Paul Ryan, Enemy of the Middle Class?

Of course he is. He sole allegiance is to the wealthy. Why do you think that other GOP lawmakers such as himself all pledge allegiance to Grover Norquist, Koch Brothers, Rove, and so on? Last I remembered, they were employed by the People, which include WAY more than just the 1ers. I hope WI votes that man out of office. See how HE likes unemployment due to his beliefs and policies.

For Paul Ryan, Ayn Rand is God. Atlas Shrugged and The Virtue of Selfishness are his Scriptures, and he reads them with no less devotion than a Christian reads the Bible.

I don't doubt that he really believes in his fantasy world where the top 1 pct (really the top 0.01 pct) "job creators" are being persecuted by "class warfare" as they continue to accumulate more and more wealth while the poor get poorer and the middle class gets squeezed out of existence.

Assuredcw said:

"We're now getting this class warfare that pits people against each other," Ryan said.

Click to expand...

This strikes me as a tautology. With domestic policy your enemy will necessarily also be a citizen of your country, hence the phrase domestic policy. We even have a name for when your ideological enemy is foreign: foreign policy.

"The president's commitment to overcome divisive politics is at the core of who he is," Carney told reporters aboard Air Force One. He pointed to past remarks by Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) about his top priority being to deny Obama a second term, adding, "Sounds like divisive politics to me."

Click to expand...

I am reluctant to do so, but here I will agree completely with Carney. Obama is absolutely nothing if not a compromising president. Much to the chagrin of the more hard line liberal part of his base, he has at nearly every turn reached so far across the aisle so as to at times lose his balance and fall over briefly to the other side.

As to class warfare: I wouldn't call this "declaring war" on the middle class, because Ryan's plan is exactly in line with the Republican philosophy since at least Reagan. It's just more of whatever they've been doing for a quarter of a century and it happens to be of virtually no benefit to the middle class.

I can guarantee you Reaganomics was a short-term solution that was not fixed because its original creator was no longer capable to overlook it by the time we didn't need it anymore. (around 2004-ish)

The things Paul Ryan has planned go beyond Reaganomics and into the territory of near-pure plutocracy.

Assuredcw said:

Paul Ryan is the (Republican) Chairman of the House Budget Committee and the architect of the proposed voucher program to replace our current Medicare program (many people think that Social Security will be next). He also wants to increase taxes on the poor and middle class and to reduce them for the upper brackets. This is all detailed in his Roadmap for America, and you can read it for yourself - just do a Google search.

But Paul Ryan isn't done (actually he hasn't gotten started thanks to his Democratic brethren, who have blocked this nonsense).

Click to expand...

Of course the Democrats blocked his common sense reform. The Democrats love the plantation system of indentured servitude. Does anyone remember the Democrat who ran against Abraham Lincoln? Ever heard the term "Solid South"?

Herman Cain's classic line "I LEFT THAT DEMOCRAT PLANTATION" - Watch Out Wannabe Master Obama!! - YouTube

Runaway Slave Movie Teaser - YouTube

.

Health care is one of the biggest industries in America.

Health care is the biggest "job creation engine" in America.

Anything that will cause people to use much less of it, besides being detrimental and perhaps even deadly to the people involved, will make the closure of a few factories look like chicken feed by comparison.

Over and over again, Republicans fail to look at two of the biggest factors in job creation:

- consumer purchases by a growing middle class.
- health care.

In destroying the middle class, they are destroying job creation, period.

Fantine said:

Over and over again, Republicans fail to look at two of the biggest factors in job creation:

Click to expand...

Fantine, I'm sure you must truly believe Obamacare will grow the Healthcare industry. Personally, I don't see how that's possible though ...

Please don't misunderstand me, I understand that the healthcare system in the USA has been broken for years, but I see that as having been caused largely by government meddling in the first place.

Why do you believe government has the ability to fix it, much less grow it?

.

Fantine said:

Health care is one of the biggest industries in America.

Health care is the biggest "job creation engine" in America.

Click to expand...

Health care is a service industry. I creates jobs, yes; and it might in fact be the largest sector in our nation right now that is creating jobs - but an "engine?"

An engine in the sense that to continue running it must itself consume something. An engine in the sense that to "grow" what it consumes to continue running must grow as well.

Fantine said:

Anything that will cause people to use much less of it, besides being detrimental and perhaps even deadly to the people involved, will make the closure of a few factories look like chicken feed by comparison.

Click to expand...

So here's the argument, and an easy one to demonstrate it hasn't been fully thought through (or if it has, accurately represented).

"Anything that will cause people to use much less of it" - speaking about health care. The only thing on the table (or allowed on the table, by the left because of its emotional appeal) is the rising cost of health care. Completely ignored is the notion that when people are HEALTHY, they will need less (and therefore consume less) of the [health care] service. The premise then in your argument is patently clear - that for "one of the biggest industries in America" to remain viable, and to remain "the largest job creation engine in America" is dependent on one thing - the UN-HEALTH of Americans.

This of course is what the left is all about - creating dependency on the federal government wherever it can - in this case dependency on the federal government by its citizens for its very health.

That, Fantine, is about as immoral a policy as there ever was - particularly when one also looks at the facts regarding how poorly the federal government is when delivering ANY service, to say nothing about one as important as health care. The federal government is demonstrably woefully inept at EVERY SERVICE it provides - and if you truly cared about health care, versus say merely getting it into the federal government hands, you MUST come to the conclusion that the federal government is the LAST entity on this planet we want running something as important as health care. But then, that's not what the left cares about, is it?

Fantine said:

Over and over again, Republicans fail to look at two of the biggest factors in job creation:

- consumer purchases by a growing middle class.
- health care.

In destroying the middle class, they are destroying job creation, period.

Click to expand...

First off, Republicans are not out to "destroy the middle class." That's pure partisan propaganda (and hooey to boot) generated by the left, nothing more. And on such a false premise to begin with, the remainder of your assertions fail miserably.

The LAST thing Republicans are "failing to look at" is consumer purchases by a growing middle class. Where in the world did you come up with that nonsense?


While services are a "consumer purchase," an economy becoming more and more dependent on services alone is an economy in decline - inasmuch as services DEPEND on a healthy economy to themselves thrive.

• Services DO NOT, CAN NOT create a "healthy economy." They are a FUNCTION of a healthy economy.
• And the left is out to DESTROY our economy so they can get it (and here's the argument again) - back into the hands of the federal government.
• ...a nation of servants - a nation of servile, compliant consumers of federal services on all levels, and its services alone.

Assuredcw said:

huffingtonpost.com/2011/10/26/paul-ryan-obama-preying-on-fear-envy-resentment n 1033115.html

"We're now getting this class warfare that pits people against each other," Ryan said. "[The President] is going from town to town, impugning the motives of Republicans, setting up straw men and scapegoats, and engaging in intellectually lazy arguments, as he tries to build support for punitive tax hikes on job creators."

Click to expand...

This I agree with totally. There isn't a word here that is in error.

Assuredcw said:

White House Press Secretary Jay Carney pushed back on Ryan’s criticisms, noting that the GOP lawmaker was attacking Obama for being politically divisive while giving a speech at a "highly partisan conservative think tank."

Click to expand...

Assuredcw said:

"The president's commitment to overcome divisive politics is at the core of who he is," Carney told reporters aboard Air Force One. He pointed to past remarks by Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) about his top priority being to deny Obama a second term, adding, "Sounds like divisive politics to me."
Carney also took issue with the substance of Ryan's speech, citing tax cuts for "the average millionaire" and the "voucherization of Medicare" as proposals that Obama opposes.

Click to expand...

This is promoting the very divisive politics he's denouncing.

"The president's commitment to overcome divisive politics is at the core of who he is" - I mean, good grief. Does anyone truly swallow this in good conscience?! Talk about taking the whole forest from your eye first Mr. Carney...

First of all, 20% of people use 80% of health services. They are often elderly or disabled (the people who would get vouchers, most likely inadequate vouchers, under the Ryan plan.)

So all of a sudden these 20% of people can only get half the medical care they need.

And use of medical services overall drops by 40%.

What happens to 40% of the people employed in the health care industry in the United States?

They lose their jobs.

Nuff said.

Ryan's idea is to starve government. Teachers lose their jobs (and our students become less competitive in the global market.) Police officers lose their job (and crime skyrockets.) Nurses, doctors, and techs lose their jobs (and people die on the streets.)

All this so that purported "job creators" could get a little more money to incentivize them to create jobs.

Whenever I say, "Let's make a big tax cut for every "job creator" if and when he creates a job, for as long as that job lasts...." I am met with stunned silence...

But if you really want to create jobs without wasting billions and billions on the 1% who WON'T create jobs, then that's what you'd do.

If I want to travel to New York, I don't also throw my money away on tickets to Miami, Chicago, and Philadelphia. I buy a ticket to NY.

If government wants to assist job creators, let them "buy" the job creators. Don't tell them to throw extra money away on the ones who will buy yachts, or park their money in the Caymans, or build a factory in Mexico. That's 100% waste. Let them help the job creator upon proof of compliance.

Fantine said:

First of all, 20% of people use 80% of health services. They are often elderly or disabled (the people who would get vouchers, most likely inadequate vouchers, under the Ryan plan.)

Click to expand...

Only you don't know that.

Fantine said:

So all of a sudden these 20% of people can only get half the medical care they need.

Click to expand...

You don't know that either.

Fantine said:

And use of medical services overall drops by 40%.

Click to expand...

Again, you don't know that.

Fantine said:

What happens to 40% of the people employed in the health care industry in the United States?

Click to expand...

< heavy sigh > I don't know; but I know what happens to speculative assertions based on conveniently fabricated premises...

Fantine said:

They lose their jobs.

Click to expand...

...to arrive at conclusions they determined in advance.

Fantine said:

Nuff said.

Click to expand...

Well, with this at least I agree. Nuff said.

Fantine said:

Ryan's idea is to starve government. Teachers lose their jobs (and our students become less competitive in the global market.) Police officers lose their job (and crime skyrockets.) Nurses, doctors, and techs lose their jobs (and people die on the streets.)

Click to expand...

Oh please... for the last 40 years we've been stuffing and stuffing our teachers with more pay, more benefits... and what's happened to our students' competitive skills? They're DOWN, and down significantly. The teachers unions, the department of education... are RUINING our education system - and demonstrably so.

..."and people die in the streets." I simply can't believe you wrote that. Good grief...

I happen to agree wholeheartedly with the notion of whittling our federal government down to size. It's critically needed. First off, it's not an institution that I worship, nor is it remotely deserving of my, or anyone else's worship, let alone faith. It's a huge, unconstitutionally overbloated threat to the freedom and liberty of the citizens of this nation and no longer functioning in the manner it ought - because extreme, radical leftistism, progressivism, marxism (pick your ism) has hijacked it right out from under our noses over the past century - with the willing aid and abettment of a number of citizens who worship the notion of "security" that comes in the form of someone else taking care of them.

Assuredcw said:

98% of us are going to have to cut back on our spending with Ryan's proposed tax overhaul, that is for sure. It's shortsighted, to put it mildly, as well as political cryptonite. Paul Ryan is giving Republicans a bad name. Hopefully this alone will cause the right-wing extremism to correct itself. Either the Republicans will become more moderate (so I can rejoin their ranks - LOL!) or they will lose their majority in the House and miss out on the Presidency.

Click to expand...

no kidding. thats what happens when there isnt any MONEY. which the government doesnt have. WE ARE GOING BROKE or are broke. we borrow to much. the democrates just want to spend more. If the government runs out of money they help noone. this will happen at oour rate of spending. so someone suggesting that we spend less is wrong because it, oh my gosh, asks us to cut back our spending. oh my how could we cut back spending. To spend more we tax more. they say tax the rich even at the same time the claim they dont pay taxes find ways around it. well when they run out of money or more likely leave. who do they tax then. At some point this spending has to stop. hard choices now or miserable ones later.

EdwinWillers said:

Only you don't know that.

You don't know that either.

Click to expand...

Half of the population spends little or nothing on health care, while 5 percent of the population spends almost half of the total amount. Examining the distribution of health care expenses among the U.S. population sheds light on areas where changes in policy might bring about the greatest savings.

Click to expand...

The High Concentration of U.S. Health Care Expenditures

That's from a report from the Department of Health and Human Services.

Remember, the average Social Security check is a little over $1000 a month.

If they have to purchase their own healthcare, they will purchase and use a lot less of it.

And if the people who use 50% of the total healthcare budget suddenly use a lot less of it, besides the very human cost of loss of mobility and earlier death, there will be a huge rise in unemployment.

Obviously you don't believe it because you don't want to, but you can certainly find more corroboration if you care to.

And regardless of what you think about American student achievement compared to the rest of the world, the idea that spending less and lowering teacher salaries will help is obviously an idea of someone who was very poorly educated him or herself.

Like it or not, 1/3 of babies born in the US are born out of wedlock. 20% grow up in poverty. Regardless of 5the deep seated conservative belief that these children should be home-schooled by stay-at-home moms using the Bible to teach literacy instead of children's literature, today's parents are not financially or often educationally equipped to do so.

I wish every person who prayed at an abortion clinic would make an 18 year commitment to pray for those babies for their entire childhoods--because they will need every bit of those prayers (and a sizeable amount of tax dollars, too.)