are due to inflation. And yes budgets are also since things are bought with the budgeted money and that is of course affected by inflation. Never com pared money across time with out adjusting for inflation.

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 36
RE: Paul Ryan: An opportunity to cut poverty - 7/26/2014 1:01:31 PM   
joether


Posts: 5195
Joined: 7/24/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic
quote:

ORIGINAL: joether
If it was a Democrat, I could get on board with it.

Thank you for your honesty.


Lets use the full quote of mine: "If it was a Democrat, I could get on board with it (provided I got to read the bill before voting on)"

Notice the bold part? The part you left off to make your silly 'comment'? That is a conditional idea if a Democrat presented a plan in its 'beginnings' like what Mr. Ryan has recently announced. That while I look forward to what Mr. Ryan has in mind, I am not a fool to think he will not try something underhand and dishonest. The man has quite the history of being underhanded and dishonest, if not also mean spirits and just a plain useless asshole. But I'll read his ideas if and when he prints them.

Which is unlike you, whom will except anything from conservative media, the GOP/TP, or conservative/libertarian groups without an ounce of consideration or thought. You would support such stuff as mindlessly as you support impeaching the current President over any of the half billion stupid ideas coming out of conservative/libertarian circles right now.

Yes, I'm honest. Are you?

(in reply to TheHeretic)
Profile   Post #: 37
RE: Paul Ryan: An opportunity to cut poverty - 7/26/2014 9:16:21 PM   
MrRodgers


Posts: 10542
Joined: 7/30/2005
Status: offline
Ryan's 'hidden' agenda...is not hidden at all. A leopard doesn't change its spots, and Paul Ryan continues to tweak his budget proposals, but his priorities do not change:

.....privatize and cut Social Security and Medicare, erode Medicaid, and make significant cuts to virtually everything but Pentagon spending, while giving large tax breaks to the wealthy and profitable corporations.

Ryan’s 2012 proposal increased the bloated military budget by $228 billion over the ten years. It cut Medicare by 35-42 percent by 2050. Sixty-two percent of the cuts were targeted at low-income programs: Medicaid, Pell Grants, food stamps, and job training. It cut infrastructure, education, veterans’ programs, medical and scientific research, protection of food safety and the water supply, national parks, law enforcement, and other domestic programs.

The wealthy and corporations would receive new tax cuts of historic proportions despite the fact that taxes are at an all-time low. Mark Zandi, economic advisor to John McCain during the 2008 presidential campaign, said that Ryan’s 2012 budget  would “cost America 1.7 million jobs” over two years.

Ryan’s latest blueprint, his “anti-poverty” plan, is classic GOP strategy of hiding their real purpose which is to make shortsighted and savage cuts on the backs of the most vulnerable and politically weakest in our society.

Then under the guise of getting people out of property...turn it over to the states for 'help' encouragement' 'new ideas' and really...to obscure.

(in reply to joether)
Profile   Post #: 38
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2]
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Paul Ryan: An opportunity to cut poverty Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.328